~ by James Fire
What’s your favorite version of the Bible?
What are the sources used to create that manuscript? How accurate is the translation that you use, compared to others?
Of course as Christians, we know it’s important that we have as accurate a translation of God’s Word as possible; anything less is intolerable. We also realize that scripture itself prohibits adding to, or taking away from God’s Word (REV 22:18-19).
You may well be as alarmed as I was when I first learned the sources and the actual rendering of, modern translations of the Bible. You may further be alarmed by the fact that those who formulated the root source for all modern translations were scholars who denied much of what we as Christians hold dear as God’s Truth represented in biblical doctrines!
Let’s back up however and examine what the Gnostics believed regarding the Truth as revealed by God’s Word. You will find an uncomfortable parallel between these ancient philosophers and the modern scholars involved in the creation of that root source for all modern translations:
GNOSTIC INFILTRATION of the SCRIPTURES
(Material used in this section to the end of this article also includes transcripts of information by pastor Chuck Smith in his two part teaching, “Foundation of the Word.” While his research and stand on the KJV is, I believe sound, we at the TTUF do not necessarily endorse everything as taught by pastor Chuck.)
2 PETER 2:1-3
“But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.”
2 PETER 3:15-17
“And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.”
In these two portions of scripture we see that Peter mentions false teachers, bringing in damnable heresies in secrecy (that is heresies that would prevent proper faith in salvation, and all the accompanying doctrines connected with it). The truth would be spoken of with disdain and disrespect by these false teachers.
Also, even those epistles written by Paul (around 66 A.D. at the time of Peter’s epistle and his commendation of his fellow apostle), which interestingly enough Peter esteems as valid scripture comparable to those written in the canon of the Torah, are maligned and mangled by these false teachers, unlearned in the way of righteousness and unstable.
The Greek word used for “wrest” is ‘strepho’ meaning, “to twist, to reverse, to convert, to change from one thing to another” and in regards to the scriptures that’s exactly what the Gnostics did!
So we see even during the time of the apostles, during the period of inspired scripture and the collection of these into what we know as the New Testament, there were false teachers promulgating false doctrine, many of these being Gnostics. These men were highly intelligent, gifted orators and steeped in the education and finest schools in Greek thought and philosophy, and they disdained the apostles who were unlearned fishermen for the most part.
They viewed scripture that contradicted their own beliefs as reprehensible and so when given the opportunity, would alter them to suit their views. Irenaeus, one of the early church fathers stated concerning Marcion, a known Gnostic, “Wherefore also Marcion and his followers have betaken upon themselves to mutilating the scriptures which they themselves have shortened.” Here we have a contemporary of these events and deeds, specifically stating that Gnostics such as Marcion were deleting or “shorten[ing]” the scriptures.
Various Gnostic sects would deny the truth of scripture regarding Jesus Christ as the Son of God, and again as God made flesh, the efficacy of His atonement on the cross, etc.
Arias, also a Gnostic founded his own sect and gained a great following, and this belief system was known as ‘Arianism’ and taught that Jesus was a specially created being by God who was ordained for redemption, but that He wasn’t God made flesh. Arian along with other Gnostics found a home in the city of Alexandria, Egypt.
In the same year that John the apostle died, Justin Martyr was born, and he became a prolific Gnostic and had as his chief disciple, Tatian, who greatly expounded on his mentor’s work. Tatian’s disciple was Clement and Clement’s disciple was Origen who is recognized as an early church father, but seldom is it mentioned that he was also a Gnostic. It was Origen who first proposed the concept of interpreting scripture allegorically, rather than literally.
Eusibeus was greatly influenced by Origen and together they produced a copy of the scriptures known as Codex Alexandrius from which came the Codex Sinaiticus.
