Search the Community

Here are some important differences between Bibles based on the Majority Text, on the one hand, and the Critical Text, on the other hand. Mark 16:9-20 This whole passage is marked as being spurious, in many CT-based translations. It is present in almost all Greek manuscripts that contain the ending of Mark (with slight variations). The two main manuscripts that omit it (Vaticanus and Sinaiticus) have clear indications of having been tampered with, at this point. One of them has a space where the passage should be (the only such space in the entire manuscript) and the other enlarges the font size here, to mask the fact that verses are missing (again the only such place in the whole manuscript where this is done). Why would anyone in his right mind mark this as spurious, on the basis of no reliable evidence whatever? 1 Tim. 3:16 (WPNT) Yes, the mystery of our religion is confessedly great: God was manifested in flesh, was vindicated in spirit, was revealed to angels, was proclaimed among nations, was believed in the world, was received up in glory! Here is textual criticism expert (and Majority Text advocate) Dr. Wilbur Pickering's comment on "God was manifested in flesh...". "Instead of ‘God’, 1% of the Greek manuscripts read ‘who’, and most modern versions follow this 1%. But ‘who’ is nonsensical (in the context), so most of them take evasive action: NEB and NASB have “he who”; Phillips has “the one”; NRSV, Jerusalem, TEV and NIV render “he”. Berkley actually has “who”! In the Greek Text the relative pronoun has no antecedent, so it is a grammatical ‘impossibility’, besides being a stupidity—what is so mysterious about someone being manifested in flesh? All human beings have bodies. The pronoun can be accounted for as an easy transcriptional error, a simple copying mistake, so why not stay with the 98.5%? “God was manifested in flesh”—now there you have a mystery!" John 7:8 (WPNT) You guys go up to this feast; I’m not going up yet to this feast, because my time has not yet fully come.” Here is Pickering's comment (in his NT translation - "The Sovereign Creator Has Spoken") on the missing "yet", in most CT translations. "Perhaps 1% of the Greek manuscripts, of inferior quality, omit “yet” (as in NASB, TEV, RSV, etc.). The reading of the so-called ‘critical’ text has the effect of ascribing a falsehood to Jesus, since He did in fact go to the feast (and doubtless knew what He was going to do). Among the 99% are P66,75 and B—since the UBS editors usually attach the highest value to P75 and B, isn’t it strange that they reject them in this case?" Matt. 5:22 (WEB) But I tell you, that everyone who is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment; and whoever shall say to his brother, ‘Raca !’ shall be in danger of the council; and whoever shall say, ‘You fool!’ shall be in danger of the fire of Gehenna. Here is what Pickering says about the omission of "without a cause", in the CT. "God hates injustice and will judge it. Less than 2% of the Greek manuscripts, of inferior quality, omit “without cause” (as in NIV, NASB, LB, TEV, etc.). NIV, NASB and LB favor us with a footnote informing us that “some manuscripts” add ‘without cause’—by “some” they mean 98% of them!! More serious, the shorter text has the effect of forbidding anger, which would contradict other Scriptures (Ephesians 4:26, Psalm 4:4) and the Lord’s own example (Mark 3:5)." John 3:13 (VW) No one has ascended to Heaven but He who came down from Heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in Heaven. This is one of the main verses proving that the Lord Jesus was omnipresent, during his earthly ministry (thus refuting the "Kenosis" heresy that Jesus emptied himself of some of his attributes as God). Here is part of what Jay P. Green (textual critic, TR supporter, author of the KJ3 Bible translation and a Hebrew and Greek to English Interlinear) says about the omission of "who is in Heaven", by most of the CT translations. "Evidence for the omission: MANUSCRIPTS: P66, P75, Aleph, B, L, T and 33 = 2 papyri, 4 uncials, 1 cursive (the first 4 executed in Egypt, at a time when the Gnostics dominated that nation; the latter 3 are late manuscripts, executed by those, who, like our modern critics, venerated Aleph and B). Versions: none FATHERS: 7 Evidence the words are divine: MANUSCRIPTS: More than 1,800 and that many more lectionaries = at least 99.5% of all manuscripts. VERSIONS: 10 FATHERS: 38" [The Gnostics, The New Versions, and The Deity of Christ, by Jay P. Green, Sr., 1994, p23] --------------------------------- There is much more, but this should be enough to show that something disturbing is going on here. God's providence gave the Church the Received Text, at a time of great God-given return to the Lord and the Bible (The Reformation, imperfect as it was). This went through several editions, but they were all very similar to each other. The Reformers only had a relatively small number of manuscripts to work with, but those have since been found to be highly representative of the majority discovered since then. The rest of this post is taken from a post I made, in another thread, earlier today. It's mainly a matter of faith in God's character and providence. The Reformation was a time of great, God-given, return to God and his word. It was at this time that the TR was collated and accepted, by the people of God, in many countries; and sound translations were produced in English, German, French, Italian, Spanish, Chinese, etc.. Zoom forwards to the 1800s and we find the first determined opposition to the TR (amongst Protestants - the RCs had always opposed it vehemently), in the form of Westcott, Hort and a few others. This was a time of great departure from faith in God and his word, with a worship of man's reason replacing it. Westcott and Hort desperately wanted to replace the TR with a new Greek NT, based on their own ideas. Hort hated the TR, calling it "vile" and "villainous" (before he'd even studied the subject, by his own admission) and laboured for decades to create a replacement. Decades later, he had been made the head of the translation committee for the Revised Version (an officially sanctioned revision of the KJV, whose remit was to revise the English (and that as little as possible), NOT the underlying Greek and Hebrew). Hort secretly, and contrary to his mandate, introduced his own Greek NT, to replace the TR, and persuaded the other committee members to go along with it. Most modern Bibles are based on Greek NTs that are similar to Hort's version and they have serious changes and omissions, in very important places. There is much more to it than this; but the point is that the TR is based on trust in God and his providence; whereas, the replacement Greek NT is based on trust in some very dubious people and their very dubious suppositions.