This may be too involved for this thread but I like sharing it when I think it could be interesting and possibly helpful.
My intentions in this post are not to oppose nor contend but to merely share what I've come to believe is true concerning Bible manuscripts and translations. The only translations which contain the plenary of Scripture are those derived from what is classified as the Majority Text, which contains the generality (90%) of all extant manuscript copies, for there are no known extant original autographs (writings) of the Biblical writers.
All translations derive from either the Majority Text or the Minority Text, and a few passage checks can determine from which of these Texts a translation originates. One significant passage that arouses attention is 2Samual 21:19 which is supposed to read "Elhanan the son of Jaareoregim, a Bethlehemite, slew the brother of Goliath.” Most of the modern translations omit the phrase “the brother of” because there are no known Hebrew manuscripts containing this phrase, and therefore it’s obvious this omission was a mistake in the Hebrew copy tradition, because the correct reading confirming its validity is in 1 Chronicles 20:5 which states that “Elhanan the son of Jair slew Lahmi the brother of Goliath.” Thus the errant reading portrays Elhanan and not David who killed Goliath.
The NIV, which still may be outselling the KJV just recently included this phrase, but for the majority of its existence it contained the errant reading, as do others such as the ESV, HCSB, NASB, RSV and others. The existing problems with most modern translations are not in the OT Hebrew but in the NT Greek, with omissions being the primary problem among them.
The omission problem does not exist in the Hebrew of the OT due to the careful copying procedures of the Masoretic scribes and others who required the counting of all the letters within all contents. The King James translators italicized words to let the reader know they were not in the manuscripts, and this maintained correct renderings which are collated with other passages that are in the manuscripts, i.e. in the above 2Sam. 21:19 and 1Chr. 20:5 you will note the italicization of “the brother of” in 2Sam, but not in 1Chr. .
In the winter of 1928 this translation error got the attention of a prominent publisher in England who wrote an article entitled “Who Killed Goliath?” Then in the spring of 1929 another article was published entitled “The Dispute About Goliath,” in which the supposed most learned Bible scholars in the Church of England claimed that this rendering was correct; that Elhanan and not David killed Goliath, and that there were other “exaggerations” such as Noah and the ark, Jonah and the whale, the Garden of Eden and the longevity of Methuselah. The editor claimed they were inundated with letters as to which rendering was correct (David Otis Fuller, “Which Bible”; pgs. 176, 177).
The overview concerning the variances between the Majority and Minority texts lies within their age, where less validity is given to the oldest manuscripts (the Minority Text, which represents only five percent of extant manuscripts, and another five percent with the Neutral Text) because they should have worn out from copying usage along with most of the others. Early in Church history scribes would discard these manuscripts and not use them because they were too inconsistent with the majority of all manuscripts, thus extending their antiquity, which also resulted from the arid climate in which they were discovered.
The two codex manuscripts which comprise most of the Minority Text are the Vaticanus and the Sinaiticus, both of which are purported to be the corrupt work of Gnostic and heretic scholars. The Vaticanus was found abandoned in the Vatican library, and the Sinaiticus abandoned at the foot of Mount Sinai in a monastery. I say abandoned because the Vaticanus laid perdue for fifteen hundred years on a shelf in the Vatican library, and the Sinaiticus was found at the same time a monk was in the process of burning parchments which accompanied it.
Omissions only exist within the Greek NT, and some significant examples (hundreds exist) are listed below to give you an idea of this situation:
“No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven” (John 3:13). The phrase “who is in heaven” is omitted, which avoids validity to Christ being omnipresent in heaven and on earth simultaneously.
“For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one” (1John 5:7). There has been suspicion as to the validity of manuscript evidence warranting the inclusion of this entire verse, but the KJ translators evidently had sufficient manuscript validity, evidenced by their absence of italicizing them. This Trinitarian verification verse it called the “Comma Johanneum” and my suspicion is that doubt to it is due to it being the primary trinity Scripture. We can also note that this too avoids validity concerning the Spirit’s omnipresence, as indicated by what I call “the companion verse”, number eight, which along with verse seven reveals He is simultaneously in “heaven” (v 7) and on “earth” (v 8).
“And to make all see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the ages has been hidden in God who created all things through Jesus Christ” (Eph 3:9). There are numerous other passages which confirm Christ’s omnipotence in creation, but not in this one because they omit “through Jesus Christ.”
There are multitudes of omissions and variations too exhaustive to include at this time but what I’ve listed is intended to get attention to others into investigating (if desirable) this situation for themselves. The research which addresses this category of study is called “Textual Criticism” for any who would like to view and learn more about the origins of the Bible and its translations.
There are numerous books exposing this problem but the best I’ve found so far in the last 35 years are by David Otis Fuller, D.D.; “Which Bible” (best one - been rereading it for about 20 years); “True or False” and “Counterfeit or Genuine.”
The significance of knowing the accuracy of a Bible translation cannot alter the possession of faith within salvation, but it can alter the learning of a believer who is concerned about spiritual growth within salvation. The same is true concerning essential and nonessential doctrine within Soteriology.
