Someone suggested Pickering as a New Testament text source. I wrote "someone suggesting Pickering" - which is a good example of mistakes easily made. I merged "suggested" with "Pickering" and failed to see the mistake the first time through.
I was immediately impressed by the clarity of Pickering's writing, especially so much has been claimed without convincing evidence.
Everyone with a modern Bible, including the New KJV, is dealing with the "eclectic text," which means a Greek New Testament patchwork quilt, taking readings from this and that source. The two main sources are Sinaiticus (Aleph) and Vaticanus (B). I consider both of them to be fraudulent and modern, not trustworthy and ancient. Tischendorf is connected to both and based his fame on his promotion of them as the earliest and best.
Hort, of Westcott-Hort fame, loathed the traditional text. He favored a "Mary" religion over a "Jesus" religion, so he and colleague Westcott produced their own Greek text secretly for the KJV revision and published it at the same time as the revision. Special note - the Westcott-Hort Greek New Testament has no footnotes to support their patchwork. Hort's massive effort failed in his lifetime, but he almost destroyed the concept of a valid, trustworthy apostolic text.
When you hear "eclectic text," replace it with "patchwork quilt" - from here and there and everywhere, but especially from Aleph (Sinaiticus) and B (Vaticanus), which do not agree.
Another datum - the traditional - or Byzantine - or Majority text comprise 95% of all the documents. The Wescott-Hort evidence comes from 5%.
All the modernists after Westcott-Hort have attached themselves to the claims of those two men and have not moved beyond W-H.
The variations among the modernist Greek versions would be hilarious if they were not so sad. They do not agree with each other, which goes along well with the theme of uncertainty.
Pickering gets to the heart of the matter by asking, "How would apostolic sources be treated?" The key copies (parchment/skin) would be used as the template for paper (papyrus) copies as the Church expanded in all directions.
Very early in the game, heretics produced their own versions. There are more heresies in the early Egyptian congregations than fleas on a dog, and the early Church Fathers complained of these heretical texts.
What would circulate in abundance versus those copied in very limited editions? - like those NIV "Youth Bibles" and "Macho Men" Bibles and "Young Housewife" Bibles. I can go to the bookstore and get a Holy Spirit Bible, plus all manner of commentary in Bibles from those fleas reborn in the footnotes. The New KJV takes away clarity by constantly offering up Westcott-Hort style corrections in the footnotes. They suggest a scenario where a sports book says, "The Chicago Cubs won the World Series in 2016." Footnote - Or, the Indians.
Thus we have the Majority Text of the New Testament wearing out the previous generation of templates - copied again as the parchment deteriorated. A popular book, even post-Reformation, is worn out when enough people handle it. Example - Bunyan's works, some of which fell apart during secretive, energetic sharing.
The modernist argument is that they have the earliest and most accurate text, but "earliest" is a stretch. They give Sinaiticus and Vaticanus birth dates of 400 AD. I have trouble believing that either one lasted 1400+ years.
Here is a sample of Vatican publishing, the Douai version of Genesis 3:15 - the First Gospel.
Jesuit Douay Reims - Genesis 3:15 -
I will put enmities between thee and the woman, and thy seed and her seed: she shall crush thy head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel.
King James - Genesis 3:15
15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
I spent a lot of time checking out books from the Vatican owned seminary in Columbus, Ohio. This passage is one of many used by Rome to elevate Mary as the Savior (Co-Redeemer, literally). The cloud that ended the drought was foot-shaped! 1 Kings 18:44. Much of the Mariology was based on that Roman version of Genesis 3:15 which turned the Gospel into the opposite. And yet the Protestants have united with Rome in the production and distribution of Bibles.
