westcott and hort bible translations westcott and hort bible translations

Codex Vaticanus (according to the introduction in the reprint edition by S. F. Pells) of the Septuagint (but excluding the Apocrypha) and of the New Testament, Masoretic Text (Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, 1983), Nestle-Aland Greek text, Masoretic Text, the 27th Nestle-AlandNovum Testamentum Graece. It is not surprising, therefore, that modern version proponents today often disassociate themselves from Westcott-Hort and claim that they merely use an eclectic Greek text. This combination of claim and quote comes from the July/August 1993 issue of Battle Cry, the newspaper put out by Jack Chick. But in truth, the majority of anything does not automatically mean that it is the best or even correct. Westcott and Hort. In other words, the manuscript Codex Vatican B does not contain Mark 16:9-20. This knowledge also informs us that the New Testament was not written generally in posh language more a sort of popular tabloid type language. I have used the NIV for comparison. According to Bruce M. Metzger, "the general validity of their critical principles and procedures is widely acknowledged by scholars today. Setting Straight the Indefensible Defenders of the Textus Receptus. There are many early byzantine readings as you would expect since it is the original text. They started the "Ghostly Guild" in 1851 and before that the "Hermes Club" in 1845. This new text caused Bible translators to doubt God's preserved words and long-held Christian doctrines, resulting in Bibles translated after 1881 to contain thousands of changes from the . For those books, C. D. Ginsburgs Hebrew text was used. In 1981 Metzger said: The international committee that produced the United Bible Societies Greek New Testament, not only adopted the Westcott and Hort edition as its basic text, but followed their methodology in giving attention to both external and internal consideration. These are commonly called the MINORITY TEXTS, but they are also known to many as the corrupted manuscripts. Nevertheless, it was Westcott himself who wrote, Many years ago, I had occasion to investigate spiritualistic phenomena with some care, and I came to a clear conclusion, which I feel bound to express in answer to your circular. http://www.bible-researcher.com/kutilek1.html. The Occult Connections of Westcott and Hort. Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia,Novum Testamentum Graece28th Edition (NA28), United Bible Societies 5th Edition (UBS5). (1881). It shows that the Church rejected them and did not read them. The very title itself - Revised Version - is a lie, since it was not a revision of the KJV at all, but an entirely new bible, intended to supplant the KJV. He has been working in the apologetic area since his teens. This Bible version is now Public Domain worldwide due to copyright expiration except in the United Kingdom due to crown letters patent until 2039. In like manner, if a scientist is also an evolutionist and aetheist, do we need to hear his science before we know his verdict? The following are quotes of Westcott and Hort, found in Riplingers book. This knowledge also informs us that the New Testament was not written generally in posh language more a sort of popular tabloid type language. KJV edition: OT:Masoretic Text, NT:Textus Receptus. It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man. Ps. The one who writes the earliest manuscripts.. is the man we call a textual critic. The NABRE is the latest official English Catholic Bible translation released. The reading is to be preferred that makes the best sense, that is, that best conforms to the grammar and is most congruous with the purport of the rest of the sentence and of the larger context. The Response to the Appeal. No English translation is inspired. The book, New Age Bible Versions has this to say about Wescott and Hort: B.F. Westcott is identified as "a mystic" by the standard reference work of his day: The Encyclopedia Britannica (1911). Westcott and Hort were spiritualists. You will note it is not included in almost all modern translations. This text has only a few changes of the original. Much has been written about them, but also their own recorded words shed light on their beliefs. In Matthew 24:35 Jesus said, Heaven and earth shall pass away but My words shall not pass away. Isaiah 40:8 says, The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the Word of our God shall stand forever. See also Is. [6] Riplinger, G. A. It follows the edition ofSeligman Baerexcept for the books of Exodus to Deuteronomy, which never appeared in Baers edition. That is, it is generally shorter than the text of other forms, and it does not exhibit the degree of grammatical and stylistic polishing that is characteristic of the Byzantine type of text. We trust that your Christian honesty will preserve the integrity of this policy. He clearly infers that he had occasion to investigate spiritualistic phenomena with some care, which would indicate that much earlier in his life he had some fascination with spiritualism and the occult. I would