NetChaplain
Active
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2012
- Messages
- 1,490
For some time now (recent century) many Christians have encountered a dearth of spiritual growth, and in my opinion it’s undeniably obvious that this is derived from a twofold lack of sufficient Bible reading/studying, and of less desire for church fellowship, both of which are a priority in Scripture (Mat 4:4; Heb 10:25); and is necessary for for sufficient leading (Rom 8:14) and conforming (Rom 8:13) of the Spirit’s ongoing work within the believer’s lifestyle. It’s my understanding that in one degree or another all who have been reborn are “being conformed to the image of His Son” (Rom 8:29), but the less activity of church fellowship and Bible study, the less progression there will be in the conforming process—especially concerning encouragement—which mostly comes by Christians “exhorting one another.”
Of all that the Holy Spirit of God uses to continue His guidance and enablement within the believer, His Word (2Ti 3:16; 2Pe 1:21) is the sole tangible or physical instrument available, for all else is evaluated by the Word! This makes studying the Scriptures one of the most important (fellowship is the other means) practical means by which believers grow. This answers to the Enemy’s initial opposition to God’s Word (“Yea, hath God said – Gen 3:1) and his continued attempts against it, in order to interfere with fellowship (but never union) in this life between God and those who are His. It stands to reason that since the written Word of God is the most significant instrument by which “faith comes” (Rom 10:17), distraction from the Word is required to weaken the strength of faith by reducing or eliminating the ongoing reading and studying it. Faith never diminishes (reduced), but is ever on the increase in strength, according to the degree of knowledge and understanding of the Word of God.
[The intent of this article is to familiarize interested viewers with what I believe to be significant information concerning nearly all modern Bible translations, and searching on Bible manuscripts on YouTube will reveal information that supports both available Texts; Majority Text (Antiochain-150 AD) and Minority Text (Alexandrian-200—400 AD).]
At the time of the discovery concerning the recent finds of the Sinaiticus (1859) and Vaticanus (1881—abounded for 500 yrs.), there were Bible scholars who actually believed these codices represented a recovery of the “the pure Word of God”! The major source of the Minority Text consist of the codices Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. The former was found in a monastery at the foot of Mt. Sinai in 1859. It was discovered by Constantin (von) Tischendorf, who realized it was part of the OT and a complete copy of the NT in Greek. The latter (codex B) laid perdue on a library shelf in the Vatican, which was abandoned (circa 1350 AD), and then discovered in 1881.
Here are some brief examples concerning omitted readings in most of the modern translations:
Most neglect to include the inferred words “the brother of” in 2Sam 21:19, rendering the errant reading that “Elhanan killed Goliath.” These three words were unintentionally neglected to be entered in all manuscript copies of the Hebrew OT, thus without the inference the passage contradicts 1Chronicles 20:5 (and the entirety of David’s encounter with the giant), which correctly reads “Elhanan the son of Jair slew Lahmi the brother of Goliath,”—and no italics in this phrase!
A far greater problem concerning omissions lies within the Greek NT, containing numerous words and passages not included in the translations. A few of hundreds of significant examples is 1Jn 5:7. This passage is known to be the most direct description of the Trinitarian doctrine, but the passage is nearly entirely omitted in all Minority-based translations. It’s known as the Johannine Comma, which is absent in many sources, but nevertheless was supported enough somewhere for Erasmus and other scholars to include it in his Greek New Testament (1516), which is known as the Textus Receptus (received text).
The King James translators italicized words not found in manuscript copies, in order to maintain non-contradictive readings (e.g. “the brother of”); and let it be noticed that where this passage appears in the KJV, the words are void of italicization. Two other examples are John 3:13. The Majority Text reads “no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.” The Minority text translations omits “even the Son of man which is in heaven,” which manifests His omnipresence, being Deity. In Ephesians 3:9, the traditional reading is “hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ.” The modern translations omit “through Jesus Christ.”
The reason for this article is to assist Bible-studying viewers of the oppositional renderings between the Majority Text, which is favored due to the safety in the numbers of manuscripts; and the Minority Text, which is favored due to the antiquity of the manuscripts. As it is shown below, the age of the latter (2-4th century) is due to the disuse of them because the early copiers rejected them as unacceptable for usage, and therefore did not undergo normal ware, as did most of the manuscripts available (Majority Text).
Some of the following contains excerpts from the book “Which Bible,” by David Otis Fuller, D.D., pages 191-193. This book and two others like it of which he wrote, reveals historical conflicts over the Scriptures of the Word of God! Ground zero of this debate lies between the significant differences between the two primary groups of manuscript copies from which all Bible translations are derived; Majority Text and Minority Text. To me the most significant point to remember concerning this issue is that the former consists of most extant manuscript copies (there are no known extant original autographs or writings), and the latter are few in number, esp. in comparison to the former.
