In Christian theology, Mary is revered as the Mother of God (Theotokos) but is not considered divine in nature. While she holds a highly exalted, sinless, and honored position as the mother of the divine person Jesus Christ, she is a human creature, not a goddess, and therefore is not worshipped, say Catholic Answers Magazine and Catholic Stand. from AI
77 Changed Doctrines in Modern Bibles
- Thread starter Bible_Highlighter
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Many know she was a virgin from
Luke 1:26-35
Easy-to-Read Version
The Virgin Mary
26-27 During Elizabeth’s sixth month of pregnancy, God sent the angel Gabriel to a virgin girl who lived in Nazareth, a town in Galilee. She was engaged to marry a man named Joseph from the family of David. Her name was Mary. 28 The angel came to her and said, “Greetings! The Lord is with you; you are very special to him.”
29 But Mary was very confused about what the angel said. She wondered, “What does this mean?”
30 The angel said to her, “Don’t be afraid, Mary, because God is very pleased with you. 31 Listen! You will become pregnant and have a baby boy. You will name him Jesus. 32 He will be great. People will call him the Son of the Most High God, and the Lord God will make him king like his ancestor David. 33 He will rule over the people of Jacob forever; his kingdom will never end.”
34 Mary said to the angel, “How will this happen? I am still a virgin.”
35 The angel said to Mary, “The Holy Spirit will come to you, and the power of the Most High God will cover you. The baby will be holy and will be called the Son of God.
Matthew 1:18-25
Easy-to-Read Version
The Birth of Jesus the Messiah
18 This is how the birth of Jesus the Messiah happened. His mother Mary was engaged to marry Joseph. But before they married, he learned that she was expecting a baby. (She was pregnant by the power of the Holy Spirit.) 19 Mary’s husband, Joseph, was a good man. He did not want to cause her public disgrace, so he planned to divorce her secretly.
20 But after Joseph thought about this, an angel from the Lord came to him in a dream. The angel said, “Joseph, son of David, don’t be afraid to accept Mary to be your wife. The baby inside her is from the Holy Spirit. 21 She will give birth to a son. You will name him Jesus.[a] Give him that name because he will save his people from their sins.”
22 All this happened to make clear the full meaning of what the Lord said through the prophet: 23 “The virgin will be pregnant and will give birth to a son. They will name him Immanuel.” (Immanuel means “God with us.”)
24 When Joseph woke up, he did what the Lord’s angel told him to do. He married Mary. 25 But Joseph did not have sexual relations with her until her son was born. And he named him Jesus.
As a former RC, I think they would agree.
That said, the prayers, adoration and exaltation would be considered by Born Again believers as a form of their worship.
I only remember one young RC lady ever told me she still worships Mary. Her name coincidentally happened to be Mary aka Maria S. and this conversation took place at lunch the week after I cast a demon out of her at the campus of WVU.
The Short of it, that proved to me she never trusted Christ as she misled me to believe. She had been insincere when I shared the gospel previously and led her in prayer.
She said she still worshipped Mary and only prayed with me to be agreeable/make me happy.
That was admitted at that lunch....
Then I broke up with my girlfriend, but I digress.
Brother, I see the insignia [RIP] under your name and notice that you haven't posted since last November.
Let me just say it was a complete honor to read Your posts and understand Your wisdom and knowledge. You have ran Your race and Won. One day we shall meet on the other side when my race is finished. Enjoy Your Peace, no more suffering, and Eternal Journey in the presence of our Wonderful Lord!
Take a look at this comparison of a few verses on key doctrines in the King James Version versus the RSV and NIV....
1 John 5:7
Removal of the Trinity
KJV---For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost:and these three are one.
RSV---For there are three that testify the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost
NIV---( missing )
Romans 1:3
Systematic removal of the divinity of Jesus Christ
KJV---Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;
RSV--- concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh,
NIV---regarding his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who as to his human nature was a descendant of David,
Acts 22:16
Systematic removal of the divinity of Jesus Christ
KJV---wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord
RSV---and wash away thy sins, calling on his name.
NIV---wash your sins away, calling on his name.
The problem is that some of these new versions are not just a 'different translation', they basically have done editing to actually change doctrines or take out whatever they disagree with or doesnt fit with a doctrine they hold or someones traditions. Some have taken out whole chapters out or like the Mormons have done away and written their own... and eventually you get to a point which the proffessor brings up where 'You cannot prove the Trinity in the NIV...'
So its not just a 'different translation'....
In the new RSV/ NIV the following is missing so its message or meaning it gave has just been wiped out:
Matt 17:21
Matt 18:11
Matt 23:14
Mark 7:16
Mark 9:44
Mark 9:46
Mark 11:26
Mark 15:28
Luke 17:36
Luke 23:17
John 5:4
Acts 8:37
Acts 15:34
Acts 28:29
Romans 16:24
Also, look at Rev 1:11, which I have always memorized as: "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end." That phrase is also missing from the NRSV.
The Textus Receptus or Majority Text (the vast majority of copies from original, and what the King James is based on) has been attacked with changes, amendments, deletions, and to diminish Gods truth but yet it still stands. Many of the new versions are based on a few corrupted manuscripts of Alexandrian codices which have major deletions which form the basis of the Minority Text.
