Unity of Knowledge

NetChaplain

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
79
Location
Missouri
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
For some time now (recent century) many Christians have encountered a dearth of spiritual growth, and in my opinion it’s undeniably obvious that this is derived from a twofold lack of sufficient Bible reading/studying, and of less desire for church fellowship, both of which are a priority in Scripture (Mat 4:4; Heb 10:25); and is necessary for for sufficient leading (Rom 8:14) and conforming (Rom 8:13) of the Spirit’s ongoing work within the believer’s lifestyle. It’s my understanding that in one degree or another all who have been reborn are “being conformed to the image of His Son” (Rom 8:29), but the less activity of church fellowship and Bible study, the less progression there will be in the conforming process—especially concerning encouragement—which mostly comes by Christians “exhorting one another.”

Of all that the Holy Spirit of God uses to continue His guidance and enablement within the believer, His Word (2Ti 3:16; 2Pe 1:21) is the sole tangible or physical instrument available, for all else is evaluated by the Word! This makes studying the Scriptures one of the most important (fellowship is the other means) practical means by which believers grow. This answers to the Enemy’s initial opposition to God’s Word (“Yea, hath God said – Gen 3:1) and his continued attempts against it, in order to interfere with fellowship (but never union) in this life between God and those who are His. It stands to reason that since the written Word of God is the most significant instrument by which “faith comes” (Rom 10:17), distraction from the Word is required to weaken the strength of faith by reducing or eliminating the ongoing reading and studying it. Faith never diminishes (reduced), but is ever on the increase in strength, according to the degree of knowledge and understanding of the Word of God.

At the time of the discovery concerning the recent finds of the Sinaiticus (1859) and Vaticanus (1881—abounded for 500 yrs.), there were Bible scholars who actually believed these codices represented a recovery of the “the pure Word of God”! The major source of the Minority Text consist of the codices Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. The former was found in a monastery at the foot of Mt. Sinai in 1859. It was discovered by Constantin (von) Tischendorf, who realized it was part of the OT and a complete copy of the NT in Greek. The latter (codex B) laid perdue on a library shelf in the Vatican, which was abandoned (circa 1350 AD), and then discovered in 1881.

Here are some brief examples concerning omitted readings in most of the modern translations:

Most neglect to include the inferred words “the brother of” in 2Sam 21:19, rendering the errant reading that “Elhanan killed Goliath.” These three words were unintentionally neglected to be entered in all manuscript copies of the Hebrew OT, thus without the inference the passage contradicts 1Chronicles 20:5 (and the entirety of David’s encounter with the giant), which correctly reads “Elhanan the son of Jair slew Lahmi the brother of Goliath,”—and no italics in this phrase!

A far greater problem concerning omissions lies within the Greek NT, containing numerous words and passages not included in the translations. A few of hundreds of significant examples is 1Jn 5:7. This passage is known to be the most direct description of the Trinitarian doctrine, but the passage is nearly entirely omitted in all Minority-based translations. It’s known as the Johannine Comma, which is absent in many sources, but nevertheless was supported enough somewhere for Erasmus and other scholars to include it in his Greek New Testament (1516), which is known as the Textus Receptus (received text).

The King James translators italicized words not found in manuscript copies, in order to maintain non-contradictive readings (e.g. “the brother of”); and let it be noticed that where this passage appears in the KJV, the words are void of italicization. Two other examples are John 3:13. The Majority Text reads “no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.” The Minority text translations omits “even the Son of man which is in heaven,” which manifests His omnipresence, being Deity. In Ephesians 3:9, the traditional reading is “hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ.” The modern translations omit “through Jesus Christ.”

Some of the following contains excerpts from the book “Which Bible,” by David Otis Fuller, D.D., pages 191-193. This book and two others like it of which he wrote, reveals historical conflicts over the Scriptures of the Word of God! Ground zero of this debate lies between the significant differences between the two primary groups of manuscript copies from which all Bible translations are derived; Majority Text and Minority Text. To me the most significant point to remember concerning this issue is that the former consists of most extant manuscript copies (there are no known extant original autographs or writings), and the latter are few in number, esp. in comparison to the former.