Emperor Constantine wanted a copy of the scriptures in the Latin language and so he commissioned Jerome to produce this work, using the Codex Alexandrius for his scriptural basis. An earlier Latin based text of scripture had already been produced prior to Jerome’s project, but this was held in contempt by Constantine, as this other Latin version was based on something called the Textus Receptus (The received text). Because it was desired by Constantine to unite his empire, he wanted to synthesize the church with the pagan religions within his realm, and to do this, he realized he needed a scriptural text that would cause no significant barriers between Christians and pagans.
ANOTHER TALE OF TWO CITIES
Just as Alexandria became the home base for Gnosticism, Antioch became a home base for the church, and the apostle Paul spent much of his time there, teaching, preaching and discipling the saints. Scriptoriums were raised up and copies of the New Testament canon were made, and these came to be known as Textus Receptus at around 165 A.D. These texts were produced at a rate of 5 to 1, compared to copies made in Alexandria of the Codex Alexandria.
While it is quite true today that some of the oldest manuscripts we have intact are Codices Alexandrius and Sinaiaticus, and the only remains of Textus Receptus are fragments, yet even these number in the thousands and are dated from the late 1st century to the middle 2nd century.
The Roman church deliberately destroyed Textus Receptus where ever they would find it, favoring instead their own Latin Vulgate version. Pope Gregory found a great library fill of Textus Receptus copies and ordered it burned to the ground.
During the time when the Latin Vulgate grew in prominence across Europe, the Waldenses of northern Italy hid high up in the Alps and kept the Textus Receptus scriptures faithfully as did those who went into Scotland and brought great revival.
The Textus Receptus was translated into Syriac, and was called the Peshitta , and this is identical to the King James Bible, all verses intact.
Martin Luthor discovered copies of Textus Receptus and this led to his discovery of salvation by faith alone in Christ alone; he produced the scriptures in his own native German and it’s identical to the King James Version of today, all verses intact.
To date, of the 5,255 preserved manuscripts of biblical scripture, 85 to 90% are in agreement with Textus Receptus. The remainder are based on Codex Alexandrius and these are for the most part whole documents and very well preserved.
Of all our modern translations of the Bible, two primary sources are used to produce them:
1) Textus Receptus and what’s known as the
2) Westcott and Hort text (information about these two men in more detail, following).
In 1881 Westcott and Hort were in a committee with other biblical scholars to revise and update the King James Version into more colloquial English; yet these two men influenced the rest of the committee to turn from the Textus Receptus and utilize two ancient manuscripts, the Codices Sinaiaticus and Vaticanus! Westcott and Hort followed these two manuscripts 99% of the time, knowing full well that these were Gnostic writings that denied the basic fundamentals of the Christian faith.
Here are some assertions that just might shock you regarding the personal history of Westcott and Hort:
“Westcott and Hort were not only Fathers in the Anglican church. But, according to numerous historians and New Age researchers, appear to be among the Fathers of the modern channeling movement. Channeling and Spiritualism is New Age heresy that are forbidden by the Word of God... In 1993, Gail Riplinger published New Age Bible Versions. In this book, she alleges that Westcott and Hort were practitioners of the occult. It is indicated that they provide a bridge between apostate Christianity and the occult and the New Age Movement. These two "esteemed scholars" were not even fundamental Christians. It is additionally known about Hort and Wescott that they did not believe in: a literal heaven, the literal Second Coming of Jesus and his coming 1000 yr reign on earth. Also, they did not believe in angels, the oneness of the Trinity, and the soul's existence separated from the body. They also did not believe in a literal Devil.
What’s your favorite version of the Bible?
What are the sources used to create that manuscript? How accurate is the translation that you use, compared to others?
Of course as Christians, we know it’s important that we have as accurate a translation of God’s Word as possible; anything less is intolerable. We also realize that scripture itself prohibits adding to, or taking away from God’s Word (REV 22:18-19).
You may well be as alarmed as I was when I first learned the sources and the actual rendering of, modern translations of the Bible. You may further be alarmed by the fact that those who formulated the root source for all modern translations were scholars who denied much of what we as Christians hold dear as God’s Truth represented in biblical doctrines!
