✔ Early Corruption Noted By Paul

Paul warned that there were “many” corrupting the Word of God in his day in 2 Corinthians 2:17: “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.”

There were even false letters, allegedly written by Paul, circulating in his day. 2 Thessalonians 2:2: “That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.”

✔ Two Different Lines of New Testament Texts

Hence, there is a pure line of texts and a corrupt line of texts.

There are about 6,059 Greek manuscripts portions of the New Testament in existence today. Not to mention the new ones which have just arrived at the Center for Study and Preservation of the Majority Text for examination. Of that 6,000+, only 45 to 50 follow the Alexandrian Text line (the corrupt line) that underlies the modern Bible versions, while 98-99% follow the Antiochian or Traditional Text line, that underlies the King James Bible.

There are 8,000 differences between the text that underlies the King James Bible and the Modern Bibles. Things that are different are NOT the same!

✔ Problems

Two of the main Greek manuscripts that underlie the modern translations of the Bible are Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.

Scott McKendrick of the British Library says there are 35,000 edits and corrections in Sinaiticus.

Vaticanus has been overwritten. Scholars think it was overwritten letter by letter in the 10th or 11th century, with accents and breathing added along with corrections from the 8th, 10th, and 15th centuries. All this activity makes precise paleographic analysis impossible. Missing portions were supplied in the 15th century by copying other Greek manuscripts. One sure example of the changes is a marginal note between the first and second column, which if the verses were numbered, would be Hebrews 1:3, in which a corrector came along and pumiced out the correction by a scribe and reinserted the original word then noted - “Fool and knave, leave the old reading, don’t change it!”

In the Gospels, it leaves out 749 entire sentences and 452 clauses, plus 237 other words, all of which are found in hundreds of other Greek manuscripts. The total number of words omitted in Codex B in the Gospels alone is 2,877 as compared with the majority of manuscripts (Burgon, The Revision Revised, p. 75).

3,036 textual variations between Sinaiticus and Vaticanus in the text of the Gospels alone, enumerated as follows: Matthew: 656; Mark: 567; Luke: 791; John: 1,022. According to John Burgon: "It is in fact easier to find two consecutive verses in which these two MSS differ the one from the other, than two consecutive verses in which they entirely agree."

✔ Translation Differences

17 complete verses missing in the modern versions that are in the King James & hundreds of partial verses missing.

Verses Completely Omitted From Two of the Most Popular Modern Versions:

• King James Version
• New International Version
• English Standard Version

Examples:

• Matthew 17:21 - Entire Verse Omitted
• Matthew 18:11 - Entire Verse Omitted
• Matthew 23:14 - Entire Verse Omitted
• Mark 7:16 - Entire Verse Omitted
• Mark 9:44 - Entire Verse Omitted
• Mark 9:46 - Entire Verse Omitted
• Mark 11:26 - Entire Verse Omitted
• Mark 15:28 - Entire Verse Omitted
• Luke 17:36 - Entire Verse Omitted
• Luke 23:17 - Entire Verse Omitted
• John 5:4 - Entire Verse Omitted
• Acts 8:37 - Entire Verse Omitted
• Acts 15:34 - Entire Verse Omitted
• Acts 24:7 - Entire Verse Omitted
• Acts 28:29 - Entire Verse Omitted
• Romans 16:24 - Entire Verse Omitted

1 John 5:7 (KJV): "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. 8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one."

1 John 5:7 (NIV): "For there are three that testify: [omit – in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.] 8 the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement."

1 John 5:7 (ESV): "For there are three that testify: [omit – in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.] 8 the Spirit and the water and the blood; and these three agree."