The teachings of four theologians who are said to have most “contributed both to the heresy and final issuing of manuscripts of a corrupt New Testament”:
1. Justin Martyr (100–165 AD); “originally a pagan and of pagan parentage . . . his teachings were of a heretical nature. Even as a Christian teacher he continued to where the robes of a pagan philosopher.” With Martyr, “We see how muddy the stream of pure Christian doctrine was running among the heretical sects fifty years after the death of the apostle John (100 ad).”
2. Tatain (2nd century); “Embraced the Gnostic heresy.” “Wrote a Harmony of the Gospels which was called the Diatessaron, meaning four-inone. The Gospels were so notoriously corrupt that a bishop of Syria was obliged to throw out two hundred copies of this Diatessaron, since the church members were mistaking it for the true Gospel.”
3. Clement of Alexandria (150 –215 AD); Tatian’s pupil, who founded a school in Alexandria which supported propaganda within the “heretical lines.” “Clement expressly tells us that he would not hand down Christian teachings, pure and unmixed, but rather clothed with precepts of pagan philosophy.” The entirety of heretical teachers “were possessed by Clement, and he freely quoted from their corrupted manuscripts as if they were the pure words of Scripture” (Dean Burgon, The Revision Revised, p. 336). Clements “influence in the depravation of Christianity was tremendous. But his greatest contribution was the direction given to the studies and activities of Origen, his famous pupil.”
4. Origen of Alexandria (184–253 AD); he “did the most of all to create and give direction to the forces of apostasy down through the centuries.” He said “the Scriptures are of little use to those who understand them as they are written.” Being “a pupil of Clement, he learned the teachings of the Gnostic heresy.” Phillip Schaff (1819-1893) said, “His (Origen) predilection for Plato (pagan philosopher) led him into many grand and fascinating errors.” Origen believed and taught that the human soul existed “from eternity before it was incarnated and that after death it migrated to a higher or lower form of life in accordance to the deeds done in the body. He also believed that Satan and the devils would be saved,” and he also manipulated “the whole Law and Gospel into an allegory” (this article cannot include the hundreds of other erroneous heresies he propagated). D. Ira Maurice Price (1856-1939) said that “the Emperor Constantine gave orders that fifty copies of Origen’s fifth column in his ‘Hexapla’ (the Hebrew Bible in six versions) be prepared for use in churches,” and “it has been suggested that the Codex Vaticanus may have been one of these copies” (Which Bible, pg. 3).
Frederick Ambrose Scrivener (1813-1891) wrote that “It is no less true to fact than paradoxical in sound, that the worst corruptions to which the New Testament has ever been subjected, originated within a hundred years after it was composed; that Irenaeus (150 AD), and the African Fathers, and the whole Western, with a portion of the Syrian Church, used far inferior manuscripts to those employed by Stunica, Erasmus and Stephens thirteen centuries later, when molding the Textus Receptus.” (Received Text, which content and context has the least variance of all translations with the Majority Text).
“According to J.W. Burgon (1813-1888 – wrote “The Revision Revised”) Dean of Chichester, there once were many ancient manuscripts containing the Byzantine text (circa 350), manuscripts much older than B (Vaticanus) and Aleph (codex Sinaiticus). But they were read so constantly and copied so frequently that finally they wore out and perished.” This answers to the reason why so “few Byzantine manuscripts are extant today”; and is why non-Byzantine manuscripts (Alexandrian or Minority Text) “have survived to this present day, because they were rejected by the Greek Church as faulty and so were not used.” It was also said that “the scribes usually destroyed their exemplars when they had copied the sacred books,” thus the Majority Text manuscripts are not as old as those within the Minority Text. Some examples of translations which are derived from the Majority Text are KJV, NKJV, Young’s Literal Translation and Webster’s translation, et al.
On the subject of maintaining Bible reading practices, I’ve found that a reading/studying is most consistent by merely noting the last position, then returning there, eliminating a decision of where to read (only a couple pages a day allowed me to reread the NT about 30 times in a 20 year period. This also ensures exposure to the entirety of the texts. Once a regular habit of reading is established, there will be a noticeable increase in your understanding of Biblical doctrines. It’s my suspicion that this article will find little interest to many who view it because of the lack of desire to spend significant time in studying the Word of God (not judging, just stating an observation for a sense of urgency).