Let’s back up however and examine what the Gnostics believed regarding the Truth as revealed by God’s Word. You will find an uncomfortable parallel between these ancient philosophers and the modern scholars involved in the creation of that root source for all modern translations:
GNOSTIC INFILTRATION of the SCRIPTURES
(Material used in this section to the end of this article also includes transcripts of information by pastor Chuck Smith in his two part teaching, “Foundation of the Word.” While his research and stand on the KJV is, I believe sound, we at the TTUF do not necessarily endorse everything as taught by pastor Chuck.)
2 PETER 2:1-3
“But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.”
2 PETER 3:15-17
“And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.”
In these two portions of scripture we see that Peter mentions false teachers, bringing in damnable heresies in secrecy (that is heresies that would prevent proper faith in salvation, and all the accompanying doctrines connected with it). The truth would be spoken of with disdain and disrespect by these false teachers.
Also, even those epistles written by Paul (around 66 A.D. at the time of Peter’s epistle and his commendation of his fellow apostle), which interestingly enough Peter esteems as valid scripture comparable to those written in the canon of the Torah, are maligned and mangled by these false teachers, unlearned in the way of righteousness and unstable.
The Greek word used for “wrest” is ‘strepho’ meaning, “to twist, to reverse, to convert, to change from one thing to another” and in regards to the scriptures that’s exactly what the Gnostics did!
So we see even during the time of the apostles, during the period of inspired scripture and the collection of these into what we know as the New Testament, there were false teachers promulgating false doctrine, many of these being Gnostics. These men were highly intelligent, gifted orators and steeped in the education and finest schools in Greek thought and philosophy, and they disdained the apostles who were unlearned fishermen for the most part.
They viewed scripture that contradicted their own beliefs as reprehensible and so when given the opportunity, would alter them to suit their views. Irenaeus, one of the early church fathers stated concerning Marcion, a known Gnostic, “Wherefore also Marcion and his followers have betaken upon themselves to mutilating the scriptures which they themselves have shortened.” Here we have a contemporary of these events and deeds, specifically stating that Gnostics such as Marcion were deleting or “shorten[ing]” the scriptures.
Various Gnostic sects would deny the truth of scripture regarding Jesus Christ as the Son of God, and again as God made flesh, the efficacy of His atonement on the cross, etc.
Arias, also a Gnostic founded his own sect and gained a great following, and this belief system was known as ‘Arianism’ and taught that Jesus was a specially created being by God who was ordained for redemption, but that He wasn’t God made flesh. Arian along with other Gnostics found a home in the city of Alexandria, Egypt.
In the same year that John the apostle died, Justin Martyr was born, and he became a prolific Gnostic and had as his chief disciple, Tatian, who greatly expounded on his mentor’s work. Tatian’s disciple was Clement and Clement’s disciple was Origen who is recognized as an early church father, but seldom is it mentioned that he was also a Gnostic. It was Origen who first proposed the concept of interpreting scripture allegorically, rather than literally.
Eusibeus was greatly influenced by Origen and together they produced a copy of the scriptures known as Codex Alexandrius from which came the Codex Sinaiticus.
Emperor Constantine wanted a copy of the scriptures in the Latin language and so he commissioned Jerome to produce this work, using the Codex Alexandrius for his scriptural basis. An earlier Latin based text of scripture had already been produced prior to Jerome’s project, but this was held in contempt by Constantine, as this other Latin version was based on something called the Textus Receptus (The received text). Because it was desired by Constantine to unite his empire, he wanted to synthesize the church with the pagan religions within his realm, and to do this, he realized he needed a scriptural text that would cause no significant barriers between Christians and pagans.
ANOTHER TALE OF TWO CITIES
Just as Alexandria became the home base for Gnosticism, Antioch became a home base for the church, and the apostle Paul spent much of his time there, teaching, preaching and discipling the saints. Scriptoriums were raised up and copies of the New Testament canon were made, and these came to be known as Textus Receptus at around 165 A.D. These texts were produced at a rate of 5 to 1, compared to copies made in Alexandria of the Codex Alexandria.