The teachings of four theologians who are said to have most “contributed both to the heresy and final issuing of manuscripts of a corrupt New Testament”:

1. Justin Martyr (100–165 AD); “originally a pagan and of pagan parentage . . . his teachings were of a heretical nature. Even as a Christian teacher he continued to where the robes of a pagan philosopher.” With Martyr, “We see how muddy the stream of pure Christian doctrine was running among the heretical sects fifty years after the death of the apostle John (100 ad).”

2. Tatain (2nd century); “Embraced the Gnostic heresy.” “Wrote a Harmony of the Gospels which was called the Diatessaron, meaning four-inone. The Gospels were so notoriously corrupt that a bishop of Syria was obliged to throw out two hundred copies of this Diatessaron, since the church members were mistaking it for the true Gospel.”

3. Clement of Alexandria (150 –215 AD); Tatian’s pupil, who founded a school in Alexandria which supported propaganda within the “heretical lines.” “Clement expressly tells us that he would not hand down Christian teachings, pure and unmixed, but rather clothed with precepts of pagan philosophy.” The entirety of heretical teachers “were possessed by Clement, and he freely quoted from their corrupted manuscripts as if they were the pure words of Scripture” (Dean Burgon, The Revision Revised, p. 336). Clements “influence in the depravation of Christianity was tremendous. But his greatest contribution was the direction given to the studies and activities of Origen, his famous pupil.”

4. Origen of Alexandria (184–253 AD); he “did the most of all to create and give direction to the forces of apostasy down through the centuries.” He said “the Scriptures are of little use to those who understand them as they are written.” Being “a pupil of Clement, he learned the teachings of the Gnostic heresy.” Phillip Schaff (1819-1893) said, “His (Origen) predilection for Plato (pagan philosopher) led him into many grand and fascinating errors.” Origen believed and taught that the human soul existed “from eternity before it was incarnated and that after death it migrated to a higher or lower form of life in accordance to the deeds done in the body. He also believed that Satan and the devils would be saved,” and he also manipulated “the whole Law and Gospel into an allegory” (this article cannot include the hundreds of other erroneous heresies he propagated). D. Ira Maurice Price (1856-1939) said that “the Emperor Constantine gave orders that fifty copies of Origen’s fifth column in his ‘Hexapla’ (the Hebrew Bible in six versions) be prepared for use in churches,” and “it has been suggested that the Codex Vaticanus may have been one of these copies” (Which Bible, pg. 3).

Frederick Ambrose Scrivener (1813-1891) wrote that “It is no less true to fact than paradoxical in sound, that the worst corruptions to which the New Testament has ever been subjected, originated within a hundred years after it was composed; that Irenaeus (150 AD), and the African Fathers, and the whole Western, with a portion of the Syrian Church, used far inferior manuscripts to those employed by Stunica, Erasmus and Stephens thirteen centuries later, when molding the Textus Receptus.” (Received Text, which content and context has the least variance of all translations with the Majority Text).

“According to J.W. Burgon (1813-1888 – wrote “The Revision Revised”) Dean of Chichester, there once were many ancient manuscripts containing the Byzantine text (circa 350), manuscripts much older than B (Vaticanus) and Aleph (codex Sinaiticus). But they were read so constantly and copied so frequently that finally they wore out and perished.” This answers to the reason why so “few Byzantine manuscripts are extant today”; and is why non-Byzantine manuscripts (Alexandrian or Minority Text) “have survived to this present day, because they were rejected by the Greek Church as faulty and so were not used.” It was also said that “the scribes usually destroyed their exemplars when they had copied the sacred books,” thus the Majority Text manuscripts are not as old as those within the Minority Text. Some examples of translations which are derived from the Majority Text are KJV, NKJV, Young’s Literal Translation and Webster’s translation, et al.






