Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

I agree with childoftheking.  There is a lot of information and history here that it would be nice to maintain.

I am sorry to share the news that our dear friend Sister went to her rest on April 3, 2019.  I never met her on earth, but I look forward to meeting her on that glorious morning when there will be no more death, no more pain, no more tears.

Have you seen the following video???:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2X0bmLOHR8M&t=01

Very interesting information in the video that is verified in our own SDA Bible Commentary.

I favor the KJV and Received Text.

There are no new postings but I feel that information should still be available for those who weren't aware of it when it was happening as it may become relevant again.

After now looking at the Save 3ABN site and noticing that there hasn't been any update there since January 10,2013, I am wondering if that site is still an active site?

Just read this sad news now and also hadn't heard of his passing away until I read this.

All the modern translations which were written during this time are based on the Westcott & Hort Coptic Greek text including the American Standard Version (ASV), the New International Version (NIV), the New World Translation (NWT) & many others with vague references or worse deceptive about what they are based on. But since from the theory Westcott & Hort had spread, the Alexandrian Codices were considered older than any document in the Textus Receptus. The idea of Westcott & Hort mushroomed and had made many believing that these verses did not exist in the original manuscripts that the apostles wrote and may even have been added by eager scribes or others sometime between the 3rd century & the 5th. This idea grew andwas the prevailing theory for many years.

However, since Westcott & Hort's version, some revealing scholarship & textual discoveries have taken place and there now exist over 24,000 fragments & complete texts of the New Testament, many dating to even earlier than the Alexandrian Codices. There is even fragments of the Gospel of Matthew dating to AD 50 a mere twenty or so years after the crucifixion of Christ. From this assemblage of 24,000 documents, scholars have found it agrees with Textus Receptus and thus  has shown the value of the KJV  as the more authoritative text.

 (You can look for Acts 8:37 in most of these 'Modern' Bibles based on the Westcott & Hort Coptic Greek text & you will see that it skips directly from 8:36 to 8:38 without the proclamation of the deity of Christ by the Ethiopian.)

But lets get back to what occurred because of these corrupted Alexandrian manuscripts. Now the corrupted Alexandrian text was allowed to creep into the early church and led to the spread of a wrong belief or doctrine which divided the church, confused even true followers, and is with us to this day. Arius, parish priest of the church of Alexandria, spread his doctrine which diminished the deity of Christ and create such a controversy in the Christian church that a general council was called at Nicaea, by the emperor Constantine in A.D. 325, to consider and rule upon its teaching. Arius maintained "that the Son was totally and essentially distinct from the Father; that He was the first and noblest of those beings whom the Father had created out of nothing, the instrument by whose subordinate operation the Almighty Father formed the universe, and therefore inferior to the Father, both in nature and dignity." This opinion was condemned by the council, which decreed that Christ was of one and the same substance with the Father. For ages it continued to agitate the Christian world, as the Arians spread the false teaching of Arianism among the people of the Roman Empire and beyond. We can look at the changes and deletions of the Alexandrian text and its derivatives and see the results in this view held by Arians, it almost destroyed the faith of Christian believers.

But what was it that was in these changes that led to the spread of Arianism.
Lets go back and look a the Vaticanus & Sinaiticus since they were somehow 'found' in the Vatican Library & a monastery in the Sinai respectively. They were not in the original Greek language, but in a Coptic translation, an early Egyptian language. These previously unknown or unrecognized Alexandrian manuscripts became known collectively as the Alexandrian Codices .

In Alexandria the Gnostic heresy had many followers, it was a Greek line of thought which came to be known as Gnosticism and started soon after the death of Christ.  Gnosticism tried to blend into Christianity and attempted to combine Paganism with Christianity. Some Gnostic groups had beliefs that often contradicted the beliefs of other Gnostic groups. The Gnostic mixed their beliefs into the manuscripts they made of the scriptures, putting changes of their particular beliefs or taking out what disagreed with it.

The Alexandrian Codices that Westcott & Hort's version used, the Vaticanis & the Sinaiticus reflect this. In fact many, if not all of the passages altered or missing from these codices were in fact quoted by the early church fathers as far back as the late 1st century. For instance, if one reads Irenaeus' Against Heresies 3.10.5-6, he states, "Furthermore, near the end of his Gospel, Mark says:'thus, after the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, he was taken up into heaven, and sits on the right hand of God.'" quoting Mark 16:19. Irenaeus wrote this in AD180, some 200 years before the Alexandrian Codices, yet he quotes word for word all the verses from the missing part of Mark which were supposedly not to have been added until the 4th or 5th centuries.

With the discovery of a Gnostic Library called the Nag Hammadi, it became clear that the sect known as the "Gnostics" did not believe in the deity of Jesus Christ. Nor did they really believe in His humanity either. Jesus' mission according to the Gnostics, was to impart special knowledge or "Gnosis" to spirits trapped in this material world seeking release. Thus, Jesus never died on the cross, was never resurrected, was not God, nor was He human. Rather conveniently, all the altered or missing texts in the Alexandrian Codices always happen to involve one or a combination of these subjects.

