The greater danger is not so much whether a version states such things AT ALL, but how many times the total testimony is weakened. W N Pickering points out that one of the major thrusts of modern versions is to undermine the authority of Scripture, by the use of enclosing parts of the text in brackets and have (ing) numerous footnotes of a sort that raise doubt about the integrity of the Text. It was given to the Vatican from the East and was pretty well hidden away although not totally forgotten, Erasmus in compiling Textus Receptus was told of it but warned of its unreliability and so he ignored it. The case of using the Dead Sea Scrolls to modify the Masoretic text is no different. We know the Catholics hated the Bible then and even today. Each of these three codices "clearly exhibits a fabricated text - is the result of arbitrary and reckless recension." . It should be noted, for starters, that the four pages containing Mark 15:54b-Luke 1:56a were not produced by the same copyist who wrote the text on the surrounding pages. Thank you. For example the Magna Carta (c.1200 AD) is so frail and desiccated that it is enclosed in a sealed environment, to prevent total disintegration. The text of Codex Sinaiticus differs in numerous instances from that of the authorized version of the Bible in use during Tischendorfs time. Versions of the bible that are forever under scrutiny?. The textus receptus was essentially a slogan used by the distributors of the KJV after it was error corrected and reprinted on the printing press. I will want a copy of the oldest new testament it is written how Jesus says it should be. But it seems quite okay and acceptable if we put our own spin on Gods word. Earlier? members of one of the over 30,000 versions of Christianity (aka: denominations) none of this has any meaning, because believers follow their beliefs, not facts. Theres also another question which IS academic but also glossed over: The King James Version is taken from the Textus Receptus while the American Standard Version is taken from the Critical Text. Nothing could be more errant than to write Catholics hate the Bible. Of course I dont want to seem to imply that such inability to feel empathy is limited to Christians, Far from it. BeDuhn points out that the general public and many Bible scholars assume that the differences in the New World Translation (NW) are due to religious bias on the part of its translators. Therefore reveal thy righteousness Stop using your cults limited understanding of morality, spirituality and limited understanding of the universe.as a template for how you should think believe. Codex Sinaiticus (A) Codex Sinaiticus discovered from the Monastery of Saint Catherine at Sinai 1844. Just a thought, but if the Sinai Bible was a fourth century record of the New Testament, and the modern canon came about under Athanasius at around 390AD, then doesnt it suggest that a lot of our modern Bible was filled in by the likes of Athanasius late in the fourth century, just before the text was canonized. These all have been traced (by liberal and conservative scholars alike) to a probable source in Alexandria, Egypt, in the 2nd or 3rd century. gr. But regarding Mark, I would to point out another consideration. The person who wrote this is obviously undereducated read Mark 16:6!!! Before Mark and Matthew and Luke, there was supposedly Q, M, L all those other documents? The Characteristics of Vaticanus and Sinaiticus - Scion Of Zion Perhaps I will have the opportunity of sharing this with you in another article. There are over 5,800 hand written New Testament manuscripts on record which predate the Guttenburg press. Constantine Tischendorf was a false teacher, like one of the ones Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Messiah, warned about. A piece here and a piece there but no even close to a complete speach. Secondly, you believe that Bible transmission/translation is totally the work of men and that God was not involved in directing any copyists or translators. Frederick Henry Ambrose Scrivener - Wikipedia I can answer the first question here in part from my own experience. Battle of the Bibles on link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNv-zzpIwBs ; and Changing the Wordon link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqBEuxGY7DI. Hundreds of english Bible versions, and most of them are ONLY making small changes ..INSIGNIFICANT changes which over time become gradually accepted. In the end I wonder,was this truly a omission,or could there be illness,war,fire or any other disasters?? PLUS, why is it when I read the KJV for six months I experience a power, unlike anything I have ever experienced. If Satan can place doubt about the word of God in mans head, he has the war half won It is by faith and faith alone we can be saved I have personally been transformed from a drunkard, dope head, and whoremonger, into a son of God by faith and our so called flawed KJV. This debate has been going on for centuries and likely there will always be disagreements as to which is closer to the original Greek autographs. They knew exactly what Jesus was saying Are There Any Real Differences Between the Textus Receptus and the Such a production line was slow and laborious and costly. Washingtonicus and one of its principle claims to fame is its particular addition to the last chapter. But it would be fair for an annotated version of the Bible to include reference to One of Jesus disciples had been such a zealot. delivered over to death, that they may return to the truth and sin Clearly, as promised, Jehovah God has preserved his Holy Word. check out this documentary by Abduhla Films called Bridge To Babylon And presto, what do we have today? his