* Gnostic heresy was principally based of the concept that just having knowledge of God saves you. “Gnostics considered the principal element of salvation to be direct knowledge of the supreme divinity in the form of mystical or esoteric insight. Many Gnostic texts deal not in concepts of sin and repentance, but with illusion and enlightenment.”

“In most Gnostic systems, the sufficient cause of salvation is this "knowledge of" ("acquaintance with") the divine.” –Etymology, Gnosticism.
 

Origen

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 1, 2021
Messages
817
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
A far greater problem concerning omissions lies within the Greek NT, containing numerous words and passages not included in the translations. A few of hundreds of significant examples is 1Jn 5:7. This passage is known to be the most direct description of the Trinitarian doctrine, but the passage is nearly entirely omitted in all Minority-based translations. It’s known as the Johannine Comma, which is absent in many sources, but nevertheless was supported enough somewhere for Erasmus and other scholars to include it in his Greek New Testament (1516), which is known as the Textus Receptus (received text).
Let address this example first.

Can you tell me how many Greek manuscripts of 1st John are known at this time?
 
Last edited:

pinacled

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 24, 2015
Messages
2,862
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Non-Denominational
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single

NetChaplain

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
79
Location
Missouri
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Let address this example first.

Can you tell me how many Greek manuscripts of 1st John are known at this time?
It is in none in the original codices, which is commonly known among lay-critics. I agree that this gives ample rise to inquire why the comma was added, but it's my experience that the Majority Text, or Textus Receptus by Erasmus presents the most sensible choice because it maintains the greatest consistency in paralleling with most extant manuscript copies within the last 5 centuries.

All translations have their difficulties concerning originality due to additions and omissions, but I believe the Spirit's Word of God is within the translations which are derived from a compilation of most of the extant manuscripts that are mostly parallel in content first, then context apprehension (intended thought). Myself, I've chosen to remain with what engenders unity, which are translations that are mostly parallel in these two requisites!

I also consider this: Who is most likely to be trustworthy concerning good intentions? Scholars from traditional times when there was much less distraction by false teachings, or modern scholars in the midst of a multitudinous of false teachings.
 

Origen

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 1, 2021
Messages
817
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
It is in none in the original codices, which is commonly known among lay-critics. I agree that this gives ample rise to inquire why the comma was added, but it's my experience that the Majority Text, or Textus Receptus by Erasmus presents the most sensible choice because it maintains the greatest consistency in paralleling with most extant manuscript copies within the last 5 centuries.
Do you think the Comma is part of the Majority Text?
 

NetChaplain

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
79
Location
Missouri
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Do you think the Comma is part of the Majority Text?
It's okay to ask but I thought we've established that; but that issue in my opinion is far less significant than the issue that much of the Majority Text is missing in the two codices from which most modern translations are derived; Sinaiticaus, Vaticanus.

The most significant change I've seen in modern Christendom which I find interesting within the last half century is the diminished numbers of Christians within America's churches. This seems to coincide about the same time the modern translations became popular. I also have been long convinced that the appearance of these translations have significantly effected this phenomena. Even if most chose which one they desired, it would not address the lack of solidarity that exists in the Word among Christians. It's the Word that brought us to Christ, and it's the lack of it that weakens those in Christ!

I also believe the majority of Body of Christ will be in it's weakest condition at the Translation of Christ's arrival. Of course if this is true He already knows this; but our acceptance with God isn't the condition of His Church, but the expiation of the Lord Jesus for our sin, by which He will "present it to Himself a glorious Church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing" (Eph 5:27).

God's blessing to the Family!
 

Origen

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 1, 2021
Messages
817
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
It's okay to ask but I thought we've established that; but that issue in my opinion is far less significant than the issue that much of the Majority Text is missing in the two codices from which most modern translations are derived; Sinaiticaus, Vaticanus.
I am discussing your claims concerning the Comma.