I John 5:7-8 is called the Johannine comma. It lends strong support to the Triune nature of God! Bruce Metzger, one of The Motley Crew behind the modern Bible versions, wrote in his 1992 book The Test of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration on page 62 that the “the first Greek manuscript discovered which contained the passage relating to the Three Heavenly Witnesses of I John 5:7-8 was a New Testament from the late 15th or early 16th century.” That just is NOT TRUE! There is an abundance of other ancient manuscript evidence in support of the passage. As Edward Hills says, “The first undisputed citations of the Johannine comma occur in the writing of two 4th-century Spanish bishops… In the 5th century the Johannine comma was quoted by several orthodox African writers to defend the doctrine of the Trinity against the gainsaying of the Vandals, who…were fanatically attached to the Arian heresy." Evidence for the early existence of the Johannine comma is found in the Latin versions and in the writings of the Latin Church Fathers." Among these is Cyprian (c. 250) and Cassiodorus (480–570), as well as an Old Latin manuscript of the 5th or 6th century, and in the Speculum, a treatise which contains an Old Latin text.

I stand aligned with those who believe that it is very probable Origen (c. 185-254 A.D.), the great corrupter of the Bible, is responsible for removing 1 John 5:7. Without 1 John 5:7, the Greek syntax of verses 6-8 makes no sense.

✔ Examining “Higher Criticism”

Higher criticism treats the Bible as a text created by human beings at a particular historical time and for various human motives. “They based their interpretations on a presupposition that the Bible is not divinely inspired and that a conglomerate of unknown authors and editors assembled and modified the Bible as they desired.” (www.foundationsforfreedom.net)

Here is an example. Higher critics claimed that Isaiah 53 was inserted into the Old Testament book of Isaiah after the time of Jesus. However, with the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, particularly the scroll of Isaiah, which was dated to 335-324 B.C., it proves that Isaiah 53 was NOT an insertion! Previous to the discovery of the Dead Sea Scroll of Isaiah, the oldest scroll of the Old Testament dated to about 900 A.D. Obviously, with the discovery of this older scroll, Isaiah 53 could no longer be said to have been inserted after Jesus' time. The higher critics were shown to be liars!

✔ Explaining Textual Criticism

The editors of the eclectic Greek Text believe that the original text of the Greek New Testament has been lost. Textual criticism is a humanly contrived method that so-called “Bible scholars” use to discover what the original manuscripts of the Bible most likely said. The object of textual criticism is to restore as nearly as possible the original text of a work the autograph of which has been lost. That is why they have produced numerous editions of the critical text of the Greek New Testament. They are seeking to restore it but still have not accomplished the job.

The 24th edition of Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament says in the front –

Novum Testamentum Graece seeks to provide the reader with the critical appreciation of the whole textual tradition... It should naturally be understood that this text is a working text (in the sense of the century-long Nestle tradition); it is not to be considered as definitive, but as a stimulus to further efforts towards redefining and verifying the text of the New Testament.

What about the newer editions? Here is a quote from my Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece 27th. It is the same text as the United Bible Society (UBS) 4th edition. In the last paragraph on page 45, it says -

"The text shared by these two editions was adopted internationally by Bible Societies, and following an agreement between the Vatican and the United Bible Societies it has served as the basis for new translations and for revisions made under their supervision. This marks a significant step with regard to interconfessional relationships. It should naturally be understood that this text is a working text: it is not to be considered as definitive, but as a stimulus to further efforts toward defining and verifying the text of the New Testament."

In 1987, a formal agreement was made between the Roman Catholic Church and the United Bible Societies that the critical Greek New Testament will be used for all future translations, both Catholic and Protestant (Guidelines for International Cooperation in Translating the Bible, Rome, 1987, p. 5). Most of the translations produced by the United Bible Societies are “interconfessional,” meaning they have Roman Catholic participation and backing. That should be a RED FLAG!