While it is quite true today that some of the oldest manuscripts we have intact are Codices Alexandrius and Sinaiaticus, and the only remains of Textus Receptus are fragments, yet even these number in the thousands and are dated from the late 1st century to the middle 2nd century.
The Roman church deliberately destroyed Textus Receptus where ever they would find it, favoring instead their own Latin Vulgate version. Pope Gregory found a great library fill of Textus Receptus copies and ordered it burned to the ground.
During the time when the Latin Vulgate grew in prominence across Europe, the Waldenses of northern Italy hid high up in the Alps and kept the Textus Receptus scriptures faithfully as did those who went into Scotland and brought great revival.
The Textus Receptus was translated into Syriac, and was called the Peshitta , and this is identical to the King James Bible, all verses intact.
Martin Luthor discovered copies of Textus Receptus and this led to his discovery of salvation by faith alone in Christ alone; he produced the scriptures in his own native German and it’s identical to the King James Version of today, all verses intact.
To date, of the 5,255 preserved manuscripts of biblical scripture, 85 to 90% are in agreement with Textus Receptus. The remainder are based on Codex Alexandrius and these are for the most part whole documents and very well preserved.
Of all our modern translations of the Bible, two primary sources are used to produce them:
1) Textus Receptus and what’s known as the
2) Westcott and Hort text (information about these two men in more detail, following).
In 1881 Westcott and Hort were in a committee with other biblical scholars to revise and update the King James Version into more colloquial English; yet these two men influenced the rest of the committee to turn from the Textus Receptus and utilize two ancient manuscripts, the Codices Sinaiaticus and Vaticanus! Westcott and Hort followed these two manuscripts 99% of the time, knowing full well that these were Gnostic writings that denied the basic fundamentals of the Christian faith.
Here are some assertions that just might shock you regarding the personal history of Westcott and Hort:
“Westcott and Hort were not only Fathers in the Anglican church. But, according to numerous historians and New Age researchers, appear to be among the Fathers of the modern channeling movement. Channeling and Spiritualism is New Age heresy that are forbidden by the Word of God... In 1993, Gail Riplinger published New Age Bible Versions. In this book, she alleges that Westcott and Hort were practitioners of the occult. It is indicated that they provide a bridge between apostate Christianity and the occult and the New Age Movement. These two "esteemed scholars" were not even fundamental Christians. It is additionally known about Hort and Wescott that they did not believe in: a literal heaven, the literal Second Coming of Jesus and his coming 1000 yr reign on earth. Also, they did not believe in angels, the oneness of the Trinity, and the soul's existence separated from the body. They also did not believe in a literal Devil.
“According to Hort’s son, Dr. Hort’s own mother (a devout Bible believer) could not be sympathetic to his views about the Bible. Westcott wrote to Hort that he overwhelmingly rejected the "idea of the infallibility of the Bible". Hort says the same thing, the same week, in a letter to Bishop Lightfoot. Hort called the doctrine of the substitutionary atonement "immoral".
In doing so he sided with the normal doctrine of the High Church Party of the Church of England. The Low Church Party was generally evangelical, teaching salvation through personal faith in Jesus Christ. The High Church Party taught salvation by good works, including baptism and church membership. Additionally, many may find it hard to believe this about the two men behind these new bibles.
Westcott denied that GENESIS 1 through 3 were historically true.
Hort praised Darwin and his theory of evolution.
According to Fuller (page 157); "Textual criticism cannot be divorced entirely from theology. No matter how great a Greek scholar a man may be, or no matter how great an authority on the textual evidence, his conclusions must always be open to suspicion if he does not accept the Bible as the very Word of God."