venture to say that every King James Version Onlyist doctrinally believes differently than the other. Way of Life's content falls into two categories: sharable and non-sharable. Westcott & Hort in their day, and others from that period, as well as scholars today, serve us and God well in what they provide. Brooke Foss Westcott (1825 1901) Christian Publishing House Blog, Fenton John Anthony Hort (1828 1892) Christian Publishing House Blog, CHOOSING THE BEST BIBLE TRANSLATION JUST GOT EASIER! (3) How many textual errors (differences) are in the handful of Byzantine manuscripts used to make the Textus Receptus, which is behind the KJV? 118:8 Putting our confidence in God and not man, it seems apparent our Lord has kept His promise and that His Word is faithfully preserved in over 5000 witnesses! If we investigated the translators of the KJV we may be surprised at what we would find. Translators of the Bible over the years have used these agreeing manuscripts to make what is called the MAJORITY TEXT. Throw away the bones.. Chapter 8: Westcott and Hort - part 1. Tobin Pederson, When it comes to the various Bible versions of our modern day, most readers assume that all Bibles are created equal, with perhaps differing degrees of readability. and it progressed into the most corrupt period for the Church (priests to the popes: stealing, sexual sins, torture, and murder); so much so, it ends with the Reformation. His method of picking and choosing which verses belong and which verses dont, is called the eclectic method. Christian Publishing House Blog, HOW ACCURATE WAS/IS THE 1881 WESTCOTT AND HORT GREEK NEW TESTAMENT? The men produced The New Testament in the Original Greek in 1881, advancing the belief that centuries of translation work did extremely little to change the Bible. 3. To Westcott and Hort, the King James Bible was clearly an inferior translation. the KJV, it doesnt include 1 John 5:7 or the end of Mark, but it is established by many manuscripts. Borderland. [7] Westcott, B.F. (July 1893). Even the casual reader of the Bible, if he were to compare a modern translation (NIV) with the KJV, will easily find numerous differences between the two (Consider Revelation 1:11, Heb. To hold to varying forms of King James Only or Textus Receptus Only has caused great harm to the Christian Church; it confuses people. Assigns to each Greek word one unique English meaning. It is their position that the King James Version of the Bible is superior to all other English translations and that all English translations based on the Westcott and Hort text of 1881 (foundation text of UBS5 and NA28) are corrupt due to the influence of the Alexandrian Greek manuscripts. The translators said they expect new revisions of their KJV translation when more manuscripts come to light, and if there was an improved understanding of Hebrew and Greek, there should be revisions. An update to the 1966 Jerusalem Bible which uses more extensive gender neutral language, New Jewish Publication Society of America Version. The fact is that the United Bible Societies (UBS) text is almost identical to the W-H text of 1881 IN SIGNIFICANT DEPARTURES FROM THE RECEIVED TEXT. I have never personally come across anyone that actually believes it, but some scholars do. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061, which underlie the Westcott-Hort Greek New Testament of 1881 have been somewhat discredited by textual critics of the 20th century. I once saw a Christian rant and rave to some Jehovahs Witnesses and he quoted 1 John 5:7, 1 Tim 3:16 and said the KJV was the true Word of God, it was embarrassing and it reinforced the Witnesses in their faith. At Constantinople, it became the predominant form of the New Testament throughout the Greek-speaking world. [3] A connected group of Christians promotes the King James Only movement. Brooke Foss Westcott (an Anglican bishop and professor at Cambridge University) and Fenton John Anthony Hort (also an ordained priest and professor at Cambridge) produced a Greek New Testament in 1881 based on the findings of Tischendorf. We dont even know what part of which text they used and where! So, why reject efforts to do so with the 1881 English Revised Version (ERV), the 1901 American Standard Version (ASV), the 1952 Revised Standard Version (RSV), the 1995 New American Standard Bible (NASB), the 2001 English Standard Version (ESV), and the forthcoming Updated American Standard Version (UASV)? You are welcome to make copies of these at your own expense and share them with friends and family, but they cannot be posted to web sites. Riplinger speaks much on this subject and also aligns them with the New Age movement. In 1841 an old manuscript (Codex Vaticanus) was discovered lying on a shelf in the Vatican library. Believing that the KJV is the Gold Standard or even worse the Word of God. As time progressed more and earlier manuscripts came to light which have helped us to hone the text of the New Testament so that today it stands without equal among the works of antiquity in the number of witnesses and quality of its manuscript evidence. Are not these revisions simply