If one studies deeper and looks in history, you will see what Bible versions that are based on the Majority Text (Textus Receptus), also called the Byzantine Text is based on the vast majority of manuscripts still in existence. The manuscripts were brought together by various editors such as Lucian (AD 250-312), Erasmus, Stephanus, Beza and the Elzevir brothers to form the text known as Textus Receptus. When the Protestant Reformers decided to translate the scriptures directly from Greek into the languages of Europe, they selected Textus Receptus as their foundation Greek document.
Important points on the Majority Text (Textus Receptus):
· Textus Receptus is based on the vast
majority
(90%) of the 5000+ Greek manuscripts in existence. That is why it is also called the
Majority
Text.
· Textus Receptus is not mutilated with deletions, additions and amendments, as is the Minority Text.
· Textus Receptus agrees with the earliest versions of the Bible: Pesh*tta (AD150) Old Latin Vulgate (AD157), the Italic Bible (AD157) etc.
· Textus Receptus agrees wih the vast
majority
of the 86,000+ citations from scripture by the early church fathers.
· Textus Receptus strongly upholds the fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith: the creation account in Genesis, the divinity of Jesus Christ, the virgin birth, the Saviour's miracles, his bodily resurrection, his literal return.
Now lets look a the Minority Text which are based on previously unknown or unrecognized Alexandrian manuscripts. These were called Vaticanus & Sinaiticus since they were somehow 'found' in the Vatican Library & a monastery in the Sinai respectively. Neither was in the original Greek language, but in a Coptic translation, an early Egyptian language. Coptic placed the origin of these two texts in the region of Alexandria, Egypt the center of the gnosticism heresy. Hence they became known collectively as the Alexandrian Codices.
The Gnostic heresy was a Greek line of thought which came to be known as Gnosticism. We find it specially in the background of the Pastoral Epistles, the Letter to the Colossians and the Fourth Gospel. This Gnostic line of thought had certain characteristics which appear all through the Pastoral Epistles as the characteristics of those whose heresies were threatening the Church and the purity of the faith. It had serious moral and ethical consequences. Its basic belief was that matter was essentially evil and spirit alone was good. That issued in two opposite results.
If matter is evil, the body is evil; and the body must be despised and held down. Therefore Gnosticism could and did issue in a rigid asceticism. The Gnostic looked on creation as an evil thing, the work of an evil god; the Christian looks on creation as a noble thing, the gift of a good God. The Christian lives in a world where all things are pure; the Gnostic lived in a world where all things were defiled.
But Gnosticism could issue in precisely the opposite ethical belief. If the body is evil, it does not matter what a man does with it. Therefore, let him sate his appetites. These things are of no importance, therefore a man can use his body in the most licentious way and it makes no difference. So the Pastorals speak of those who lead away weak women until they are laden with sin and the victims of all kinds of lusts. Such men profess to know God, but they deny him by their deeds.(Titus 1:16) They used their religious beliefs as an excuse for immorality.
Gnosticism tried to blend the new religion but ultimately was against traditional Christian beliefs and attempted to combine Paganism with Christianity. Some Gnostic groups had beliefs that often contradicted the beliefs of other Gnostic groups. The one thing they all had in common was that all of these groups departed from the orthodox Christian faith, but the Gnostic mixed their beliefs into the manuscripts they made of the scriptures, putting changes of their particular beliefs or taking out what disagreed with it.
The Alexandrian Codices that Westcott & Hort's version used, the Vaticanis & the Sinaiticus reflect this and many of the passages altered or missing from these codices were in fact quoted by the early church fathers. For instance, if one reads Irenaeus' Against Heresies 3.10.5-6, he states, "Furthermore, near the end of his Gospel, Mark says:' thus, after the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, he was taken up into heaven, and sits on the right hand of God.'" quoting Mark 16:19. Irenaeus wrote this in AD180, some 200 years before the Alexandrian Codices, yet he quotes word for word all the verses from the missing part of Mark which were supposedly not to have been added until the 4th or 5th centuries.
Important points on the Majority Text (Textus Receptus):
· Textus Receptus is based on the vast
majority
(90%) of the 5000+ Greek manuscripts in existence. That is why it is also called the
Majority
Text.
· Textus Receptus is not mutilated with deletions, additions and amendments, as is the Minority Text.
· Textus Receptus agrees with the earliest versions of the Bible: Pesh*tta (AD150) Old Latin Vulgate (AD157), the Italic Bible (AD157) etc.
· Textus Receptus agrees wih the vast
majority
of the 86,000+ citations from scripture by the early church fathers.
· Textus Receptus strongly upholds the fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith: the creation account in Genesis, the divinity of Jesus Christ, the virgin birth, the Saviour's miracles, his bodily resurrection, his literal return.
Now lets look a the Minority Text which are based on previously unknown or unrecognized Alexandrian manuscripts. These were called Vaticanus & Sinaiticus since they were somehow 'found' in the Vatican Library & a monastery in the Sinai respectively. Neither was in the original Greek language, but in a Coptic translation, an early Egyptian language. Coptic placed the origin of these two texts in the region of Alexandria, Egypt the center of the gnosticism heresy. Hence they became known collectively as the Alexandrian Codices.
