James White posted this on 02/03/09. "... but I also would like to invite the "Truly Reformed" out there to call the DL and defend their exaltation of the Textus Receptus. Specifically, I would like to ask them to answer the following questions:
1) When did 'the church' 'received' this text?
2) What council engaged in a study of the respective texts and determined that this is the 'one' text that most closely represents the original?
3) Which text IS the 'TR'? Can you identify a single text as THE TR? If not, why not?
4) Please explain why I should use the TR's readings of Luke 2:22, Revelation 16:5, and the final six verses of Revelation. "
I'm keeping this post as a trailmarker containing relevant questions to answer. I don't have the answers, since I'm a newbie.
But I do have some questions:
1. When did 'the church' determine the canon?
2. What council determined the canon?
3. It doesn't matter to me that any one of the several TR's has errors. It's a textual family or tradition.
4. James often uses these small examples as showstoppers for TR priority. Seems to me like you'd need to take a bigger view than just a handful of problem sections.
5. Here's an example of taking a bigger view, first raised by Burgon. The two hero texts of the Critical Text fans--Sinaiticus and Vaticanus--leave out the last 12 verses of Mark. This should be seen as a major strike against their reliability and value in anything Text Critical.