Condensed Compilation

[NetChaplain]

The Majority Text source (MAT), consists of most of extant manuscript copies. The Minority Text source (MIT), which consists of a few manuscript copies recently rediscovered (around mid 1800's) ; Vaticanus codex, Sinaiticus codex, Alexandrinus codex.

The Minority text (MIT) is a recent addition to the manuscript tradition (17th-18th century) and is known as the Alexandrian text (which comprise 30 manuscripts--as opposed to 6,000 copies in the MAT). They were never used for copying purposes, the scribes would reject them because they did not sufficiently represent the Byzantine Text (which is where most of the extant copies reside).

Believers who are not used to Bible study will not understand the extent of difference between the Traditional Text, which has been in use for English speaking Protestants for 500 years; and the Alexandrian Text, which recently became part of the Bible tradition.

They are not even nearly identical, as great masses of Scripture in the Alexandrian Text-type translations are omitted, interpolated and transposed; and only avid readers of the Word can notice the subtle (which are great) variations between the two sources of translations.

"There are approximately 20,000 or more corrections in the Codex Sinaiticus, made by multiple scribes over several centuries." -Google AI

They are not even nearly identical, as great masses of Scripture in the Alexandrian Text-type translations are omitted, interpolated and transposed; and only avid readers of the Word can notice the subtle (which are great) variations between the two sources of translations.

“The Codex Alexandrinus is in a condition described as "Just OK," with significant damage and loss of folios, making it fragile and requiring restricted access for preservation. The vellum has deteriorated, with holes in many places, and the ink is prone to flaking, which limits handling to prevent further damage. The manuscript has lost ten leaves from the Old Testament and 31 leaves from the New Testament, along with portions of 1 and 2 Clement, and many sections are damaged or have defects due to age and poor modern binding” –Brave Browser

“The Codex Alexandrinus is currently in a fragile condition, with some pages being brittle and damaged, which limits handling. It has deteriorated more than other ancient manuscripts like Codex Sinaiticus.” –purebibleforum.com –Wikipedia

The Minority text (MIT) is a recent addition to the manuscript tradition (17th-18th century) and is known as the Alexandrian text (which comprise 30 manuscripts—as opposed to 6,000 copies in the MAT). They were never used for copying purposes, the scribes would reject them because they did not sufficiently represent the Byzantine Text, which is where most of the extant copies reside – 90% of copies.

They are not even nearly identical, as great masses of Scripture in the Alexandrian Text-type translations are omitted, interpolated and transposed; and only avid readers of the Word can notice the subtle variations between the two sources of translations.

It's my opinion that the majority of Christians have come short of reading and studying God's Word for the last century, and thus most will never receive enough spiritual-growth in the Lord Jesus so they can be useful, until He returns and brings all up to par!

 

[mikesw]

This does not seem like a sufficient argument for anything. The 20,000 corrections has no meaning without characterizing what that means -- misspellings, typos, corrections to other errors, adapting an MAT usage to the new copy. The simple rejection of the minority texts because they are not the majority texts just means these scribes automatically made more copies of the majority texts and does not explain a reason for rejection.
The main issue is the type of doctrines that change due to the differences of the texts. Otherwise, we are just making people uncertain of the scriptures for no positive gain in faith and growth.

 

[dwight92070]

Wow, I guess all Christians for the last 100 years are basically lost, because if we are not useful or fruitful, we are "thrown away as a branch and (we dry) up". John 15:6 Then we will be cast into the fire and we are burned. John 15:6

And all because we didn't read from the correct text. Thanks for being a "good Chaplain" and warning us. It's too bad that you didn't warn all those who have already died, or else they could have been saved too. Better late than never.

 

[mikesw]

Wow, I guess all Christians for the last 100 years are basically lost, because if we are not useful or fruitful, we are "thrown away as a branch and (we dry) up". John 15:6 Then we will be cast into the fire and we are burned. John 15:6

And all because we didn't read from the correct text. Thanks for being a "good Chaplain" and warning us. It's too bad that you didn't warn all those who have already died, or else they could have been saved too. Better late than never.

oh no. You too have been using the forbidden translations?

In reality, I do not think the discovery of Jesus and redemption is so tenuous that a person will miss redemption between the KJV and the ESV. The real question at hand concerns the identification of what would be lost if the KJV and MAT were not our source of insight into God. Also, I suggest that much of scripture is misunderstood anyhow. It could be asked if that is a greater problem than the decision between some translations.

 

[NetChaplain]

This does not seem like a sufficient argument for anything. The 20,000 corrections has no meaning without characterizing what that means -- misspellings, typos, corrections to other errors, adapting an MAT usage to the new copy.

First, I wanted to make it known that how one believes about what Bible they may read has no effect on one's salvation, for salvation does not admit in degrees; either one is saved or not. The issue is how one grows in their faith is Christ through the Word, for faith does admit in degrees!

True, minor issues do not change anything, though there are many of those in these three codex's of the Alexandrian-type. But the changes I refer to are significant. If you "add" or "take away" from Scripture (God only wrote one Bible) you can change doctrine, plus incur the curse God put on those who have changed it, usually for money (Rev 22:18, 19). This curse of God, no doubt is directly in reference to the Book of Revelation, but the same goes for the remnant of Scripture, which is no less significant!

