It is the Majority Texts that have undergone the greatest amounts of alteration (often in the form of conflation) that has been demonstrated to start sometime around the 9th century. They were essentially non-existent before that time. Also, any alterations to the Alexandrian line can be seen quite clearly because the format of the codices makes it nearly impossible to alter them within the text body themselves. One very notable example of textual corruption in the TR is the 1 John 5:7, which never would have made it into the text had it not been for Catholic meddling and the production of a last minute manuscript with the reading in it. The last six verses of Revelation were translated from the Latin of the Catholic Vulgate into Greek, hence peculiar TR readings that are not found in a single Greek manuscript.

Compare Luke 2:33. The TR is a clear example of Catholic meddling of the text. If the Critical Text was part of some Catholic conspiracy, is certainly would not leave unchanged the reference to Joseph as Jesus' father. Rather, it is the TR that alters the text so as to uphold the Catholic doctrine of Mariolotry.

The KJV-onlyists want to have their cake and eat it to. They accuse Westcott and Hort as being part of some pro-Catholic Jesuit conspiracy, while at the same time accusing them of being secularists because of textual renderings that are perceived to jeopardize doctrines such as the Trinity (1 John 5:7).

Dave,

I won't object regarding the Johannine Comma. That may well have been added. I don't believe there is any "proof" one way or the other, but the text is certainly not required to support the belief in a triunal Godhead. There are plenty of other texts that do this. No doctrine would be destroyed by its removal. This, of course, undermines the necessity for it to have been "added." If it is not needed to support the Catholic doctrine, why would they have added it? Regardless, Ellen White never used the text, and it is not necessary.

As for the TR having been meddled with regarding the Luke 2:33 & 2:43 texts, I disagree. It is the Alexandrian Text that was changed there. You see, Luke, the scholar, was careful to set Joseph in his proper place, recognizing that Jesus' true Father was not human. By saying "Jesus' father and mother" in place of "Joseph and his mother" one undermines the divine origin of the Son of God. It has nothing to do with "mariolotry." It has everything to do with Jesus' divine identity. Naturally, those who adjusted the texts to undermine Jesus' divinity will come up with plausible-sounding arguments to support their changes, and this may be their argument here--that the KJV supported "mariolotry." It doesn't, though.

There really is very little else you might find to claim changes in the Majority Text. Mrs. White underscores the fact that the Majority Text was "unadulterated" in speaking of the Waldensian Bibles which are of that line.



Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

The Truth About the Waldensian Bible

Wilkinson has done our church a disservice by some of the claims he has made regarding the Waldensian Bible. Also, you are misquoting Ellen White regarding their Bible. Just because they had the "truth unadulterated" does not mean that the Bible they possessed was free of scribal error. Even in our modern translations, the 3 Angels Message can be taught. It was what was gleaned from their Bibles that was unadulterated.

If the Critical Texts were from adulterated manuscripts as KJV-onliers assert, Sister White never would have used the Revised Version as freely as she did. It is notable that Westcott and Hort's Greek was inferior to the far more eclectically derived Nestle-Alland/United Bible society text that the vast majority of Modern Translations are based on today. Why did she use them? Because they still contained the "truth unadulterated."

Regarding Luke 2:33, my point was that the modern rendering debunks the absurd notion that the Greek behind it is the result of Catholic tampering. The modern text rendering does not refer to Jesus' biological origin, but the custodial responsibility conferred upon Joseph by God.

Thanks. That pretty much pegs Green to a T. And I thought it was something unusual just for him. Who knew. But it does make sense with the invalid arguments used.
Here's something I thought was particularly appropriate:
That's something which cannot be argued with nor reasoned with. But I say, if that's what they want to believe, that's their choice. As long as they don't try to force something on me or otherwise cause harm to me. Any more, when someone is promoting one version only, I tend to mark them as either ignorant or intentionally deceptive such as those who wanted to keep the Bible out of the language of the people. I guess believing something without valid justification, could be another option.

I also found it interesting that from what I understand from it, the TR is the New Testament only. To me, that kind of diminishes some arguments for KJV as a whole.



I think you fell for Green's suggestion. As I had pointed out to him before, Ellen White's quote had nothing to do with versions. "They had the truth unadulterated." Not versions unadulterated. But the truth from the Bible. That's why she said they were the first of all the peoples of Europe to obtain a translation of the Holy Scriptures. Not the first to have a KJV. It had nothing to do with versions, but had to do with any Bible in a language they could understand.


And regarding Catholic manipulations, I showed another how the Catholic Bible had the same as KJV. When pointing out why wouldn't they want to manipulate their own version, he skipped over it and still insisted they manipulated other versions.

Thanks kland. I was making the same point you were about the "truth unadulterated". Since switching to the NASB, I've had a growing appreciation for our church's doctrines. The NASB's rendering of Hebrews 4:9 has a much more Adventist flavor than the KJV. Perhaps the KJV translators were part of a conspiracy to downgrade the Sabbath

It wasn't so much a conspiracy as it was an attempt by act of parliament to make the word conform to the Episcopal ecclesiology of the church of England, which is where the 47 scholars who translated the KJV came from.

If Martin Luther, the father of the protestant movement could be wrong on so many issues, how could the translators who also came from that spiritual darkness be held to a higher accountability? I think they did a great job considering the time they lived in.

I think my idea that their "more is better" was pretty on target even if I didn't realize it. I had meant they were saying more text, even if inserted incorrectly, was better. But further reading of the link shows that they are meaning more texts (Majority texts) is better. Even if those texts didn't even exist until 800 years after Paul!

And if the majority text is more accurate for the reason of being the majority text, at what point should we determine that majority?

Is it today? Tomorrow? Yesterday or the day before?

Or should we do like the global warmists do and arbitrarily pick a date which fits our already presumed beliefs and make comparisons from that point?

Majority opinion seems rather fleeting.

The KJV translator conspiracy thing was in jest. I said it because lots of people (like Veith) suggest that the modern versions are part of the vast Jesuit conspiracy. The KJV is worthy of veneration in view of its place in the reformation. However, it is a disservice to the KJV and its translators, as well as to the TR, to bring the work of textual criticism to an arbitrary end.

Agreed Brother Dave.
This may be a simplified response for a purpose, but I believe that those who search the scriptural discrepancies between versions, as you do, will be more prepared to receive the later rain.

If they speak not according to this word...

While the Spirit of Truth is breathed over the disciples to prepare them for the later rain, all of the errors will be swept away just as the disciples had their errors swept away in preparation of the early rain.

Our efforts will be rewarded by God's stamp of approval in our hearts and minds. He will give us the perfect interpretation on every subject, tying the points we have been already enlightened with together, making a more perfect reflection of Christ in our hearts.

The mystery of Godliness fulfilled in us leads us to deeper repentance which purges us from sin. We truly become broken on the rock.

This is what happened to our prophet Mrs. White and her fellow believers. When the Spirit of truth comes, it overpowers any other belief unless you have not received the truth to get you where you are. There is a division that occurs among the people, a polarization. The remnant are the true children. Those who stay with the truth and allow it to work in them, seeking after it as purest gold, are those who will stand in the dreadful day of our Lord.

So it is our duty to continue to search all of the versions of the scriptures for every ounce of golden truth that we can find. Then God will bring us together, because it was not until the disciples came to the upper room and worked out their scriptural differences and made up the number, that the early rain was poured out at the exact moment Jesus was anointed as High Priest in heaven. Then Wham the Spirit came in force and they spoke with the voice of God, just as the 144,000 will in the last days.