A manuscript is a hand-copied document .

This was t he met hod used for writ ing and duplicat ing exist ing lit erat ure prior t o t he invent ion of print ing. There are over 5,300 (5,309 t o be exact ) exist ing manuscript s of t he Script ures. Some of t hese manuscript s cont ain a large port ion of script ure, while ot her are fragment s. Let us first consider cert ain Greek t ext s from which all New Test ament t ranslat ions are derived: 1. t he Majorit y Text s (Textus Receptus ), and 2. t h e Minorit y Text s (primarily t he West cot t and Hort Greek Text , based primarily on t he Codex Sinaiticus and t he Codex Vaticanus ). For obvious reasons, t he Text us Recept us is also referred t o as t he "Majority Text" since t he majorit y (95% or more) of exist ing manuscript s support t his reading. These ext ant manuscript s were brought t oget her by various edit ors such as Lucian (AD 250-312), Erasmus, St ephanus, Beza, and t he Elzevir
PDFmyURL.com

t oget her by various edit ors such as Lucian (AD 250-312), Erasmus, St ephanus, Beza, and t he Elzevir brot hers. The most not able edit or of all was Desiderius Erasmus (1466-1536) one of t he great est scholars t he world has ever known. When t he early Prot est ant Reformers of t he 16t h and 17t h cent uries decided t o t ranslat e t he script ures direct ly from Greek int o t he languages of Europe, t h e y select ed Text us Recept us as t heir foundat ion Greek document .

The NASB, t he NIV, t he Jehovah's Wit ness bible ("New World Translat ion"), and most modern t ranslat ions and paraphrases use t he West cot t and Hort Greek Text , which is support ed by only a small port ion (5% or less) of exist ing manuscript s, including Codex Vat icanus, Codex Sinait icus, Alexandrian Codex, Parisian Codex, and Codex Bezae. For obvious reasons, t his t ext is referred t o as t he "Minority Text s." West cot t and Hort relied heavily on t he Vat icanus and Sinait icus for t heir Greek Text , which is part icularly odd, considering t he fact t hat t hese t wo codices cont radict each ot her over 3,000 t imes in t he gospels alone. As st at ed above, t here are more t han 5,300 manuscript s in exist ence. These manuscript s are divided int o several different format s: 1. Papyrus fragments -- papyrus was relat ively inexpensive compared t o vellum (animal skins), and t herefore was widely used. However, it was not very durable and copies would wear out rat her rapidly t hrough usage. The size of t hese papyrus fragment s range from a few verses t o large port ions of an ent ire book. 2. Unical - - t hese are copies t hat were writ t en in capit al let t ers. 3. Cursive -- t hose writ t en in small hand.
PDFmyURL.com

Of t hese 5,300+ exist ing manuscript s, over 95% are in agreement wit h, and form t he basis for t he Text us Recept us, which is t he t ext which t he King James t ranslat ors used. St range as it may seem, West cot t and Hort t hrew out t he preponderance of manuscript evidence and opt ed rat her t o go wit h t he M inorit y Text s! Hence we have inherit ed an ongoing st ruggle among New Test ament crit ics, accompanied by havoc and confusion in churches caused by t he int roduct ion of t hese conflict ing New Test ament Greek t ext s. Since 1881, most subsequent versions have followed t he M inorit y Text s. St udy t he informat ion in t he following t able. Alt hough t his dat a was compiled in 1967, recent archeological discoveries will not significant ly effect t he result s. This dat a illust rat es why t he Text us Recept us is referred t o as t he "M ajorit y Text ."

Type Tot al # of t his Number t hat Number t hat of M anuscript t ype manuscript support WH* support TR** Papyrus Unical Cursive Lect ionary*** 88 267 2764 2143 13 (15%) 9 (3%) 23 (1%) 0 75 (85%) 258 (97%) 2741 (99%) 2143 (100%)

* WH indicat es Westcott-Hort Greek Text (Minority Text) ** TR indicat es Textus Receptus (Majority Text) *** A lect ionary is a book t hat cont ains a collect ion of script ure readings The t able gives t he approximat e number and percent of each t ype of Greek manuscript t hat support s t he West cot t and Hort Greek Text , as well as t he number and percent of each class t hat support s t he Text us Recept us Greek t ext . These approximat ions are t aken from t he careful research of Dr. Jack M oorman in his book Forever Set t led. [From: TH E FOUR-FOLD SUPERIORITY OF THE KING JAM ES VERSION By Dr. D.A. Wait e] There are a few ot her old manuscript s, even including fragment ary Greek papyri, whose t ext ual charact er seems t o conform more t o t he Codex Sinait icus and Codex Vat icanus t han t o t he Text us Recept us. However, t hese all have been t raced (by liberal and conservat ive scholars alike) t o a probable source in Alexandria, Egypt , in t he 2nd or 3rd cent ury. The most influent ial man among t he "int ellect ual" communit y
PDFmyURL.com

