77 Changed Doctrines in Modern Bibles

[TheLearner]

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.

contradiction?

 

[TheLearner]

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.



.....

I read those manuscripts when they were at Univeristy of Michigan. I did not see any major doctrines changed or removed.

 

[TheLearner]

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.




.....

Why Codex Sinaiticus Doesn't Say What Its Website Says It Says

www.thetextofthegospels.com

All I see is copist errors!!!

Codex Sinaiticus - See The Manuscript | John |

Codex Sinaiticus is one of the most important books in the world. Handwritten well over 1600 years ago, the manuscript contains the Christian Bible in Greek, including the oldest complete copy of the New Testament. The Codex Sinaiticus Project is an international collaboration to reunite the...

codexsinaiticus.org

The Biblical Archaeology Review article resorts to cherry-picking, but the manuscript the authors claim as evidence actually does teach the orthodox faith. And it does so very clearly.
...
Codex Sinaiticus’ Matthew 28 Resurrection account: https://www.codexsinaiticus.org/en/manuscript.aspx?book=33&chapter=28&lid=en&side=r&zoomSlider=0
Codex Sinaiticus’ Luke 24 Resurrection account:

Codex Sinaiticus - See The Manuscript | Luke |

Codex Sinaiticus is one of the most important books in the world. Handwritten well over 1600 years ago, the manuscript contains the Christian Bible in Greek, including the oldest complete copy of the New Testament. The Codex Sinaiticus Project is an international collaboration to reunite the...

www.codexsinaiticus.org

Codex Sinaiticus’ John 21 Resurrection account: https://www.codexsinaiticus.org/en/manuscript.aspx?book=36&chapter=21&lid=en&side=r&zoomSlider=0
Codex Sinaiticus’ Acts 1 Resurrection account:

Codex Sinaiticus - See The Manuscript | Acts |

Codex Sinaiticus is one of the most important books in the world. Handwritten well over 1600 years ago, the manuscript contains the Christian Bible in Greek, including the oldest complete copy of the New Testament. The Codex Sinaiticus Project is an international collaboration to reunite the...

www.codexsinaiticus.org

Codex Sinaiticus’ I Corinthians 15 Resurrection account:

Codex Sinaiticus - See The Manuscript | 1 Corinthians |

Codex Sinaiticus is one of the most important books in the world. Handwritten well over 1600 years ago, the manuscript contains the Christian Bible in Greek, including the oldest complete copy of the New Testament. The Codex Sinaiticus Project is an international collaboration to reunite the...

www.codexsinaiticus.org

Codex Sinaiticus’ Mark 16 Resurrection account:

Codex Sinaiticus - See The Manuscript | Mark |

Codex Sinaiticus is one of the most important books in the world. Handwritten well over 1600 years ago, the manuscript contains the Christian Bible in Greek, including the oldest complete copy of the New Testament. The Codex Sinaiticus Project is an international collaboration to reunite the...

www.codexsinaiticus.org

And the point could be belabored with at least a dozen more references that show that the texts in Codex Sinaiticus teach the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Please print and read this https://steadfastlutherans.org/blog...o-a-hit-piece-against-the-doctrine-of-christ/

 

[TheLearner]

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.


.....

John 19:30-35
King James Version
30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.

31 The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away.

32 Then came the soldiers, and brake the legs of the first, and of the other which was crucified with him.

33 But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they brake not his legs:

34 But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water.

35 And he that saw it bare record, and his record is true: and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe.

Me: now where is the spear below in Matthew?

Matthew 27:40-55
King James Version
40 And saying, Thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days, save thyself. If thou be the Son of God, come down from the cross.

41 Likewise also the chief priests mocking him, with the scribes and elders, said,

42 He saved others; himself he cannot save. If he be the King of Israel, let him now come down from the cross, and we will believe him.

43 He trusted in God; let him deliver him now, if he will have him: for he said, I am the Son of God.

44 The thieves also, which were crucified with him, cast the same in his teeth.

45 Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth hour.

46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?

47 Some of them that stood there, when they heard that, said, This man calleth for Elias.

48 And straightway one of them ran, and took a spunge, and filled it with vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave him to drink.

49 The rest said, Let be, let us see whether Elias will come to save him.

50 Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.

51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;

52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,

53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.

54 Now when the centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jesus, saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared greatly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God.

55 And many women were there beholding afar off, which followed Jesus from Galilee, ministering unto him:

 

[TheLearner]

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).



.....

And, yet they have other texts that proves major doctrines.

 

[TheLearner]

read to here, praying for all. My shoulders still in lots of pain.

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

And, yet they have other texts that proves major doctrines.

There is too much corrupt doctrine to value any good out of it.
It's like a mix of dog poo with some pieces of gold in it.
Sure, can a person be saved by a Modern Bible?
Yeah, but when it comes to spiritual growth, it is going to stunt such growth, big time.
Plus, your text keeps shape shifting and none of your Modern English Bibles agree with each other.
Not even all NIV editions agree among themselves in major ways.
Not even all NASB editions agree among themselves in major ways.
These were not printing errors or trying to get back to what the intent of the original translator team desired by any means.
It's just a money making scheme for different Bible translations and they are not even that good.
Are you even aware that your movement is rooted in German Rationalism?
Do you even know what German Rationalism even is?
Try doing a history lesson on it sometime and see if you can connect the dots with Vaticanus.
Connect the dots of how they influenced Westcott and Hort.



....

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

read to here, praying for all. My shoulders still in lots of pain.

Sorry to hear about your shoulders.



....

 

[Bible_Highlighter]

Why Codex Sinaiticus Doesn't Say What Its Website Says It Says

www.thetextofthegospels.com

All I see is copist errors!!!

