Bible Version Comparison

[The Liturgist]

https://www.historyofinformation.com/detail.php?entryid=2602

Um so what?

 

[Davy]

Maybe, but not for any of the reasons you specified. And he died in the peace of the Church; I have a real problem with pronouncing anathemas post mortem.

"his applying allegory to The Bible like a pagan philosopher"

He never did that.

Sure he did, he was the father of it.

Origen was never excommunicated. He was anathematized by Emperor Justinian, by the Roman Emperor, more than 200 years after he died.

Clement of Alexandria was not a Gnostic.

Actually, Gnosticism did die out, with one exception, the non-Christian sect of Manichaeans (who are Gnostics but revere John the Baptist and regard our Lord as a false prophet, but otherwise believe in the whole stack of Gnostic beliefs, such as emanationism, the evil nature of matter, evil archons, etc), in that the last of the medieval Gnostic psuedo-Christian cults, the Paulicans of Armenia, were converted to Orthodoxy in the 19th century (presumably by the Armenian church, so Oriental Orthodoxy). Thus modern neo-Gnosticism, such as the Ecclesia Gnostica, is discomtinuous with medieval Gnostic sects (the Paulicans, Bogomils, Albigensians, Cathars) were themselves discontinuous with the sects of the Patristic era, except possibly Manichaeanism.

That being said, while there are some neo-Gnostic cults which also embrace New Age ideas, and in the realm of occult secret societies any kind of messed up belief system can be encountered, there is a radical difference between the ideas of historic Gnosticism (the idea of secret salvific knowledge, dualism, matter being evil, emanations or aeons of dyads, syszagies, heptads and ogdoads, which we see reflected in later mysticism such as Kabbalah, a false creator demiurge, Jesus Christ being divine but not human) are quite different from New Age beliefs (humans having power over matter, flexible reality, spiritism, certain Buddhist/Hindu concepts like karma, an emphasis on meditation, union with nature and so on) and these in turn are different from the beliefs of secret societies like Freemasonry, the Rosicrucians, the Theosophists, and so on, and the New Thought movement, of which Mary Baker Eddy’s Christian Science cult was the most dangerous practitioner. Of course, some people do link them together, but these were distinct concepts with distinct origins.

And Origen was not the origin of any of them.

Umm no, considering that many practitioners of these occult heresies you discuss are right wing, and others abhorr politics altogether.

I am known on this forum as being one of the most outspoken opponents of abortion, homosexuality and smoking dope, and for the record, Origen also opposed those things. Indeed, St. Gregory of Nyssa and his brother St. Basil the Great, who were admirers of Origen and compiled, with their friend St. Gregory Nazianzus, the Philocalia, an anthology of Origen’s best writings, not to be confused with the Philokalia, an 18th century compendium of Eastern Orthodox Christian texts, are among the relatively small number of Early Church Fathers who felt a pastoral need to write statements condemning the practise of abortion (because generally homosexuality was considered to be obviously wrong in the Early Church).

So in criticizing Origen and the Alexandrian exegetical tradition, you are actually attacking the very Patristic figures whose writings disprove attempts by liberal revisionists in the mainline denominations to claim the early church tolerated homosexuality, when it did not. In fact earlier this evening, when in another thread on this forum a member claimed falsely claimed that arsenokoetia did not refer to homosexual perversion, I was able to cite St. Basil and St. Gregory of Nyssa’s canons in refutation of their claim.

I don’t know what could lead someone to think that I would support homosexuality or the abuse of drugs or abortions. I mean did you not notice my signature, where it says “Thanks be to God for the Supreme Court reversal of Roe vs. Wade”???

Indeed, I am known for severely criticizing the liberal element in mainline Protestantism, as any Episcopalian member can immediately confirm.

What I smell is a supporter of Neoplatonist and Gnostic philosophy by your false claims that Origen was not excommunicated. And just saying Gnosticism died out is such a huge falsehood!

You've never read any of Dan Brown's books? Like Holy Blood Holy Grail? The theme in his books are about the GNOSTIC false doctrine that Jesus did not die on the cross, but was removed off the cross by His disciples before He died, and that He married and had children. Like I said, Gnosticism today is very alive and well. So is Neoplatonism and ancient Mysticism.

So you might want to be more careful what you say here about those things, because you might begin to reveal more about yourself than you had planned.

 

[Davy]

Um so what?

One can find documented sources, even by the Catholic Church, that counters ideas you've said here.

 

[The Liturgist]

One can find documented sources, even by the Catholic Church, that counters ideas you've said here.

That doesn’t contradict anything I’ve said. You are attempting to link the existence of the Codex Alexandricus and the Alexandrian text type to the ancient Catechtical School of Alexandria, when the reality is we have zero evidence that these Bibles, only one of which was found in Alexandria, are connected to the Alexandrian catechetical school, or were even composed in Alexandria, whereas we do have the Coptic Bibles, which belong to the Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria, but are uniformly of the Byzantine text type.

