77 Changed Doctrines in Modern Bibles

[Bible_Highlighter]

spear in side, most of the modern translations do have it.

Again, it appears that you both are not understanding what I am talking about.

#1. I am NOT saying the Modern ENGLISH Bibles have a chronological error involving the timing of Jesus being stabbed by a spear and His giving up His spirit.

#2. I am saying that VATICANUS & SINAITICUS Greek Manuscripts have this chronological problem. These two Greek manuscripts (NOT THE MODERN ENGLISH BIBLES) have Jesus being stabbed by a spear and then giving up His spirit. Why does this matter? Because your Modern Bibles say these are the best manuscripts. However, if they are the best, then why did the Modern English Bibles not render this contradiction into English? After all, the Nestle and Aland 28 Greek Critical Text follows Vaticanus and Sinaiticus primarily. All your Modern English Bibles are based on the Nestle and Aland Greek text (Which in turn is based primarily on Vaticanus and Sinaiticus).

I have said this several times, and it appears you both are not understanding what I have said.
You both can copy and paste what I said into Claude AI or ChatGPT and have it explain it to you in simpler words if you like.

In any event, may God bless you both (even if you do not understand).



....

 

[ResidentAlien]

After all, the Nestle and Aland 28 Greek Critical Text follows Vaticanus and Sinaiticus primarily.

Except it doesn't follow them in the passage you're referring to, Matthew 27:49. NA28 says:

"οἱ δὲ λοιποὶ ἔλεγον· ἄφες ἴδωμεν εἰ ἔρχεται Ἠλίας σώσων αὐτόν."

"The rest said, 'Let us see whether Elijah will come to save him.' "

Nothing about Jesus getting speared before he died.

https://www.die-bibel.de/en/bible/NA28/MAT.27

 

[Dino246]

Again, it appears that you both are not understanding what I am talking about.

#1. I am NOT saying the Modern ENGLISH Bibles have a chronological error involving the timing of Jesus being stabbed by a spear and His giving up His spirit.

#2. I am saying that VATICANUS & SINAITICUS Greek Manuscripts have this chronological problem. These two Greek manuscripts (NOT THE MODERN ENGLISH BIBLES) have Jesus being stabbed by a spear and then giving up His spirit. Why does this matter? Because your Modern Bibles say these are the best manuscripts. However, if they are the best, then why did the Modern English Bibles not render this contradiction into English? After all, the Nestle and Aland 28 Greek Critical Text follows Vaticanus and Sinaiticus primarily. All your Modern English Bibles are based on the Nestle and Aland Greek text (Which in turn is based primarily on Vaticanus and Sinaiticus).

I have said this several times, and it appears you both are not understanding what I have said.
You both can copy and paste what I said into Claude AI or ChatGPT and have it explain it to you in simpler words if you like.

In any event, may God bless you both (even if you do not understand).



....

It's a simple issue, but you're attempting to make it into a significant issue.

On this point, Sinaiticus and Vaticanus are simply wrong. Being wrong on one particular point when it is abundantly clear they are wrong does not undermine them being otherwise good sources. There is no obligation for any translator to rely on one or two sources when other sources and common sense dictate an alternative order.

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

Except it doesn't follow them in the passage you're referring to, Matthew 27:49. NA28 says:

"οἱ δὲ λοιποὶ ἔλεγον· ἄφες ἴδωμεν εἰ ἔρχεται Ἠλίας σώσων αὐτόν."

"The rest said, 'Let us see whether Elijah will come to save him.' "

Nothing about Jesus getting speared before he died.

https://www.die-bibel.de/en/bible/NA28/MAT.27

I said repeatedly that the Nestle and Aland 28 primarily follows Vaticanus and Sinaticus.
In fact, I have been aware for a long time that there are other Greek MSS that the NA 28 also sides with over Codex Aleph and B.
But most of the time, the NA 28 goes with Vaticanus and Sinaiticus. This is not news.
Granted, some try to deny this fact. But the point here is if Codex B and Aleph are the best as they claim, then why does it have this horrible chronological goof in it? That's the point I am making that your are side stepping.


