Understanding the Times ad

Transcription

1 C H A P T E R F o u r Understanding the Times ad The mere mention of Bible translations in a Christian bookstore today can generate controversy and conflict. There are so many choices for today s Christian. And the overriding question for any sincere Christian is Which one is the Word of God? Of all the translations available, which one did God preserve as He promised and which ones, if any, are frauds? This is a large subject to cover in one book and there are sincerely good people who stand on both sides of this issue. The purpose of the next two chapters is to simply give a brief overview of the history of Bible texts to give a reference point to the underlying textual issue that has resulted in the present-day translational issue. Biblical preservation did not start in In like manner, it did not begin in 1881 with the revised Greek text of Westcott and Hort. Before there is preservation of God s word, there must first be the inspiration of it. This work of the Holy Spirit, as concerning the 43

2 A More Sure Word New Testament, took place during the first century. What God gave to His writers in the first century has been copied from generation to generation with God s divine power guiding while guarding from error and superintending the work to get the exact product. In these chapters we are going to dive into some historical names and terms that may seem overwhelming at first, but remember that the purpose is to show you the common thread of the true word of God and the true church of Jesus Christ through the early centuries of Christian history. As we survey the times, you will begin to see that history reveals two distinctly different churches the true local assemblies and their spiritual descendents started by Jesus and planted by the apostles, and in contrast, the state-backed Catholic church (also called Christian). These two churches, one true and one false, are often confused in the historical record. Along with these two churches, we will see the development of two distinctly different streams of Bible texts. One stream can be traced to the very beginnings of the church in Acts and its translations can be verified in many languages from almost the earliest years of the church. The other stream can be traced to early efforts to pervert and distort the word of God and ultimately to the Catholic Church and its attempts to remove God s word from the common language. All of this will give you a basic understanding of how we arrived at the translation debate of today. As we venture into these historical details and textual terms, please beware that sometimes well-meaning scholars (whether intentionally or simply as pawns in a larger spiritual battle) cloud this issue with redundant terminologies and a different interpretation of the basic facts of history. Don t let the terms intimidate you. The larger issue is quite simple the facts of history bear record that God s word was immediately available in the firstcentury church to the known world and in many languages. ( But the word of God grew and multiplied Acts 12:24. So mightily grew the word of God and prevailed Acts 19:20.) From that point, the 44

3 Chapter Four Understanding the Times word of God was both preserved in a pure stream and attacked and perverted in what became a corrupt stream. Attacks upon the word of God began almost immediately with the establishment of the New Testament Church, For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God (2 Corinthians 2:17). The way that many see the Bible issue largely flows from their understanding of the development of the Christian Church. Many embrace Reformation Theology and believe that the Catholic Church was the true church of the New Testament that simply erred from the faith. These Christians often see the Bible issue through a completely different paradigm than those who believe the true church of the New Testament never had any affiliation with the Catholic Church, and in fact was considered an underground group of renegade non-conformists by that Catholic Church. As you decide which Bible is God s word, it is important to know the history of today s Bible versions as well as the history of the New Testament Church. In this chapter we will trace the lineage of God s word through time along with the church. You will see that the texts upon which the King James Bible is based, are the same texts that agree with the earliest Scriptures used in the first and second century Christian church that grew and multiplied throughout the known world. Many modern scholars would have you think otherwise that God s word was not available in many languages until much later, as a result of the Reformation. This simply isn t true, and history, as well as God s word bears the record. The Bible text of the early Christian church was not lost. It was preserved by God, used by early believers throughout the known Defining the Term Autograph: This is the original letter from the human writer. All autographs were used by the early church and are no longer in existence. 45

4 A More Sure Word world, and used of God to form a pure stream of text that flows to our hands today. Let s turn back the pages of time and briefly survey where history reveals the true word of God ad From the years of ad, the original writings (or autographs) of each of the twenty-seven New Testament books were completed and placed into use through the ministry of the apostles and firstcentury missionaries. While no one living at this time would have had a complete copy of the word of God in one binding as we do today, this does not negate God s promise to preserve His word. Additionally, there was no running list of an official canon in the first century, but there is evidence that the New Testament books, as we know them today, were all in use by the first-century church and were collectively recognized as the word of God. The official list of the canon would come later when the church began to confront those who were trying to add to or take away from the word of God. One of the biggest questions in the Bible debate relates to determining which source of text is the most reliable. The new versions claim that the newer Greek texts more accurately reflect the original writings of the apostles. The historical record shows otherwise. Consider two examples of early church leaders and their writings. A man named Ignatius was the pastor of the church at Antioch. He died in the year 107. He lived during and just after the time of Notable Names Ignatius: He was a pastor at Antioch, Syria, martyred in 107 by the Roman Emperor. (see expanded definition, p. 216) Polycarp: An early Christian leader who pastored the church at Smyrna. As a disciple of John, he had first hand knowledge about apostolic writings. His letters agree with the Traditional Text. 46