* Gnostic heresy was principally based of the concept that just having knowledge of God saves you. “Gnostics considered the principal element of salvation to be direct knowledge of the supreme divinity in the form of mystical or esoteric insight. Many Gnostic texts deal not in concepts of sin and repentance, but with illusion and enlightenment.”
“In most Gnostic systems, the sufficient cause of salvation is this "knowledge of" ("acquaintance with") the divine.” –Etymology, Gnosticism.
Of all that the Holy Spirit of God uses to continue His guidance and enablement within the believer, His Word (2Ti 3:16; 2Pe 1:21) is the sole tangible or physical instrument available, for all else is evaluated by the Word! This makes studying the Scriptures one of the most important (fellowship is the other means) practical means by which believers grow. This answers to the Enemy’s initial opposition to God’s Word (“Yea, hath God said – Gen 3:1) and his continued attempts against it, in order to interfere with fellowship (but never union) in this life between God and those who are His. It stands to reason that since the written Word of God is the most significant instrument by which “faith comes” (Rom 10:17), distraction from the Word is required to weaken the strength of faith by reducing or eliminating the ongoing reading and studying it. Faith never diminishes (reduced), but is ever on the increase in strength, according to the degree of knowledge and understanding of the Word of God.
[The intent of this article is to familiarize interested viewers with what I believe to be significant information concerning nearly all modern Bible translations, and searching on Bible manuscripts on YouTube will reveal information that supports both available Texts; Majority Text (Antiochain-150 AD) and Minority Text (Alexandrian-200—400 AD).]
At the time of the discovery concerning the recent finds of the Sinaiticus (1859) and Vaticanus (1881—abounded for 500 yrs.), there were Bible scholars who actually believed these codices represented a recovery of the “the pure Word of God”! The major source of the Minority Text consist of the codices Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. The former was found in a monastery at the foot of Mt. Sinai in 1859. It was discovered by Constantin (von) Tischendorf, who realized it was part of the OT and a complete copy of the NT in Greek. The latter (codex B) laid perdue on a library shelf in the Vatican, which was abandoned (circa 1350 AD), and then discovered in 1881.
Here are some brief examples concerning omitted readings in most of the modern translations:
Most neglect to include the inferred words “the brother of” in 2Sam 21:19, rendering the errant reading that “Elhanan killed Goliath.” These three words were unintentionally neglected to be entered in all manuscript copies of the Hebrew OT, thus without the inference the passage contradicts 1Chronicles 20:5 (and the entirety of David’s encounter with the giant), which correctly reads “Elhanan the son of Jair slew Lahmi the brother of Goliath,”—and no italics in this phrase!
A far greater problem concerning omissions lies within the Greek NT, containing numerous words and passages not included in the translations. A few of hundreds of significant examples is 1Jn 5:7. This passage is known to be the most direct description of the Trinitarian doctrine, but the passage is nearly entirely omitted in all Minority-based translations. It’s known as the Johannine Comma, which is absent in many sources, but nevertheless was supported enough somewhere for Erasmus and other scholars to include it in his Greek New Testament (1516), which is known as the Textus Receptus (received text).
The King James translators italicized words not found in manuscript copies, in order to maintain non-contradictive readings (e.g. “the brother of”); and let it be noticed that where this passage appears in the KJV, the words are void of italicization. Two other examples are John 3:13. The Majority Text reads “no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.” The Minority text translations omits “even the Son of man which is in heaven,” which manifests His omnipresence, being Deity. In Ephesians 3:9, the traditional reading is “hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ.” The modern translations omit “through Jesus Christ.”
The reason for this article is to assist Bible-studying viewers of the oppositional renderings between the Majority Text, which is favored due to the safety in the numbers of manuscripts; and the Minority Text, which is favored due to the antiquity of the manuscripts. As it is shown below, the age of the latter (2-4th century) is due to the disuse of them because the early copiers rejected them as unacceptable for usage, and therefore did not undergo normal ware, as did most of the manuscripts available (Majority Text).
Some of the following contains excerpts from the book “Which Bible,” by David Otis Fuller, D.D., pages 191-193. This book and two others like it of which he wrote, reveals historical conflicts over the Scriptures of the Word of God! Ground zero of this debate lies between the significant differences between the two primary groups of manuscript copies from which all Bible translations are derived; Majority Text and Minority Text. To me the most significant point to remember concerning this issue is that the former consists of most extant manuscript copies (there are no known extant original autographs or writings), and the latter are few in number, esp. in comparison to the former.
