Riders of The Wrecking Machine: Nine Part Series On The Textus Receptus-King James and the Westcott-Hort-NIV and Other Recent Versions: Parts Six and Seven - 8:13 AM, 2/5/2012 |
Riders of The Wrecking Machine: Nine Part Series On The Textus Receptus-King James and the Westcott-Hort-NIV and Other Recent Versions: Parts Six and Seven Bernard Pyron PART SIX Part 6: Riders of the Wrecking Machine: More On Different Wordings of Westcott-Hort Part 6 is a continuation of part 5, on the different verse wordings in the Westcott-Hort Greek text compared to that of the Textus Receptus. I Corinthians 15: 47: Textus Receptus: o protos anthropos ek ges choikos o deuteros anthropos o kurios ex ouranou I Corinthians 15: 47: Westcott-Hort: o protos anthropos ek ges choikos o deuteros anthropos ex ouranou The Westcott-Hort Greek text leaves out "o kurios," the Christ. This is fairly easy Greek. "O protos" is the first. "Anthropos" is man, the Greek word from which we get our anthropology, the study of man. "Ek ges" is out of earth. "Choikos," is made of dust. "O deuteros anthropos" is the second man. The Textus Receptus has at the end of the sentence "o kurios ex ouranou," the Lord out of heaven. But the Westcott-Hort text says at the end of the sentence only "ex ouranou," out of heaven. The literal translation of the entire sentence in the Westcott-Hort might say "The first man (is) out of earth, made of dust, the second (is) man out of heaven." The Westcott-Hort wording does not say who this second man is. the Textus Receptus identifies the second man as the Lord, and Christians know that this is Jesus Christ. For I Corinthians 15: 47 the King James Version says: "The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven." The American Standard Version (1901) for I Corinthians 15: 47 has: "The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is of heaven." As expected, the New American Standard, the New Revised Standard and the NIV all follow the Westcott-Hort Greek text and leave out Lord. The Catholic Douay-Rheims also leaves out Lord. Following the Textus Receptus the Young's Literal Translation and the Green translation contain Lord. According to the web site Gnostic Corruptions in the Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament the only Greek texts that omit Lord are the Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, and Ephraemi Rescriptus. Lord is in most Byzantine texts as well as the Alexandrinus. The papyrus fragment p46 replaces "the Lord" with "the spiritual" (pneumatikos). Remember that I Corinthians 15: 45, just a couple of verses before verse 47, says "And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the second Adam was made a quickening spirit." Paul in I Corinthians 15:45 says Christ as the second Adam was a quickening spirit. Jesus Christ was incarnated in the flesh of sinful man so that he could save those who accepted him and his truth from the sentence of death (II Corinthians 1: 9). Romans 5: 21 states that "That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto everlasting life by Jesus Christ our Lord." And in Philippians 3: 9 Paul wants "...to be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith. Christ as the second Adam paid the price for our sins when as fully God he took on human flesh and died on the cross. As the replacement of Adam as the head of his people, he gives to us, on faith, his righteousness, so that we might come to be on the right side of the plumb line of Amos (7: 7-8). And Christ as the second Adam at his appearing will give us a body and a likeness somewhat like his own. I John 3: 2 promises "...we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is." Leaving the word Lord out of I Corinthians 15: 47 could weaken faith in the promises that Jesus Christ as the second Adam has made to his people. The omission of Lord, which identifies the second Adam as Jesus Christ to Christians, fits with some gnostic ideas. Many gnostics of the second and third centuries thought that man had a physical nature (soul) and a spiritual nature. His spiritual nature was corrupted by being in the dark and evil material world created by the Demiurge. The spiritual, part of man could be liberated by gnosis - knowledge or insight - and might join the Eternal Father in the spiritual realm. This gnostic Eternal Father is not a personal being, but is some kind of spiritual force (Daniel 11:38) ; he is not the God of the Bible. In gnostic theology the Eternal Father created several spiritual beings called Aeons. The lowest of these is Sophia and she rebelled because of her low status and created the Demiurge who in turn created the evil material world which corrupts the spiritual side of man. Then, in some gnostic teachings, Sophia gave men, or some men, a spark of spirituality to defy the evil demiurge. Another Aeon, the Christos or the