Far Above All – NT Literal Translation. Currently the file is for e-sword only.
The Text
We regard the Bible as one consistent whole, but as the translation of the New Testament has been published whereas that of the Old Testament (Tanakh) is only under preparation at the time of writing, this introduction only covers the New Testament.
We have chosen the Robinson-Pierpont text for the underlying Greek text because we consider it to be in principle the best attested text, not simply because it as a whole is consistently attested by the vast majority of manuscripts, but also because it is also has good early version support (especially the Syriac Peshitta, and often also the Vulgate), and good “church father” support. It is also underpinned by well-founded working principles of transmissional history. See the works of J.W. Burgon and F.H.A. Scrivener, and the appendix to the Robinson-Pierpont text by Maurice A. Robinson, The Case for Byzantine Priority, for a detailed factual and scholarly rebuttal of the modern critical approach which ignores the text in favour of the few and mutually disparate Egyptian manuscripts and their scarce supporters among the ancient witnesses.
We also value the Greek Orthodox Church Patriarchal text of 1904 and the Received Text, which have both served well for a long time, and continue to do so.
The Greek Orthodox Church Patriarchal text was constructed from 20 manuscripts, though with one dominant one, by the Greek Orthodox Church in 1904 and is copyright free. We refer to it as P1904.
The Received Text, or Textus Receptus, is best known in three slightly different editions: the Stephanus edition of 1550, the Elzevir edition of 1624, and the Scrivener edition of 1894. Where all three agree, we denote the reading by TR. Where any one differs from the others, we specify these editions as S1550, E1624 and S1894 respectively. The S1894 edition is what Scrivener took to underlie the Authorized Version.
We have observed that P1904 has more deviations from RP than average in the gospels, and that TR has far more deviations from RP than average in Revelation.
We regard RP as representing, as accurately as the efforts and skill of the compilers would permit, the majority text[1], and P1904 and TR as being fairly typical representatives of that type of text. Furthermore, we would emphasize that since the majority text type manuscripts provide a very solid, consistent witness, there are fewer differences among them than there are in comparison with the very disparate Egyptian texts (è B etc.) and the modern editions which favour them so greatly (such as Westcott-Hort, Nestle-Aland). Moreover, the differences amongst majority text type manuscripts are almost always very trivial, whereas the variant readings in the Egyptian texts, though often trivial, are occasionally of enormous doctrinal importance (e.g. 1 Timothy 3:16, where the majority text reading is God was manifested in the flesh…, a tremendous statement lost in the Nestle-Aland text and modern versions based on it).copied from biblesupport.com, Baptized believer