Established what? That the Comma is part of the Majority Text, is that your claim?

I am just trying to make sure I am understand your claim. You appear to be going out of your way not to directly answer any question.
 
Last edited:

NetChaplain

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
79
Location
Missouri
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I am discussing your claims concerning the Comma.

Established what? That the Comma is part of the Majority Text, is that your claim?

I am just trying to make sure I am understand your claim. You appear to be going out of your way not to directly answer any question.
Sorry, I suppose I wasn't being clear enough because maybe I was stating my opinions too much. When I stated "It is in none in the original codices" #4, I thought you would know my answer is no, it's not in the Majority Text.
 

Origen

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 1, 2021
Messages
817
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Sorry, I suppose I wasn't being clear enough because maybe I was stating my opinions too much. When I stated "It is in none in the original codices" #4, I thought you would know my answer is no, it's not in the Majority Text.
Then on what basis should it be include? What is the objective evidence?
 

NetChaplain

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
79
Location
Missouri
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Then on what basis should it be include? What is the objective evidence?
I think only Erasmus could answer that because their is no available basis, other than the majority of the late Latin manuscripts (circa 13th to 16th centuries).
 

Origen

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 1, 2021
Messages
817
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I think only Erasmus could answer that because their is no available basis, other than the majority of the late Latin manuscripts (circa 13th to 16th centuries).
(1) Should we just accept what Erasmus says without evidence?

(2) Should the Greek text be corrected by the Latin text (especially when the evidence of the Greek manuscripts is so overwhelmingly against it)?
 

NetChaplain

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
79
Location
Missouri
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
(1) Should we just accept what Erasmus says without evidence?

(2) Should the Greek text be corrected by the Latin text (especially when the evidence of the Greek manuscripts is so overwhelmingly against it)?
Does what the comma teach represent truth?
 

Origen

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 1, 2021
Messages
817
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Does what the comma teach represent truth?
Let's assume that it does for the sake of the argument.

Thus your argument is,
since what the Comma teaches represents truth,
it therefore follows that the Comma was part of the original document (i.e. that John himself wrote it),
no matter what the evidence shows.

Is that is all you have? Do you have any objective evidence?
 
Last edited:

NetChaplain

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
79
Location
Missouri
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Let's assume that it does for the sake of the argument.

Thus your argument is,
since what the Comma teaches represents truth,
it therefore follows that the Comma was part of the original document (i.e. that John himself wrote it),
no matter what the evidence shows.

Is that is all you have? Do you have any objective evidence?
Not in relation to our disagreements or to change the subject, but why would translators intentionally allow a Bible to read that "Elhanan killed Goliath"? I'm certain they knew it would effect scriptural credibility, esp. concerning novice readers. It's silly that most Minority-based translations contain this blunder of an error. Any thoughts, and I'm asking out of curiosity or debate. I just haven't come across anyone with a sensible answer here? I also wanted you to know that I appreciate the manner of kindness within our communications, and also learning some from you concerning them. Thanks and God bless!
 

Origen

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 1, 2021
Messages
817
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Not in relation to our disagreements or to change the subject, but why would translators intentionally allow a Bible to read that "Elhanan killed Goliath"? I'm certain they knew it would effect scriptural credibility, esp. concerning novice readers. It's silly that most Minority-based translations contain this blunder of an error. Any thoughts, and I'm asking out of curiosity or debate. I just haven't come across anyone with a sensible answer here? I also wanted you to know that I appreciate the manner of kindness within our communications, and also learning some from you concerning them. Thanks and God bless!
I do plan on addressing all your examples, however at this point I am focusing on the Comma.

So I ask again, what is the objective evidence for its inclusion?
 
Last edited:

NetChaplain

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
79
Location
Missouri
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I do plan on addressing all your examples, however at this point I am focusing on the Comma.

