Woe to the Textus Receptus supporters. It would enshrine the abominable concept that the church was without the most correct text for 1600 years. You are right about charity. But the people supporting the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus say that since Textus Receptus came after these two, many things must have been erroneously added to the texts. Your email address will not be published. These discarded old manuscripts that were full of scribal errors and as result were never circulated by the church. In the end I wonder,was this truly a omission,or could there be illness,war,fire or any other disasters?? https://www.faraboveall.com/015_Textual/SPLIT%20TEXTS_JETS_current.pdf. Also, Luke 9:55-56 are not completely absent in Codex Sinaiticus. Jews and Muslims to this day consider the destruction of their holy book to be a terrible sin, so Christian monks realising that they had a very misleading copy of the Bible on their hands would most likely act for the same reasons as I and in just the same way that I did.That very easily and practically explains Siniaticus and the explanation for Vaticanus is similar. Would appreciate knowing what is considered to be the oldest versions of the OT and NT. (HINT: The Catholics would burn one at the stake for even possessing a Bible copy back in the day). While faith comes by the hearing of the Word, the fact that there is the omission of the ending of St. Marks Gospel in the Sinaiticus, whatever the reason, does not prevent the Holy Spirit from bringing hearers to the knowledge of salvation in Jesus Christ, the crucified and risen Son of God. Westcott and Hort corrected the King James Bible (1881 NT and 1884 AT) and replaced the Textus Receptus as a basis through the Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus. But understand that back then they probably did not quote scripture in that numerical manner: And they excused themselves, saying, This age of lawlessness Washingtonicus and one of its principle claims to fame is its particular addition to the last chapter. Unfortunately, the comments section that follow the article remind us that anti-Catholic bigotry and the ignorance from which it springs is still present in the minds and hearts of fundamentalist Christians. -Thus proving anything Godly about Christianity is bogus. "Textus Receptus Only"/"Received Text Only" - This group holds the position that the traditional Greek texts represented in the Textus Receptus were supernaturally (or providentially) preserved and that other Greek manuscripts not used in this compilation may be flawed. As for the resurrection in Mark or not in Mark versus Sinaiticus..I think there are endless debates over the Long Ending and the Short Ending of Mark, with scholars evenly divided in their views. If we speak of provenance in an art museum, we know where the picture has been since it was painted by the artist. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukRCVDmiAts. Such a production line was slow and laborious and costly. The Codex Sinaiticus Project is an international collaboration to reunite the entire manuscript in digital form and make it accessible to a global audience for the first time. Even back then there was an undue political influence and the personal interests of committee members affected the outcome The text of Codex Sinaiticus differs in numerous instances from that of the authorized version of the Bible in use during Tischendorfs time. Vat., Vat. The KJV is familiar to most of us so naturally we prefer the familiar, but to place it on par with the original Greek manuscripts of the bible seems sacrilegious. When I have tried this really no one had remembered what had been said. Each of these three codices "clearly exhibits a fabricated text - is the result of arbitrary and reckless recension." . You forgot to mention 2 Corinthians 13:14, May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all. I just checked a photo of the relevant page in the Sinaiticus, and its not there. And presto, what do we have today? Being added to the church of Christ 2014. after having many different translations. Nowhere does the OT say; He was with God in the beginning. Four highly acclaimed books, published in conjunction with the Smithsonian Institution: Aspects of Monotheism, Feminist Approaches to the Bible, The Rise of Ancient Israel and The Search for Jesus. righteousness which is in heaven.[. Ask yourself this. Although the Diatesseron had some Textus Receptus readings in it, it was considered to be corrupted. To believers (in whatever version they *like* ?) Jesus was in the OT, in Genesis 1:26 God said let US make man in OUR image, after OUR likeness, this would be funny language for God alone and by himself to be using. The real question you must come to grips with is whether Jesus is God incarnate. How come these two were preserved when many thousands of others were not? (..) 27 When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth (..) 