For more information from the source quoted in the above two paragraphs, please visit this site (Please be advised that some of the views expressed at this site are not necessarily the views of those of us at The TRUTH Under FIRE):
False Teachers, False Bibles
Also, it would prove useful to understand the views and biases of these two men, by reading quotes excerpted from correspondence and diary entries by these two men: Brooke Foss Westcott and Fenton John Anthony Hort. Here are a few of the more notable ones below:
1848 July 6th - Hort: "One of the things, I think, which shows the falsity of the Evangelical notion of this subject (baptism), is that it is so trim and precise...no deep spiritual truths of the Reason are thus logically harmonious and systematic...the pure Romish view seems to me nearer, and more likely to lead to, the truth than the Evangelical...the fanaticism of the bibliolaters, among whom reading so many 'chapters' seems exactly to correspond to the Romish superstition of telling so many dozen beads on a rosary...still we dare not forsake the Sacraments, or God will forsake us...I am inclined to think that no such state as 'Eden' (I mean the popular notion) ever existed, and that Adam's fall in no degree differed from the fall of each of his descendants" (Life, Vol.I, pp.76-78).
Aug. 11th - Westcott: "I never read an account of a miracle (in Scripture?) but I seem instinctively to feel its improbability, and discover some want of evidence in the account of it." (Life, Vol.I, p.52).
1858 Oct. 21st - Further I agree with them in condemning many leading specific doctrines of the popular theology as, to say the least, containing much superstition and immorality of a very pernicious kind...The positive doctrines even of the Evangelicals seem to me perverted rather than untrue...There are, I fear, still more serious differences between us on the subject of authority, and especially the authority of the Bible" (Life, Vol.I, p.400).
1860 Apr. 3rd - Hort: "But the book which has most engaged me is Darwin [Origin of the Species]. Whatever may be thought of it, it is a book that one is proud to be contemporary with. I must work out and examine the argument in more detail, but at present my feeling is strong that the theory is unanswerable (without any plausible dispute)." (Life, Vol.I, p.416).
For more information from the source quoted in the above two paragraphs, please visit this site (Please be advised that some of the views expressed at this site are not necessarily the views of those of us at The TRUTH Under FIRE):
False Teachers, False Bibles
Also, it would prove useful to understand the views and biases of these two men, by reading quotes excerpted from correspondence and diary entries by these two men: Brooke Foss Westcott and Fenton John Anthony Hort. Here are a few of the more notable ones below:
1848 July 6th - Hort: "One of the things, I think, which shows the falsity of the Evangelical notion of this subject (baptism), is that it is so trim and precise...no deep spiritual truths of the Reason are thus logically harmonious and systematic...the pure Romish view seems to me nearer, and more likely to lead to, the truth than the Evangelical...the fanaticism of the bibliolaters, among whom reading so many 'chapters' seems exactly to correspond to the Romish superstition of telling so many dozen beads on a rosary...still we dare not forsake the Sacraments, or God will forsake us...I am inclined to think that no such state as 'Eden' (I mean the popular notion) ever existed, and that Adam's fall in no degree differed from the fall of each of his descendants" (Life, Vol.I, pp.76-78).
Aug. 11th - Westcott: "I never read an account of a miracle (in Scripture?) but I seem instinctively to feel its improbability, and discover some want of evidence in the account of it." (Life, Vol.I, p.52).
1858 Oct. 21st - Further I agree with them in condemning many leading specific doctrines of the popular theology as, to say the least, containing much superstition and immorality of a very pernicious kind...The positive doctrines even of the Evangelicals seem to me perverted rather than untrue...There are, I fear, still more serious differences between us on the subject of authority, and especially the authority of the Bible" (Life, Vol.I, p.400).
1860 Apr. 3rd - Hort: "But the book which has most engaged me is Darwin [Origin of the Species]. Whatever may be thought of it, it is a book that one is proud to be contemporary with. I must work out and examine the argument in more detail, but at present my feeling is strong that the theory is unanswerable (without any plausible dispute)." (Life, Vol.I, p.416).