The Gnostic heresy was a Greek line of thought which came to be known as Gnosticism. We find it specially in the background of the Pastoral Epistles, the Letter to the Colossians and the Fourth Gospel. This Gnostic line of thought had certain characteristics which appear all through the Pastoral Epistles as the characteristics of those whose heresies were threatening the Church and the purity of the faith. It had serious moral and ethical consequences. Its basic belief was that matter was essentially evil and spirit alone was good. That issued in two opposite results.
If matter is evil, the body is evil; and the body must be despised and held down. Therefore Gnosticism could and did issue in a rigid asceticism. The Gnostic looked on creation as an evil thing, the work of an evil god; the Christian looks on creation as a noble thing, the gift of a good God. The Christian lives in a world where all things are pure; the Gnostic lived in a world where all things were defiled.
But Gnosticism could issue in precisely the opposite ethical belief. If the body is evil, it does not matter what a man does with it. Therefore, let him sate his appetites. These things are of no importance, therefore a man can use his body in the most licentious way and it makes no difference. So the Pastorals speak of those who lead away weak women until they are laden with sin and the victims of all kinds of lusts. Such men profess to know God, but they deny him by their deeds.(Titus 1:16) They used their religious beliefs as an excuse for immorality.
Gnosticism tried to blend the new religion but ultimately was against traditional Christian beliefs and attempted to combine Paganism with Christianity. Some Gnostic groups had beliefs that often contradicted the beliefs of other Gnostic groups. The one thing they all had in common was that all of these groups departed from the orthodox Christian faith, but the Gnostic mixed their beliefs into the manuscripts they made of the scriptures, putting changes of their particular beliefs or taking out what disagreed with it.
The Alexandrian Codices that Westcott & Hort's version used, the Vaticanis & the Sinaiticus reflect this and many of the passages altered or missing from these codices were in fact quoted by the early church fathers. For instance, if one reads Irenaeus' Against Heresies 3.10.5-6, he states, "Furthermore, near the end of his Gospel, Mark says:' thus, after the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, he was taken up into heaven, and sits on the right hand of God.'" quoting Mark 16:19. Irenaeus wrote this in AD180, some 200 years before the Alexandrian Codices, yet he quotes word for word all the verses from the missing part of Mark which were supposedly not to have been added until the 4th or 5th centuries.
Theologian Benjamin G. Wilkinson writes in his book Truth Triumphant: 'The Protestant denominations are built upon that manuscript of the Greek New Testament sometimes called Textus Receptus, or the Received Text. It is that Greek New Testament from which the writings of the apostles in Greek have been translated into English, German, Dutch and other languages. During the dark ages the Received Text was practically unknown outside the Greek Church. It was restored to Christendom by the labours of that great scholar Erasmus. It is altogether too little known that the real editor of the Received Text was Lucian. None of Lucian's enemies fails to credit him with this work. Neither Lucian nor Erasmus, but rather the apostles, wrote the Greek New Testament. However, Lucian's day was an age of apostasy when a flood of depravations was systematically attempting to devastate both the Bible manuscripts and Bible theology. Origen, of the Alexandrian college, made his editions and commentaries of the Bible a secure retreat for all errors, and deformed them with philosophical speculations introducing casuistry and lying. Lucian's unrivalled success in verifying, safeguarding, and transmitting those divine writings left a heritage for which all generations should be thankful.'
In his book Which Bible? David Otis Fuller says this about Textus Receptus, that all churches fall into one of two basic study categories:
Those who use a variety of Bibles influenced by the Minority Text (the Nestle/Aland Text). Those who only study Bibles based on the Majority Text, from which came the Received Text - Textus Receptus.
Fuller continues: "First of all, the Textus Receptus was the Bible of early Eastern Christianity. Later it was adopted as the official text of the Greek Catholic Church. There were local reasons which contributed to this result. But, probably, far greater reasons will be found in the fact that the Received Text had authority enough to become, either in itself or by its translation, the Bible of the great Syrian Church; of the Waldensian Church of northern Italy; of the Gallic Church in southern France; and of the Celtic Church in Scotland and Ireland; as well as the official Bible of the Greek Catholic Church.
All these churches, some earlier, some later, were in opposition to the Church of Rome and at a time when the Received Text and these Bibles of the Constantine type were rivals. They, as represented in their descendants, are rivals to this day. The Church of Rome built on the Eusebio-Origen type of Bible; these others built on the Received Text. Therefore, because they themselves believed that the Received Text was the true apostolic Bible, and further, because the Church of Rome arrogated to itself the power to choose a Bible which bore the marks of systematic depravation, we have the testimony of these five churches to the authenticity and the apostolicity of the Received Text."
