Textus Receptus

Mark Ward and Scott Ingram discuss their points of agreement and disagreement on textual criticism, Textus Receptus, and the New King James version. - YouTube

“Did Erasmus back translate the last five verses of Revelation from Latin to Greek in his textual critical work or did he place the Latin in the Greek text as a placeholder until his publisher was able to find a Greek text containing those five verses?” - Ref21

“I’m not being snarky; I’m asking very sincerely. I’m driving at what I think is an important and even peacemaking point in the debate over the text of the Greek New Testament.” - Mark Ward

(A YouTube transcript is available at the link above, though you have to do a bit of hunting to find it.)

“Why don’t my brothers who prefer the TR use the NKJV or MEV? And if they don’t like these options, why not create one that fits in that quadrant? [‘right’ text, easy words]” - Mark Ward

“Scrivener carefully noted 111 passages in which the KJV translators chose to follow Beza against Stephanus, 59 in which they did the opposite, and 67 in which they differed from both texts and went with some other reading.” - Mark Ward

“There are about two dozen printed ‘TR’ editions with varying levels of difference among them. Which one preserves the perfect text? Purchasers of which of these editions had the every jot and tittle promise fulfilled for them? It can be only one—if indeed you believe in perfect preservation.” - By Faith We Understand

Mark Ward: “[H]enceforth and forevermore, God helping me, I will not discuss textual criticism with people who insist on the exclusive use of the KJV … [v]ernacular translation is the only issue I’ll debate. Resolved: the KJV is not—or rather, is no longer—a vernacular translation. Let’s talk English.”