Oct. 15th - Hort: "I entirely agree - correcting one word - with what you there say on the Atonement, having for many years believed that "the absolute union of the Christian (or rather, of man) with Christ Himself" is the spiritual truth of which the popular doctrine of substitution is an immoral and material counterfeit...Certainly nothing can be more unscriptural than the modern limiting of Christ's bearing our sins and sufferings to His death; but indeed that is only one aspect of an almost universal heresy." (Life, Vol.I, p.430).
1864 Sept. 23rd - Hort: "I believe Coleridge was quite right in saying that Christianity without a substantial Church is vanity and dissolution; and I remember shocking you and Lightfoot not so very long ago by expressing a belief that 'Protestantism' is only parenthetical and temporary. In short, the Irvingite creed (minus the belief in the superior claims of the Irvingite communion) seems to me unassailable in things ecclesiastical." (Life, Vol.II, p.30,31).
For more quotes by these quite liberal theologians, who discredit any account of Scripture as truly being the authoritative Word of God, please follow this link:
More Quotes By Westcott and Hort
In 2 CORINTHIANS 2:17 it states:
“For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.”
Due to the fact that Gnostics began altering texts so early in church history, it must not therefore be assumed that the oldest manuscripts are the most accurate.
The oldest we have is actually Codex Sinaiticus and it’s actually a very poor copy: it’s missing whole books out of the Bible, many of the Psalms, the first several chapters out of Genesis.
These copies of Codex Sinaiaticus (C.S.) were so well preserved because of the fact that such were corrupt from the original, and thus Christians left them alone, whereas Textus Receptus (T.R.) were all worn out and dilapidated because they were in constant use.
TEXTUS RECEPTUS TRANSLATED
At the time when KJV was being translated, all of the known manuscripts were at the disposal of the commissioned translators, with the exception of C.S.; they had on hand copies of both Codices of Alexandrius and Vaticanus.
The majority of manuscripts available to the KJV commission were in agreement with the T.R. (85-90%), the remainder were in agreement with C.A. and had as their source, Alexandria (home base of the Gnostics).
An Example of Gnostic Influence: In Matthews Gospel 19:16-17 we have the record of the rich young ruler coming to Jesus and asking Him what he may do to inherit eternal life. Jesus responds in the KJV (T.R. based text) “Why do you call Me good?”
However in the C.A. Jesus replies with “Why do you ask me concerning good?”
A very different sort of question! What this latter version implies is a Greek philosophical speculation, the seeking after the ultimate good, that is, the ‘Sonum Bonum’. Of all the over 5,000 texts available, only ten of them have this account recorded with this philosophical inquiry. The vast majority have it posed in the same way as we find in the KJV, thus revealing the Gnostic/Greek influence in the C.A.
The intelligentsia of the 19th and 20th century seminaries has bowed before the scholarship of two men: Brooke Foss Westcott (1825-1901) was born at Birmingham, England and Fenton John Anthony Hort (1828-1892) at Dublin, Ireland and has despised the supposedly poor scholarship of the King James translators of 1611.
Such a supposition couldn’t be farther from the truth!
Forty seven scholars and pastors were gathered together for the work that was commissioned by King James, who had nothing to do with the actual work, but only commissioned and financed the endeavor, and insisted that the Bible be named after him (for vanity’s sake, no doubt).
These forty seven men were divided into six committees, and each was given a portion of scripture to translate, and this was then cycled through the other five committees for comment and comparison, and then the text was passed onto John Boyce for final editing, who himself leaned heavily on the counsel of his peers and colleagues.
John Boyce – born in 1560 was an apt student, and gifted in languages; he began reading Hebrew at just five years of age. He was admitted to St. John’s College in Cambridge at fourteen years old. He often studied Greek for twelve hours or more daily, and was used as a tutor for any students desiring to gather together at 4 a.m. to study Greek.