Rev. Samuel C. Gipp comments on this issue:
"The Majority Text has been known throughout history by several names. It has been known as the Byzantine text, the Imperial Text, the Traditional Text and the Reformation Text as well as the Majority Text. This text culminates in the TEXTUS RECEPTUS or Received Text which is the basis for the King James Bible, which we know also as the Authorized Version....We describe this text with the term "Universal," because it represents the majority of extant MSS which represent the original autographs. Professor Hodges of Dallas Theological Seminary explains, "The manuscript of an ancient book will, under any but the most exceptional conditions, multiply in a reasonable regular fashion with the result that the copies nearest the autograph will normally have the largest number of descendants."
Continuing from page 66 in Gipp's book: "Professor Hodges concludes, 'Thus the Majority text, upon which the King James Version is based, has in reality the strongest claim possible to be regarded as an authentic representation of the original text. This claim is quite independent of any shifting consensus of scholarly judgment about its readings and is based on the objective reality of its dominance in the transmissional history of the New Testament text.' "
In his book God Wrote Only One Bible, Jasper J Ray pens the following testimony about Textus Receptus: "Wonder of wonders, in the midst of all the present confusion regarding manuscripts, we still have a Bible we can trust. The writing of the Word of God by inspiration is no greater miracle than the miracle of its preservation in the Textus Receptus. All criticism of this text from which was translated the King James Bible, is based upon an unproved hypothesis: i.e. that there are older and more dependable copies of the original Bible manuscripts. No one in nineteen hundred years, has been able to prove that one jot or tittle has been inserted or taken out."
In his book Final Authority, William P Grady provides further interesting details about Textus Receptus, the Received Text:
"For instance, over 5,000 Greek manuscripts of the New Testament exist today ranging from small fragments containing two or three verses to nearly entire Bibles. Their ages vary from the second to the sixteenth century; the manuscripts are ending with the arrival of printing. By comparison, there exist only ten quality manuscripts of Caesar's Gallic War composed between 58-50BC "Once again, the outstanding features of the Received Text is its high percentage of agreement among so many thousands of independent witnesses. This agreement is often placed at about 90 percent; in other words, 90 percent of all existing manuscripts agree with one another so miraculously that they are able to form their own unique text If the critic of your King James Bible is correct in his rejection of the underlying Textus Receptus, then he is also under the greatest pressure to account for its existence. To complain of fabrication is one thing, but to account for its universal prevalence is quite another. Whenever a large body of ancient documents are seen to be in agreement, this inexplicable harmony becomes their greatest evidence for legitimacy. Simple arithmetic confirms that the nearer a particular reading is to the original, the longer the time span will be for descendants to follow. The longer the family is, the older the original source must be."
In his book Which Bible? David Otis Fuller says this about Textus Receptus, that all churches fall into one of two basic study categories:
Those who use a variety of Bibles influenced by the Minority Text (the Nestle/Aland Text). Those who only study Bibles based on the Majority Text, from which came the Received Text - Textus Receptus.
Fuller continues: "First of all, the Textus Receptus was the Bible of early Eastern Christianity. Later it was adopted as the official text of the Greek Catholic Church. There were local reasons which contributed to this result. But, probably, far greater reasons will be found in the fact that the Received Text had authority enough to become, either in itself or by its translation, the Bible of the great Syrian Church; of the Waldensian Church of northern Italy; of the Gallic Church in southern France; and of the Celtic Church in Scotland and Ireland; as well as the official Bible of the Greek Catholic Church.
All these churches, some earlier, some later, were in opposition to the Church of Rome and at a time when the Received Text and these Bibles of the Constantine type were rivals. They, as represented in their descendants, are rivals to this day. The Church of Rome built on the Eusebio-Origen type of Bible; these others built on the Received Text. Therefore, because they themselves believed that the Received Text was the true apostolic Bible, and further, because the Church of Rome arrogated to itself the power to choose a Bible which bore the marks of systematic depravation, we have the testimony of these five churches to the authenticity and the apostolicity of the Received Text."
Rev. Samuel C. Gipp comments on this issue:
"The Majority Text has been known throughout history by several names. It has been known as the Byzantine text, the Imperial Text, the Traditional Text and the Reformation Text as well as the Majority Text. This text culminates in the TEXTUS RECEPTUS or Received Text which is the basis for the King James Bible, which we know also as the Authorized Version....We describe this text with the term "Universal," because it represents the majority of extant MSS which represent the original autographs. Professor Hodges of Dallas Theological Seminary explains, "The manuscript of an ancient book will, under any but the most exceptional conditions, multiply in a reasonable regular fashion with the result that the copies nearest the autograph will normally have the largest number of descendants."
Continuing from page 66 in Gipp's book: "Professor Hodges concludes, 'Thus the Majority text, upon which the King James Version is based, has in reality the strongest claim possible to be regarded as an authentic representation of the original text. This claim is quite independent of any shifting consensus of scholarly judgment about its readings and is based on the objective reality of its dominance in the transmissional history of the New Testament text.' "
In his book God Wrote Only One Bible, Jasper J Ray pens the following testimony about Textus Receptus: "Wonder of wonders, in the midst of all the present confusion regarding manuscripts, we still have a Bible we can trust. The writing of the Word of God by inspiration is no greater miracle than the miracle of its preservation in the Textus Receptus. All criticism of this text from which was translated the King James Bible, is based upon an unproved hypothesis: i.e. that there are older and more dependable copies of the original Bible manuscripts. No one in nineteen hundred years, has been able to prove that one jot or tittle has been inserted or taken out."
