KJV Questions and Answers - Far Eastern Bible College

form of textual reading. A comparison of this reading with the ‘Post-Westcott-Hort’ text of the 27 th edition of the Nestle-Aland NovumTestamentum Graece indicated a salient difference. Thiede and D’Ancona... point out that GR17 has, on the last four words of Matthew 26:22 areading which is disparate from modern standard critical editions of theGreek New Testament which are of course, all ‘Westcott-Hort’ basedeclectic text, the basis of all modern translations.”A comparison of the last four words of Matt 26:22 in the TextusReceptus and Westcott-Hort Text with the Jesus Papyrus bears this outquite clearly.Last Four Words of Matt 26:22Westcott-Hort PapyrusGR 17 TextusReceptus This is significant. We have in the Magdalen papyrus a very early 1 stcentury manuscript which agrees with the Textus Receptus over againstthe Westcott-Hort Text! This confirms Dean Burgon’s observation allalong—the Westcott-Hort Text is a corrupted text, the early age of itsprimary manuscripts notwithstanding.The second is papyrus P 75 . P 75 is another early manuscript (3 rdcentury) that supports the traditional reading of the Textus Receptus. TheNew American Standard Bible (NASB) by virtue of P 75 will soon updateits NT by putting the clause on Christ’s ascension, “and carried up intoheaven,” back into Luke 24:51 which is currently omitted. This is nosmall embarrassment to the NASB translation committee. Shame on themfor playing ping-pong with God’s Word! NASB users would soon have tocough out cash for their new and improved NASB.All this tells us that the Textus Receptus on which the KJV is based,being the divinely preserved text, is a steady text. The Westcott-Hort textof the modern versions, on the other hand, is a shifty text that isrepeatedly being “tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind” oftextual criticism. God has confounded His critics indeed!30 KJV Q&A