Christ of the gnostics, was sent into the world to bring gnosis or secret knowledge to some men. He did not die to atone for our sins, and in gnostic theology sin is not a problem. Man, or some men, have a spark of spirituality or "god-nature" in them, and secret knowledge can develop this spark and liberate them from bondage to the material world. Though the gnostics used some of the terminoloy of Christianity, their theology was really quite different from Biblical doctrine. Removing the Lord, referring to Jesus Christ, from I Corinthians 15: 47 could make the verse appear consistent with gnostic doctrine for the gnostics and for a few Christians who were taken in by this deception. If some gnostic influenced scribes did make this change to omit Lord in a few New Testament copies duiring the two centuries before the Alexandrian Vanticanus and Sinaiticus were copied out in the ny changes like this in the Westcott-Hort Greek text are in line with gnostic teachings, this is some evidence for the idea that gnostics changed a few copies of Scripture. It may not be seen as decisive proof to the followers of Westcott and Hort though. If the second Adam is not identified as Jesus Christ, the gnostics might have placed some doubt on the gospel itself which may be the effect they desired. The omission of Lord in this verse could throw it into partial ageement with the gnostic teaching of the Apocryphon of John, part of the Nag Hammadi manuscript find, that the first Adam was created with soul (psyche), and the second Adam was created with spirit (pneumatos). Maybe the omission of Lord in I Corinthians 15: 47 could be read as supporting the gnostic teaching that the first man, the psychical, was an earthly creation of the Demiurge, but that the second man, who had pneuma or the spiritual, was from heaven, because in the Gnostic system, all spirituality came from the Eternal Father and from heaven. The change from "the Lord" to "the spiritual" in the papyrus fragment p46 could also help change this verse from a Christian to a gnostic view. But the change from a Christian to a gnostic view is not found consistently in the Westcott-Hort Greek text; this kind of change is not found in all verses dealing with the deity and incarnation of Christ. It is found is many verses, enough to justify taking a close look at the possibility that gnostics tampered with some verses of the New Testament. Perhaps if gnostics actually did change some verses in some copies of Scripture, the effect of this change was to create doubt in the minds of Christians using the new translations about the Christian doctrines. Over time this doubt could grow into apostasy. It looks like some in the Christian churches may have become hungry for spiritual experience because they are not being led into it in most of the churches - and so get into a kind of gnostic spiritual experience that masquerades as authentic Holy Spirit inspiration. The Holy Spirit works through Scripture to bring us its truth, and if the new translations from the Westcott-Hort are too abbreviated and under some influence of the gnostics, then the Holy Spirit would not work through these versions as he has done with the Textus Receptus and KJV. II Corinthins 4: 6: Textus Receptus: oti o theos o eipwn ek skotous phws lampsai os elampsen en tais kardiais emwn pros phwtismon ths gnoseos tes doxes tou theou en proswpps iesou christou II Corinthians 4: 6: Westcott-Hort: oti o theos o eipwn ek skotous phws lampsei os elampsen en tais kardiais emwn pros phwtismon ths gnoseos tes doxes tou theou en proswpps christou "Iesou" or Jesus is left out of the Westcott-Hort Greek text. The King James version for II Corinthians 4: 6 says "For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ." In accord with the Westcott-Hort Greek text, the New American Standard version and the NIV omit Jesus. But the American Standard version and the New revised Standard do have Jesus, in agreement wioth the Textus Receptus. The Dopuay-Rheims, the Young's Literal translation and Green's translation all have Jesus. Jesus is not found for II Corinthians 4: 6 in the Vaticanus, the Alexandrinus (5th century), and in Southern Coptic (Egyptian) Greek texts. It is found in almost all other Greek texts. Leaving out Jesus is in agreement with the gnostic separation of the earthly "Jesus" from the heavenly "Christ." The followers of Julius Cassianus said the body of Jesus was only an illusion and not real, a teaching based on the gnostic belief that matter is evil. For the gnostics Christ or the Christos, but not Jesus, came to free man from bondage to the material world and to become part of the spiritual world of the Eternal Father. Galatians 6: 17: Textus Receptus: tou loipou kopous moi medeis parechetw ego gar ta stigmata tou kuriou ihsou en to somati mou bastazo Galatians 6: 17: Westcott-Hort: tou