Another enlightening fact: How do the editors of these critical Greek New Testaments determine how they make the changes as they go about restoring the New Testament? I think you will be shocked! For the answer, we need to look at the 27th edition of the Novum Testamentum Graece edited by Kurt Aland and Barbara Aland (27th edition, Stuttgart, 1993). It was agreed upon by the committee as the “best” reading and it has nothing to do with the “original” text. When they disagreed on the best reading to print, they voted. Who voted? Barbara Aland, Kurt Aland, Johannes Karavidopoulos, Cardinal Carlo M. Martini, Bruce M. Metzger.

Now, the reason I am explaining this rather technical information is because it is the critical text of the New Testament from which nearly all the modern versions of the Bible are translated. And let me tell you this. If the text the modern Bible translators use for their bibles “is not to be considered as definitive,” then certainly their translation cannot be considered definitive.

Things that are different are NOT the same! The Eclectic Greek Text disagrees with the Traditional text that underlies the King James Bible in 8,000 places. The Eclectic text is CONSTANTLY changing. Because of the massive manuscript witness of the traditional text group, and the careful translation of the underlying Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts, our King James Bible is God’s Word kept intact.

The King James Bible is built on the foundation of faith by men who had a high regard for the Bible.

The translators of the King James Bible had a high regard for the Scriptures. They believed in biblical inspiration and preservation.

I believe that God inspired the original writings of the Bible, which are called the autographa. He did this ONCE. There are numerous verses that teach this. Let’s look at -

2 Timothy 3:16: "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:"

The word inspiration is derived from the Greek word θεοπνευστος - theopneustos (2 Timothy 3:16), which literally means “God breathed” or more accurately, “breathed into by God.” Charles Ryrie writes that inspiration is – “God’s superintending of human authors so that, using their own individual personalities, they composed and recorded without error in the words of the original autographs His revelation to man.”

Dr. Thomas Strouse puts it this way – “Inspiration is the process whereby the Holy Spirit led the writers of Scripture to record accurately His very words; the product of the process was an inspired original.”

The best definition of inspiration that helps me to accurately understand what happened is by Dr. H. D. Williams. He wrote -

“Inspiration is the miracle whereby the Words of the Scripture in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek were God-breathed and ‘once delivered’ (Jude 1:3) using ‘holy men of God’ and their vocabulary, who perfectly recorded them ‘once’ as they were ‘moved’ along by the Holy Spirit in such a way that ‘all’ the Words written are infallible and inerrant in sixty-six books of the canon of Scripture.”

There is an important fact you must know when it comes to biblical inspiration. It was the WORDS that were inspired, not the men! God worked through men by His Holy Spirit with the result of the WORDS being inspired.

2 Peter 1:20-21 reveals this - “Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. 21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.”

Let me explain verse 21. The idea is that Scripture neither proceeds from the prophet’s own knowledge, thoughts, ideas or inventions, nor was it rooted in the calculation or conjecture of the one to whom it was revealed. As one commentator put it, “this means that the origin of the Scripture was not of anyone’s private or personal ideas.” The Scriptures were of the Lord! It was the Words that were inspired or breathed out by God (see 2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 1:20-21; Jude 1:3).

Again, God only inspired His words ONCE! God only inspired the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek writings, the originals! He has not done it again. The natural question is, if we do not have the originals, do we have the Word of God? The answer is YES! GOD HAS PRESERVED HIS WORDS FOR US!

The Bible teaches verbal preservation. I believe that God has preserved His Words in the copies of those original writings in the Hebrew Masoretic Text of the Old Testament and the Traditional Text (Textus Receptus) of the New Testament.

I have FAITH that the God who inspired the original autographs can and did preserve the apographs so that we can say, “Thus saith the Lord; This IS the Word of God” when we hold up our King James Bibles.

Nineteenth-century believing Bible scholar par excellence, John Burgon wrote: "If you and I believe that the original writings of the Scriptures were verbally inspired by God, then of necessity they must have been providentially preserved through the ages."

The London Baptist Confession of 1677 and 1689 says, “The Old Testament in Hebrew, (which was the native language of the people of God of old), and the New Testament Greek (which at the time of the writing of it was the most generally known to the nations) being immediately inspired by God, and by his singular care and providence kept pure in all ages and are therefore authentical.”