5 Chapter Four Understanding the Times the apostles, and his writings share several quotations that give us a clear picture of the Bible that he and the churches of this time used. These quotes wonderfully bear record to God s true word. Let s examine one instance where Ignatius writings provide an answer to a modern conflict in Bible texts. In 1 Timothy 3:16 the King James Version reads, God was manifest in the flesh. Most contemporary versions (which follow the Critical Text) read, He was manifest in the flesh. There is an obvious difference between He and God. Where the King James Bible makes a clear proclamation concerning the deity of Jesus Christ, new Bibles weaken that proclamation significantly based on changes made from the Critical Text. So we must ask What does the historical record support? Which reading is correct? This is why Ignatius writings are so important. He apparently used a text that strongly affirmed the deity of Jesus Christ for he wrote, There is one Physician who is possessed both of flesh and spirit; both made and not made; God existing in flesh (Ephesians 7:1) and God Himself being manifested in human form (Ephesians 19:1). Ignatius uses the Greek words for God (theos) and for flesh (sarki) in the first citation, and a form of the Greek word for manifest (peanerosas) in the second. It is also interesting to read the phraseology of Ignatius in reference to the person of Jesus Christ. Consistently in his writings, he refers to the second Person of the Trinity as the Lord Jesus Christ, or our God Jesus Christ, or the more often used phrase, Jesus Christ. Very rarely do we find Jesus or Christ by themselves in his writings. This would demonstrate a fuller text concerning divine titles that we also find consistently used in the Traditional Text of the New Testament. 1 This is important to the discredit of the conflation theory, which we will study later in this chapter. Our second example is a man named Polycarp who was the pastor of the church at Smyrna. He is traditionally called the disciple of the Apostle John. During the first century he wrote a 47

6 A More Sure Word letter to the Philippians in which he refers to or quotes the New Testament about sixty different times. His references all support the Traditional Text readings that were used to translate the King James Bible. His age allowed him to either access the apostles original writings or copies made shortly thereafter. An example of one of his Scripture quotations would be And we must all stand at the judgment-seat of Christ (Philippians 6:2), agreeing with the Traditional Text. The Alexandrian manuscripts (a family of manuscripts heavily relied upon for the creation of the new Critical Text that resulted in all modern translations) reads judgment seat of God rather than judgment seat of Christ. The point of these two examples Ignatius and Polycarp is simply to show that the writings of early church leaders and the Scriptures they quoted support the Received Text and the readings of the present-day King James Bible over the newer translations. We will see this in greater detail in coming chapters. In contrast to this, history shows us early attempts to corrupt and pervert the word of God. Between ad, an early false teacher named Marcion began to create his own canon of the Bible. He removed large portions of the New Testament and references to the Jewishness of Jesus. This act, in God s providence, resulted in Defining the Term Alexandrian manuscripts: These manuscripts are dated to the fourth century. They originated in Alexandria, Egypt. They are Byzantine in the Gospels, Alexandrian in the Epistles. These manuscripts are in question by Bible-believers because of the false Alexandrian teachings that influenced their textual readings. Old Latin (Italic): The Bible used by early Latin Christians, primarily Waldensians, a group of Christians persecuted by the organized Roman church. It is referred to as old because the Catholic church rejected it for the Latin Vulgate. 48

7 Chapter Four Understanding the Times the true Christians of the early churches moving toward an official canon so that there could be no mistaking the true word of God. Also, during this century, Christians at Antioch began to translate the Scriptures into other languages. This was only natural since the missionary movement began with these Christians as the Holy Spirit sent Paul and Barnabas to the field (Acts 13). Around 150 ad, the Greek New Testament was translated into Syriac, a key language in the middle east for several centuries. This Bible is known today as the Peshitta (Syriac for the simple version ). It was a Bible for the common man that was translated from Greek manuscripts that would have been closely related to the Scriptures of the first-century church. In fact, it is quite possible that the originals were still in existence and in use when the Peshitta was translated. The Peshitta is a powerful ancient witness that the Received Text is the reliable text for God s word. Around 157 ad another very important historical Bible came into being. It is called the Old Latin, or Italic Bible. This was simply a Latin translation of God s word used by Christians who spoke Latin. This Bible was later rejected by the Catholic church. One supporter of the Received Text, FHA Scrivener, wrote the following, the Latin Bible, the Italic, was translated from the Greek not later than This is important because it distinctly shows that God s word, from the early church, was taken into Latin regions long before the Catholic church began to correct it and create Jerome s Latin Vulgate. Notable Names FHA Scrivener: This man lived from He was a British writer and manuscript editor, and a contemporary of scholars such as Westcott and Hort. He did not share their views. After serving on the Revision Committee with Westcott and Hort, he distanced himself from that project by editing his own edition of the Received Text in

