Subject: Re: KJV MSS

From: Mike Arcieri <[email-masked]>
Date: 10 Mar 97 23:02:53 EST

> > On Fri, 7 Mar 1997, Ronald L. Minton wrote:
> > 
> > > I know that the KJV team relied mostly on Beza, but I have heard that 
> > > they likely used a few Greek manuscripts as well.  Is there any definitive

> > > word on this?
> > > 
> > Yes, there is definitive word on this.

Now, once more.  Do we know about any actual mss the KJV team likely used?

Dr. Minton, 

I don't think they used _any_ Greek MSS whatsoever. They did use Beza's GNT as
the primary basis (as Robinson correctly pointed out) and they did occasionally
use Stephanus, the Complutensian and, very rarely, Erasmus. The occasional
textual ref in the margin obviously came from one of the printed editions. The
only person I know of who claims the KJV translators used Greek and/or Latin MSS
(Old Latin at that) is Peter Ruckman - and the evidence he presents for this is
his own opinion. :-) 

Had the KJV translators used MSS, I suspect they would have made mention of this
in their "Translators to the Reader" but they only speak about Hebrew and Greek
texts: the title page does say  "Original tongues: & with the former
Translations diligently compared" (an obvious ref. to the Heb/Greek texts and
various translations available to them).

Hope this helps.

Mike A.

---

From: "Ronald L. Minton" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 1997 13:15:34 -0600 (CST)

aI have seen the price date A.D. 157 used to date the first OL translation.
I have read what Aland and a few others say about the OL and I have not 
seen the 157.  What is the source of the 157, and is it accurate?  My 
initial reaction is that it is not accurate, but there may be some 
evidence I do not know of.  I have always taught approximately 180 or 190 
as the date.  Also, do we have evidence that anyone before Cyprian used 
it?  How about Irenaeus?

--
Prof. Ron Minton: [email-masked]   W (417)268-6053  H 833-9581
Baptist Bible Graduate School 628 E. Kearney St. Springfield, MO 65803

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 97 16:36:00 +0100

>as the date.  Also, do we have evidence that anyone before Cyprian used 

My apologize for late dealing with this post. Without further references I 
simply fail to assess this date (A.D. 157).

Some hold that Tertullian used at least parts of the Bible in a Latin 
translation, but his testimony is notoriously difficult to assess. 

Irenaeus wrote in Greek (around A.D. 180). Unfortunately, his work *adversus 
Haereses* has been preserved only in a slavish (and therefore poor) Latin 
translation (Greek fragments have been preserved only in one papyrus MS, in 
Euseb's Church History, and in Epiphanius' Panarion). Some ascribe this Latin 
translation to the 3rd century, others to the late 4th century. There seems to 
be some connection between Latin Irenaeus and Cyprian.
To sum up: Irenaeus has not helped us so far in assessing the date A.D. 157.

Ulrich Schmid, Muenster