Anyone Want to LOOK AT VATICANUS? GREAT PHOTOS OF THE PAGES?

  • 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.
A

Atwood

Senior Member
May 1, 2014
4,995
52
48
http://digi.vatlib.it/view/MSS_Vat.gr.1209/0003/scroll?sid=0e15bf9d4e006d54547d86b8d0fcacd1

Now to be sure, the papacy ain't gonna let you march in their and put your hands on it in person,
but this is pretty close to doing that.

We are seeing the wheat and tares, the wheat & weeds both flourish alongside each other. Never in history have their been such tools for Bible study, such access to texts. Never in history has their been such wonderful praise music (IMHO) and what you can find on YouTube. At the same time somehow we are going to Hell in a handbasket culturally. We have the courts telling the people they have to recognize sodomy and cooperate with it. We have idiots who insist that placement of the membrum virile into a male posterior is the equal to placement into a female anterior. Equality! How dare we discriminate between the two acts.

But while the world continues its downward spiral to destruction, at the same time Christianity flourishes in astounding new ways. I can look at the pages of Vaticanus!
 
yup, and bibles can be found stacked in Thrift Stores in America for under a buck whereas in other countries Christians would give their arm and leg for two pages of Holy Writ.
 
an evil thing , that is .... are you trying to promote the heresy with it ??? or just didn't know?

Fighting Back! A Handy Reference Guide For King James Bible Believers

"3. Vaticanus was available to the King James translators, but God gave them sense enough to ignore it.

"When someone "corrects" the King James Bible with "more authoritative manuscripts" or "older manuscripts," or "the best authorities," they're usually making some reference to Sinaiticus or Vaticanus. These are two very corrupt fourth century uncials that are practically worshipped by modern scholars. These are the primary manuscripts that Westcott and Hort relied so heavily on when constructing their Greek text (1851-1871) on which the new versions are based.

Vaticanus (B) is the most worshipped. This manuscript was officially catalogued in the Vatican library in 1475, and is still property of the Vatican today. Siniaticus (Aleph) was discovered in a trash can at St. Catherine's Monastery on Mt. Sinai by Count Tischendorf, a German scholar, in the year 1844. Both B and Aleph are Roman Catholic manuscripts. Remember that! You might also familiarize yourself with the following facts:

1. Both manuscripts contain the Apocrypha as part of the Old Testament.

2. Tischendorf, who had seen both manuscripts, believed they were written by the same man, possibly Eusebius of Caesarea (260-340 A.D.).

3. Vaticanus was available to the King James translators, but God gave them sense enough to ignore it.

4. Vaticanus omits Geneses 1:1-46:28, Psalm 106-138, Matthew 16:2-3, Rom. 16:24, I Timothy through Titus, the entire book of Revelation, and it conveniently ends the book of Hebrews at Hebrews 9:14. If you're familiar with Hebrews 10, you know why.
 
Jeff_56 said:
an evil thing , that is .... are you trying to promote the heresy with it ??? or just didn't know?
Click to expand...

KJV onlyism is a heresy. Treasuring ancient copies of God's Word is no heresy.

"3. Vaticanus was available to the King James translators, but God gave them sense enough to ignore it."

Kindly prove that one, or retract.
 
Atwood said:
KJV onlyism is a heresy. Treasuring ancient copies of God's Word is no heresy.

"3. Vaticanus was available to the King James translators, but God gave them sense enough to ignore it."

Kindly prove that one, or retract.
Click to expand...

catholicism is heresy, according to yahweh the creator of life, yahshua (yahweh's salvation), torah, scripture, all ekklesia, the reformers(most of them anyway), and RoboOp and ALL the Admins.

where is it written that anyone here is kjv only ? (it doesn't matter if it's heresy or not, if no one here is kjv only)

so, are you in darkness, a false accuser ? or just confused ?
 
Jeff_56 said:
"When someone "corrects" the King James Bible with "more authoritative manuscripts" or "older manuscripts," or "the best authorities," they're usually making some reference to Sinaiticus or Vaticanus
Click to expand...
.
What is your proof of that one?

