Textual Criticism and Why It Matters

[@aspektx]

No matter your stance on the claims of the NT this is important to know.

[@charlesWarlick-r3s]

Excellent video. Concise and informative. I just wish it didn't have the plug for their publication company at the end. It hurts the credibility and sense of objectivity of the argument they're making.

[@joaodavid2001]

Jewish philosophy is the way to go. They never take things for granted. Despite copy mistakes, we must always seek better translations and understanding. God's words are perfect, not their human copies.

[@gregoryjones7712]

the King James bible was purposely written Beautifully , its the Most Beautiful Book ever Written , thats why it will always be my Bible.

[@Joshtheigbo]

Sigh.....

[@gregoryjones7712]

@@Joshtheigbo WOW great point i never thought of that you really added to the discussion ......

[@addajjalsonofallah6217]

I mean yeah it's like Shakespeare but the bible

[@FilthyXylophone]

So you take the word of scribes and error over the truth. Got it.

[@bryanstark324]

The video doesn't discuss who created textual criticism theory. It also didn't discuss how there are only 3 sources for the greek of the new versions, while KJV has thousands. Also they don't mention how all those sources are found in Egypt where the Gnostics corrupted the Bible because they didn't believe in the divinity of Jesus.

[@Mrqwerty2109]

Hello bryan. How did you come to the conclusion that modern bible translations only have 3 sources? Modern translations usually use the Nestle-Aland critical text.

[@bryanstark324]

@@Mrqwerty2109 Nestle-Aland is a single source in this context even if made from many fragments. Most modern versions have three main sources. I'd have to look up what they are.

[@tonimccoy9778]

Also remember that under the critical text system, there is no scripture that is sacred .If they found an old parchment written in crayon that said the true Son was named Allah, they would toss the TR in the trash and start a whole new religion...Toni's husband

[@dittoman1995]

Doubtful considering Jesus divinity has been main stream since the beginning

[@bryanstark324]

@@dittoman1995 The Gnostics didn't believe in the divinity of Jesus. If you believe in Jesus' divinity then you're not a Gnostic.

[@ChristianCentury2000]

I know that you may disagree with my opinion, but I think that the Word of God SHOWS us WHEN the right translation of the Holy Scriptures were unfolded! That was done during the time period of the Church Age of Philadelphia, which is found in Revelation 3, 7 And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write; These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth, and no man shutteth; and shutteth, and no man openeth; 8 I know thy works: behold, I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it: for thou hast a little strength, and hast kept my word, and hast not denied my name. 9 Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee. 10 Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth. 11 Behold, I come quickly: hold that fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown. 12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name. 13 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches. In verses 7 and 8, God has opened the door to the Holy Bible for all Christians, and in their native tongue, which was the hope of William Tyndale, that all Christian believers may now readily read and study the Word of God (2 Timothy 2:15) without any interference! This happened finally with the reign of Queen Elisabeth I which started in 1558! Under Queen Elisabeth I, the Geneva Bible was completed and Christians in the United Kingdom were now able to read the Word of God in their own native tongue LEGALLY and without fear of arrest! I believe that the Church Age of Philadelphia ENDED around 1885, with the emergence of Wescott & Hort's new paradigm for bible translation and their support of the Codex Vaticanis and Codex Sinaiticus. Their new translation of the bible started the explosion of so many different translations since 1885! Textual Criticism reflects the emergence of academic intellectualism over the humble prayer and guidance of the Holy Spirit which the translators of the Holy Bible had during the church time period of Philadelphia. In addition, I don't think that the beautiful language of that time period, which gives honor and reverence to God, was any mistake! I don't think that today's modern, post Elisabethan/Shakespearean era, English, gives the same level of honor and reverence to God! I think we definitely live in the last time period of Church history, the Church Age of Laodicea. Revelation 3: 14 And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God; 15 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. 16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth. Revelation 3, verse 16, warns us that we are "lukewarm" and "neither cold nor hot." I think we have already reached that point in our society, and "lukewarm" is the law of the land. The laws of our society DEMAND that we be "lukewarm" or tolerant of things like: late term abortions, gay and lesbian marriages, transgender confusion, cults, heresies... We are no longer "cold" about lewdness and violence in our films at the movie theaters! In the 1920s to 1960s, films that displayed significant levels of foul language and immorality, just wouldn't sell many tickets. In the 1920s to 1960s, people would get "hot" about gay and lesbian marriage and transgender confusion taught to young kids in public schools! So many parents would get very upset if their children were taught in public schools things like: God does not exist... Evolution is fact and reality... God is an invention of the human mind to try to cope with reality... Homosexuality is okay and just as normal as heterosexuality... MANY PARENTS would be in outrage back in the 1920s to 1960s, if their kids were taught such things, and demand to see the School Principal... Most people are "lukewarm" now. This is just the time period which we wall live in now, and we cannot go back in time. We can only live in the present and move forward in time.

[@SpencerLionheart-l9p]

AMEN!