In his book Final Authority, William P Grady provides further interesting details about Textus Receptus, the Received Text:
"For instance, over 5,000 Greek manuscripts of the New Testament exist today ranging from small fragments containing two or three verses to nearly entire Bibles. Their ages vary from the second to the sixteenth century; the manuscripts are ending with the arrival of printing. By comparison, there exist only ten quality manuscripts of Caesar's Gallic War composed between 58-50BC "Once again, the outstanding features of the Received Text is its high percentage of agreement among so many thousands of independent witnesses. This agreement is often placed at about 90 percent; in other words, 90 percent of all existing manuscripts agree with one another so miraculously that they are able to form their own unique text If the critic of your King James Bible is correct in his rejection of the underlying Textus Receptus, then he is also under the greatest pressure to account for its existence. To complain of fabrication is one thing, but to account for its universal prevalence is quite another. Whenever a large body of ancient documents are seen to be in agreement, this inexplicable harmony becomes their greatest evidence for legitimacy. Simple arithmetic confirms that the nearer a particular reading is to the original, the longer the time span will be for descendants to follow. The longer the family is, the older the original source must be."
The Majority text keeps any one person or group of persons from making changes that can obscure or drastically change the meaning but if they take it out completely then that causes a real problem as one doesnt even have words to check. Here is what having such large numbers of the Textus Receptus does..
"THE MAJORITY TEXT PRINCIPLE
If one will place all the texts along side each other and then see the most common words, he will see the truth through the error. One error by one man can never outnumber the truth presented by the majority. Remember that God promised that He would preserve His Word. This is a Biblical principle, as shown in Deuteronomy 19:15, Matthew 18:16 and II Corinthians 13:1.
The Bible way to determine truth is to collect all the witnesses and examine the facts that each one has and trust the things that the majority agree upon. All men at the beginning had the truth. As error began to creep in, a need appeared to find the truth again. As far back as the Syriac text in A. D. 150, this majority text principle was used as the common way to find the truth.
All of the texts were put together and the agreeing words were recorded, and God's Word was considered complete. Textus Receptus is a Latin term meaning: "Text Received", or "Text Approved", or "Text Accepted". This name was placed on the text in 1624 by the first men who put it into print in one volume. In 1624 this was the text that had long been accepted. Prior to that time it was called: The Majority Text. In the preface to the Greek text the publishers wrote: "The text which is now received by all, in which we give nothing altered or corrupt....."
Now here is a good explanation by Marion H. Reynolds, Jr. and Dennis W. Costella of how some of the modern translations have picked up corruption..
"...In 2 Corinthians 2:17, the Spirit of God warned against the "many which corrupt the word of God " Therefore, it is not surprising in studying church history to discover that such attempts to corrupt the Word of God were clearly evident in the altered, polluted and revised manuscripts purporting to be the Word of God that have existed through the centuries....
It is impossible in such limited space to trace the history and preservation of the true Word of God down through the centuries. However, in the providence of God, two very important things happened in the 15th and 16th centuries for which we should all be eternally grateful. First, was the invention of the printing press and second, the Protestant Reformation. It was the combination of these two developments that made possible the translation and publication of the Authorized King James Version of the Bible in 1611. From then until now, this wonderful gift of God and its subsequent translation into every known major language in the world has changed the course of history and we enjoy its benefits today.
In the latter part of the 19th Century......Theories and methods of "higher criticism" and "textual criticism" were developed and couched in such scholarly language that most people failed to recognize that these were actually attacks upon the Word of God - even though carefully disguised as an effort to "supply the English reader with a more correct text of the New Testament" and to "render the New Testament more generally intelligible." The rush toward new versions was on and though the early progress was slow, we are seeing the results today..... In 1881, influenced by and sympathetic to the Darwinian theory of evolution, two men, Brooke Foss Westcott and Fenton J. A. Hort brought forth a different version of the Greek New Testament - one which differed from the Textus Receptus (the underlying Greek text of the KJV) in over 5,700 places.
This Westcott-Hort Greek Text was later to become the basis for the English Revised Version and the American Standard Version. It gave great weight to two corrupted manuscripts-the Vaticanus (Codex B) which was found in the Vatican Library in 1481 and was known to the KJV translators but was not used by them, and the Sinaiticus (Codex Aleph) which was found in a monastery wastebasket at the foot of Mt. Sinai in 1844....
Tischendorf, who discovered the Sinaiticus manuscript, noted at least 12,000 changes that had been made on this manuscript by others than the original copyist. It is difficult to understand why such documents as these could lead one to ignore the simple fact that the Greek text underlying the King James Version, the Textus Receptus, agreed with 90-95% of all known Scripture- related manuscripts..."
So its a easy thing to discern which is the corrupted text and where it comes from in these 'new' Bible versions....