My point in quoting this document is simply this; Bible-believing Christians in the past, for the most part, believed in the inspiration and providential preservation of the Word of God. It is only in the last quarter of the 19th century and 20th century that born-again Christians have believed anything else!

In fact, the Bible teaches providential preservation! The Lord Jesus Christ taught providential preservation. In Matthew 4:4, we read, "But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." Did you know that no original manuscripts existed in Christ’s day? Yet, Christ confidently quoted a portion of Deuteronomy 8:3 as the authoritative Word of God, and it was a copy of the original without a doubt.

There are many Scriptures that indicate God has providentially preserved His Word. Here are just a few:

• Psalms 12:6-7: "The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. 7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever."
• Psalms 33:11: "The counsel of the LORD standeth for ever, the thoughts of his heart to all generations."
• Psalms 100:5: "For the LORD is good; his mercy is everlasting; and his truth endureth to all generations."
• Matthew 24:35: "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away."
• Luke 16:17: "And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail."
• 1 Peter 1:23, 25: "Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you."

I believe God. What He promised, He is able to perform (Romans 4:21). He has promised to preserve His Word(s), and I believe Him. I have the faith that He has done it. Therefore, I have chosen to use the King James Bible, because it is built on the Traditional Text, which is laid on the foundation of faith.

Modern Bible Versions are based on a foundation of doubt by men who had a low regard for the Bible.

Why do I say that? The men behind the eclectic Greek New Testament used for the modern translations were unbelievers, skeptics, and mutilators of the Bible!

Here are some examples: Kurt Aland, one of the men behind the Nestle-Aland Greek New Testaments, denied the verbal inspiration of the Bible. Eugene Nida, the Father of Dynamic Equivalency, denies the substitutionary blood atonement of Christ. Cardinal Carlos Martini, who is a Jesuit priest, believed God was in all men and all religions. Bruce Metzger believed the Old Testament was a “matrix of myth, legend, and history.” He did not believe that Moses wrote the Pentateuch, but that it was written over a long period of time. He denied the worldwide flood, said Job was a folktale. Isaiah was not just written by Isaiah, but also by two or three other unknown men who wrote centuries later. He claimed that Paul did NOT write the Pastoral Epistles.

In looking deeper, you will find that the late Princeton Theological Seminary textual critic Dr. Bruce Metzger, who is behind the Greek text used in translating the modern versions of the Bible, reveals some other alarming things. In writing to Dr. Kirt DiVietro, he testified that the text they founded their work on was that of Westcott and Hort. He wrote, “We took as our base at the beginning the text of Westcott and Hort and introduced changes as seemed necessary on the basis of MSS evidence.”

Modern versions are erected on the faulty foundation of doubt! Here’s why I say that. Westcott and Hort speculated, with no evidence to support their idea, that the “pure” text of the New Testament had been lost. They said that the Antiochian text (also called the Traditional Text, Textus Receptus, etc.), the text type behind the King James New Testament, was an artificial and arbitrarily invented text, fabricated between 250 A.D. and 350 A.D. In fact, Westcott and Hort asserted that it remained lost until the 19th century when Vaticanus was rediscovered in 1845 in the Vatican library, where it had lain since 1481, and Sinaiticus was discovered in a wastebasket in St. Catherine’s Monastery in 1844.

Figure it out. If you believe their conjured theory, that means people were without the Word of God for 1,500 years! Therefore, the question must be, were Westcott and Hort correct? Had the Word of God been lost for 1,500 years?

Dr. F. H. A. Scrivener wrote:

"Dr. Hort's System is entirely destitute of historical foundation….We are compelled to repeat as emphatically as ever our strong conviction that the hypothesis to whose proof he has devoted so many laborious years, is destitute not only of historical foundation, but of all probability…” (Dr. F. H. A. Scrivener's Plain Introduction, 1883, pp. 537, 542).

