"Modern Bibles" Are Based on Wescott and Hort - Who Were They? Part I

by Perry 105 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Earnest

  Earnest : The fact is we do not know when the Vatican obtained possession of the codex but it was certainly before the library was established.

  Perry : I have found many sources as listing 1481 as a discovery date for Vaticanus in the Vatican Library.

  Hi Perry, the Vatican Library was only established in 1475 and the first listing of all the contents was in 1481. The codex was not lost in those six years and so was not suddenly discovered, but I agree that to an extent it is semantics. It was simply another of Rev. Gipp's inaccuracies.

  Although the codex Vaticanus was in the Vatican Library it was not directly consulted by Erasmus or used in the Complutensian Polyglot or the Jesuit Bible aka Rheims New Testament. Erasmus did have a friend in Rome, Paolo Bombace, who was secretary to Cardinal Lorenzo Pucci and who checked passages in the first letter of John for Erasmus. In 1521 he sent Erasmus variant readings of chapters 4 and 5 from a "very ancient" manuscript in the Vatican Library which seems to have been the codex Vaticanus.

  In addition to this, one of his detractors was a humanist priest named Juan Gines de Sepulveda who wrote to him on November 1, 1534. He mentions the Vatican MS. and refers to a list of 365 places where it differs from Erasmus' text. It is difficult to see how anyone can conclude from this limited second-hand acquaintance of the codex Vaticanus that Erasmus rejected it because of the thousands of disagreements with the texts he had collated.

  In addition, your suggestion that the codex Vaticanus and codex Sinaiticus were rejected because the "KJ translators" considered the Latin Vulgate to be flawed is even more tenuous. You can no more derive the Greek readings from the Latin than you can from the English.
• 

  Deputy Dog

  Perry

  I just thought you may find this interesting? Here's a sample

  From:http: //vintage.aomin.org/erasmus.html

  ERASMUS OF ROTTERDAM: HIS NEW TESTAMENT AND ITS IMPORTANCE
  By James White
  Europe of 1516 presented quite a world of contrasts. Superstition still ruled many people’s minds, yet men of great scholarship and insight were to be found in every nation. Great political struggles were taking place, struggles which would soon give form and outline to the Europe of today. Nationalism was on the rise, and the papacy on the decline. Heretics were still being burnt at the stake, and the ages-old cry of reform was not thought to mean reform outside of the Roman Catholic Church but rather within it. Luther had yet to post his 95 Theses. In that year of 1516 a momentous event occurred - at Basle, Switzerland. From the press of John Froben came Novum Instrumentum omne, diligenter ab Erasmo Rot. Recognitum et Emendatum, Desiderius Erasmus’s edition of the Greek New Testament, along with his own new Latin translation, with annotations. This work, put through five different editions in Erasmus’s lifetime, would have lasting effects on Biblical scholarship. Who was Erasmus? Why was he the first to publish a critical edition of the Greek New Testament? How did this edition change Christianity?
• 

  Terry

  The great Johnny Green composed Body and Soul for a film with John Garfield and Lana Turner.

  The song became popular and was "covered" by a number of bands.

  Let's perform a "thought experiment". Shall we?

  Imagine walking in to a series of Jazz nightclubs in the 1950's and hearing various soloists and trios performing their variations on the same tune.

  If a famous orchestra, trio or band becomes popular other groups try to emulate them. Musicians at the top try to best one another in a "battle of the bands."

  A pianist like Thelonius Monk created awkwardly wonderful chords, accents and improvisations hunched over the keyboard so that other pianists and copyists could not tell what he was doing with his hands.

  Jazz players like to substitute chords and change harmonic structures to create interest. Arrangements often change the temp and alter eighth notes into dotted notes for syncopation.

  Many players can work in other snippets of familiar tunes when the mood strikes them.

  The result (the performance) is live and "on the fly". Inspiration is never twice the same.

  HERE COMES THE THOUGHT EXPERIMENT.

  What if, instead of Johnny Green's BODY AND SOUL, there was a tune written 300 years in the past found on parchment by a musicologist who showed it to a jazz pianist who played it and it was heard by a sax soloist who played it who was heard by an arranger who wrote it up for his band to play.

  QUESTION:

  What relationship exist (if any) between the 1748 composition on parchment (in the mind of the composer) and the various "versions" performed in jazz nightclubs in the 1950's?

  Could any of the NEWER versions be said to be "more accurate". Or, is the question not even worth trying to answer?

  ____________________________________

  I assert that something like our thought experiment is what is going on with Scripture!
• 

  Perry

  In Houston, I grew up practicing magic (sleight of hand) since a very early age. I was always intrigued by how the mind worked. I have two close friends who are also magicians, one of which I go back as far a kindergarten with. Both went professional for a good long while, even leading the Italian Magic Circus in Mexico.

  I do a trick that consists of two coins, a copper coin and a silver coin. I keep putting them in my pocket with one hand but they keep "reappearing" in the other. The trick will not work unless I place the copper coin(s) and the silver coin(s) into my pocket, one at a time, in a specific order.Only I know the right order.

  So, the way it goes is like this: I hold both in my hand in plain view with an open palm. I ask the one watching, which of the coins that he or she likes the best. If they "choose" the copper coin, but I want silver coin to go into my pocket, as I slowly close my hand, I simply say, "That's great, I'm going to leave the copper coin in my hand, the one that You Chose, and take the silver coin out and put it in my pocket. (If they choose the silver one I simply remove that one that they "chose")

  Then they are simple asked what should be left in my closed hand. Of course, they answer only the silver coin. I open my hand and there are still two coins there.... a silver one and a copper one. The person is told that they are not paying attention....because the were told in the beginning that this trick is done with two coins... a silver one and a copper one.