What I smell is a supporter of Neoplatonist and Gnostic philosophy by your false claims that Origen was not excommunicated.

My claim is entirely correct. You have to be alive to be excommunicated. Origen was anathematized by Emperor Justinian in the early 6th century, not excommunicated. There is a difference. Now had Origen been alive, he would have been deprived of communion if he had been anathematized, but the fact is he was dead. When he died, he was in full communion with Gnosticism.

So based on your faulty of ecclesiastical history you are falsely accusing me of Neoplatonism and Gnosticism, which is absurd. I denounce these as heresies of the highest order.

[/quote]
And just saying Gnosticism died out is such a huge falsehood!

You misunderstood me - what I was saying is that the Gnosticism of today is discontinuous with medieval Gnosticism, which is discontinuous with ancient Gnosticism. There are no Valentinians or Tatianists or Bogomils among the living.

You've never read any of Dan Brown's books? Like Holy Blood Holy Grail? The theme in his books are about the GNOSTIC false doctrine that Jesus did not die on the cross, but was removed off the cross by His disciples before He died, and that He married and had children.

I am familiar with them and they are utter ahistorical nonsense.

Like I said, Gnosticism today is very alive and well. So is Neoplatonism and ancient Mysticism.

Firstly, I never denied Gnosticism exists. I said the Gnosticism of today was not historically contiguous with ancient Gnosticism, with the exception of the Mandaean religion. I would question the existence of Neo-Platonism but not of Neo-Platonic concepts. In the case of ancient mysticism, there are traces of it in some Near East religions, and of course Zoroastrianism still survives, and that religion was the basis for much ancient mysticism.

So you might want to be more careful what you say here about those things, because you might begin to reveal more about yourself than you had planned.

On the contrary, you just falsely accused me of being an adherent of two horrible heresies and of supporting homosexuality, abortion and marijuana smoking, because you misread my post.

 

[Davy]

....
So based on your faulty of ecclesiastical history you are falsely accusing me of Neoplatonism and Gnosticism, which is absurd. I denounce these as heresies of the highest order.
....

Anyone who even suggests that Gnosticism died out long ago, AS YOU DID, is suspect in my book.

Try a little visit to your local New Age bookstore, and get up to speed on what the occult secret societies are teaching today. You'll notice those old Kabbalistic ceremonial magic teachings are still actively taught too.

 

[The Liturgist]

Anyone who even suggests that Gnosticism died out long ago, AS YOU DID, is suspect in my book.

Once again, I did not. What I said was that it was discontinuous, in that last of the medieval psuedo-Christian Gnostic sects, the Paulicans, died out in the 18th century, and the current neo-Gnostic sects are attempts at recreating their belief system.

So since I did not say what you claim I said, you are really falsely accusing me; if you looked at my posting history on CF.com you would see that I am consistently hostile to abortion, homosexuality and marijuana use. Ask any member of the forum who takes a different view about me and I expect generally negative feedback.

Try a little visit to your local New Age bookstore, and get up to speed on what the occult secret societies are teaching today.

I know what they are teaching. Also, dude, if you’re visiting New Age bookstores, you have no business accusing me of supporting the occult, since the only time in my life I set foot in one was in my youth when I was shopping for used books, and when I noticed the peculiar specialization of the bookstore, which was apparent to me even as a naive teenager (the pentagrams and the poster saying “Celebrate Yule!” with various pagan symbols made it obvious), I didn’t stick around.

Which is a good idea because such places are no places for Christians. We should treat the occult like we would radioactive debris.

Once I was staying in a hotel and was horrified to find the Gideon Bible had been vandalized with an occult symbol. I took it to the front desk, where the poor young lady working there was equally shaken, and she provided a replacement. This was at a five star hotel, by the way.

Oh, speaking of hotels, I could write quite a bit on how superstitious hotel owners and workers are, for example, their fear of the number 13. Also, there is a Holiday Inn in San Diego with a Room 666, into which I was randomly booked once. The bellhop, who was surprised by the room number, said “If it was me, I would ask for a different room.” However, superficial correlations like the room number, which most hotels avoid, by the way, should not worry the Christian; on that trip my relative and I were quite safe and survived two round trips into Tijuana. This was in the first week of January, 2008.

You'll notice those old Kabbalistic ceremonial magic teachings are still actively taught too.

I am well aware of that. Madonna has actually boasted of studying it. And some Christians have taken it up as well as occult Hebrew numerology.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

For the devout Christian who wants to look deeper into the hoax of new and improved modern Bible versions, I recommend this scholarly documentary on the Wescott and Hort hoax in the 1880's...

