Daniel J. Mount | Christian Author and Speaker

New Testament Textual Defense

This book is Daniel’s current project. His studies have led him to believe that the modern critical text is an inaccurate representation of the original manuscripts. It was originally advanced by liberal 18th-century German and English scholars, who sought to excise certain passages supporting central doctrines of orthodox Christianity (such as Christ’s divinity and His virgin birth), by arguing that a small group of flawed manuscripts was superior to the traditional text. Unfortunately, many conservative scholars have followed their lead, unaware of the agenda that leads scholars to argue that verses like Matthew 18:11 and Luke 9:55-56 were not originally part of the Gospels. (Compare a King James Version or New King James Version to almost any modern translation in these verses. You might be surprised!)
Daniel believes that the overwhelming majority of manuscripts—the manuscript base for the King James Version, New King James Version, and other versions—is far more representative of the original autographs. He is preparing a comprehensive case for the superiority of the Traditional Text.


	New Testament Textual Defense This book is Daniel’s current project. His studies have led him to believe that the modern critical text is an inaccurate representation of the original manuscripts. It was originally advanced by liberal 18th-century German and English scholars, who sought to excise certain passages supporting central doctrines of orthodox Christianity (such as Christ’s divinity and His virgin birth), by arguing that a small group of flawed manuscripts was superior to the traditional text. Unfortunately, many conservative scholars have followed their lead, unaware of the agenda that leads scholars to argue that verses like Matthew 18:11 and Luke 9:55-56 were not originally part of the Gospels. (Compare a King James Version or New King James Version to almost any modern translation in these verses. You might be surprised!) Daniel believes that the overwhelming majority of manuscripts—the manuscript base for the King James Version, New King James Version, and other versions—is far more representative of the original autographs. He is preparing a comprehensive case for the superiority of the Traditional Text.