"THE MAJORITY TEXT PRINCIPLE
If one will place all the texts along side each other and then see the most common words, he will see the truth through the error. One error by one man can never outnumber the truth presented by the majority. Remember that God promised that He would preserve His Word. This is a Biblical principle, as shown in Deuteronomy 19:15, Matthew 18:16 and II Corinthians 13:1.
The Bible way to determine truth is to collect all the witnesses and examine the facts that each one has and trust the things that the majority agree upon. All men at the beginning had the truth. As error began to creep in, a need appeared to find the truth again. As far back as the Syriac text in A. D. 150, this majority text principle was used as the common way to find the truth.
All of the texts were put together and the agreeing words were recorded, and God's Word was considered complete. Textus Receptus is a Latin term meaning: "Text Received", or "Text Approved", or "Text Accepted". This name was placed on the text in 1624 by the first men who put it into print in one volume. In 1624 this was the text that had long been accepted. Prior to that time it was called: The Majority Text. In the preface to the Greek text the publishers wrote: "The text which is now received by all, in which we give nothing altered or corrupt....."
Now here is a good explanation by Marion H. Reynolds, Jr. and Dennis W. Costella of how some of the modern translations have picked up corruption..
"...In 2 Corinthians 2:17, the Spirit of God warned against the "many which corrupt the word of God " Therefore, it is not surprising in studying church history to discover that such attempts to corrupt the Word of God were clearly evident in the altered, polluted and revised manuscripts purporting to be the Word of God that have existed through the centuries....
It is impossible in such limited space to trace the history and preservation of the true Word of God down through the centuries. However, in the providence of God, two very important things happened in the 15th and 16th centuries for which we should all be eternally grateful. First, was the invention of the printing press and second, the Protestant Reformation. It was the combination of these two developments that made possible the translation and publication of the Authorized King James Version of the Bible in 1611. From then until now, this wonderful gift of God and its subsequent translation into every known major language in the world has changed the course of history and we enjoy its benefits today.
In the latter part of the 19th Century......Theories and methods of "higher criticism" and "textual criticism" were developed and couched in such scholarly language that most people failed to recognize that these were actually attacks upon the Word of God - even though carefully disguised as an effort to "supply the English reader with a more correct text of the New Testament" and to "render the New Testament more generally intelligible." The rush toward new versions was on and though the early progress was slow, we are seeing the results today..... In 1881, influenced by and sympathetic to the Darwinian theory of evolution, two men, Brooke Foss Westcott and Fenton J. A. Hort brought forth a different version of the Greek New Testament - one which differed from the Textus Receptus (the underlying Greek text of the KJV) in over 5,700 places.
This Westcott-Hort Greek Text was later to become the basis for the English Revised Version and the American Standard Version. It gave great weight to two corrupted manuscripts-the Vaticanus (Codex B) which was found in the Vatican Library in 1481 and was known to the KJV translators but was not used by them, and the Sinaiticus (Codex Aleph) which was found in a monastery wastebasket at the foot of Mt. Sinai in 1844....
Tischendorf, who discovered the Sinaiticus manuscript, noted at least 12,000 changes that had been made on this manuscript by others than the original copyist. It is difficult to understand why such documents as these could lead one to ignore the simple fact that the Greek text underlying the King James Version, the Textus Receptus, agreed with 90-95% of all known Scripture- related manuscripts..."
So its a easy thing to discern which is the corrupted text and where it comes from in these 'new' Bible versions....
So lets take a closer look a the Minority Text, which are called the Alexandrian Texts because they were from the few manuscripts produced in Alexandria in Egypt.
"..The Minority Texts were rejected by the early Christians and also by all the Protestant Reformers of the 15th, 16th and 17th centuries. The Reformers, who were well aware of the existence of
the Minority Texts, considered them unfit for translation purposes.
It is believed that the Minority Texts were butchered by Egyptian gnosticism with many changes, which are mostly deletions. The gnostics were a group that did not believe:
In the virgin birth, that Jesus was the Son of God, that Jesus was resurrected to heaven, that Jesus was the Creator, or that Jesus made atonement for our sins. There are many alterations in the Minority Texts, often a single manuscript being amended by several different scribes over a period of many years.
The Minority Texts omit approximately 200 versus from the Scriptures. This is equivalent to omitting First and Second Peter. The Minority Texts contradict themselves in hundreds of places...."
http://endtimeoutreach.com/whichbible.html
Here is some more background on the corruption of the Minority Text from another site....
"...almost all modern English bibles translated since 1898 are based on the Minority Text (this includes the New American Standard Bible, the New International Version, the Living Bible, the New Revised Standard Version, the New World Translation, the New Century Version, the Good News Bible, etc.). These bible versions are only supported by about five of the over 5,000 manuscripts in existence, or about .1% of all manuscripts, which is why it's also known as the "Minority text.".
The two most prominent manuscripts of the Minority Texts are the Vaticanus and the Sinaiticus....These Minority Texts frequently disagreed with each other as well as with the Majority Text, and also contained many obvious and flagrant mistakes. Up until the late 1800s, the Minority Texts were utterly rejected by Christians.
The fact that these two manuscripts may have been older does not prove they are better. More likely it indicates that they were set aside because of their numerous errors....
