P

Palfrey, 1830. J.G. Palfrey, The New Testament in the common Version, conformed to Griesbach's Standard Greek Text. Boston, 1830.

Dr. Palfrey's revision of the King James version in accordance with Griesbach 1805 is perhaps the earliest example of a scholar's attempt to fully inform the public at large of the results of the new textual criticism.

Palmer, 1881. Edwin Palmer, Η ΚΑΙΝΗ ΔΙΑΘΗΚΗ. The Greek Testament with the Readings Adopted by the Revisers of the Authorised Version. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1881.

This volume was published as a companion to the Revised Version of the New Testament. The Preface gives the following information: "[The revisers] did not esteem it within their province to construct a continuous and complete Greek text. They adopted, however, a large number of readings which deviated from the text presumed to underlie the Authorised version, and they put a list of these readings into the hands of the Delegates and Syndics of the Oxford and Cambridge University Presses, in order that they may be brought in one way or another before the public. The Delegates of the Oxford Press have thought it most convenient to introduce them into a continuous Greek text, and to set at the foot of each page the readings which they displace, together with those readings which are noticed in the margin of the Revised Version. The body of the text is taken from the third edition of Stephanus, published in 1550."

This text was reprinted in an Oxford edition "with References in the Margin to Parallel Passages of the Old and the New Testament" in 1882, and together with parallel KJV and RV texts in The New Testament of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, being the Authorised Version set forth in 1611 arranged in parallel Columns with the Revised Version of 1881 and with the Greek Text followed in the Revised Version, to which are added the Readings followed in the Authorised Version and the Readings noted in the Margin of the Revised Version (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1882). Compare with Scrivener 1881 and the English Revised Version. Collated against Estienne 1550 in Scrivener and Nestle 1906.

Palmer et al., 1973. Edwin H. Palmer et al., The Holy Bible: New International Version. The New Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1973. Revised 1978 and 1984.

The New International Version is evidently based on Aland Black Metzger Wikren 1966. For a history of the version see Richard Barnard, God's Word in Our Language: The Story of the New International Version (Colorado Springs: International Bible Society, 1989). For an explanation and defense of the version see Kenneth L. Barker et al., The NIV. The Making of a Contemporary Translation (Colorado Springs: International Bible Society, 1991). For scholarly criticism see Robert Martin, Accuracy of Translation and the New International Version (Carlisle, Pennsylvania: Banner of Truth Trust, 1989).

Parker et al., 1568. Matthew Parker et al., The holi Bible, conteynyng the Olde Testament and the newe, Imprinted at London in povvles Curch-yarde, by Richard Jugge, printer to the Queenes Maiestie. Cum privilegio Regiae Maiestatis. London, 1568.

The Bishops' Bible, a revision of Coverdale 1539.

Parker, 1863. Herman Heinfetter [Pseudonym of Frederick Parker], A Literal Translation of the New Testament of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, on definite rules of translation, from the text of the Vatican Manuscript. 6th ed. London: Evan Evans, 1863.

By the same author: A Collation of an English version of the New Testament of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, from the text of the Vatican Manuscript, with the Authorized English version (London: Evan Evans, 1864); and Corrections of the copies of the New Testament portion of the Vatican Manuscript (London: Evan Evans, 1866).

Parker's translation of Codex Vaticanus is based upon Cardinal Mai's edition of the manuscript.

Pettigrew, 1827. Thomas Joseph Pettigrew, Bibliotheca Sussexiana. A Descriptive Catalogue, accompanied by Historical and Biographical Notices, of the Manuscripts and Printed Books contained in the Library of His Royal Highness the Duke of Sussex. London, 1827.

Pickering, 1977. Wilbur Pickering, The Identity of the New Testament Text. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1977; 2nd edition, 1980.

Pickering presents the case for the "majority text method" (see Hodges and Farstad 1982), and critiques other methods. This book is the most thorough defense of the traditional text to appear since the days of John Burgon, and is regarded by Hodges and Farstad as providing the appropriate Prolegomena to their text, but as a work of scholarship it falls well below the ordinary standards. Pickering's arguments are essentially theological, and he depends upon unreliable secondary sources for most of his text-critical information. For criticism of this book see chapter ten of Epp and Fee 1993. For other more cautious defenses of the traditional text see Sturz 1984 and Pierpont and Robinson 1991.

Pierpont and Robinson, 1991. William G. Pierpont and Maurice A. Robinson, The New Testament in the Original Greek According to the Byzantine/Majority Textform. Atlanta: Original Word Publishers, 1991.

This text, like the text of Hodges and Farstad 1982, is derived from the Byzantine manuscript data of von Soden 1913. It is similar to the Hodges & Farstad text, but differs slightly because of two differences in the method: (1) Pierpont and Robinson adopted only the readings that von Soden had classified as Byzantine "K-text," whereas Hodges and Farstad sometimes adopted readings from his "I-text." (2) In cases where the majority reading within the "K-text" represented less than 70% of that group, Pierpont and Robinson sometimes adopted another reading from the group on the basis of internal principles relating to transmissional probabilities, transcriptional probabilities, and style and syntax considerations, etc., rather than simply adopt the majority reading. The Introduction states that in this they "have followed the critical canons of John W. Burgon throughout the entire Greek New Testament," and for a discussion of these canons it refers the reader to pages 40-67 of Burgon's The Traditional Text of the Holy Gospels Vindicated and Established (see Burgon 1896. But unlike Burgon, Pierpont and Robinson leave out of consideration the evidence of the ancient versions and patristic quotations, and deal exclusively with evidence from the Greek copies). The edition thus aims to represent not merely the majority of all manuscripts, but the earliest form of the "Byzantine" text. Hodges and Farstad attempted to do this only in the book of Revelation and in the Story of the Adulteress in the eighth chapter of John. Also unlike Hodges and Farstad, the Pierpont and Robinson edition lacks an apparatus of variants. The Introduction to the text explains the method used, and lays out some arguments for the editors' contention that the later "Byzantine" manuscripts are closer to the original than are any of the earlier "Alexandrian" manuscripts. The text is compared in English with the KJV in Pierpont 1991, and collated against Scrivener 1881 in the "majority text notes" appendix of Green 1979.

Pierpont and Robinson, 2005. Maurice A. Robinson and William G. Pierpont, The New Testament in the Original Greek: Byzantine Textform, 2005. Southborough, Massachusetts: Chilton Book Publishing, 2005.

A slightly revised edition of the text published by Robinson and Pierpont in 1991, with marginal notes showing variations of the Byzantine manuscript groups and the readings of the Nestle-Aland text.

Pierpont, 1991. William Pierpont, Some Improvements to the King James Version from the Majority Greek Manuscripts. Wichita: William Pierpont, 1991.

This is a pamphlet published by the author, giving in English about 800 readings of the Pierpont & Robinson text (see Pierpont and Robinson 1991) where it differs from the Greek text presumed to underlie the King James version.

Porter, 1848. J.S. Porter, Principles of Textual Criticism. London, 1848.