loipou kopous moi medeis parechetw ego gar ta stigmata tou ihsou en to somati mou bastazo "Lord" is left out of the Westcott-Hort Greek text. The King James Version says for Galatians 6: 17 that "From henceforth let no man trouble me: for I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus." The American Standard version, the New American Standard, the New revised Standard and the NIV all leave out "Lord," following Westcott-Hort. But the Douay-Rheims, the Young's Literal Translation and the Green translation all have "Lord Jesus." The Vaticanus, Alexandrinus, Ephraemi Rescriptus, and papyrus p46 omit "Lord" according to Gnostic Corruptions in the Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament The Byzantine Greek texts all have "Lord." Gnostics tried to make a distinction between the "Lord", meaning God, and the earthly Jesus. For the gnostics the Aeon they called the Christ from the spiritual world would not be called "Jesus." In addition, for gnostics, especially the Docetist variety, the spiritual "Lord" who had no real physical body, would not have left marks on Paul. Again, the omission of "Lord" seems to fit gnostic theology. PART SEVEN Part 7: Riders of the Wrecking Machine; Last of Westcott-Hort Wordings Part 7: Riders of the Wrecking Machine; Last of Westcott-Hort Wordings This comparision of Greek texts involves the Westcott-Hort verses the Textus Receptus, or the Alexandarian text versus the Byzantine text. In part, on the basis of New testament papyri more recent than the fourth century Alexandarian texts used by Westcott-Hort, Bible scholars have distinguished several New Testament text types which have distinctive wordings. In addition to the Alexandarian and Byzantine text types, focused on here, there is the Western type text, used in Italy, Gaul and in parts of North Africa. On http://legacy.earlham.edu/~seidti/iam/text_crit.html they say of the Byzantine type text that "It is called Byzantine because it was adopted in Constantinople and used as the common text in the Byzantine world. It was produced in Antioch, Syria, under the direction of Lucian near the beginning of the fourth century and has been called the Syrian or Antiochene text. It was used almost universally after the eight century. Both Erasmus, who created the first printed Greek text, and the translators of the King James Version of the Bible used this type of text. The Westcott-Hort Greek text is from two Alexandarian texts, the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, parchment manuscripts dating from about the middle of the fourth century. On The Greek Text of the New Testament they say that "The modern versions are based mainly upon a Greek New Testament which was derived from a small handful of Greek manuscripts from the 4th century onwards. Two of these manuscripts, which many modern scholars claim to be superior to the Byzantine, are the Sinai manuscript and the Vatican manuscript (c. 4th century). These are derived from a text type known as the Alexandrian text (because of its origin in Egypt)... These two manuscripts form the basis of the Greek New Testament, referred to as the Critical Text, which has been in widespread use since the late 19th century. There are many problems of omission which characterize this Greek New Testament. Verses and passages which are found in the writings of Church Fathers from around 200 to 300 A.D. are missing in the Alexandrian Text manuscripts which date from around 300 to 400 A.D. In addition, these early readings are found in manuscripts in existence from 500 A.D. onwards. An example of this is Mark 16.9-20: this passage is found in the writings of Irenaeus and Hippolytus in the 2nd century, and is in almost every manuscript of Mark's Gospel from 500 A.D. onwards. It is missing in two Alexandrian manuscripts, the Sinai and the Vatican. This is but one of many examples of this problem. There are many words, verses and passages which are omitted from the modern versions but which are found in the Traditional or Byzantine Text of the New Testament, and thus in the Textus Receptus. The Critical Text differs from the Textus Receptus text 5,337 times, according to one calculation. The Vatican manuscript omits 2,877 words in the Gospels; the Sinai manuscript 3,455 words in the Gospels. These problems between the Textus Receptus and the Critical Text are very important to the correct translation and interpretation of the New Testament. Contrary to the contention of supporters of the Critical Text, these omissions do affect doctrine and faith in the Christian life. Several examples of doctrinal problems caused by the omissions from the Critical Text follow. This is by no means an exhaustive list. The modern reconstructed Critical Text. * omits reference to the Virgin Birth in Luke 2.33 * omits reference to the deity of Christ in 1 Timothy 3.16 * omits reference to the deity of Christ in Romans 14.10 and 12 * omits reference to the blood of Christ in Colossians 1.14" Here is the last of the verse wording comparisons involving the Westcoltt-Hort and the Textus Receptus: Ephesians 3: 9: Textus Receptus: kai photisai pantas tis e koinonia tou musteriou tou apokekrummenou apo ton aionon en to theo tw ta panta ktisanti dia ihsou christou Ephesians 3: 9: Westcott-Hort: kai photisai tis e oikonomia tou musthriou tou apokekrummenou apo ton aionon en to theo to ta panta ktisanti Literally the Textus Receptus says: "and to enlighten all about the fellowship of the mystery which has been hidden from the ages in the God, who all things created by Jesus Christ." But the Westcott-Hort Greek text says "and enlighten about the stewardship of the mystery which has been hidden from the ages in the God who created all things." Instead of the "photisai pantas e koinonia" of the Textus Receptus the Westcott-Hort says "photisai tis e okonomia." Westcott-Hort leave out "pantas," or "all" and have "okonomia" instead of "koinonia." Okonomia means something like stewardship while koinonia means fellowship, people having something in common, and for the Apostles and all Christians, being together on one path to Christ. OK. The King James Version for Ephesians 3: 9 says: "And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:" "Men" has been added in the King James. But the King James does follow the Textus Receptus and say "fellowship" of the mystery. It is going to be interesting to see what the various translations do with this verse. We are very likely to see that the new Bible versions which are obedient to the Westcott-Hort Greek text wording will leave out Jesus, Christ, or both words, Jesus Christ. The American Standard Version of 1901 says for Ephesians 3: 9 that "and to make all men see what is the dispensation of the mystery which for ages hath been hid in God who created all things;" Then, the New American Standard says: "and to bring to light what is the administration of the mystery which for ages has been hidden in God who created all things;" The New Revised Standard says: "men, that they may see what is the dispensation of the mystery which hath been hidden from eternity in God, who created all things: and to make everyone see what is the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God who created all things;" And the NIV for Ephesians 3: 9 says "and to make plain to everyone the administration of this mystery, which for ages past was kept hidden in God, who created all things." The Catholic English Bible, the Douay-Rheims, says for Ephesians 3: 9 that " And to enlighten all men, that they may see what is the dispensation of the mystery which hath been hidden from eternity in God who created all things:" What I have seen so far of the verses of the Catholic Douay-Rheims suggests it has mixed wordings, some close or almost identical to the Textus Receptus and King James and some close or idential to the Westcott-Hort and the NIV.. Young's Literal Translation says: "and to cause all to see what [is] the fellowship of the secret that hath been hid from the ages in God, who the all things did create by Jesus Christ." Green's translation says: "and to bring to light what is the fellowship of the mystery which from eternity has been hidden in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ;" The American Standard, the New American Standard, the Revised Standard, the NIV and the Douay-Rheims talk about the "dispensation" or "administration" of the mystery that has been hidden for ages in God. But the translations loyal to the Textus Receptus - the King James, the New King James, the Young's and the Green translation - write about the "fellowship" of the mystery hidden for the ages in God. There is a difference in meaning between a fellowship of the mystery and the administration or dispensation of the mystery. In his commentary on Ephesians 3: 9 John Gill has this to say: "Or "the dispensation of the mystery" as the Complutensian, and several copies, and the Vulgate Latin and Syriac versions, read. The mystery is the Gospel; the fellowship of it is the communication of grace by it, a participation of the truths and doctrines of it, communion with Father, Son, and Spirit, which the Gospel calls and leads unto..." Gill goes on to say that " Now men are naturally in the dark about these things, and the ministry of the word is the means of enlightening them, and is indeed the grand design of it; and the ministers of the Gospel do instrumentally enlighten persons, though it is God only that does it efficiently; and for this, gifts of grace were bestowed upon the apostle, even for the enlightening of all men, not every individual person in the world, but some of all sorts,..." Matthew Henry on Ephesians 3: 9 says "The holy angels, who