30 Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him; 31 Rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth; and my delights were with the sons of men. So our second question is really: why were these two unorthodox* manuscripts unused? No one was copying the thought in ant way, it now was a part of each hearers memory and as such will be changed a bit by each hearer. So, you admit there are serious problems with Sinaiticus bibles and also that the only thing of importance to you is you can still be saved using these bibles. It should be noted, for starters, that the four pages containing Mark 15:54b-Luke 1:56a were not produced by the same copyist who wrote the text on the surrounding pages. his words will never pass away ! Thanks in advance. Galatians 4:6. I believe that by the power of the Holy Spirit the mysteries will be revealed to those who seek truth. Being the oldest and best makes Rome correct in their belief. From the epistles we find the basic Christian beliefs: Christ is the Son of God and His resurrection etc. But just to make sure, here's a comparison of both texts to the contents of Revelation 22:10-21 as printed in the Tyndale House edition of the Greek New Testament: People will accept critical change if it appears in small and harmless doses. Constantine Tischendorf Turns Two Hundred in the September/October 2015 issue of Biblical Archaeology Review, Stanley E. Porter contends that Tischendorf should be considered a hero, not a thief. Like all of them If there is more than what is listed here on this page? Last time I looked poison is stil poison no matter what kind it is. Amongst the Dead Sea Scrolls. Pilate was used to trouble makers in Judea and he saw and heard a lot of phony messiahs, and many of those were armed to the teeth to try and get rid of Romes power base in Judea. WHAT IS HIS NAME? Interpretation is of God also. Kevin, thanks for this insight, And how about the epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas? Everyones complaining yet the letter, sent from Juda to his apostles, in jerusalem warning of people corrupting the words of jesus clearly names jesus as a servant of god rather than the son of god if they were gods first companions why didnt they state so i mean jesus should have told them at from the beginning quite EXPLICITLY! Strange where you find some of BC assertions of the immortality of the soul. Compare differences between the King James Version and Codex Sinaiticus. No one said they were quoteing Joe but passing on what they remembered. . Theres also another question which IS academic but also glossed over: Take a look at these two English translations. The English translation was not translated from the Codex, but evidently copy-pasted from some English version of the Bible and mapped onto the verse numbers in the CS. If I misquote the Prime minister of my country just by a little bit, publicly, and insist that my quote is what he said, even when it is pointed out that I got it wrong, will I be excused by the Chief Prosecutor for the Government? He discovered the first part in 1844 and the second part in 1859. They are significant. Please respond if youre interested. When it comes to a consideration of the authenticity of Siniaticus and Vaticanus, few academics seem to ask some very basic non-academic but practical questions such as: Here is Matthew 16:14. Posted on . https://www.gotquestions.org/Textus-Receptus.html, Good Morning Oscar heres some interesting reading that may assist with your query: In the Beginning: The Story of the King James Bible and How it Changed a Nation, a Language, and a Culture by Alister McGrath In the Gospel of Mark alone, Vaticanus disagrees with Sinaiticus 652 times and with Codex D 1,944 times. Making a case against Christianity based on the integrity of Scriptural reliability is a losing battle. This is history. And that was only a few years after it occured. personnaly have seen evangelists using NIV Codex Sinaiticus based bibles and in front of my eyes not but 3 different times this verse fulfilled. Christians believe absolute truth does exist. From what I read, that gospel goes straight to the point that Jesus was the living Word of God, the only begotten son, and the light to the world. Describes her perfectly. One of Jesus disciples had been such a zealot. The fact all four codices, discovered in four separate places and times, all agree with one another suggests Textus Receptus (Desiderius Erasmus Roterodamus) ADDED them in the 16th century AD. Subversion is often of a greater danger than frontal attack. Also, like most early mss, Codex Sinaiticus omits John 7:53-8:11, not just 8:3-11. You cant get any plalner than that. It is one of the four great uncial codices. And for those who have sinned I was Details are important. The codex sin was proven to be a fraudulent in court. Not in Gods economy. Can these manuscripts be useful to Bible students today? Finally, I have one suggestion, as I close. There is nothing when and how Mary Magdalena saw the Risen Christ, indicating, of course, it never happened. The King James and Tischendorf? Some linguists have examined modern Bible translationsincluding the New World Translationfor examples of inaccuracy and bias. Unlike the KJV. One needs to study the various Codices and again ask why have certain critical aspects like (1) Jesus Christ being part of the Godhead, or (2) that we are saved only through Jesus Christ and his blood atoning sacrifice for our sins, have been changed or completely left out?