8 A More Sure Word According to the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, The Old Latin was translated in Antioch by missionaries to North Africa. It was then copied out by the common Christians in North Africa. 3 This would be one strong indication that the Old Latin (at least in its beginnings) was from the Received Text, for Antioch in Syria was the chief focal point for that text. This is yet another ancient witness that the Received Text is the historically accurate record of God s word. Another name used to refer to the Bible of first-century Christianity is the Byzantine Greek Text referring to the fact that it is traced to and throughout the Byzantine Empire where the first-century churches were planted and where the apostles ministered. The Old Latin Text which was based on what would form the Byzantine Greek Text, was used of God in a mighty way to take God s word into the Latin-speaking world, and eventually into Scotland and the British Isles. God s providence also led this text into the Gallic Empire (modern-day France) via the Gallic Bible (177 ad). In 177 ad, Christians in southern France were frightfully massacred by the heathen, and a record of their suffering was drawn up by the survivors. This record was then sent to their brethren in Asia Minor. This bears out the simple fact that these Christians were reached by the missionaries of Asia minor and gives evidence that the Bible of the true first-century church (the Received Text) was available in Europe long before the Catholic Church was in existence and long before the newest ancient manuscripts were ever written. Defining the Term Byzantine Greek Text: A synonym for the Received Text notating that it flowed throughout that Byzantine Empire, which historically correlates with early missionary efforts and apostolic writings of the first century. 50

9 Chapter Four Understanding the Times Another powerful historical fact is that the Old Latin became the basis for the Waldensian Bible which had indirect influence on the King James translators. (The Waldensians were a group of Christians in the middle ages who refused to align with the Catholic church, one reason being that they practiced baptism by immersion. The Catholic church poured out several centuries of persecution in an attempt to destroy these early non-conformists. Many Waldensians were martyred and their Bibles destroyed by the Catholic church.) In studying this Old Latin Bible, one writer paints a picture of the textual debate during the days of Jerome the fourthcentury editor of the Catholic Latin Vulgate: Helvidius, a great scholar of northern Italy, accused Jerome, whom the Pope had empowered to form a Bible in Latin for Catholicism, with using corrupt Greek manuscripts. How could Helvidius have accused Jerome of employing corrupt Greek manuscripts if Helvidius had not had the pure Greek manuscripts? 4 These facts show us several important truths. First, we see that the text of the first-century church was translated and spread throughout the known world, having generational impact even throughout the middle ages. Second, we see that the Bible debate was raging even in early centuries, and can often be tied to the early formation of the corrupt Roman Catholic Church which would eventually custom-tailor a new Bible more suited to Catholic heresy. These true early Christians were willing to risk everything and to take their stand on what they knew to be the faithful and proven word of God. We owe them a deep debt of gratitude for the battle they faced to protect the faith once delivered unto the saints. Modern textual critics believe, with no historical evidence, that the text of the early church was artificially expanded (conflated). We will see later that their case for this conflation theory was very weak to begin with. But several recent discoveries have essentially 51

10 A More Sure Word disproved the conflation theory altogether. One discovery was a papyrus dated to 200 ad called p66. One author shares this observation regarding this papyrus and the conflation theory: This theory of Byzantine conflation was postulated by Brooke F. Westcott and Fenton John Anthony Hort who contended that the Byzantine (or King James) Text was a late text, specifically because it contained so many of these expanded readings. [These are also called expansions of piety. eg: Lord Jesus Christ rather than simply Jesus] However, the theory of conflation is increasingly being challenged as more distinctive Byzantine readings are appearing in the Egyptian papyri which dates from the second and third centuries. 5 Harry Sturz in The Byzantine Text-Type: New Testament Textual Criticism states, In the John 10:19 passage, while p45 and p75 support the Alexandrian reading, p66, the earliest papyrus, reads SCHISMA OUV PALIN. In other words, the earliest known papyrus fragment agrees with the Byzantine. This does not conclusively prove an early date for the entire Byzantine Text-type, but it does profoundly invalidate the conclusion that longer readings are always the result of conflation. For it is entirely reasonable to suggest the exact opposite; instead of Byzantine conflation, the other texts experienced scribal omission. 6 In other words p66, the earliest papyrus containing John 10:19, disproves that the text was added to in later years. We re seeing Defining the Term Papyrus: An early form of paper made from the pith of the papyrus plant. Expansions of Piety: This is the belief that early copyists of Scripture added to the titles of Christ. It is asserted that the Critical Text editions did not remove the full names of Christ; rather, the Byzantine Text editions added these names as a form of piety and worship. 52