following the instructions of the 1611 KJV translators? Jehovahs Witness Discussion Techniques: How to Meet Them. Both found nothing wrong with the worship of Mary. The consensus however is they favored the Aleph and B text more than the others. Characteristics of the Alexandrian text are brevity and austerity. Pastor Tobin Pederson, Reformation Day, October 31, 2007. OT:Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. In short, the Westcott and Hort theory states that the Bible is to be treated as any other book would be. Some things most people do not know about the KJV. It must be replaced by a new translation from texts that they considered to be older and better. But we must remember that Bibles are translated by men, and thus corruption is possible. If Westcott and Hort were the only textual scholars to endorse, defend, recommend, validate their critical text, we might be more critical of them and theyre younger days; however, their work has been reviewed or about 140 years now and literally hundreds upon hundreds of textual and translation scholars have adopted their scholarship, their work, and their product as the foundation for their translation: NIV, TEV, NASB, CEV, NLT, ESV, CSB, UASV, HCSB, and on and on. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward" (1 Timothy 5:18). Brooke Foss Westcott (1825-1901) and Fenton John Anthony Hort (1828-1892) have been highly controversial figures in biblical history. Riplinger, pg 625. What Does the Bible Really Teach About ________? Westcott and Hort state: "[It is] our belief that even among the numerous unquestionably spurious readings of the New Testament there are no signs of deliberate falsification of the text for dogmatic purposes. A. Hort (1828-1892), the towering pioneers of the textual criticism of the Greek New Testament. Naturally so because they were Greek textual scholars. We suspect that these two manuscripts are indebted for their preservation, solely to their ascertained evil character . I have provided a link to a website that answers some of the more preposterous allegations against WH. To use the KJV as a baseline so that anything different to it is changing the word of God. Revision of the New International Version. . It is generally believed that these were from the 50 that Eusebius prepared for Constantine. Sinaticus and alexandrinus not only disagree with the overwhelming majority, they disagree with each other. So here is the dilemma when it comes to the witness of the Greek manuscripts. The fact is that the Westcott-Hort text represents the first widely-accepted departure from the Received Text in the post-Reformation era, and the modern English versions descend directly from the W-H text. THE DEAD HAND OF FENTON JOHN ANTHONY HORT LIES HEAVY UPON US. The Western text-type is much older, but tends to paraphrase, so according to the critical text view also lacks dependability. Generally speaking Wescott and Hort favored the Alexandrian text, which they called the "Neutral Text," namely based on the two chief 4th century witnesses Codex Vaticanus and . To start with a doctrine and then correct or prefer a Bible translation because of it is, frankly, the wrong way around!! Please Help Us Keep These Thousands of Blog Posts Growing and Free for All. baseline is the original Greek and Hebrew, so what we compare all versions to is the best text we can produce, our favourite translation. I observe, then, that while spiritual ministries are constantly recorded in the Bible, there is not the faintest encouragement to seek them. Together, they produced The New Testament in the Original Greek, one of the earliest examples of modern textual criticism. I, p.211). In one sense it matters not. Westcott and Hort, in turn, were rationalists in their approach to the textual problem in the New Testament and employed techniques within which rationalism and every other kind of bias are free to operate. Other names for the Majority Text are Traditional Text, Syrian Text, Byzantine Text, and the Common Text. During the eighteenth-century scholars assembled a great amount of information from many Greek manuscripts, as well as from versional and patristic witnesses. To learn more about Bible versions and the many problems with modern translations, consider the following: David Otis Fuller, D. D. Which Bible Grand Rapids International Publications, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 49501, David Otis Fuller, D. D. Counterfeit Or Genuine Mark 16? A. Hort (1881). Brooke Foss Westcott and John Maurice Schulhof, eds., Saint Pauls Epistle to the Ephesians: The Greek Text with Notes and Addenda, Classic Commentaries on the Greek New Testament (London; New York: The Macmillan Company, 1909), v. Brooke Foss Westcott and Arthur Westcott, eds., The Gospel according to St. John Introduction and Notes on the Authorized Version, Classic Commentaries on the Greek New Testament (London: J. Murray, 1908), v. Brooke Foss Westcott, ed., The Epistles of St. John: The Greek Text with Notes and Essays, 4th ed., Classic Commentaries on the Greek New Testament (London; New York: Macmillan, 1902), v. Brooke Foss