Alexandria, Egypt , in t he 2nd or 3rd cent ury. The most influent ial man among t he "int ellect ual" communit y of Alexandria was t he learned Origen, and it is believed by many t hat he was largely inst rument al in developing t he so-called "Alexandrian" t ext of t he New Test ament (of which t he Vat ican and Sinai manuscript s are represent at ive), in cont rast t o t he "Byzant ine" t ext , from which t he Text us Recept us has largely come. Wit h all his immense learning and zeal, however, Origen was a heret ic. Like modern t heist ic evolut ionist s, he felt const rained t o harmonize Christ ianit y wit h pagan philosophy, especially t hat of Plat o and t he St oics. This led him int o excessive allegorizat ion of Script ure, especially Genesis, and int o denigrat ing t he act ual hist orical records of t he Bible, even t hat of t he bodily resurrect ion of Christ , as well as t he lit eral creat ion of t he world. Whet her or not Origen and his associat es were first responsible for t he differences in t he Alexandrian t ext from t he Byzant ine, t he fact remains t hat significant differences do exist , and t hat pract ically all modern English t ranslat ions have been heavily influenced (via West cot t and Hort , et c.) in favor of t he former, whereas t he King James t ranslat ion has it s basis primarily in t he lat t er. The only place where t hese error laden, unreliable manuscript s excel is in t he qualit y of t he mat erials used on t hem. They have good bindings and fine animal skin pages. Their physical appearance, cont rary t o t heir wort hless t ext s, are really rat her at t ract ive. But t hen we have all heard t he saying, "You can't judge a book by its cover ." The covers are beaut iful but t heir t ext s are reprehensible. And yet in spit e of t hese well-known corrupt ions, t hey are t he basis for many new versions such as t he NIV and t he NASB, rendering t hese versions crit ically flawed and unreliable . I will give many, many examples of t hese errors and omissions when I deal wit h t he alt ered verses. M any of t he differences bet ween t he manuscript s involve significant wat ering down of even such basic doct rines as Biblical inerrancy and t he perfect divine/human nat ure of Christ . IMPORTANT NOTE: Please remember t hat , while t he modern versions of t he Bible do wat er down t he t rut h and are not t he BEST t ranslat ions, t hey cert ainly do not complet ely eliminat e t hese key doct rines, so it is st ill possible t o discern t hese doct rines and t o find t he t rue gospel and way of salvat ion in many of t he new t ext s or t ranslat ions. M y wife, for inst ance, was saved while reading t he Good News Bible, which is a paraphrase based on t he M inorit y Text s, which were corrupt ed. So you see, God uses even t he flawed t ranslat ions t o accomplish His purposes and decrees.

Think about it . . . can you really imagine t he Lord of Lords, t he Holy One of Israel hiding Codex Vat icanus away for over 1,000
PDFmyURL.com

Holy One of Israel hiding Codex Vat icanus away for over 1,000 years in t he Vat ican Library t ill 1481? Or bet t er yet , can you imagine Him prompt ing t he monks of St Cat herine's M onast ery t o dump Codex Sinait icus int o a wast e basket ? Remember, t he early Christ ians REJECTED t hese manuscript s. So, t hey went int o secret libariesand t here t hey layunt il t hey were lat er dug up as "ancient manuscript s." So here's what likely happened: t he corrupt Alexandrian t ext (also called t he "Egypt ian" or "Hesychian" t ype t ext ) found it 's way int o Const ant ine's bible (via Origen and Eusebius), one of which was t he Vat ican manuscript and anot her of which was t he Sinai manuscript , but t hey were reject ed and "t hrown in t he closet " by Christ ians of t hat day. However, aft er hundreds of years, t hey event ually were revived via t he West cot t and Hort Greek Text , and finally crept int o t he new "Bible" versions in your local "Christ ian" bookst ore.

T he Devil is sneaky, isn't he??

Therefore, when you hear or read of someone "correct ing" t he King James Bible wit h "older" or "more aut horit at ive" manuscript s, you are simply hearing someone t rying t o use a corrupt ed, pagan, gnost ic, ecumenical, Roman Cat holic t ext t o overt hrow t he God-honored t ext of t he Prot est ant Reformat ion and t he great revivals.

Home Is Older Better?

Does it Really Matter? Other Translations

Manuscripts Codex Sinaiticus Receptus Westcott & Hort Altered Verses Constantine Catholics & the Jesuits

Codex Vaticanus Origen

Textus Tischendorf

PDFmyURL.com

PDFmyURL.com