look into the mystery of our redemption by Christ, could not but take notice of this branch of that mystery, that among the Gentiles is preached the unsearchable riches of Christ..." According to the web site Gnostic Corruptions in the Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament the only Greek texts which contain the wording close to the Westcott-Hort - leaving out "Jesus Christ" and saying only that God created all things - is found in the papyrus fragments p46, Alexandrinus, Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, and Ephraemi Rescriptus. We can be pretty sure that Westcott and Hort got their wording for Ephesians 3: 9 from the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. Leaving out "by Jesus Christ" in Ephesians 3: 9 removes from these New Testament copies of the verse the important doctrine that Jesus Christ created all things. I know that the Westcott-Hort for Colossians 1: 16 has "oti en auto ektisthe ta panta en tois ouranois kai epi tes ges ta orata kai ta aorata eite thronoi eite kuriothtes eite archai eite exousiai ta panta di autou kai eis auton ektistai." This wording is the same as in the Textus Receptus, saying "oti en auto ektisthe ta panta ta en tois ouranois kai ta epi ths ges ta orata kai ta aorata eite thronoi eite kuriothtes eite archai eite exousiai ta panta di autou kai eis auton ektistai." The King James translates this as : " For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him." And the NIV has for Colossians 1: 16: "For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him." "He" refers back to "the Son" in Colossians 1: 13, and Christ is mentioned in verse 8, and our Lord Jesus Christ in verse 3. If there were theological reasons for changing some copies of verses of the New Testament, whoever did the changing probably knew altering all verses dealing with a major New Testament doctrine would be rejected by almost all Christians. Lets get back to looking at the possibility that changes in the wordings of some copies of the New Testament are in agreement with gnostic theology. Leaving out "Jesus Christ" and saying instead that God created all things does less damage to that theology than saying Jesus Christ is the creator.. Gnostics thought that since the Christ was a spiritual "emanation" from the Eternal Father, he was totally removed from the material creation. To the gnostics, the Christ as an Aeon entered our material world only as a spiritual being to bring enlightenment and liberation to a few from the evil material universe. Christ, to gnostics, would not have created the material world. Gnostics taught that the evil Demiurge created the material world. I Thessalonians 2: 19: Textus Receptus: tis gar emon elpis e chara e stephanos kauchseos e ouchi kai umeis emprosthen tou kuriou emon ihsou christou en te autou parousia I Thessalonians 2: 19: Westcott-Hort: tis gar emon elpis e chara e stephanos kauchseos e ouchi kai umeis emprosthen tou kuriou emon ihsou en th autou parousia Westcott-Hort leave out "christou," Christ. In the King Kames Version, I Thessalonians 2: 19 reads, "For what is our hope, or joy, or crown of rejoicing? Are not even ye in the presence of our Lord Jesus Christ at his coming?" The American Standard Version, the New American Standard, the New Revised Standard, the NIV leave out "Christ," and say "Lord Jesus." But the Catholic Douay-Rheims, the Young's Literal Translation and Green's translation have the full Textus Receptus wording of "Lord Jesus Christ." The gnostics made a distinction between the earthly Jesus who was in human flesh and the spiritual Christ, who - they thought - would not take on human flesh. Leaving "Christ" out of this verse would seem to make it consistent with gnostic theology. But Paul in I Thessalonians 2: 19 says the "Lord Jesus Christ" will appear again and when he does we will be with him, or in his presence. Saying only that the "Lord Jesus" will appear and we will be before him weakens the great promise of the appearing of God. If Jesus were not fully God, he could not have satisfied the charge against us sinners on the cross. Only God could have redeemed us. The Westcott-Hort Greek text and its English translations usually do not change all verses in the New Testament which present specific doctrines, but many such verses are changed, as compared to the Textus Receptus and KJV. But what Paul says in I Corinthians 5: 6, "Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?" applies to the Westcott-Hort and its English versions. We will see later that for certain doctrines which are presented in only one verse, that the Westcott-Hort comes up with statements that are so abbreviated that the doctrine is really not stated, the doctrine is lost in the wording, or the verse in the Textus Receptus is left out. |
Post Comment |
 |
| « Last Page | Next Page » |