[@betawithbrett7068]

Excellent job by the way!!!

[@benedictosei3767]

Then why is it that some works of the early Church Fathers contain verses that are supposedly not in the early manuscripts? Isn't a manuscript a copy of the autograph? So the fact that a copy is old doesn't make it authentic.

[@toma3447]

It doesn’t matter how accurate the texts are if Christianity is false or if Jesus didn’t rise from the dead. Textual criticism does have its place in apologetics but it’s not top priority.

[@annemcniell6956]

I love how the word of god is becoming known again 😊👍

[@Moath1277]

After being corrupted though

[@scottmercer86]

This is brilliant!

[@walkbyfaithinlove]

the assumption here is that the Codex Vaticanus and the Codex Sinaiticus are more accurate. This is the argument for Modern Critical Text people, but those who hold to the Textus Receptus is the most accurate hold that the KJV is the best for the Greek translations have not been negatively influenced by these two early, but more corrupted version.

[@Flagrum3]

Watch the video and listen close. The KJV is far behind since it used more recent authorizations/manuscripts 1200ad. Thousands of manuscripts much older have been found since and enable scholars to get much closer to the original writings of the apostle's autographs. I am talking new testament here, as the Old testament has been verified by the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls dating back to 200BC.

[@walkbyfaithinlove]

@@Flagrum3 ok, there are not 'thousands' of older manuscripts of the New Testament before the 13th c. In total, of all the witnesses - we have around 5,800 in Greek, 10,000 in Latin and almost 10,000 in other languages. Textual scholarship sorta focuses on the Greek copies, and most of these fall into the Majority text which does start to pick up around the 12th-13th c. The oldest copies are from the 4th c, but does that mean they are better? The answer for me is, "No!" The two oldest manuscripts are the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, and these are the bases of the Greek manuscripts used today, and for textual criticism itself. There are other copies such as the P66, P75 and the Alexandrinus but they're not the primary sources. This group is known as the Alexandrinus Texts or the Minority Text. But if you have a look at these primary sources, you'll discover they're questionable - to say the least, even though they are from the 4th - 5th c. Not to mention, the variance between the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus are enormous. So making the claim that these sources are closest to the original is nonsensical, because these two sources have a tremendous variance between them themselves. No true sourcing can be determined from these two wildly extreme sources with their questionable roots - in my opinion. You can make your own opinion. The vast majority of texts are in the Byzantine (aka, the Majority text), and you are right, they are from the 12th c onward. But these texts, even though older, are strikingly similar and come from reliable sources or areas. So for some of us, we remain loyal to the majority texts, which includes the Textus Receptus, and we strongly reject the Minority Texts, which the Greek NA28/UBS5 and all day English translations are based upon. Also the notion within textual criticism that implies older is better is inherently wrong. And that the shorter is always better (because we can't trust those lying scribes) is also something to reject. And to always take the non-harmonious text instead of the harmonized text is also a questionable practice within textual criticism.

[@Flagrum3]

@heather biller - You make many good points, but no one is saying that older is inherently better, only that more is. The more transcripts found from different areas and times, and through careful study, gets us that much closer to the original writings. Can you refute that? Otherwise good comment. God Bless. (Edit; Okay I did make it sound like older is better in my previous comment, sorry just grammatical error on my part.) Writing was never one of my strengths. ; )

[@walkbyfaithinlove]

@@Flagrum3 Hello, it's nice chatting with you - especially about something this important. Ok, the central theme behind textual criticism is, "Older means better," which is why these documents hold more value than the rest of the 5,800 Greek copies that we have. Now, it might shock you to know that almost everyone falls into this camp. The modern day Greek copy of the New Testament which is used by everyone is the NA28/UBS05; and all new English versions are written from it (HCBS, ESV, NJKV, NIV, NLT ...). It is widely accepted by theologians, scholars, etc. Now, if you are saying, "More is better," then you're saying something completely different. And you'd be saying what I am saying, in fact. Then you would either be a Majority text or Textus Receptus person. So what I am saying is that most people believe the veracity and authenticity of 2 manuscripts which have tremendous variance between themselves, while ignoring the vast majority of manuscripts which harmonize. It's a fundamental problem within the church.

[@walkbyfaithinlove]

Here is a link to me discussing this very issue. kzbin.info/www/bejne/rom0aHx3a5xpl5o

[@mohmad2822]

I have a question, I have a question, the textual critique must be applied by comparing the various textual evidence, including the manuscripts of Masurian, moons, Samriya, Sbenet, Folga, Pasheta and Marafolk, all aimed ultimately at reaching the most healthy manuscripts. Is there a hebrew book about the old Testament written and these things have been applied before writing it .. ? please If there is one give me his name

[@godblesschille7345]

The aim of textual criticism is to figure out what the original manuscripts said so as to discern the true meaning of the texts. There is no fixed way or fixed people who must criticize the Bible to prove that the texts were original. Please think about this first before asking something that is aimed at ciriticizing the Bible for no good intent/for personal justification. Thanks :)

[@Moath1277]

Godbless Chille and surprisingly, the consensus among scholars of textual criticism concluded that none of the 4 Gospels has a known author.