The Vaticanus, which is the sole property of the Roman Catholic Church, and the Sinaiticus, are both known to be overwhelmed with errors. Words and whole phrases are repeated twice in succession or completely omitted, while the entire manuscript has had the text mutilated by some person or persons who ran over every letter with a pen making exact identification of many of the characters impossible...."
"...One of the manuscripts that make up the Minority Text is the Vaticanus. The Vaticanus was found in 1481 in the Vatican library. The other manuscript is the Sinaiticus. The Sinaiticus was found in 1844 in a trash pile at Saint Catherine's monastery, and rescued from a long (and well-deserved) obscurity. It has a great number of omissions and has many words and phrases marked out and re-written. Both of these manuscripts are from Roman Catholic origin...."
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/nt_manuscripts.html
and it just goes on and on....
"...The Vaticanus Manuscript (B)
The Vaticanus manuscript was found in the Vatican library in 1481. It was rejected by the King James Translators because it was very corrupt and unreliable. The following portions of Scripture are missing from the Vaticanus: Genesis 1:1-46; 28; Psalms 106-138; Matthew 16:2-3; Mark 16:9-20; The Pastoral Epistles (1 & 2 Timothy and Titus) and everything after Hebrews 9:14. These were intentional omissions because the manuscript was found in excellent condition with no pieces missing. In the Gospels it leaves out 237 words, 452 clauses, and 748 whole sentences. These omissions were intentional since there was room left on pages to write these in. The Vaticanus manuscript was written on expensive Vellum and was in good condition when found which means that the missing areas were not due to missing sections but intentional omission.
The Sinaiticus Manuscript (a) Aleph
The major characteristic of this manuscript is that it is a literary mess. There are mistakes, erasures, sentences written on top of other sentences plus many words are omitted. It contains nearly all the New Testament, the Apocryphal Books plus two other false books, The Shepherd of Hermes...."
"..The Minority Texts were rejected by the early Christians and also by all the Protestant Reformers of the 15th, 16th and 17th centuries. The Reformers, who were well aware of the existence of
the Minority Texts, considered them unfit for translation purposes.
It is believed that the Minority Texts were butchered by Egyptian gnosticism with many changes, which are mostly deletions. The gnostics were a group that did not believe:
In the virgin birth, that Jesus was the Son of God, that Jesus was resurrected to heaven, that Jesus was the Creator, or that Jesus made atonement for our sins. There are many alterations in the Minority Texts, often a single manuscript being amended by several different scribes over a period of many years.
The Minority Texts omit approximately 200 versus from the Scriptures. This is equivalent to omitting First and Second Peter. The Minority Texts contradict themselves in hundreds of places...."
http://endtimeoutreach.com/whichbible.html
Here is some more background on the corruption of the Minority Text from another site....
"...almost all modern English bibles translated since 1898 are based on the Minority Text (this includes the New American Standard Bible, the New International Version, the Living Bible, the New Revised Standard Version, the New World Translation, the New Century Version, the Good News Bible, etc.). These bible versions are only supported by about five of the over 5,000 manuscripts in existence, or about .1% of all manuscripts, which is why it's also known as the "Minority text.".
The two most prominent manuscripts of the Minority Texts are the Vaticanus and the Sinaiticus....These Minority Texts frequently disagreed with each other as well as with the Majority Text, and also contained many obvious and flagrant mistakes. Up until the late 1800s, the Minority Texts were utterly rejected by Christians.
The fact that these two manuscripts may have been older does not prove they are better. More likely it indicates that they were set aside because of their numerous errors....
The Vaticanus, which is the sole property of the Roman Catholic Church, and the Sinaiticus, are both known to be overwhelmed with errors. Words and whole phrases are repeated twice in succession or completely omitted, while the entire manuscript has had the text mutilated by some person or persons who ran over every letter with a pen making exact identification of many of the characters impossible...."
"...One of the manuscripts that make up the Minority Text is the Vaticanus. The Vaticanus was found in 1481 in the Vatican library. The other manuscript is the Sinaiticus. The Sinaiticus was found in 1844 in a trash pile at Saint Catherine's monastery, and rescued from a long (and well-deserved) obscurity. It has a great number of omissions and has many words and phrases marked out and re-written. Both of these manuscripts are from Roman Catholic origin...."
http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/nt_manuscripts.html
and it just goes on and on....
"...The Vaticanus Manuscript (B)
The Vaticanus manuscript was found in the Vatican library in 1481. It was rejected by the King James Translators because it was very corrupt and unreliable. The following portions of Scripture are missing from the Vaticanus: Genesis 1:1-46; 28; Psalms 106-138; Matthew 16:2-3; Mark 16:9-20; The Pastoral Epistles (1 & 2 Timothy and Titus) and everything after Hebrews 9:14. These were intentional omissions because the manuscript was found in excellent condition with no pieces missing. In the Gospels it leaves out 237 words, 452 clauses, and 748 whole sentences. These omissions were intentional since there was room left on pages to write these in. The Vaticanus manuscript was written on expensive Vellum and was in good condition when found which means that the missing areas were not due to missing sections but intentional omission.