It is extremely unfortunate that malicious tripe such as that presented in this video is found on a Christian website.

 

[The Liturgist]

.

 

[Christoph Maria]

@Davy:

So - what I gather from all this (in a nutshell): Righteous, honest, conservative, right-wing people read the KJV whereas new-age, sinful, no-good left-wing blasphemers read the NIV ???

I am aware of the fact that I may be over-simplifying but you get my drift, don´t you?

Personally, I take no stock in this Westcott & Hort conspiracy hypothesis...

But that´s just me...

 

[Tuur]

Once happened to meet one of the proofreaders for the New Testament, a minister as Theologically Conservative as you could get. He made the off comment that he feared some would look at the endeavor and think Southern Baptists were trying to come up with their own translation. That raised some questions: Lifeway/Broadman Publishers supported the HCSB effort, and was looking at using it along with the KJV in their literature. At the time, their literature used the KJV and NIV.

What follows is from memory, and could be faulty. Soon after this, Lifeway/Broadman dropped the NIV and was KJV only for a time. That turned out to be because the owners of the NIV either didn't like how they were going to the HCSB, or maybe had a licensing dispute. So it was that Lifeway/Broadman had only KJV literature until the HCSB was ready, then carried KJV and HCSB.

What I remember looking into then left a bad taste in my mouth, which brings me to the topic here. I got the impression, right or wrong, that the newer translations were about sales. I'm not KJV only, and have read several, my favorite being the original NASB, then the NASB 1995. But the NASB was released in 1977, with an update in 1995, and I don't think English changes that fast. The HCSB has been supplanted by the CSB, an update of a translation that isn't all that old, and here we have another, and I have to ask if the issue is updating the accuracy of translations or simply having something new to sell.

I could be wrong. Maybe I'm just cynical.

I don't know Greek or Hebrew or any of the languages in use when the scriptures were written. The closest I can get to them in to look at an interlinear bible or check out the Strong numbers. Much of the readings of different translations seem practically the same. Usually.

Something that's bothered is how the relatively newer translations are addressing John 3:16, leaving out the word "begotten." I've seen some reasoning as to why, but have the uneasy feeling that it makes a subtle theological change, and should be left in the text.

 

[Davy]

It is extremely unfortunate that malicious tripe such as that presented in this video is found on a Christian website.

It is MORE unfortunate that good Christian brethren have allowed a bunch of communist Spinoza type followers become their head Bible scholars with today's modern textual criticism based on corrupt Greek New Testament texts whose origins cannot be documented (Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus).

 

[Davy]

@Davy:

So - what I gather from all this (in a nutshell): Righteous, honest, conservative, right-wing people read the KJV whereas new-age, sinful, no-good left-wing blasphemers read the NIV ???

I am aware of the fact that I may be over-simplifying but you get my drift, don´t you?

Personally, I take no stock in this Westcott & Hort conspiracy hypothesis...

But that´s just me...

No, spiritually DUPED folks prefer the corrupt modern versions like the NIV, which is from a completely different source of Greek texts than the Traditional Greek texts which the early Church has used for over a thousand years.

And FYI, not every phrase or verse in the NIV disagrees with the Traditional Greek text where the Textus Receptus came from. The modern Bible revisionists did one better, they simply OMITTED whole verses that are in the Traditional Greek text.

As for what Wescott and Hort were involved in regarding the occult 'spiritism' movement, which was popular in their day, that is NOT UP FOR DEBATE, because the proof comes from their own personal letters they wrote each other. (look at their letters on the archive.org website). So your 'attempt'... to say that is just some man's theory won't work. It is fact they were involved in the Occult.

 

[Davy]

Once happened to meet one of the proofreaders for the New Testament, a minister as Theologically Conservative as you could get. He made the off comment that he feared some would look at the endeavor and think Southern Baptists were trying to come up with their own translation. That raised some questions: Lifeway/Broadman Publishers supported the HCSB effort, and was looking at using it along with the KJV in their literature. At the time, their literature used the KJV and NIV.

What follows is from memory, and could be faulty. Soon after this, Lifeway/Broadman dropped the NIV and was KJV only for a time. That turned out to be because the owners of the NIV either didn't like how they were going to the HCSB, or maybe had a licensing dispute. So it was that Lifeway/Broadman had only KJV literature until the HCSB was ready, then carried KJV and HCSB.

What I remember looking into then left a bad taste in my mouth, which brings me to the topic here. I got the impression, right or wrong, that the newer translations were about sales. I'm not KJV only, and have read several, my favorite being the original NASB, then the NASB 1995. But the NASB was released in 1977, with an update in 1995, and I don't think English changes that fast. The HCSB has been supplanted by the CSB, an update of a translation that isn't all that old, and here we have another, and I have to ask if the issue is updating the accuracy of translations or simply having something new to sell.