11 Chapter Four Understanding the Times here the contrast of two very distinct opinions on the Bible debate. Either early Christians added to the Scriptures (conflation) which renders the Received Text as erroneous, or others omitted portions of Scripture in the creation of what became a new stream of texts through history. Why does this matter? Simply because, by about 300 ad there were two distinct streams of Bible texts the historical record bears this out clearly. One text stream could be traced back through the Byzantine Empire to the original churches and missions efforts of the apostles, including the church at Antioch. This stream of text could be directly traced to the events of the book of Acts including God s miraculous intervention with tongues at Pentecost and the planting of local churches by the apostles. Incidentally, it is important to note that this text was also written in the language of the common man (ie: the Syriac simple version Syriac Peshitta). The other text stream could be traced to early attacks of corruption to the word of God, even in Paul s day, especially texts that would soon appear in Alexandria, Egypt texts that would eventually be used by the Roman Catholic Church. These texts were developed in a style of language that was more elite and allegorical heading in the direction of taking the words of God into a language not accessible by the common man. Every English Bible is translated from one of these two streams of texts which means these facts are critical to your personal decision on the word of God. Most new modern Bible versions flow directly from the Alexandrian stream of text and are based upon Greek texts that were formed by men who hold to the conflation theory. That is why there are so many differences between these Bibles and the King James Bible. The only trustworthy Bible widely available in English that comes solely from the Byzantine or Received Text stream is the King James Bible. It is also amazing to note that modern textual critics claim that the King James translators did not have access to the readings that 53

12 A More Sure Word have since been discovered in ancient manuscripts. This is not true. The King James translators had access to these same corrupt readings in the form of the Latin Vulgate (which contained both Byzantine and Alexandrian readings), but they rejected them because of their origin. They understood that there were two streams of text, and they chose the pure textual stream of the early church on purpose. At the very least, these facts should cause modern scholars to re-evaluate their opinions concerning the Byzantine Text and the conflation theory. The previously named papyrus pre-dates Vaticanus (B) and Sinaiticus (Aleph or A) by almost one hundred and fifty years. We ll learn about these two manuscripts in an upcoming chapter ad One of the most interesting developments of this period involved a man named Ufilas. Ufilas was a missionary to the Goths a third and fourth century people that populated eastern Europe. Early in his missions efforts he became burdened to translate the Bible into the Gothic language. The only problem was that the Gothic language had no written form. Using his knowledge of Greek and Latin, Ufilas first created a Gothic alphabet and then began translating God s word into that previously unwritten language. He used the Byzantine Greek Text for his translation. Defining the Term Codex Vaticanus (B): This manuscript has been housed in the Vatican Library for as long as it has been known, appearing in its earliest catalog of 1475 and in the 1481 catalog. Its place of origin and the history of the manuscript is uncertain. (see expanded definition, p. 211) Codex Sinaiticus (Aleph or A): A fourth century uncial manuscript of the Greek Bible, widely believed to be written between (see expanded definition, p. 211) 54

13 Chapter Four Understanding the Times Today, though the Gothic language is long since unused, this Gothic Bible is the oldest preserved text ever discovered in any Germanic language, and it is found to agree with the Received Text. In The Text of the Old Testament we read, As a rule it [the Gothic version] is cited only casually, because the general character of its textual base is rather precisely known; for his translation [Ufilas] made use of a manuscript of the late Byzantine Text differing little from what we find in the Greek manuscript. 7 Additionally, several other very important Bible translations were produced during the fourth century. These include the Armenian Bible (400 ad), the Ethiopic (early fourth century), the Georgian, and the Latin Vulgate (382 ad). Each of these contain readings that agree with the Byzantine Text. Concerning the Vulgate, scholars cannot even agree on the text-type of the original Vulgate. In the gospels, some have called it Alexandrian and some Byzantine. In fact it has readings of both types, as well as a number of Western readings which are probably holdovers from the Old Latin. The strongest single strand, however, seems to be Byzantine; in 870 test passages, one writer found it to agree with the Byzantine manuscripts 60 70% of the time and with Vaticanus and Sinaiticus only about 45% of the time. 8 During this same century, much happened to the Christian church. For the first part of the century, Christians were brutally persecuted. A third-century Roman Emperor named Diocletian ordered every Bible and sacred book to be burned in 303 ad. This implies that the early church already knew (well before 303 ad) what constituted the biblical canon. This also helps us understand Defining the Term Latin Vulgate: A translation made by Jerome in 382 based upon both Byzantine and Alexandrian manuscripts. It became the official translation for the Roman Catholic Church. 55

14 A More Sure Word one reason why there are fewer manuscripts dating prior to this time. In 313 ad, the Roman Emperor Constantine came to the rescue, establishing Christianity as a legal (and favored) religion. His attempt to merge Christianity and heathenism together had a devastating effect on Christianity. His union of church and state violated God s principles and gave rise to the corrupt Catholic church. During this time, many true Christians viewed him as at least a temporary end to their persecution. At this point in history, in parallel with the two streams of text, we now begin to see two distinct church systems developing. From the time of Christ to the present day there has been and always will be a lineage of true believers who stand upon God s word, independent of any state church or political ties (Matthew 16:18.)With Constantine s new state-run version of Christianity we see the early beginnings of a state-controlled church that will ultimately become the Catholic church an eventual enemy and persecutor of all those independent believers who hold to the true teachings of God s preserved word. Some view the establishment of the Catholic church as a fork in the family tree of Christian church history. Others view it as the planting of a completely different tree. The gray area is that while this church from its earliest days was a form of Christianity with a pure Gospel, it quickly became corrupt from state control and proved to eventually become the arch-enemy of true Christianity in the middle ages. There have always been true believers who did not align themselves with the Catholic church and who ultimately came to be brutally persecuted by the same. This issue becomes more confusing when you consider the fact that both churches are often referred to with the term Christian and that many historical records of today were influenced heavily by Jesuit Catholic Priests who slanted so much Christian history in the direction of the Catholic church. 56

