Help! Rev. 1:11, someone expain?

FRUSR8TD

so here I am just reading my the book of revelation in my bible (NKV)..and I'm thinking "how can they read this and NOT see that Jesus and God are the same? So I get out my wife'ss bible (NWT) and boom there it is...my bible has the Alpha and Omega refrence in Rev 1:11...hers does not. I then take a look at Rev 22:19 and there it has the punishments for adding or deleting anything from this book. So I think "well one of these bibles is in critical error". I looked up the original greek text at www.blueletterbible.com and sure enough...the Alph and Omega refrence is there.

so..anyone able to tell me what they tell the rank and file about this? I know of course that it is to fit the scripture to there doctrine rather than fitting the doctrine to the scripture. But I would like to know how they "reason" it away to the regular JW. This can't be the smokeing gun I think it is. There is no way of denying that that part of the verse was taken out of the NWT.

Edited by - FRUSR8TD on 16 June 2002 14:16:36

Yerusalyim

I'm thinking we have a case here of variant texts used in translation. My catholic bible doesn't contain this reference either at least not here, though Christ is indeed called THE FIRST and THE LAST

Elsewhere

What a PIG! No one should be the first AND last at the buffet!!!!

A Paduan

1:17 ?

paduan

logical

The thing with this is that how do you know the Greek text is what was actually written down by John?

Just as the Watchtower have changed scriptures by adding / removing words in certain places, so could have people in past generations, which includes the generation from which the Greek manuscripts originate. Can you imagine how distorted they could be? Its like Chinese Whispers.

Hence the reason why the law was to be written on the hearts of Christians, so that wicked men, plunderers cannot interfere with it and change it to suit their twisted doctrine. The bible (not all of the bible is scripture) can serve as a written reminder; but ultimately the true law will come from your heart, if you listen to what the spirit has to say.

BugParadise

I'm thinking we have a case here of variant texts used in translation.

I don't know because but the oldest manuscripts (A, B, Aleph, C, and D) do not contain even one verse of Revelations. They are missing all 22 chapters of Revelations as well as the first 45 chapters of the Bible. These are the manuscripts the newer versions are based on. I am researching to see what families of manuscripts the newer versions used for the missing chapters.

~Bugs

Earnest

It must first be said that the oldest manuscripts DO contain the book of Revelation. These include Aleph (codex Sinaiticus), A (codex Alexandrinus) and C (codex Ephraemi).

B (codex Vaticanus) is missing the book of Revelation as well as the first forty-five chapters of Genesis as BugParadise reports.

None of these manuscripts contain the reference to the Alpha and Omega in Revelation 1:11.

However, at the beginning of the ninth century the style of writing changed to a script of smaller letters in a running hand called miniscules. This style was popular as copying could be done faster and cheaper and the number of miniscule manuscripts outnumber the uncials by more than ten to one. The miniscules which follow the text of Andreas of Caesarea's commentary on Revelation do contain the reference to the Alpha and Omega in Revelation 1:11.

How did this get into the KJV? When Erasmus was collating the Greek text of the Bible in 1516 he had considerable difficulty in obtaining a copy of Revelation. It was only through Johannes Reuchlin that he finally managed to obtain the incomplete twelfth-century manuscript that he published in his Nouum Instrumentum. Reuchlin himself had borrowed the Kommentartext to the commentary of Andreas of Caesarea from the Dominican monastery in Basel. The KJV was primarily based on the text Erasmus had collated.

As the text containing Alpha and Omega in Revelation 1:11 has no uncial support or any manuscripts prior to the ninth century it clearly lacks authority and that is why it is not included in most recent translations including the NWT.

Earnest

Edited by - Earnest on 16 June 2002 22:36:29

Yerusalyim

Just one more reason to toss the KJV for something like the New Jerusalem Bible.

jst2laws

FRUSR8TD

I refuse to get seriously involved in application of prophesy to modern times. I believe in God and the value of prophecy in the old revelation of the God Jehovah in the Hebrew scriptures. This history, if anything, lead up to the "end of the system of things" 2000 years. There is a valuable lesson to learn from that part of human history, but that is something to cover in another post.

As to prophesy applying to our time, don't hold your breath. I suspect the lessons are already there to learn, and any modern application is futile. Yet the lessons are not a formula of facts and future events but a revelation of what not to expect of God. It is over already. Now we can choose to be spiritual persons or not, live good lives or not, learn from the Job like drama played out be Jesus or not. We can learn from their lessons or not. But if we are waiting for modern prophetic fulfillment I fear the lesson has evaded our attention, we missed the point of it all. Thoughts for the future but hopefully we are beyond the 'end is near' expectations.

Logical

Glad to see you responding. Somehow you surprise me with your 'logic'.

Jst2laws

BugParadise

As the text containing Alpha and Omega in Revelation 1:11 has no uncial support or any manuscripts prior to the ninth century it clearly lacks authority and that is why it is not included in most recent translations including the NWT.

Thanks for the correction on Aleph, A and C. I am looking for source materials to study on this particularly Revelation manuscript evidence for the ones you mentioned. Could you give me some suggestions on ones (source material) you recommend or have used?

There are many Syriac and Latin translations from as far back as the SECOND CENTURY that agree with the King James readings. For instance, the Pashitta (145 A.D.), and the Old Syriac (400 A.D.) both contain strong support for the King James readings. There are about fifty extant copies of the Old Latin from about 157 A.D. Then Ulfilas produced a Gothic version for Europe in A.D. 330. The Armenian Bible, which agrees with the King James, has over 1,200 extant copies and was translated by Mesrob around the year 400.

Help! Rev. 1:11, someone expain?

Share this