The simple rejection of the minority texts because they are not the majority texts just means these scribes automatically made more copies of the majority texts and does not explain a reason for rejection.

These manuscript copies didn't get by the good scribes, and more than likely were never used, primarily because they contained excessive omissions which the majority of extant manuscripts contained.

The main issue is the type of doctrines that change due to the differences of the texts. Otherwise, we are just making people uncertain of the scriptures for no positive gain in faith and growth.

It's my opinion that footnotes claiming that a verse or a partial verse, or even a word should not be in the text can create doubt.
Here some examples of whole verses omitted!
Matt 18:11
Act 8:37; 28:29
1Jn 5:7
Jhn 5:4

These are a few of many, not counting the many partially omitted verses!

 

[mikesw]

First, I wanted to make it known that how one believes about what Bible they may read has no effect on one's salvation, for salvation does not admit in degrees; either one is saved or not. The issue is how one grows in their faith is Christ through the Word, for faith does admit in degrees!

True, minor issues do not change anything, though there are many of those in these three codex's of the Alexandrian-type. But the changes I refer to are significant. If you "add" or "take away" from Scripture (God only wrote one Bible) you can change doctrine, plus incur the curse God put on those who have changed it, usually for money (Rev 22:18, 19). This curse of God, no doubt is directly in reference to the Book of Revelation, but the same goes for the remnant of Scripture, which is no less significant!

These manuscript copies didn't get by the good scribes, and more than likely were never used, primarily because they contained excessive omissions which the majority of extant manuscripts contained.

It's my opinion that footnotes claiming that a verse or a partial verse, or even a word should not be in the text can create doubt.
Here some examples of whole verses omitted!
Matt 18:11
Act 8:37; 28:29
1Jn 5:7
Jhn 5:4

These are a few of many, not counting the many partially omitted verses!

It may be the majority text that adds and expands the original Greek. Consequently, that majority text would be in error.

The second is that Revelation 22 is speaking of Revelation, not of the general scriptures. The NT writings were still individual letters being passed around or, perhaps, were in some collections, such as proposed of Paul's letters.

I think it is best to introduce such issues about textual variants later on to Christians. New Christians can be content with learning the basics at first but eventually should be introduced to some of the issues raised in NT studies. I had begun assuming that all issues of scripture were settled except perhaps eschatology. Eventually, I find that lots of issues remain unsettled in scripture. That is just the type of things we face in life and in faith.

Edited: I should have noted however that Peter equated Paul's writing with other scripture. But I still do not think that Revelation was anticipating these writings being altered. Nor does this exclude the sense of some who distorted the gospel. One question that arises regards the potential details that people might have sought to alter about Revelation.

 

[NetChaplain]

It may be the majority text that adds and expands the original Greek. Consequently, that majority text would be in error.

Hi Mike! You make some good points. Either we haven't had the New Testament for 2000 years (52 AD) and the Alexandrian Text is correct; or we've had the NT all this time and the AT is wrong. The two manuscript sources (Majority and Minority Texts) both can't be the Word of God, they are far too scripturally indifferent.

Also, Gnostics have had their hands in discrediting manuscripts, and is why so many verses relating to Christ being deity are tampered with; and it's all modern translations involved. One example is Jn 3:13: “No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven." The words "who is in heaven" are omitted in the Alexandrian Text, detracting Christ's deity of omnipresence.

Eph 3:9 "And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ." By Jesus Christ" is omitted, again detracting His deity of omnipotence. These are but a minute example of the issue!

The second is that Revelation 22 is speaking of Revelation, not of the general scriptures. The NT writings were still individual letters being passed around or, perhaps, were in some collections, such as proposed of Paul's letters.

Christ was 33 when He ascended and Revelation was written around 95 AD. Paul wrote His Epistles around 64 AD finishing in prison, which puts it close to 2000 years when the writing of the Word was completed.

I think it is best to introduce such issues about textual variants later on to Christians. New Christians can be content with learning the basics at first but eventually should be introduced to some of the issues raised in NT studies.

They need to know which Bible to study. He only wrote one Bible.

I had begun assuming that all issues of scripture were settled except perhaps eschatology. Eventually, I find that lots of issues remain unsettled in scripture. That is just the type of things we face in life and in faith.

One can understand more issues if he learns from the right teachers and commentators.

Edited: I should have noted however that Peter equated Paul's writing with other scripture. But I still do not think that Revelation was anticipating these writings being altered. Nor does this exclude the sense of some who distorted the gospel. One question that arises regards the potential details that people might have sought to alter about Revelation.

The Enemy has always been after discrediting God's Word, since his first attack when he said "yea hath God said."

 

[NetChaplain]

Also, the absence of the Comma Johannian in 1Jn 5:7 is a sad state of existence, omitting a verse that witnesses to the Holy Spirit's deity of omnipresence; manifesting His presence in Heaven and Earth simultaneously. Same with Christ's deity with the absence of "which is in heaven," in Jn 3:13, which is also sadly omitted!