15 Chapter Four Understanding the Times The true Christians of the New Testament established independent, local churches throughout the Byzantine Empire. Yet, by the fourth century, we see the term Christian artificially attached to the Catholic church, which becomes quite a different entity altogether the very term Catholic means universal and is not what Christ established. In 325 ad, the Emperor Constantine authorized the holding of a council which became known as the Council of Nicea. This was the first effort of the state church to hold an ecumenical council to establish uniform doctrine. The true Christian church never held such a council because these essential doctrines were never in question. This council met to discuss the orthodox or traditional position on the deity of Christ. Again, His deity was never in question by true Christians. This critical Bible doctrine was under attack especially by a man named Arius. This man was a wolf in sheep s clothing purporting to be a theologian and a true Christian (incidentally, he was from Alexandria). He denied the fundamental truth of Christ s deity and founded the belief system known as Arianism. The Council of Nicea declared Arius a heretic and the resulting Nicene Creed reaffirmed the New Testament s true teaching on Christ s deity and what His deity meant, for the purposes of Constantine s new state church. This council was somewhat of a historical smoke screen, giving modern liberal scholars reason to assert that the belief in Christ s deity didn t take root until this point. True Christians and the pure textual stream affirmed Christ s deity from the beginning of the church it was literally the single truth for which tens of thousands of them had already been martyred. Some years later, approximately ad, Constantine ordered a political figure and religious scholar named Eusebius to produce fifty copies of the Scriptures. Some believe that Vaticanus and/or Sinaiticus (manuscripts used for modern-day revisions) were of this group. If not, they at least have been dated to this time period. 57

16 A More Sure Word These two manuscripts weren t rediscovered until centuries later, and more than two hundred years after the translation of the King James Bible. One was found in the Vatican library and the other in a trash pile at a Greek Monastery near Mount Sinai even the Greek-speaking monks recognized that this manuscript had no value. Their emergence in the 1800s gave way to a new Greek text based upon the single fact that these two manuscripts were older than the Received Text manuscripts. From these two manuscripts flowed literally thousands of changes in the revision of the Greek New Testament. These manuscripts were the crux of the future Critical Text that developed alongside of the Byzantine Text. Constantine s decision to order the creation of these Bibles is important because it shows the first efforts of the early Catholic (State) church to begin controlling the development of the Bible texts. This is perhaps the most critical truth to understand from all of this information. By 500 ad, the Bible (from the Received Text) had been translated into over five hundred languages and was received and used by true Christians throughout the known world as far away as eastern Europe! Yet, just one century later, the Catholic church would begin massive attempts to restrict the Bible to one language (Latin) and one church (Catholic) and they would begin to persecute and destroy all those who stood in the way or who disagreed. 58

17 Chapter Four Understanding the Times Chapter Four In Summary 1. One of the biggest questions of the Bible debate is which textual source is the most reliable? 2. The writings and Scripture quotes of early church leaders consistently support the readings found in the King James Bible over the newer translations. 3. The early church took the pure word of God to the known world in many languages. There are two powerful witnesses to the purity and authority of this textual source (called the Received Text): the Peshitta, a second century Syriac translation, and the Old Latin (Italic) a second century Latin translation. 4. Historical and biblical record states that there were attempts to add to and take away from God s word in the first and second century. Early Christians were diligent to protect the word of God even though Satan was trying to pervert it. 5. By the fourth century there were two distinctly different streams of Bible texts circulating. One was in use by true Christians and was considered the word of God, the other was rejected by them as being corrupt. 6. Early in the fourth century, Constantine established what would become the Catholic church, which adopted a Bible text that was different from the Received Text of the true church. 59

18 A More Sure Word 7. By 500 ad the pure word of God had been translated by the true church into more than 500 languages and had been distributed throughout the known world. 60

19 C H A P T E R F i v e Understanding the Times 600 ad Present Day God did a providential work of preservation during the first six hundred years of Christian history. By this time, in spite of every attempt to stamp out the early Christian church, throughout the known world Christians were holding to the faith once delivered, and they were using reliable texts of the word of God ad As we ve seen, by this time the Byzantine Text had found its way throughout Europe and as far as the British Isles even through the efforts of early Catholic monks (such as Columba of Iona) who, in spite of their ecclesiastical ties, were still preaching the true Gospel and were still using and translating Bibles taken from the Received Text. It was during these centuries that the Catholic church as an institution, began to make every attempt to extinguish the 61