I could be wrong. Maybe I'm just cynical.

I don't know Greek or Hebrew or any of the languages in use when the scriptures were written. The closest I can get to them in to look at an interlinear bible or check out the Strong numbers. Much of the readings of different translations seem practically the same. Usually.

Something that's bothered is how the relatively newer translations are addressing John 3:16, leaving out the word "begotten." I've seen some reasoning as to why, but have the uneasy feeling that it makes a subtle theological change, and should be left in the text.

You are correct. The Nestle-Aland, which most modern New Testaments are based upon, is in its 28th revision. So anytime someone throws up the commercial advertising sign that says, "New and Improved!", that ought to also raise a red flag.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

It is MORE unfortunate that good Christian brethren have allowed a bunch of communist Spinoza type followers become their head Bible scholars with today's modern textual criticism based on corrupt Greek New Testament texts whose origins cannot be documented (Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus).

There is nothing more important to me than the truth. Unfortunately, however, not everyone shares that value.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

You are correct. The Nestle-Aland, which most modern New Testaments are based upon, is in its 28th revision. So anytime someone throws up the commercial advertising sign that says, "New and Improved!", that ought to also raise a red flag.

Fact check:

The 28th revision of Novum Testamentum Graece (Nestle-Aland) has not yet been published. The 28th edition of Novum Testamentum Graece (Nestle-Aland) is the most recent edition, being the 27th revision of the first edition publish in 1896. It is almost amusing that the most severe critics of this excellent work have never used it. Anyone can criticize, but not very many can produce such a helpful and useful work as the Nestle-Aland.

 

[The Liturgist]

Fact check:

The 28th revision of Novum Testamentum Graece (Nestle-Aland) has not yet been published. The 28th edition of Novum Testamentum Graece (Nestle-Aland) is the most recent edition, being the 27th revision of the first edition publish in 1896. It is almost amusing that the most severe critics of this excellent work have never used it. Anyone can criticize, but not very many can produce such a helpful and useful work as the Nestle-Aland.

Indeed, I agree entirely.

 

[Davy]

There is nothing more important to me than the truth. Unfortunately, however, not everyone shares that value.

Like only you... have the Truth? What vanity!

 

[Davy]

Fact check:

The 28th revision of Novum Testamentum Graece (Nestle-Aland) has not yet been published. The 28th edition of Novum Testamentum Graece (Nestle-Aland) is the most recent edition, being the 27th revision of the first edition publish in 1896. It is almost amusing that the most severe critics of this excellent work have never used it. Anyone can criticize, but not very many can produce such a helpful and useful work as the Nestle-Aland.

The fact that there IS... a 28th edition, should be the concern, regardless of whether or not it has been released yet or not.

What is actually amusing is that 28 REVISIONS have been necessary, revealing the creators really are not accurate Bible scholars.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

The fact that there IS... a 28th edition, should be the concern, regardless of whether or not it has been released yet or not.

What is actually amusing is that 28 REVISIONS have been necessary, revealing the creators really are not accurate Bible scholars.

People who are familiar with the Bible and biblical research performed since 1896 know that the Nestle-Aland is being frequently revised so that it accurately reflects the fruits of that ongoing research. The 29th edition, which is in preparation and expected to be released in 2024, will reflect some important and very recent research especially in the Gospel of Mark and the Acts of the Apostles. For people who love God and His word, refinements in the understanding of it are of special interest.

 

[Davy]

Those behind the modern Bible versions that use 'NU' (Nestle-Aland and United Bible Societies) have BASED their versions on CORRUPT GREEK TEXTS whose authenticity has NOT BEEN DOCUMENTED. Those corrupt texts are the Codex Vaticanus, only discovered buried in the Vatican in 1475, and the Codex Sinaiticus discovered in the trash at a Greek monastery in the 1840s of just 1 Part, and then later in 1859 a 2nd claimed Part, by Tischendorf who 'alone' made the claim of its authenticity! And that is what all those 29 editions of the Critical text is based upon!

Even the publishers of the New King James Version Bible have lied about it, because it ALSO has passages from the corrupt Critical Text, i.e., texts that are NOT from the Traditional Greek New Testament text that the KJV translators used!!! And the publishers have the audactiy to call it a NEW KJV Bible?? So even those behind the NKJV are LIARS!

Is this just about MONEY, the continued release of 'new and improved' Bible versions? No, because when one actually makes comparisons with older Bible versions that used the Traditional Greek texts (like the 1611 KJV and others before it), they will discover in the modern versions many verses totally missing, and major changes that try to remove the idea of the Deity of Jesus Christ as God.

What their corrupt Greek text represents, which is called the Critical Text, is the Gnosticism that crept into the Christian school at Alexandria, Egypt. That is actually what is happening with this fake 'textual criticism' movement that began in Germany with philosophers.