If one looks below the surface, the pieces fall into place. All these "missing" verses were in the original texts written by the apostles, but taken out in the Alexandrian versions. The older manuscripts & the many quotes from the 1st and 2nd century church fathers more than confirm that. However, since these verses did not agree with the theology being taught by the Gnostics, when they made their own Alexandrian copies of the Greek originals, they conveniently altered or deleted them to suit their own ideas of what God should say.

Westcott & Hort picked up on these corrupted Alexandrian texts as they supported views prevalent in their time from Darwinism & secular humanist questioning of the validity of orthodox Christianity, if just a few verse could be altered or brought into question, it would serve their purpose. These corrupted Alexandrian texts easily appealed to Westcott & Hort's own views. They as seen in many of the letters they exchanged, knowingly made a Greek translation of what was a changed or heavily edited & thus corrupted Alexandrian translation of a Greek original.

And yet here we are today, with the same text in the NIV and other new versions which was one of causes of Arianism, and Christians pick it up and don't understand what it is..

Here is the line of the various versions which followed the reading of the Textus Receptus and you can see why the Waldensians were persecuted and their Bibles and manuscripts burned, I feel because it had the true text which some wanted to destroy.

These versions include: The Peshitta Version (AD 150), The Italic Bible (AD 157), The Waldensian (AD 120 & onwards), The Gallic Bible (Southern France) (AD177), The Gothic Bible (AD 330-350), The Old Syriac Bible (AD 400), The Armenian Bible (AD 400 There are 1244 copies of this version still in existence.), The Palestinian Syriac (AD 450), The French Bible of Oliveton (AD 1535), The Czech Bible (AD 1602), The Italian Bible of Diodati (AD 1606), The Greek Orthodox Bible (Used from Apostolic times to the present day by the Greek Orthodox Church). [Bible Versions, D.B. Loughran]
http://home.sprynet.com/~eagreen/kjv-3.htm

THE OLD TESTAMENT

The Masoretic Text

1524-25 Bomberg Edition of the Masoretic Text also known as the Ben Chayyim Text

THE NEW TESTAMENT

All dates are Anno Domini (A.D.)

30-95------------Original Autographs
95-150----------Greek Vulgate (Copy of Originals)
120---------------The Waldensian Bible
150---------------The Pesh*tta (Syrian Copy)
150-400--------Papyrus Readings of the Receptus
157--------------The Italic Bible - From the Old Latin Vulgate used in Northern Italy
157--------------The Old Latin Vulgate
177--------------The Gallic Bible
310--------------The Gothic Version of Ulfilas
350-400-------The Textus Receptus is Dominant Text
400--------------Augustine favors Textus Receptus
400--------------The Armenian Bible (Translated by Mesrob)
400--------------The Old Syriac
450--------------The Palestinian Syriac Version
450-1450------Byzantine Text Dominant (Textus Receptus)
508--------------Philoxenian - by Chorepiscopos Polycarp, who commissioned by Philoxenos of Mabbug
500-1500------Uncial Readings of Receptus (Codices)
616--------------Harclean Syriac (Translated by Thomas of Harqel - Revision of 508 Philoxenian)
864--------------Slavonic
1100-1300----The Latin Bible of the Waldensians (History goes back as far as the 2nd century as people of the Vaudoix Valley)
1160------------The Romaunt Version (Waldensian)
1300-1500----The Latin Bible of the Albigenses
1382-1550----The Latin Bible of the Lollards
1384------------The Wycliffe Bible
1516------------Erasmus's First Edition Greek New Testament
1522------------Erasmus's Third Edition Published
1522-1534----Martin Luther's German Bible (1)
1525------------Tyndale Version
1534------------Tyndale's Amended Version
1534------------Colinaeus' Receptus
1535------------Coverdale Version
1535------------Lefevre's French Bible
1537------------Olivetan's French Bible
1537------------Matthew's Bible (John Rogers Printer)
1539------------The Great Bible
1541------------Swedish Upsala Bible by Laurentius
1550------------Stephanus Receptus (St. Stephen's Text)
1550------------Danish Christian III Bible
1558------------Biestken's Dutch Work
1560------------The Geneva Bible
1565------------Theodore Beza's Receptus
1568------------The Bishop's Bible
1569------------Spanish Translation by Cassiodoro de Reyna
1598------------Theodore Beza's Text
1602------------Czech Version
1607------------Diodati Italian Version
1611------------The King James Bible with Apocrypha between Old and New Testament
1613------------The King James Bible (Apocrypha Removed)

This Received Text or  Majority Text (Textus Receptus), was soon translated into a old Latin version before Jerome’s Latin Vulgate and was called the Italic Bible. The Vaudois (later called Waldensians) of northern Italy used the Italic Bible.The Vaudois (Waldenses) the Albigenses, used it and passed it on to the Reformers (Luther, Calvin and Knox) who all held to the Received Text.

Now the "Waldensian," or "Vaudois" Bibles stretch from about 157 to the 1400s AD. The fact is, according to John Calvin's successor Theodore Beza, that the Vaudois received the Scriptures from missionaries of Antioch of Syria in the 120s AD and finished translating it into their Latin language by 157 AD. This Bible was passed down from generation, until the Reformation of the 1500s, when the Protestants translated the Vaudois Bible into French, Italian, etc. John Wesley and Jonathan Edwards believed, as most of the Reformers, that the Vaudois were the descendants of the true Christians, and that they preserved the Christian faith for the Bible-believing Christians today.