.....

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

It's a simple issue, but you're attempting to make it into a significant issue.

On this point, Sinaiticus and Vaticanus are simply wrong. Being wrong on one particular point when it is abundantly clear they are wrong does not undermine them being otherwise good sources. There is no obligation for any translator to rely on one or two sources when other sources and common sense dictate an alternative order.

You cannot say they are the best and yet have this kind of horrible reading in it.
That would be like saying that this steak dinner is the best you ever had except for the mold growth in the fries.


....

 

[TheLearner]

Again, it appears that you both are not understanding what I am talking about.

#1. I am NOT saying the Modern ENGLISH Bibles have a chronological error involving the timing of Jesus being stabbed by a spear and His giving up His spirit.

#2. I am saying that VATICANUS & SINAITICUS Greek Manuscripts have this chronological problem. These two Greek manuscripts (NOT THE MODERN ENGLISH BIBLES) have Jesus being stabbed by a spear and then giving up His spirit. Why does this matter? Because your Modern Bibles say these are the best manuscripts. However, if they are the best, then why did the Modern English Bibles not render this contradiction into English? After all, the Nestle and Aland 28 Greek Critical Text follows Vaticanus and Sinaiticus primarily. All your Modern English Bibles are based on the Nestle and Aland Greek text (Which in turn is based primarily on Vaticanus and Sinaiticus).

I have said this several times, and it appears you both are not understanding what I have said.
You both can copy and paste what I said into Claude AI or ChatGPT and have it explain it to you in simpler words if you like.

In any event, may God bless you both (even if you do not understand).



....

I don't see a chronological problem, what is ti?

 

[TheLearner]

You cannot say they are the best and yet have this kind of horrible reading in it.
That would be like saying that this steak dinner is the best you ever had except for the mold growth in the fries.


....

Ever hear of copist error? A simple error does not rule out them as a good source.

 

[TheLearner]

read

 

[Dino246]

You cannot say they are the best and yet have this kind of horrible reading in it.
That would be like saying that this steak dinner is the best you ever had except for the mold growth in the fries.


....

*I* didn't say they are the best. I don't defend the claims others make.

I also would not defile a good steak dinner by adding a side of fries.

 

[ResidentAlien]

I said repeatedly that the Nestle and Aland 28 primarily follows Vaticanus and Sinaticus.

But it doesn't follow them in the case of Matthew 27:49. Thank you for clarifying.

 

[ResidentAlien]

I don't see a chronological problem, what is ti?

1. John 19:33 records that Jesus died before He was stabbed with a spear. 2. In Matthew 27:49, Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus say He was still alive, was stabbed by the spear, and then died.

BH is complaining about the fact that many textual critics tout Vaticanus and Sinaiticus as the "oldest and best," even though they contain this glaring contradiction. Regardless of what they say about these two old documents, they at least had sense enough to recognize the error and omit it in the critical Greek text.

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

Ever hear of copist error? A simple error does not rule out them as a good source.

That excuse does not work when we can see changes on a doctrinal level in Vaticanus and Sinaiticus that are for the worse and not for the better. Hebrews 1:3 comes to mind. 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. In other words, when you see a pattern of evidence of bad doctrine in these two manuscripts compared to the traditional received text, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure it out. On top of that, rank heretics are attached to the Critical Text side, as well. So that's another matter that should be like a big clue.




.....

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

It's a simple issue, but you're attempting to make it into a significant issue.

On this point, Sinaiticus and Vaticanus are simply wrong. Being wrong on one particular point when it is abundantly clear they are wrong does not undermine them being otherwise good sources. There is no obligation for any translator to rely on one or two sources when other sources and common sense dictate an alternative order.

I am just saying that it is inconsistent to say that Codex B and Aleph are the best manuscripts when there are demonstrable problems or errors like this within them.



....

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

1. John 19:33 records that Jesus died before He was stabbed with a spear. 2. In Matthew 27:49, Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus say He was still alive, was stabbed by the spear, and then died.

