Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I was, of course, referring to the N.T. AS A WHOLE, not merely the gospels. As I posted, Jerome could hardly avoid making a new translation and/or revision (of the whole N.T.), because there was no single standard Latin text, until his Latin Vulgate.
But he didn't make a new translation or revision of the entire New Testament. He only did that for the Gospels. That's my whole point. The revision of the other New Testament books from the Vetus Latina into the Latin Vulgate was done by someone else (their identity is unknown), though the idea that Jerome did the whole thing is a common misconception.
Please don't use Jack Chick as a source for anything. He was not a Biblical Scholar and was often in error.Apparently Mark was written first, then Luke and Matthew, then John.
Anyway here is the original ending to Mark:
Bible Gateway passage: Mark 16 - New International Version
Jesus Has Risen - When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices so that they might go to anoint Jesus’ body. Very early on the first day of the week, just after sunrise, they were on their way to the tomb and they asked each other, “Who will roll...www.biblegateway.com
The NIV says this:
Then there is the story of the stoning of the adulteress:
Bible Gateway passage: John 7 - New International Version
Jesus Goes to the Festival of Tabernacles - After this, Jesus went around in Galilee. He did not want to go about in Judea because the Jewish leaders there were looking for a way to kill him. But when the Jewish Festival of Tabernacles was near, Jesus’ brothers said to him, “Leave Galilee and go...
Bible Gateway passage: John 8 - New International Version
but Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group and said to Jesus...
In my 2011 NIV red letter Bible the text in that story is black italics even though the words of Jesus are meant to be in red.
There is also this NIV footnote:
Bible Gateway passage: 1 John 5:7-8 - New International Version
For there are three that testify: the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.www.biblegateway.com
I think Jack Chick uses this as an example of why the NIV is corrupted and the true Bible translation is the KJV. [7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.]
What do Christians think? Are the additions as inspired as the original? Or were the apparent additions really part of the original?
You are right brother it is the Revelation.
Your claim specifically was that Jerome did it, and to say that Jerome got criticism for how he handled that part of 1 John. Whether it was Jerome was important to the specific claim you were making.
The subject of "additions" are the result of different manuscripts, when they were found vs when they were used and were the found as rejected manuscripts or highly prized ones.
Sometimes what is termed "an older manuscript" is taken but should be rejected. The reason is that the so called older manuscript was not used in prior years because it was corrupt. Then they lose the manuscript they were using and now the older corrupt manuscript "is the older" of the ones we now have.
Erasmus collected the various manuscripts available in his day and then published "the received text" -- Textus Receptus. That is the one that NKJV and KJV are based on.
the printed editions of the Greek New Testament which served as the primary foundation for the Reformation-era Bible translations, including the King James Version (KJV)
It is newer than Sinaiticus and Vaticanus (Egyptian 4th centurty manuscripts that NASB NIV and others are based on )
Some of the so called "older manuscripts) were found crumpled up and in the trash. They were not used until more recent times.
- Codex Vaticanus: Dated to around 325–350 AD, it has been housed in the Vatican Library since at least the 15th century. [1, 2, 3, 4]
- Codex Sinaiticus: Also dated to the mid-4th century (330–360 AD). Discovered in the mid-19th century by Constantine Tischendorf at St. Catherine's Monastery in the Sinai Peninsula, portions of it were rescued from a monastic trash pile. [1, 2, 3, 4]
- Textus Receptus (Received Text): A printed Greek text compiled by scholars like Desiderius Erasmus in the early 16th century. It was the first widely published Greek New Testament, relying on a handful of later, medieval Byzantine manuscripts (primarily from the 12th to 15th centuries)
Some of the most ancient and most notable New Testament manuscripts — Wesley Huff
P52 (aka John Rylands 457) is one of the most notable New Testament manuscript fragments. Potentially the earliest extant piece of documentary evidence for the biblical New Testament, this papyrus fragment was discovered by C.H. Roberts in the basement of the John Rylands Library in 1934.www.wesleyhuff.com
mindrenewers.com
That "is-the-oldest-manuscript-really-best" link is a good one.Is the Oldest Manuscript Really Best?
Our “oldest manuscripts” survived because they weren’t accurate, so believers didn’t want to use them. They were sloppy work by careless scribes, and no one wanted to copy f…
It says "they saw" a young man, not that "it looked like" a young man. And it doesn't say the white robe was glowing. But in the other gospels, which were written later, it says they saw an angel and in Luke 24:23 "they had seen a vision of angels". Perhaps a vision suggests they weren't just using ordinary sight.
I no longer believe you can authoritatively state that. Revelation ends with warnings of adding or subtracting as is stated/warned in passages throughout the entire Bible. It seems a very cohesive line of thought and as the interpretation of Revelation requires the Spirit and through that Spirit a thorough knowledge of Scripture, I now conclude it refers to the Bible in its entirety.
John is writing at the end of the first century so he likely knows that his work is the last that is to be included in the canon of scripture.
God who governs the actions of man… such as canonizing the Scriptures…foresaw that work.
John was quite unaware of the meaning of much he heard and saw…at least so it seems to me.
You're right about the book. But I'll present some big questions to make you think:
Not to mention the schisms and wars.
The Catholic Church process of choosing the 73 books of the Bible, guided by the Holy Spirit, spanned centuries. Saint Athanasius is credited with the first Biblical canon (NT) containing the same books in the same order we use today. The list is contained in his Thirty-Ninth Festal Letter of 367 A.D. This list was approved by Pope Damasus, and formally approved in the late 300s by the Councils at Hippo (393 A.D.) and Carthage (397 A.D.) . Pope Innocent I wrote a letter to the Bishop of Toulouse in 405 A.D. containing the list. The list was re-affirmed at Carthage in 419 A.D., by the Council of Florence 1442 A.D., and by the Council of Trent in 1546 A.D. For Catholics the Bible is exactly the same as it was when the Catholic Church decided upon the books and the order in the late 300s.