Westcott, ed., The Epistle to the Hebrews the Greek Text with Notes and Essays, 3d ed., Classic Commentaries on the Greek New Testament (London: Macmillan, 1903). the KJV, it wasnt even the first (by a long way) of the English translations of the Bible. If we were to hand-copy the same manuscript a thousand times, obvious errors probably would be corrected in many copies, but new errors would be introduced, many of them probably the result of a well-intended correction. A textual criticism principle that has been derived from this observation is that manuscripts should be weighed (i.e. We have no further information about its publication history, but are making it available in the same format in which we acquired it as a public service. one of them is of mainly later texts after the fall of Antioch and Alexandria to Islam. or condemn the translators as the spawn of Satan or Lucifers dupes as I have read on occasion. The W-H text of 1881 and the latest edition of the United Bible Societies text differ only in relatively minor points. #3. SCROLL THROUGH DIFFERENT CATEGORIES BELOW. We still observe people using 1 John 5:7 to prove the Trinity. They might argue, My Bible says the earliest manuscripts do not have this verse! But does this reader know of the thousands of other manuscripts which do contain this verse? The following brief comments are not meant to stand alone, please use the links that follow that will enlarge, reinforce, and add to the article. Chicks claim is completely fabricated, and the quote he chopped to support his claim actually says theexact oppositewhen the context is examined. The majority of KJV only people believe that the Wescott and Hort exts are erroneous because they read a pamphlet from the pamphlet rack at church that said that it was. The Old Testament translation is based on the Hebrew Masoretic text. There are various groupings of texts, according to this thinking, and one of them is of mainly later texts after the fall of Antioch and Alexandria to Islam. CAN WE TRUST THE WESTCOTT AND HORT 1881 GREEK TEXT? The text today is not the WH text; things have moved on. In fact, Constantine had ordered 50 copies of the whole of the Bible for the church in Constantinople. The context is from where Westcotts son discusses Westcotts short-lived involvement in the Ghostlie Guild when he was a young man still in university (seeJames Mays articleandRobert L. Sumners articlefor more information), and the entire paragraph the quote is lifted from is as follows (bold added): What happened to this Guild in the end I have not discovered. (No available presumptions whatever as to text can be obtained from number alone, that is, from number not as yet interpreted by descent.) (2.44). The entire quote is somewhat difficult to parse as it stands, but its easier to breakdown if viewed as follows: Westcott ceased, not altogether (not entirely) from want (lack) of faith in Spiritualism, but also because such investigations led to no good. Was the reason that Westcott ceased due towant (lack)of faith in Spiritualism? This book was not read in the same manner that Christians would read their Bibles today. Adds a new translation of the LXX to an existing translation of the NKJV in a single volume. Both delete almost the same number of names and titles of the Lord (WH--221, UBS--212). We can conclude that any modern translation that uses majestic, literary or grand language is not generally reflecting the text and style of the Greek manuscripts of the New Testament. Released into the public domain by Rainbow Missions, Inc. (nonprofit corporation). The KJV translators only had fewer than 12 manuscripts of the NT in Greek to work with. [4] (Greenlee, Introduction to New Testament Textual Criticism 1995, 76-7). It appears to me that in this, as in all spiritual questions, Holy Scripture is our supreme guide. (weak textual evidence). Masoretic Text, various critical editions of the Greek text (i.a. If you have any questions, please review our Privacy Policy or email us at privacy@biblegateway.com. Publications. This Bible version is now Public Domain due to copyright expiration. The translation now is a literary masterpiece. Revision of the Revised Standard Version. . The Work of Gods Children Illustrated Bible. Second, a number of old Byzantine and Western manuscripts are in good condition as well, which by this argument would indicate that they are also guilty of never having been read because they were full of errors, alterations, additions and deletions, so they would have had little chance of wear and tear. Riplinger links the spiritualist teachings of Westcott and Hort to the occult teachings of Madame Helena P. Blavatsky who wrote the Lucifer magazine. Westcott I reject the word infallibility of Holy Scriptures overwhelmingly. Riplinger, pg 622, Hort Evangelicals seem to me perverted. Bible scholar David Fuller brings us the first argument in his book, Which Bible, where he writes, Burgon regarded the good state of preservation of B (CodexVaticanus) and ALEPH (Codex Sinaiticus) in spite of their exceptional age as proof not of their goodness but of their badness.