The Sinaiticus Manuscript (a) Aleph
The major characteristic of this manuscript is that it is a literary mess. There are mistakes, erasures, sentences written on top of other sentences plus many words are omitted. It contains nearly all the New Testament, the Apocryphal Books plus two other false books, The Shepherd of Hermes...."
I’ll just address this point for now.
Firstly, you must establish that 1 John 5:7 belongs in Scripture before you can make any sort of rational argument that it was “removed”.
Secondly, not including 1 John 5:7 does not remove the trinity… not in the least.
Thirdly, the absence of a single verse in a single translation does not support the claim that anyone is attacking the divinity of Christ.
let us all pray for herAs a former RC, I think they would agree.
That said, the prayers, adoration and exaltation would be considered by Born Again believers as a form of their worship.
I only remember one young RC lady ever told me she still worships Mary. Her name coincidentally happened to be Mary aka Maria S. and this conversation took place at lunch the week after I cast a demon out of her at the campus of WVU.
The Short of it, that proved to me she never trusted Christ as she misled me to believe. She had been insincere when I shared the gospel previously and led her in prayer.
She said she still worshipped Mary and only prayed with me to be agreeable/make me happy.
That was admitted at that lunch....
Then I broke up with my girlfriend, but I digress.
On 1 John 5:7, that was added around 1600's. There is a story of a manuscript compliler, that a manuscript with it did not exist. So, someone created one for him.
This is not a debate, just looking at topic from historical perspective.
Erasmus used only a handful of Greek manuscripts—roughly 6 to 8—to produce the first edition of his Greek New Testament (1516), which became the basis for the Textus Receptus.
The Biblical Basis of the Doctrine of the Trinity by Robert Bowman, Jr.
Robert Bowman, Jr. :: The Biblical Basis of the Doctrine of the Trinity
www.blueletterbible.org
Thank you. But that was many years ago when I was in college.
I prayed for her and her parents to be shaken, yet lives protected, so they would consider their mortality and the gospel of Jesus Christ.
The next day I saw their big 1970s vintage station wagon crumpled up against a stone wall. The girl was driving with her mom in the passenger seat.
At the intersection I was told by the father that she intended to turn left. Instead she drove straight, then veered right into the wall.
It was obvious that she must have floored it down the hill to destroy the car like that.
He told me that miraculously they only had minor injuries.
It is nothing but the old pagan worship of the "queen of heaven" and the church of Rome knows this..
Thank you, brother.
Yes, I do have a watch list of videos.
This is one I want to check out for sure.
…
I have catalogued 22 Catholic ideas in Modern Bibles. These ideas have grown since Westcott and Hort’s 1881 Revised Version.
So if this were the only change, I would agree it may not be that big of a deal, but this is one out of several changes that creates a pattern that should not surprise us because Catholics have been involved with the Critical Text even before it got popular with the success of the NIV. You can check out these 22 Catholic ideas in Modern bibles in my PDF that points out 77 changed doctrines in Modern Bibles (with this one being only one point out of the 77). Simply go to www.affectionsabove.com to view the PDF. You can find the Catholic ideas in Modern Versions quickly in the table of contents section of the PDF.
....
But the two primary source manuscripts (Vaticanus and Sinaiticus) used for the Critical Text are corrupt in both doctrine and in the record of Scripture.
For instance, both Vaticanus and Sinaiticus depict Jesus being pierced by a spear before His death on the cross (See Matthew 27:49-50), a reading that never appears in any English translation. In Hebrews 1:3, Vaticanus omits the crucial phrase “by himself,” erasing the only New Testament reference to Christ personally purging our sins. Next to this verse in Vaticanus is a marginal note that reads, ἀμαθέστατε καὶ κακέ, ἄφες τὸν παλαιόν, μὴ μεταποίει (“Fool and knave, can’t you leave the old reading alone and not alter it!”), revealing that even scribes recognized and objected to the textual corruption in progress. Moreover, Vaticanus and Sinaiticus disagree with each other in roughly three thousand places within the Gospels alone, which is hardly a mark of trustworthy or reliable witnesses.
There are other problems I document in my 2nd PDF on Vaticanus and Sinaiticus at my website www.affectionsabove.com. It is the PDF with animated fall leaves in the background. Also, most Christians do not read Hebrew and Greek, and they rely on English translations. These translations are influenced by the same Modern day school of Hebrew and Greek textual criticism, which is different from the textual criticism done by Erasmus, Stephanus, and Beza.
If you looked into the history of your version odd and crazy theories of Modern textual criticism and who it was created by, it should make you want to barf into a bowl ten times over. Then again, truth is always set aside or ignored by Modern Bible Movement adherents. Take Logos Bible software, which is owned by Faithlife. It has a Catholic branch called Verbum. Mark Ward used to work for Faithlife. You can buy Mark Ward’s book collection on Verbum. You can even buy Bart Ehrman’s book “Interrupting Jesus” on Logos and Verbum. This book is heretical in that it is attacking the faith and not that it is to build up somebody believing in Jesus. So the whole Modern Bible Movement is just deeply compromised and is in it for the money or to make a buck.
Jesus says by their fruits, you shall know them.
….