20 A More Sure Word underground church those true believers and their Bibles that did not align with Catholic teaching and the Catholic Bible. True Christians who refused allegiance to the Catholic church were continuing to hold fast to the pure words of God and the pure doctrines of Jesus Christ. Yet, thousands of them suffered horrific persecution and martyrdom at the hands of the pagan Catholic church. It is not true, as the Roman church claims, that she gave the Bible to the world. What she gave was an impure text a text with many verses and passages changed and corrupted to make way for unscriptural doctrines. While upon those who possessed the veritable word of God, she poured out through many long centuries her stream of cruel persecution. During these centuries, the Byzantine Text was available in many languages and cultures. The preserving work of the Holy Spirit was continuing what began in the book of Acts when the word of God mightily grew and multiplied ad As we follow the Traditional Text into the tenth century, we can begin to see the early entrance of God s true word into the early formation of the English language. The West Saxon Gospels are the oldest existing version of the Gospels in English and they date back to about 1,000 ad. This is not long after the earliest forms of the English language began to take shape. Amazingly, the West Saxon Gospels were based upon the Traditional Text of the first-century church. Yes, with the earliest formation of the English language between the eight and tenth centuries, we find God s pure stream of text present! Here is just one example from Luke that shows that West Saxon Gospels flowed from the stream of the Traditional Text (most likely a Latin manuscript of the Traditional Text). 62

21 Chapter Five Understanding the Times Luke 15:16 (KJV) And he would fain have filled his belly with the husks that the swine did eat: and no man gave unto him. Luke 15:16 (ESV) And he was longing to be fed with the pods that the pigs ate, and no one gave him anything. Luke 15:16 (West Saxon Version) Da gewilnode he his wambe gelyllan of pam beancoddum be oa swyn aeton: and him man ne sealde. The subtle difference comes from the variance between the two lines of manuscripts. The Greek Textus Receptus reads, gemisai ten koilian autou apo (to fill his belly with). The Critical Text reads chortasthenai ek (fed out of). Older manuscripts P75, Vaticanus, and Sinaiticus support the reading of the Critical Text. All the Byzantine manuscripts, most Old Latin manuscripts, the Peshitta, and the Armenian support the Textus Receptus. It is plain from the reading of the West Saxon Gospels that they came from the Traditional Text and not the Critical Text. The words wambe gefyllan mean stomach filled and agrees with the Traditional Text. 1 The point is, long before the King James Bible, there were Christians in every century who knew the pure stream of text, and there were Bibles that agreed with the readings of the pure stream throughout the ages in many languages even in the early formation of the English language. This is quite a contrast to the liberal record of history that leads one to believe that the Catholic church and the reformers were solely responsible for the development of God s word (especially in English) centuries after it was originally inspired. At the University of Michigan, a display contains a vellum manuscript of the four Gospels in Greek (named Mich MS 22). This book is a Byzantine monastic product from the eleventh or twelfth century. 63

22 A More Sure Word The Ostromir Gospels, written in Russian approximately ad, is the earliest dated Russian manuscript to have survived. This text is from the Old Slavonic translation from the Greek text, by Byzantine missionaries Cyril and Methodius (989 ad). Up to this point, God has provided clear evidence through the ages as to which textual stream is the pure stream which text was used by true believers and which texts were used by those in league with the state church ad The investigation from either side of the issue clearly shows that the majority of manuscripts during this time are Byzantine. There is no question which text is in the majority. The debate at this point centers on how the Byzantine Text became dominant. Most modern versions are based upon the belief that the Byzantine Text through the ages was corrupted (conflated) by early believers. This begs several questions: Was this Received Text the result of the continual copying of bad or conflated manuscripts through the ages? If so, at what point had God finally had enough? Why would God allow early believers to so pollute His word? Why would it require the state church to save the day while simultaneously taking the Bible from the common man and persecuting so many? How could centuries of believers come and go without access to the true word of God? Defining the Term Vellum: A term for a manuscript written on expensive calfskin. This was far more superior than the ancient papyri. Reformation Bibles: During the period of the Reformation, the Bible was translated into various languages. Placing the Bible into the common man s hand had a great impact on biblical Christianity. (see expanded definition, p. 221) 64