Lancelot Andrewes, another member of the Commission, was a deeply spiritual man. He would spend five hours a day in prayer, and during his latter years, he gave himself continually to prayer. Being the godly man he was, King James ordered “no levity when brother Andrewes was present in court.” He was knowledgeable in Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Syriac, Chaldee, Arabic and fifteen modern languages besides! He is known as one of the rarest linguists in Christendom.
All of the forty seven members held the view that the scriptures were divinely inspired, that Jesus was indeed God the Son, and believed the biblical doctrine of salvation in all of its aspects (soteriology).
For more information about Westcott, Hort, along with other liberal minded modern Bible translators and the translators for the KJV, please review this remarkable site that goes into some details concerning all of these men (Please be advised that we at T.T.U.F. do not necessarily subscribe to all the views expressed in this web site):
Translators In Contrast
The following links are comparison charts between the versions.
BIBLE VERSION COMPARISON
BIBLE VERSES REMOVED
BIBLE WORDS REMOVED
The work of these men was studied and verified by a later biblical scholar, a Professor Robert Dick Wilson
See also Robert Dick Wilson: Defender of the Faith
Robert Dick Wilson - The man and his work
Professor Wilson was one of the greatest scholars and linguists who have ever lived. During his life time he studied and mastered 45 languages (virtually all the languages that the Bible was written in, up to around 600 A.D.). He would routinely read the Greek New Testament in nine different languages and he could recite the entire New Testament in Hebrew from memory without one error!
He had a professorship with Princeton until it went liberal, and with Dr. Moffit and others moved away and started the Westminster school.
One day after a lecture, one of Professor Wilson’s students asked him, “What is the most profound thing you ever learned as a scholar?” He removed his glasses and the students saw a tear rolling down his face as he replied:
For more quotes by these quite liberal theologians, who discredit any account of Scripture as truly being the authoritative Word of God, please follow this link:
More Quotes By Westcott and Hort
In 2 CORINTHIANS 2:17 it states:
“For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.”
Due to the fact that Gnostics began altering texts so early in church history, it must not therefore be assumed that the oldest manuscripts are the most accurate.
The oldest we have is actually Codex Sinaiticus and it’s actually a very poor copy: it’s missing whole books out of the Bible, many of the Psalms, the first several chapters out of Genesis.
These copies of Codex Sinaiaticus (C.S.) were so well preserved because of the fact that such were corrupt from the original, and thus Christians left them alone, whereas Textus Receptus (T.R.) were all worn out and dilapidated because they were in constant use.
TEXTUS RECEPTUS TRANSLATED
At the time when KJV was being translated, all of the known manuscripts were at the disposal of the commissioned translators, with the exception of C.S.; they had on hand copies of both Codices of Alexandrius and Vaticanus.
The majority of manuscripts available to the KJV commission were in agreement with the T.R. (85-90%), the remainder were in agreement with C.A. and had as their source, Alexandria (home base of the Gnostics).
An Example of Gnostic Influence: In Matthews Gospel 19:16-17 we have the record of the rich young ruler coming to Jesus and asking Him what he may do to inherit eternal life. Jesus responds in the KJV (T.R. based text) “Why do you call Me good?”
However in the C.A. Jesus replies with “Why do you ask me concerning good?”
A very different sort of question! What this latter version implies is a Greek philosophical speculation, the seeking after the ultimate good, that is, the ‘Sonum Bonum’. Of all the over 5,000 texts available, only ten of them have this account recorded with this philosophical inquiry. The vast majority have it posed in the same way as we find in the KJV, thus revealing the Gnostic/Greek influence in the C.A.
The intelligentsia of the 19th and 20th century seminaries has bowed before the scholarship of two men: Brooke Foss Westcott (1825-1901) was born at Birmingham, England and Fenton John Anthony Hort (1828-1892) at Dublin, Ireland and has despised the supposedly poor scholarship of the King James translators of 1611.
Such a supposition couldn’t be farther from the truth!
Forty seven scholars and pastors were gathered together for the work that was commissioned by King James, who had nothing to do with the actual work, but only commissioned and financed the endeavor, and insisted that the Bible be named after him (for vanity’s sake, no doubt).