So I ask again, on what basis should it be include? What is the objective evidence?
To balance our positions we can ask, On what basis did the Alexandrian Text and it's modern-day translators (Wescott and Hort, who founded the occult organization The Ghostly Guild - Who were Westcott and Hort? - Wasco Free Will Baptist Church), intentionally produced an errant reading? There--we're even. Now there's no plausible reason to continue the comma issue; and no intended reflection on you but on I find it far greater divisive to neglect a necessary inference (e.g. "the brother of") in 2Sam 21:19, which was to maintain Biblical hermeneutics. Just saying!!

Nothing intended against you personally (which I never do to anyone) but I won't be replying to anything repeatedly presented on the comma issue. Thanks and God bless!
 

Origen

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 1, 2021
Messages
817
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
To balance our positions we can ask, On what basis did the Alexandrian Text and it's modern-day translators (Wescott and Hort, who founded the occult organization The Ghostly Guild - Who were Westcott and Hort? - Wasco Free Will Baptist Church), intentionally produced an errant reading? There--we're even. Now there's no plausible reason to continue the comma issue; and no intended reflection on you but on I find it far greater divisive to neglect a necessary inference (e.g. "the brother of") in 2Sam 21:19, which was to maintain Biblical hermeneutics. Just saying!!
This has nothing to do with the Alexandrian text type or Wescott and Hort. Whatever Wescott and Hort opinions where on the Comma, they do not matter to me. This concern the objective evidence for its inclusion.

Nothing intended against you personally (which I never do to anyone) but I won't be replying to anything repeatedly presented on the comma is issue.
Then you have no answer to the question: Do you have any objective evidence for its inclusion?

In other words, you simply want it to be included in the text and the evidence does not matter. I will now move on to another matter in my next post.
 
Last edited:

NetChaplain

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
79
Location
Missouri
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
This has nothing to do with the Alexandrian text type or Wescott and Hort. Whatever Wescott and Hort opinions where on the Comma, they do not matter to me. This concern the objective evidence for its inclusion.
I prefer not to continue the same repetition in our debates over Biblical doctrine presence (unless its a new issue), but rather on the teachings of its doctrines. Again, thanks for the schooling!
 

Origen

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 1, 2021
Messages
817
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I prefer not to continue the same repetition in our debates over Biblical doctrine presence (unless its a new issue), but rather on the teachings of its doctrines. Again, thanks for the schooling!
No schooling, however I will press on with the topic, but I will change gears for now.

The teachings of four theologians who are said to have most “contributed both to the heresy and final issuing of manuscripts of a corrupt New Testament”:

1. Justin Martyr (100–165 AD); “originally a pagan and of pagan parentage . . . his teachings were of a heretical nature. Even as a Christian teacher he continued to where the robes of a pagan philosopher.” With Martyr, “We see how muddy the stream of pure Christian doctrine was running among the heretical sects fifty years after the death of the apostle John (100 ad).”
What is the evidence that Justin Martyr had anything to do with the "issuing of manuscripts" of any kind?

Please name those manuscripts and how it can be shown that Justin Martyr had anything to do with them.
 
Last edited:

NetChaplain

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2021
Messages
79
Location
Missouri
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
No schooling, however I will press on with the topic, but I will change gears for now.


What is the evidence that Justin Martyr had anything to do with the "issuing of manuscripts" of any kind?

Please name those manuscripts and how it can be shown that Justin Martyr had anything to do with them.
The "heresies" of some these men gained much influence in the writings of the others who copied some of the Biblical manuscripts, and none copied the entire Bible. Examples of copiers are Tatian (the Diatessaron) and Origen (the Hexapla). It was a probable suspicion by Bergon and other proponents of the Majority Text that the Vaticanus may have been one of the copies of the Hexapla (as mentioned in the OP).

This will be my final reply concerning this OP, regardless if you reply again. God bless!
 
Top Bottom