words will never pass away ! Every true child of GOD knows it and cannot live without it. Set it in stone rag. I am still researching this. Here is Matthew 16:14. Those manuscripts used as originals in this business wore out very quickly, those used in worship or sold on for private devotions lasted longer, but not for centuries unless unused. Hardly. Can these manuscripts be useful to Bible students today? (HINT: The Catholics would burn one at the stake for even possessing a Bible copy back in the day). He had claimed to be God equal with God, and they had tried on a number of occasions to stone HIm, just as Moses had said they should for a charge of blasphemyas long as two or three witnesses could testify. Five Bad Reasons to Use the Textus Receptus - The Text of the Gospels There are 5,309 surviving Greek manuscripts that contain all or part of the New Testament. I prefer to accept the word of God by faith, the same way we attain salvation. Surely you know. Westcott and Hort highly valued the Romish texts -Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, as well as the doctrines of Rome above Protestant doctrine though they were publicly involved in the Protestant church. 4 I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom; 2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine. However, the two authoritative fourth-century Greek manuscriptsCodex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanusboth end with Mark 16:8. Textus Receptus (Latin: "received text") refers to all printed editions of the Greek New Testament from Erasmus's Novum Instrumentum omne (1516) to the 1633 Elzevir edition. Two men who did not believe the scriptures were inerrant, who conducted seances, who did not believe in the miracles of Christ and who were enamored of Charles Darwin and his theory of evolution. The textual character of these old texts seem to conform more to the Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus than to the Textus Receptus. But the fact remains I do not have a million dollars. https://www.faraboveall.com/015_Textual/SPLIT%20TEXTS_JETS_current.pdf. https://books.google.com/books/about/In_the_Beginning.html?id=C8Nw_SN2zgYC&printsec=frontcover&source=kp_read_button#v=onepage&q&f=false. Any organization that uses the KJV as a baseline English translation for textual criticism can safely be dismissed by anyone looking to take this topic seriously. Thanks to the comment by Frank, now I am seeing where the Oneness BS concept is being derived from. What is so important about the KJV being a translation from the Textus Receptus (received text)??? That is the question you must ask and answer for yourself honestly and carefully. Verse Analysis Compares the 1550 Stephanus Textus Receptus with the King James Bible. Ancient manuscripts? this same author states The practical effect of the W-H theory was a complete rejection of the Syrian text and an almost exclusive preference for the Neutral text (equals B and Aleph). That is why the copying of Bible manuscripts was such a big business. But rather how many manuscripts that predate Codex Sinaiticus contain the missing language if any? You cant get any plalner than that. http://www.sinaiticus.net/, Sinaiticus authentic antiquity or modern? The fact all four codices, discovered in four separate places and times, all agree with one another suggests Textus Receptus (Desiderius Erasmus Roterodamus) ADDED them in the 16th century AD. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukRCVDmiAts. Some of them date back to just 60-70 years from the original manuscript! I didnt want to put it with other translations on my bookshelves lest someone read it unawares and was led astray, but I did not feel comfortable destroying it so I hid it. in fact some say that the differences between the two are greater than their individual differences with Textus Receptus. Photo: Courtesy of St. Catherines Monastery. In Mt 6:12, Codex Sinaiticus reads forgive us our *debts* (not sins). I am so sorry that you do not see the work of GOD in our envroinment , yourself and in people around you. Instead.the Gospels end with a message of hope, (The Epilogue at the end of John was probably added later by a follower of Peter.) Who has gone up to Heaven, and come down? This use of parchment as the leading writing material continued for almost a thousand years until it was replaced by paper. Codex Sinaiticus & Vaticanus - Corruption in the KJV Bible verses I just love it when people cannot think outside of their TV dinner box and read ONE thing and run with it, yet they never believe what the Bible says. I found the many negatives, outweigh the few positives.I forced myself to face the truth of this, grew up and have been happy not to look back. -Thus proving anything Godly about Christianity is bogus. The Apocripha/Deuterocanonicals is present in Sinaiticus. The problem here is would you rather have translations from the 10th centurey or the 4th century (as they became available) which are more removed from Catholic theological bias. Why are u sending any time on this fraud? Finally, I have one suggestion, as I close. All religions are based on truth claims. I do have several annotated scriptures myself and they are from several different groups or editors A favorite is the New Jerusalem Bible, if for no other reason, it includes the deutero-canonical books of the OT such as Maccabees and Ecclesiasticus. After a cursory review, I count eight mistakes in this little article. Denominations arise from different nationalities and immigrants bringing their Christian tradition to other countries (We see this in the U.S.) But denominationalism arises from the hypocrisy of Christians who divide based on prideful arguments.