23 Chapter Five Understanding the Times Most importantly, why would God wait 1,800 years to begin (as it is not finished yet) the correction process with Constantin Von Tischendorf, Westcott and Hort through Nestle and Aland? (We will re-introduce these people and texts in the next few pages.) The more reasonable and biblical explanation of these dominant Byzantine manuscripts is simply that the true churches evaluated them as accurate and discarded the Alexandrian readings in earlier centuries. While the Catholic church was embracing the Alexandrian Texts, the true lineage of believers was embracing the same texts that they had for centuries. These Byzantine manuscripts also became the basis for all the Reformation Bibles in multiple languages. The Reformers, who had as their motto Sola Scriptura (the Scriptures only), recognized only the Byzantine Text as the pure Scriptures and rejected the Latin Vulgate and the corrupt stream of text. In the late 1300s, God worked in the heart of a man named John Wycliffe. He is called the morning star of the reformation because, as an English Catholic theologian, he was one of the earliest voices to speak out against the Roman Catholic church. He strongly believed that the common man should have the Bible, and he worked with a few others to translate the Bible into English. Notable Names Constantin Von Tischendorf: A German textual critic who lived his life with the quest of restoring the true biblical text. He is credited with finding Codex Sinaiticus at St. Catherine s Greek Monastery at Mount Sinai. He believed the Textus Receptus (Received Text) did not match the original writings and set out to reconstruct the pure text. Nestle and Aland: Two German textual editors whose Greek texts form the basis for much of the modern New Testament translations. John Wycliffe: He is called the Morning Star of the Reformation. He lived from and was the first to translate the Bible into Middle English using Latin manuscripts. 65

24 A More Sure Word He based his translation upon the Latin Vulgate. His Bible was translated into what is now commonly called Middle English reminding us that this was a developing language at the time. This Bible became widely popular among the common people and provoked the Catholic church and the English monarchy to take drastic measures to suppress it. Notice how close this fourteenth century Wycliffe reading of John 3:16 is to our modern-day King James Bible: For God louede so the world that he yaf his oon bigetun sone, that ech man that beliueth in him perische not, but haue euerlastynge lijf ad Before the Protestant Reformation began (October 31, 1517), a Catholic scholar named Erasmus became critical of Catholic departure from biblical truth. He compiled the first edition of what would later be called the Textus Receptus a Greek text of the New Testament based upon the Byzantine Text. Though a Catholic, he believed that the Catholic Bible was corrupt and wanted to bring Notable Names Erasmus: His contribution to the textual issue is the Greek text he edited in 1516, followed by several other editions. He led the way in going back to a Greek source, rather than a Latin source for the Bible. (see expanded definition, p. 215) Robert Stephanus: Also known as Robert Stephens and Estienne. He continued the line of Received Text editions. His 1550 Greek edition was a major contributor to the King James translators. Incidentally, he was also the one to give us verse divisions. Theodore Beza: He was the successor of John Calvin at Geneva. He also continued the line of Received Text editions. His 1598 Greek edition was also used heavily by the King James translators. Beza believed his manuscripts were influenced by Waldensian Christians an early group of Christians, outside of Catholicism, dating back to 120 a d. 66

25 Chapter Five Understanding the Times back the influence of the Traditional Text. He was the first to print on printing presses and widely distribute this text his first two editions sold 3,300 copies. Erasmus compiled five editions of this text, each being improved in typography and quality. The heart and motives of this man are clear in these words that he placed in the preface of his 1516 Greek text: I would have these words translated into all languages, so that not only Scots and Irishmen, but Turks and Saracens might read them. I wish that the farm workers might sing parts of them at the plough, that the weaver might hum them at the shuttle, and the traveler might beguile the weariness of the way by reciting them. These holy pages will summon up the living image of His mind. They will give you Christ Himself, talking, healing, dying, rising, the whole Christ in a word. They will give Him to you in an intimacy so close that He would be less visible to you if He stood before your eyes. Later in the mid 1500s, a Catholic book printer from Paris named Robert Stephanus edited four versions of the TR from the Byzantine manuscripts and also added the present-day verse divisions. Then a Protestant reformer named Theodore Beza gave the world nine editions of the Textus Receptus each making minor reading updates and typographical improvements. Finally the Elzevir brothers, a Dutch family that owned a printing and publishing house, were involved in printing and distributing the Received Text. It is vital that you understand the nature of the revisions of each of these Received Texts. First, many of these revisions had to do with typographical errors created during the printing process. Many of them related to improving the print quality and accuracy of the language. Finally, many of them were in selecting the most reliable representation of what God said based upon the pure stream of evidence. All of these revisions were based upon study of the Traditional Text. Their very nature and reason for being was that the men working on them believed strongly that the Latin texts 67

26 A More Sure Word used by the Catholic church were not accurate and they wanted common men to have wide access to the pure text. Those who oppose the King James Version of the Bible often categorize those who support it as not understanding how many revisions went into its formation. This argument avoids the central issue because in reality is was never revised as to any significant textual changes. The only significant change was when the Apocrypha was dropped altogether from the first edition. Originally it was not included in the sacred text but placed in between the two Testaments for historical reading purposes. God quickly moved his men to remove this altogether to be sure that people did not mistake these books for God s words. The question is not about whether there were revisions because there really were none of any consequence. The real questions should be about the authority behind those minor edition changes or edits. What was the nature of those cosmetic changes? Why were they necessary? And what text or logical motive was relied upon as the authority when they were made? It is also important to note that these minimal textual edits relate to miniscule percentage of the work itself. The 5,200 plus manuscripts available in the body of evidence for today concerning proper renderings supports the Traditional Text and the King James Bible over 99% of the time, and they do not disagree even one time in any doctrinal area. Notable Names William Tyndale: He was the first to translate the Bible into English from a Greek (Byzantine) source. Nearly 90% of his work is still retained in the King James Bible. He lived from , and died as a martyr for translating the Bible for the common man. Martin Luther: A Catholic monk who sparked the Reformation when his 95 Theses was nailed at the Wittenburg Castle on October 31,