  So, that there is no confusion I offer to do the trick again. This is repeated 5 times and the person never catches the fact that no matter what he "chooses" I still place what ever color coin that I want into my pocket.

  "I'm going to take the one that you chose and place it into my pocket."

  "I'm going to take the one that you chose, and leave it in my hand."

  Much debate over textual criticism is like this. Arguments over Wescott and Hort vs. Nestle/Aland or; NIV vs. NASB or, NWT vs. most of the other MB's gives, the illusion that a person is really getting somewhere. Psuedo-Intellectual types love this kind of technical wrangling because it feeds their vanity.

  Unlike my magic trick described above, there is some ground to be gained here for sure in the comparing of the above, but not much IMO.

  The reason is: that no matter how much time a person spends in textual criticism of these works, the person is STILL only considering the 1% corrupted texts from the Alexandrian region and ignoring the 99% texts that are traced back to the region of Antioch where people (mostly gentiles) were first called Christians.
• 

  Perry

  Satanus says:

  Can you present a simple list, starting w the most important, of doctrines that the evil westcot and hort bastards expunged or perverted?

  You are not paying attention. How many coins do you see in my hand? This trick is done with two coins, not one!

  All kidding aside. You really should read threads a little closer before commenting. I posted many instances in the beginning of this thread that are shocking to the JW mind, from right out of the bible. Why don't you look these scriptures up and see which ones are in the modern translations and which ones aren't. I wonder why this is so?

  SCRIPTURE KJV

  1 Cor. 15:47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.

  Zech 12: 9,10 (Jehovah is speaking) and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son

  Micah 5: 2 (Jesus is from everlasting…before time) Bethlehem…out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting

  Daniel 3:25 (The Son of God made occasional appearance in the OT) the Son of God

  I Timothy 3:16 God was manifest in the flesh
  
  Philippians 2:6 (Jesus did not think that he was robbing God by being his equal) thought it not robbery to be equal with God
  

  Matthew 20:20 worshipping him (Jesus was worshipped)

  Hosea 13: 4 Yet I am the LORD thy God… for there is no saviour beside me

  John 4:42 (Both Jehovah and Christ are the only saviour”) – this is indeed the Christ, the Savior of the world

  Jehovah is Lord and so is Jesus:

  Romans 1:3 Jesus Christ our Lord
  Ephesians 3:14 of our Lord Jesus Christ
  I Thess. 2:19 our Lord Jesus Christ
  I Thess. 3:11 our Lord Jesus Christ
  II Thess. 1:8 our Lord Jesus Christ
  Ephesians 3:14 of our Lord Jesus Christ

  Luke 24:52 they worshipped him (Jesus)

  Hebrews1: 5,6 (worshipping anything other than God is idolatry) Thou art my Son… And let all the angels of God worship him.

  Hebrews 1:8 (See also Ps. 45:6) But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever

  Acts 7:59,60 Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit
  
  Acts 20: 28 (The Christian God bleeds) feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

  Titus 2:13 (God himself is our savior) Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; Who gave himself for us

  Revelation 1: 7,8

  (reference to Matt. 24:30 & Mark 13:26) (Jesus returns with the clouds, he is the Almighty)

  Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, …I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, … saith the Lord, … the Almighty.

  Revelation 1: 10-17 (The Son of Man is the First and the Last, he is also the Alpha and Omega,)

  I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet,
  Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book,… And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. And being turned, I saw … one like unto the Son of man, …
  And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last

  Rev. 22;12-16 And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last…I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches
  
  I Timothy 3:16 God was manifest in the flesh

  John 3:13 (only God can be in two places at the same time) even the Son of man which is in heaven.

  I John 5:7,8 (quoted and found in the earliest Latin bibles -circa150 A.D.) For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

  Colossians 2:9 in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily
• 

  Narkissos

  Oh my [God], Perry, haven't you realised yet that Westcott & Hort produced a New Testament critical edition only? All OT references are therefore irrelevant to this thread (and Satanus' question).

  Many of your NT references have nothing to do with a different Greek text (so again W&H are innocent) but with translation (e.g. Matthew 20:20; Acts 20:28, Philippians 2:6; Hebrews 1:5f, 8).

  Most of what remains consists in secondary additions of referential explicitations ("God," "Christ," "Lord," "Jesus") or importations from parallel contexts as I pointed out above (e.g. Revelation)...

  I also see that you didn't take into account the refutation (see my previous link) of the list of pseudo-evidences for 1 Jean 5:7.

  But how could you if you don't understand what you are pasting about in the first place?
• 

  nvrgnbk

  But how could you if you don't understand what you are pasting about in the first place?

  And to think, Perry is the guy enamored with the term "false premise".

  Sweet irony.
• 

  Perry

  Narkissos,

  What exactly is your formal education experience? Do you hold any degree in the biblical languages?
• 

  nvrgnbk

  Narkissos,

  What exactly is your formal education experience? Do you hold any degree in the biblical languages?

  OMFG!

  You have got to be kidding.
• 

  hillary_step

  Perry,

  Caught with your theological trousers around your ankles, and your delicate manhood all but disappeared, you resort to this:

  What exactly is your formal education experience? Do you hold any degree in the biblical languages?

  lol..What a plonker you are.

  HS