Further, he stated;

"There is little hope for the stability of their imposing structure (speaking of Westcott & Hort), if its foundations have been laid on the sandy ground of ingenious conjecture. And, since barely the smallest vestige of historical evidence has ever been alleged in support of the views of these accomplished editors, their teaching must either be received as intuitively true, or dismissed from our consideration as precarious and even visionary." (Dr. F. H. A. Scrivener's Plain Introduction, 1883, p. 531).

In summary, I have chosen to use the English Bible that is built on the solid foundation of faith, believing that God has preserved His Words in the Masoretic Hebrew text and the Textus Receptus Greek text, and that the King James Bible “preserves” in the English language, by accurate translation, that preserved Hebrew Masoretic and Textus Receptus Greek texts.

By the same token, I must say that if you hold to a modern version of the Bible, you have chosen the sandy ground of ingenious conjecture. The critical scholars behind the modern versions do not believe that God preserved His Words as He said He did. In fact, they are not sure where His Words are. They are frantically revising, adding, deleting, modifying, and changing God’s Words as is right in their own eyes.

Will you choose the solid foundation of faith or the sandy foundation of doubt?

Things that are different are NOT the same!

✔ Formal Equivalency vs Dynamic or Conceptual Equivalency & Paraphrases

Matthew 24:35: “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.”

Matthew 4:4: “But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.”

Formal Equivalency refers to the method of translating by finding reasonably equivalent words and phrases while following the forms of the source language as closely as possible. It is often referred to as “literal translation.” It is a literal translation, (formal equivalent translation), as closely as possible the Bible is translated word-for-word. If the original has a noun, then a noun is used in the translation. If it is a verb, then a verb is used.

Dynamic Equivalence, also called Functional Equivalence, is a translation method in which the translator attempts to reflect the thought of the writer in the source language rather than the words and forms. It is not concerned about the grammatical form of the original language as it is with getting across the thoughts. DYNAMIC EQUIVALENCE AIMS TO TRANSLATE THOUGHTS RATHER THAN WORDS. However, the BIG problem is a dynamic equivalence translation is more interpretive. And because it is more interpretive, the translators do not always know whether their interpretation is right. In essence, when dynamic equivalency is used, the translators put their own spin on the Bible!

Here are some actual illustrations where this type of translation has been used. From the KJB, look at Isaiah 1:18: “Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.” David Cloud relates this in reference to this passage – “An example of adapting the Bible's language to today's cultural situations (using dynamic equivalency) was related to me by the head of the Bible Society in Nepal. He told of one of the projects of the United Bible Societies, which was done in a part of the world in which the people had not seen snow. The translators, therefore, decided to translate Isaiah 1:18—‘...though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be white as the inside of a coconut....’”

Cloud goes on – “Consider some other examples of the way these versions change the Word of God to conform with culture. The following illustrations were given to us by Ross Hodsdon of Bibles International, formerly with Wycliffe:

• In a translation for Eskimos in Alaska, ‘lamb’ was replaced with ‘seal pup.’
• In a translation in the Makusi language of Brazil, ‘son of man’ was replaced with ‘older brother.’
• In another Wycliffe translation, ‘fig tree’ was replaced with ‘banana tree.’”

That is NOT what God said! That is tampering with the Words of God! THAT IS WRONG. When one departs from the principle of a literal translation, the mind of the translator and the culture and understanding of the people become the authority rather than God’s actual words of Scriptures.

The same thing is happening in the modern versions today, because they are using the dynamic equivalent translation model. They are translating thoughts and not the words of God.

Paraphrase - Paraphrasing is NOT translation at all. It is defined as “a restatement of a text or passage in another form or other words.” Paraphrased Bibles are mini-commentaries. They are the paraphrasers' own ideas of what God was saying.

Things that are different are NOT the same!