27 Chapter Five Understanding the Times This is not the case with the Critical text which is filled with disagreement among a small number of manuscripts forcing the translation effort to often become interpretation and even guesswork rather than translation. The Greek Received Text was first translated into English by reformer William Tyndale in At the time the English language was still considered a developing language, making his English translation an early version in a language that was still to become much stronger. It is a remarkable testimony to his skill and integrity that the King James translators retained over 90% of his words. Tyndale s work was the catalyst for a line of English Bibles that were remarkably similar but that each improved upon the other as the English language continued to develop during the sixteenth century. His work was updated in 1535 by Church of England Bishop Myles Coverdale, and then again in 1537 with the Taverner s Bible. The Great Bible, Bishop s Bible, and the Geneva Bible also came out in quick succession all based upon the same Received Text. The Geneva Bible had the privilege of being brought to America with the Pilgrims. The crown of all these translations in English was that which was authorized by King James. It is extremely important for the reader to note that the changes and differences in these Received Text Bibles were minimal and primarily related to the ongoing development of the language as well as typographical updates rather than major interpretive meaning or doctrinal points. In contrast, the many Bible versions from the Alexandrian text contain major doctrinal differences with large portions of Scripture being questioned or left out altogether! In other words, if you could sit down and compare, line for line, these Received Text Bibles from earlier centuries (provided that you could make sense out of the early forms of English) you would find them very much like our present-day King James Bible. One textual path leaves the authority for interpretation in God s hands, the other places it squarely into the hands of scholars and 69

28 A More Sure Word many of them through the centuries have had very close ties with the Roman church. During these centuries, the word of God was not simply being translated into English. God was doing a work in multiple languages. In 1534, Martin Luther, a former Catholic monk who began to protest the heresy of Catholic doctrine, translated the Received Text into German although this is not the first historical record of God s word in that language, this Bible had a profound impact upon the the German language. In 1535, Olivetan translated it into French. In 1541, it was translated into Swedish at Upsala. Reina translated it into Spanish in The Bible was translated into Icelandic in The Italian Diodati was translated in This is not to say that these people never had an accurate Bible prior to these, but simply to again take into account the development of languages and cultures. The Holy Spirit was overseeing the supernatural preservation of God s word for all centuries. The Lord gave the word: great was the company of those that published it. (Psalm 68:11). This publishing of God s word continued. The Finnish Bible (1642) and the Romanian Bible (1688) were soon given to the people. Lithuania (1735) and Estonia (1739) both had the word of God translated into their language from the Received Text. The Portuguese also were given God s precious words in The Gaelic (1801), Yiddish (1821), Turkish (1827), Norwegian (1834), and Bulgarian (1864) all received the word of God as the Gospel began to circle the globe. This list does not even begin to show how here in the States, the Native Americans began to receive the word of God in their language one dialect at a time. When the great revival fires of the Reformation and then the Great Awakening spread across the land, the word of God being translated was one of the results. It is critical to note that as these translations were being made, the Byzantine Text was the source. The question of which text to use 70

29 Chapter Five Understanding the Times was not a question for the English language alone. Some scholars argue that these translators used the Byzantine Text because that was all that they had, but this is simply not the case. The Latin Vulgate which was heavily influenced by the Alexandrian stream of text had been around for centuries but true pure-stream Christians had long since rejected those translations. Whether it was the early Syrian churches, the Italic churches, the Greek churches, the Waldenses, or all the Reformers (as well as other early European churches), they each had one thing in common: they gave credence to and used only the Received Textual base for translating the New Testament. 2 Major Factors from the 1800s During the 1800s, there were perceivable changes in the world that bore a direct result upon Bible translations. These changes give an indication of the spirit of the times. In 1796, a German Bible critic named Johann Griesbach edited a critical edition of the Greek text at about the same time that German rationalism was gaining influence. This movement blended human philosphy with theology and drew into question every major Bible doctrine. This movement weakened the Christian faith in the minds of many for generations to come and became the foundation for today s theological liberalism that denies the fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith. Griesbach s edition of the Greek text was the first one to remove Mark 16:9 20. This man was heavily influenced by Semler, the Father of German Rationalism. The direct connection between German rationalism and modern textual criticism cannot be denied. Semler was the leader of the reaction in Germany against the traditional views of the canon of Scripture. 3 Another proponent of the German rationalistic school was Karl Lachmann. It has been said that to Lachmann belongs the distinction of entirely casting aside the Textus Receptus. 4 He produced editions of the New Testament in Berlin in 1842 and 1850, 71