Codex Sinaiticus - See The Manuscript | John |

Codex Sinaiticus is one of the most important books in the world. Handwritten well over 1600 years ago, the manuscript contains the Christian Bible in Greek, including the oldest complete copy of the New Testament. The Codex Sinaiticus Project is an international collaboration to reunite the...

codexsinaiticus.org

The Biblical Archaeology Review article resorts to cherry-picking, but the manuscript the authors claim as evidence actually does teach the orthodox faith. And it does so very clearly.
...
Codex Sinaiticus’ Matthew 28 Resurrection account: https://www.codexsinaiticus.org/en/manuscript.aspx?book=33&chapter=28&lid=en&side=r&zoomSlider=0
Codex Sinaiticus’ Luke 24 Resurrection account:

Codex Sinaiticus - See The Manuscript | Luke |

Codex Sinaiticus is one of the most important books in the world. Handwritten well over 1600 years ago, the manuscript contains the Christian Bible in Greek, including the oldest complete copy of the New Testament. The Codex Sinaiticus Project is an international collaboration to reunite the...

www.codexsinaiticus.org

Codex Sinaiticus’ John 21 Resurrection account: https://www.codexsinaiticus.org/en/manuscript.aspx?book=36&chapter=21&lid=en&side=r&zoomSlider=0
Codex Sinaiticus’ Acts 1 Resurrection account:

Codex Sinaiticus - See The Manuscript | Acts |

Codex Sinaiticus is one of the most important books in the world. Handwritten well over 1600 years ago, the manuscript contains the Christian Bible in Greek, including the oldest complete copy of the New Testament. The Codex Sinaiticus Project is an international collaboration to reunite the...

www.codexsinaiticus.org

Codex Sinaiticus’ I Corinthians 15 Resurrection account:

Codex Sinaiticus - See The Manuscript | 1 Corinthians |

Codex Sinaiticus is one of the most important books in the world. Handwritten well over 1600 years ago, the manuscript contains the Christian Bible in Greek, including the oldest complete copy of the New Testament. The Codex Sinaiticus Project is an international collaboration to reunite the...

www.codexsinaiticus.org

Codex Sinaiticus’ Mark 16 Resurrection account:

Codex Sinaiticus - See The Manuscript | Mark |

Codex Sinaiticus is one of the most important books in the world. Handwritten well over 1600 years ago, the manuscript contains the Christian Bible in Greek, including the oldest complete copy of the New Testament. The Codex Sinaiticus Project is an international collaboration to reunite the...

www.codexsinaiticus.org

And the point could be belabored with at least a dozen more references that show that the texts in Codex Sinaiticus teach the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Please print and read this https://steadfastlutherans.org/blog...o-a-hit-piece-against-the-doctrine-of-christ/

Of course, this is not the only problem with Vaticanus and Sinaiticus.




.....

 

[ResidentAlien]

contradiction?

You can't see the contradiction between Jesus being speared after His death and being speared before His death?

 

[TheLearner]

You can't see the contradiction between Jesus being speared after His death and being speared before His death?

ah that's it. I am only guessing authors of the gospels are writing from their memory of events.

John 19:34
But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water.

I am guessing this was before he died.

Matthew 27:49
King James Version
49 The rest said, Let be, let us see whether Elias will come to save him.

Thank You, Daniel

 

[DavidLamb]

ah that's it. I am only guessing authors of the gospels are writing from their memory of events.

John 19:34
But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water.

I am guessing this was before he died.

No, it was after He had died, because a few verses earlier in John 19 we read:

(Joh 19:30) So when Jesus had received the sour wine, He said, "It is finished!" And bowing His head, He gave up His spirit.

 

[HealthAndHappiness]

There is too much corrupt doctrine to value any good out of it.
It's like a mix of dog poo with some pieces of gold in it.
Sure, can a person be saved by a Modern Bible?
Yeah, but when it comes to spiritual growth, it is going to stunt such growth, big time.
Plus, your text keeps shape shifting and none of your Modern English Bibles agree with each other.
Not even all NIV editions agree among themselves in major ways.
Not even all NASB editions agree among themselves in major ways.
These were not printing errors or trying to get back to what the intent of the original translator team desired by any means.
It's just a money making scheme for different Bible translations and they are not even that good.
Are you even aware that your movement is rooted in German Rationalism?
Do you even know what German Rationalism even is?
Try doing a history lesson on it sometime and see if you can connect the dots with Vaticanus.
Connect the dots of how they influenced Westcott and Hort.



....

It's no wonder I've/we've heard so many pastors rip on the Traditional Text to exalt their bible of the month. They follow the German higher critics (emphasis on critics.)
Their influencers were sure to add or to (mostly) take away from the words of the prophesies of the Bible. I've recently learned of one such influencer who said,

"A good translator improves upon the original."
Eugene Nida

This philosophy denies the doctrines of inspiration and preservation.

 

[ResidentAlien]

A good translator does improve upon the original text in terms of readability and understanding. Even translators who follow formal equivalence use some dynamic equivalence; otherwise it would be a mixed up mess. Nida would've been the last to suggest that dynamic equivalence gives a translator the right to translate the text to say something it doesn't.

 

[ResidentAlien]

A good translator does improve upon the original text in terms of readability and understanding. Even translators who follow formal equivalence use some dynamic equivalence; otherwise it would be a mixed up mess. Dynamic equivalence protects inspiration and preservation by passing on the meaning of the originals so people can understand it. Nida would've been the last to suggest that dynamic equivalence gives a translator the right to translate the text to say something it doesn't.

 

[aaravnayar5]

Bible translations can definitely spark strong debates, but I think it’s important to study context, manuscripts, and history carefully before assuming doctrines were intentionally changed. Honest comparison and prayerful study matter more than fear.