The teachings of four theologians who are said to have most “contributed both to the heresy and final issuing of manuscripts of a corrupt New Testament”:
1. Justin Martyr (100–165 AD); “originally a pagan and of pagan parentage . . . his teachings were of a heretical nature. Even as a Christian teacher he continued to where the robes of a pagan philosopher.” With Martyr, “We see how muddy the stream of pure Christian doctrine was running among the heretical sects fifty years after the death of the apostle John (100 ad).”
2. Tatain (2nd century); “Embraced the Gnostic heresy.” “Wrote a Harmony of the Gospels which was called the Diatessaron, meaning four-inone. The Gospels were so notoriously corrupt that a bishop of Syria was obliged to throw out two hundred copies of this Diatessaron, since the church members were mistaking it for the true Gospel.”
3. Clement of Alexandria (150 –215 AD); Tatian’s pupil, who founded a school in Alexandria which supported propaganda within the “heretical lines.” “Clement expressly tells us that he would not hand down Christian teachings, pure and unmixed, but rather clothed with precepts of pagan philosophy.” The entirety of heretical teachers “were possessed by Clement, and he freely quoted from their corrupted manuscripts as if they were the pure words of Scripture” (Dean Burgon, The Revision Revised, p. 336). Clements “influence in the depravation of Christianity was tremendous. But his greatest contribution was the direction given to the studies and activities of Origen, his famous pupil.”
4. Origen of Alexandria (184–253 AD); he “did the most of all to create and give direction to the forces of apostasy down through the centuries.” He said “the Scriptures are of little use to those who understand them as they are written.” Being “a pupil of Clement, he learned the teachings of the Gnostic heresy.” Phillip Schaff (1819-1893) said, “His (Origen) predilection for Plato (pagan philosopher) led him into many grand and fascinating errors.” Origen believed and taught that the human soul existed “from eternity before it was incarnated and that after death it migrated to a higher or lower form of life in accordance to the deeds done in the body. He also believed that Satan and the devils would be saved,” and he also manipulated “the whole Law and Gospel into an allegory” (this article cannot include the hundreds of other erroneous heresies he propagated). D. Ira Maurice Price (1856-1939) said that “the Emperor Constantine gave orders that fifty copies of Origen’s fifth column in his ‘Hexapla’ (the Hebrew Bible in six versions) be prepared for use in churches,” and “it has been suggested that the Codex Vaticanus may have been one of these copies” (Which Bible, pg. 3).
Frederick Ambrose Scrivener (1813-1891) wrote that “It is no less true to fact than paradoxical in sound, that the worst corruptions to which the New Testament has ever been subjected, originated within a hundred years after it was composed; that Irenaeus (150 AD), and the African Fathers, and the whole Western, with a portion of the Syrian Church, used far inferior manuscripts to those employed by Stunica, Erasmus and Stephens thirteen centuries later, when molding the Textus Receptus.” (Received Text, which content and context has the least variance of all translations with the Majority Text).
“According to J.W. Burgon (1813-1888 – wrote “The Revision Revised”) Dean of Chichester, there once were many ancient manuscripts containing the Byzantine text (circa 350), manuscripts much older than B (Vaticanus) and Aleph (codex Sinaiticus). But they were read so constantly and copied so frequently that finally they wore out and perished.” This answers to the reason why so “few Byzantine manuscripts are extant today”; and is why non-Byzantine manuscripts (Alexandrian or Minority Text) “have survived to this present day, because they were rejected by the Greek Church as faulty and so were not used.” It was also said that “the scribes usually destroyed their exemplars when they had copied the sacred books,” thus the Majority Text manuscripts are not as old as those within the Minority Text. Some examples of translations which are derived from the Majority Text are KJV, NKJV, Young’s Literal Translation and Webster’s translation, et al.
On the subject of maintaining Bible reading practices, I’ve found that a reading/studying is most consistent by merely noting the last position, then returning there, eliminating a decision of where to read (only a couple pages a day allowed me to reread the NT about 30 times in a 20 year period. This also ensures exposure to the entirety of the texts. Once a regular habit of reading is established, there will be a noticeable increase in your understanding of Biblical doctrines. It’s my suspicion that this article will find little interest to many who view it because of the lack of desire to spend significant time in studying the Word of God (not judging, just stating an observation for a sense of urgency).
* Gnostic heresy was principally based of the concept that just having knowledge of God saves you. “Gnostics considered the principal element of salvation to be direct knowledge of the supreme divinity in the form of mystical or esoteric insight. Many Gnostic texts deal not in concepts of sin and repentance, but with illusion and enlightenment.”
“In most Gnostic systems, the sufficient cause of salvation is this "knowledge of" ("acquaintance with") the divine.” –Etymology, Gnosticism.