How do you know they are corrupt?

[qupte]Both B and Aleph are Roman Catholic manuscripts.[/quote]

What is your proof of that one? Let's see your prove that there was a pope when those mss were written.

"1. Both manuscripts contain the Apocrypha as part of the Old Testament."'

What is your proof of that? Does the Scofield Reference Bible consider Scofield's comments as part of the OT?
Prove that Vaticanus calls the Apoc "OT".

Why didn't the KJV translators ignore the apoc but included it? Naughty naughty! How can you endorse a version that includes the apocrypha?


4. Vaticanus omits Geneses 1:1-46:28, Psalm 106-138, Matthew 16:2-3, Rom. 16:24, I Timothy through Titus, the entire book of Revelation, and it conveniently ends the book of Hebrews at Hebrews 9:14. If you're familiar with Hebrews 10, you know why.
Click to expand...

What is your proof that Vaticanus omitted those passages, as opposed to the ancient manuscript having lost them by wear and tear over 1000 years?
 
Jeff_56 said:
catholicism is heresy, according to yahweh the creator of life, yahshua (yahweh's salvation), torah, scripture, all ekklesia, the reformers(most of them anyway), and RoboOp and ALL the Admins.

where is it written that anyone here is kjv only ? (it doesn't matter if it's heresy or not, if no one here is kjv only)

so, are you in darkness, a false accuser ? or just confused ?
Click to expand...

Given that the papal system teaches heresy, how does that prove anything about Vaticanus?
As to who is KJV-only the number of such heretics on this site is irrelevant to the fact that it is a heresy.

You the one making the accusations.
Now prove your claims or retract!


KJV onlyism is a heresy. Treasuring ancient copies of God's Word is no heresy.

"3. Vaticanus was available to the King James translators, but God gave them sense enough to ignore it."

Kindly prove that one, or retract.
 
The KJV (AKA AV) was based on the Textus Receptus.
Both the Textus Receptus and the Majority text are based on documents from Syriac, Coptic, and Byzantine areas; where the Word of God was taken literally and treated with respect.

Vaticanus and A were tainted by Constantinian heresy, and paganism.

The Wescort Hort, and the Nestle texts are based on Alexandrian documents, which, while older, come from a place that practiced allegorical interpretation. I personally have more respect for a more recent document from a place that treated God's Word with respect, than an older document from people who felt free to twist God's Word to fit their (mis)understanding.

I do NOT support the unique inspiration or inerrency of the KJV; but I prefer it to anything else out there.

I do think that except for translations based on Catholic documents the available translations are far more remarkable for their agreement than for their differences.

God elected to use fallible men to pass His Word through successive generations and languages. He allowed some human error to occur in the process; but I believe that the Holy Spirit will NOT allow the message to be corrupted by those errors.
In spite of whatever errors may have crept in; none of them will limit their usefulness to bring salvation and sound doctrine.
 
Most of the time, when people accuse Vaticanus of being tainted by heresy, have no evidence and make generalisations (often contradictory ones) about Byzantium and and Alexandrian. For instance, often the claim is that the interpretative methods of Alexandria were flawed (making accusations of 'allegorical' interpretation without specifically saying what interpretations they find problematic), but then forgetting that the likes of Athanasius, defednder of Trinitarian orthodoxy against Arius (incidentally from the eastern, Byzantine part of the empire) was born and educated in Alexandria. Or ignore the fact that, if we're talking about Constantinian heresy, such heresy is much more likely to be found in Constantinople, than in Alexandria.

Also of note is that often, the Syriac and Coptic versions will agree with each other and the Alexandrian texts against the later Byzantine texts. But the reality is, none of the critical texts rely solely on Vaticanus or Sinaiticus, and will often have readings that disagree with those texts, and agree with either the papyrii or, yes, in some cases, the majority reading.

I basically just always say - if you think someone tampered with a document for theological reasons, show us in the textual history and in the extant MSS where that tampering happened.

But MarcR's point is well taken - the agreement between all the MSS is in itself remarkable, and the differences that are of any real theological or doctrinal substance can be counted on one hand.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back