BH is complaining about the fact that many textual critics tout Vaticanus and Sinaiticus as the "oldest and best," even though they contain this glaring contradiction. Regardless of what they say about these two old documents, they at least had sense enough to recognize the error and omit it in the critical Greek text.

The problem also is that Vaticanus and Sinaiticus played no meaningful role in the majority of church history. They are aberrations or mutants that appeared out of nowhere and were then suddenly crowned as superior by liberals, unitarians, and German Rationalist scholars who had their own reasons for rejecting the received text. Vaticanus was locked in a vault for centuries. Sinaiticus did not even surface until the 1840s. Neither shaped church life, preaching, councils, or translation for the majority of Christian history. It was German Rationalionalists such as Griesbach, Lachmann, and Tischendorf who began the elevation, and Westcott and Hort who truly popularized it, weaponizing it against the English-speaking churches. Even modern scholarship's lexicons redefine words beyond their historic usage and some of them did not believe certain books of the Bible were inspired like Walter Bauer. He rejected the book of Revelation. Another lexicon creator named Thayer was a unitarian. So, you want me to believe that these heretics are going to lead to giving us good fruit or the true text. While God can use anybody He desires for his purposes, the tradition holds that men of God were attached to His word going out. You want me to ignore the bad changes in doctrines in these two manuscripts on top of that. It just seems like you are not wanting to see the elephant in the room here, my friend.


.....

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

But it doesn't follow them in the case of Matthew 27:49. Thank you for clarifying.

But they should follow them in this instance if they are truly the best.
Also, why is it that some Modern Bibles say that the oldest and best manuscripts do not contain this reading and then they do not mention Vaticanus and Sinaiticus? It's because it sounds better, right? It makes it sound like they have tons of manuscripts that are older and better when its just primarily two that they going with for their main reading. Yes, there are a few others, but that is a very small percentage by comparison to their using Codex B and Aleph. In short, they are employing deception and getting the reader to think something that is not true. When you do not add a qualifier, you are misleading them to think something false. There are even some in the Modern Bible Movement who will falsely say that your side has an embarrassment of riches. When in reality, it is the TR/KJV that is based on the majority of Byzantine manuscripts primarily (not that they are always an exact match).



.....

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

*I* didn't say they are the best. I don't defend the claims others make.

I also would not defile a good steak dinner by adding a side of fries.

I agree with you on the steak dinner. In fact, I am not a fries person.
When I look at fries I get instant flashbacks of heavy people at McDonalds eating them. Eating them makes me feel I am injecting pure grease into my veins. No offense if you or anyone here likes them of course.


....

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

Except it doesn't follow them in the passage you're referring to, Matthew 27:49. NA28 says:

"οἱ δὲ λοιποὶ ἔλεγον· ἄφες ἴδωμεν εἰ ἔρχεται Ἠλίας σώσων αὐτόν."

"The rest said, 'Let us see whether Elijah will come to save him.' "

Nothing about Jesus getting speared before he died.

https://www.die-bibel.de/en/bible/NA28/MAT.27

I never said Nestle and Aland 28 follows that reading here. I am also very familiar with that site and use it all the time to expose its corruption. But the point here is that they did not choose it because it was a bad reading. Yet, for like the majority of the other times, they do go with Vaticanus and Sinaiticus slavishly.



....

 

[Dino246]

I am just saying that it is inconsistent to say that Codex B and Aleph are the best manuscripts when there are demonstrable problems or errors like this within them.

So stop saying it.

 

[Dino246]

I agree with you on the steak dinner. In fact, I am not a fries person.
When I look at fries I get instant flashbacks of heavy people at McDonalds eating them. Eating them makes me feel I am injecting pure grease into my veins. No offense if you or anyone here likes them of course.


....

It’s off topic, but the problem isn’t the potatoes, but with the seed oil (primarily) and the high heat) secondarily).

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

So stop saying it.

I am not going to stop saying Codex B and Aleph are the worst Greek MSS.
The Modern Bible Movement as a whole is a mess.
Its like eating at a McDonalds that has not changed out its fryer oil in a long time.



....