1. Which Bible Should We Trust?
“No sooner was the work of Evangelists and Apostles recognized as the necessary counterpart and complementof God's ancient Scriptures and became the 'New Testament,' than a reception was found to be awaiting it in theworld closely resembling that which He experienced Who is the subject of its pages. Calumny andmisrepresentation, persecution and muderous hate, assailed Him continually. And the Written Word in like manner,in the earliest age of all, was shamefully handled by mankind. Not only was it confused through human infirmityand misapprehension, but it became also the object of restless malice and unsparing assualts.”
- Dean Burgon,Traditional Text, p.10.
In the past wars have been fought over the Bible. It was persecuted by the early chuch, banned in the middleages, and again came under attack during the Reformation. Today, essentially, the argument is not between the KingJames Version and other English versions, but between the traditional “Received Text” and the Alexandrianmanuscripts (the Vatican B and the Siniatic Aleph).The original manuscripts that came from Syria and Jerusalem, where the Apostles preached, have been lost andall we have is copies of copies. The oldest manuscripts originate from the Alexandrian texts. However, there arethousands (1900) in almost every language from the traditional texts. Also, there are verses missing in theAlexandrian versions that are in the traditional texts. But there are letters written between church fathers that areolder than the Alexandrian texts that include these missing verses.David Otis Fuller, D.D., says fundamentally, there are only two streams of Bibles. The first stream whichcarried the Received Text in Hebrew and Greek, precious manuscripts were preserved by such as the church at Pellain Palestine where Christians fled, when in 70 A.D. the Romans destroyed Jerusalem; by the Syrian Church of Antioch which produced eminent scholarship; by the Italic Church in northern Italy; and also at the same time by theGallic Church in southern France and by the Celtic Church in Great Britain; by the pre-Waldensian, the Waldensianand the churches of the Reformation. These manuscripts have in agreement with them, by far the vast majority of copies of the original text. So vast is this majority that even enemies of the Received Text (Textus Recepticus) admitthat nineteen-twentieths of all Greek manuscripts are of this class.
- Les Garrett, 1982, Which Bible Can We Trust?Christian Centre Press, p.64.
The second stream is a small one of a very few manuscripts. These last manuscripts are represented:a) In Greek: The Vaticanus MS., or Codex B (prominent for counter-reformation), in the library at Rome; andthe Sinaitic, or Codex Aleph (found in 1844, youngest find and oldest document). b) In Latin: The Vulgate or Latin Bible of Jerome (383 AD).c) In English: Many modern versions and the Jesuit Bible of 1582, which later with vast changes is seen in theDouay-Rheims.“It must be emphasized that the argument is not between an ancient text and a recent one, but between twoancient forms of the text, one of which was rejected and the other adopted and preserved by the Church as a wholeand remaining in common use for more than fifteen centuries.”
- Les Garrett, 1982, Which Bible Can We Trust? p.46.
“We need to understand, that many of the new translations are taken from old manuscripts. People think thatthese are more reliable. In actual fact they are saying, that a manuscript found in a waste paper basket in a cave inMt. Sinai and questionable manuscripts from Alexandria in Egypt, are more reliable than the Received Text.”
- LesGarrett, Which Bible Can We Trust? p.15.
“So the present controversy between the King James Bible in English and the modern versions is the same oldcontest fought out between the early church and rival sects; and later, between the Waldenses and the Papists fromthe fourth to the thirteenth centuries; and later still between the Reformers and the Jesuits in the sixteenth century.”
-“Which Bible” and “True and False”, edited by David Otis Fuller.
2. The Early Church
From the birth of Christ to 400 AD Gnostic gospels and other writings were written. Paul makes mention of thisin: 2 Cor. 2:17.The received text is the old Byzantine text with hundreds of copies in agreement. It was written in koine Greek of which hundreds of words cannot be translated into classical Greek. The early Church used koine Greek manuscripts and rejected the Alexandrian versions which were based on corrupt version with Origen and other Gnostic revisions.“Origen, being a textual critic, is supposed to have corrected numerous portions of the sacred manuscripts.Evidence to the contrary shows he changed them to agree with his own human philosophy of mystical andallegorical ideas. Thus, through deceptive scholarship of this kind, certain manuscripts became corrupt.”
- LesGarrett, 1982, Which Bible Can We Trust? p.16
. Origen believed man is divine and is praised in Masonic writing.