These forty seven men were divided into six committees, and each was given a portion of scripture to translate, and this was then cycled through the other five committees for comment and comparison, and then the text was passed onto John Boyce for final editing, who himself leaned heavily on the counsel of his peers and colleagues.
John Boyce – born in 1560 was an apt student, and gifted in languages; he began reading Hebrew at just five years of age. He was admitted to St. John’s College in Cambridge at fourteen years old. He often studied Greek for twelve hours or more daily, and was used as a tutor for any students desiring to gather together at 4 a.m. to study Greek.
Lancelot Andrewes, another member of the Commission, was a deeply spiritual man. He would spend five hours a day in prayer, and during his latter years, he gave himself continually to prayer. Being the godly man he was, King James ordered “no levity when brother Andrewes was present in court.” He was knowledgeable in Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Syriac, Chaldee, Arabic and fifteen modern languages besides! He is known as one of the rarest linguists in Christendom.
All of the forty seven members held the view that the scriptures were divinely inspired, that Jesus was indeed God the Son, and believed the biblical doctrine of salvation in all of its aspects (soteriology).
For more information about Westcott, Hort, along with other liberal minded modern Bible translators and the translators for the KJV, please review this remarkable site that goes into some details concerning all of these men (Please be advised that we at T.T.U.F. do not necessarily subscribe to all the views expressed in this web site):
Translators In Contrast
The following links are comparison charts between the versions.
BIBLE VERSION COMPARISON
BIBLE VERSES REMOVED
BIBLE WORDS REMOVED
The work of these men was studied and verified by a later biblical scholar, a Professor Robert Dick Wilson
See also Robert Dick Wilson: Defender of the Faith
Robert Dick Wilson - The man and his work
Professor Wilson was one of the greatest scholars and linguists who have ever lived. During his life time he studied and mastered 45 languages (virtually all the languages that the Bible was written in, up to around 600 A.D.). He would routinely read the Greek New Testament in nine different languages and he could recite the entire New Testament in Hebrew from memory without one error!
He had a professorship with Princeton until it went liberal, and with Dr. Moffit and others moved away and started the Westminster school.
One day after a lecture, one of Professor Wilson’s students asked him, “What is the most profound thing you ever learned as a scholar?” He removed his glasses and the students saw a tear rolling down his face as he replied:
“In all of my studies and in all the languages and learning I’ve ever done as I’ve given my life to be a scholar, the most profound thing that I have ever learned is that ‘Jesus loves me, this I know, for the Bible tells me so!’”
At twenty five years old, in response to the modernists, including Westcott and Hort, Ellicutt and Lightfoot, Professor Wilson dedicated himself to the study of the Bible in every language it was written so that he would possess first hand knowledge of each text, and wouldn’t have to rely on the word of any other. Then, after 45 years of study Professor Wilson was fully convinced that the Old Testament as we have it in the KJV, based on the Messoretic text, is entirely accurate and unchanged from those ancient manuscripts.
We must be aware that in the realm of spiritual warfare, our primary weapon in our holy arsenal is the Word of God. Small wonder then that our great enemy, Satan, would seek to wean and then remove God’s Word from us in any way he can. I propose that his work was indeed accomplished, that is, weaning us off from the full potency of God’s Word as He delivered to the inspired writers of Holy Writ, and providing us with tainted sources. In today’s world we have versions such as New Living Translation, The Message Bible, and others that are as far removed from NIV or NASB as these are from the KJV the only biblical manuscript based solely on Textus Receptus.
The next part of this article will deal more with Westcott and Hort, and we will provide some documentation about deletions made in the W & H text and then summarize the entire article before we proceed to the next article that continues this thread (from How Eastern Religion Invaded the West and How Near-East Religion Invaded the West), entitled: “The New Emergent Virus-How It’s Infecting the Body of Christ.”
No comments:
Post a Comment