[@Flagrum3]

@Moath Abdulghani- Total BS on your part. Lies will bring you to hell. Textual scholars have no say in what you claim, that is not their job. Your assertion shows your total ignorance on the matter or more likely your deceit. Now as for the authors of the Gospels, YES we definitely know who wrote what, as this knowledge was passed on by the early Church Fathers, some of whom actually knew the Apostles.

[@Moath1277]

Flagrum3 You think I’d make this up? Lying is prohibited in Islam and I’m not deceiving anyone. The Christian scholar and highly acclaimed textual critic Raymond E. Brown says in his book “An introduction to the New Testament”: “The Gospels, for instance, are anonymous; they do not identify their authors (see, however, John 21 :24 ); the attributions to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John that appear in titles stem from the (late?) 2d century and are not part of the original works.” Regarding the authorship of John: “As with the other Gospels it is doubted by most scholars that this Gospel was written by an eyewitness of the public ministry of Jesus” Regarding Matthew: “By way of overall judgment on the "Matthew" issue, it is best to accept the common position that canonical Matt was originally written in Greek by a noneyewitness whose name is unknown to us and who depended on sources like Mark and Q.” Heck even Wikipedia says this: Gospel of Mark, 68-70 CE. Mark, like all the gospels, is anonymous. It relies on several underlying sources, varying in form and in theology, which is evidence against the tradition that its author was John Mark (Mark the Evangelist), the companion of Peter, or that it was based on Peter's preaching.

[@mohmad2822]

@@Moath1277 *Have you seen the confessions of the christian scientist "bart ehrman" by distorting the bible!* kzbin.info/www/bejne/qpnTYnaHd51pgs0

[@watvid1]

The bible may be closer but seems it would still have errors in it until all manuscripts are found

[@Flagrum3]

@watvid1- Do some research, as of recently it has been concluded by Bible scholars less then 1.0% of the Bible is still in question, when it comes to errors or contradictions.

[@watvid1]

@@Flagrum3 clarify what you mean. Less than 1.0% has errors or less than 1.0 has been added or subtracted since the bible was written?

[@Flagrum3]

@watvid -Both.

[@watvid1]

@@Flagrum3 Provide a source for your claim. I find that HIGHLY doubtful, the bible has been changed many times and there are many versions of it. Even the earliest bible we hold comes 200-300 years after Jesus. Regardless, even if I agree about less than 1.0%, it has still changed therefore can't be trusted

[@Flagrum3]

@watvid1 - Your uneducated thoughts or assertions mean little. I'm not here to educate you, so search yourself as I did, and you may just find many things you knew nothing about, including the fact most scholars, (Including secular scholars) agree that of those changes and/or contradictions still existing, the main message of the scriptures has not changed.

[@SpencerLionheart-l9p]

It indeed DOES matter! Removing entire verses and downplaying Jesus from begotten to the ONE and ONLY son is purely blasphemous.

[@aar0n709]

The Greek text says Monogenes Only Unique. Jesus is not biologically begotten so it isn’t an accurate translation

[@SpencerLionheart-l9p]

@@aar0n709 Of course He is.

[@aar0n709]

@@SpencerLionheart-l9p No, we dont believe in Mormon birth of Jesus. The virgin birth was miraculous not biological

[@theconservativeoutlet3581]

Praise the Lord Jesus!

[@annemcniell6956]

Won’t download 😕

[@seasonedapologist]

Why Anne? Can you explain?

[@annemcniell6956]

S Apologist since I saw your comment , happily it re started 😊👍

[@achristian11]

Jesus is the Truth! the truth matters, sorry KJ only. Worship Christ not a translation pls

[@eskmoshe1570]

Bien sûr c téléchargeable ,ressayez.

[@ryanc8701]

1:59, so you're suggesting to read a Bible that's inspired by human understanding? No thanks, I'll stick with my KJV.

[@stephenrizzo2521]

Because humans didn't translate the KJV?

[@ryanc8701]

@@stephenrizzo2521 Thank you for pointing that out. I mean, reading a Bible that has a small, private publishing company produces or a Bible that had 3 different conventions of over 40 scholars of different beliefs. The KJ translators used the texts which were actually used by the people of God and not some other lost, buried scriptures found hundreds of years later. To say the Bible has been "added to" is a slippery slope to doubt and unbelief. The question is not, What was originally written? The question is, What is the Message of God? The Authorized Bible carries the True Word.

[@stephenrizzo2521]

@@ryanc8701 🤦‍♂️

[@ryanc8701]

@@stephenrizzo2521 Go ahead, practice textual criticizing, tell the bible what it should say and then tell the people what it should say bc that will promote unity. Good job Stephen 👍

[@big_bawss]

Just read the quran and save yourself the headache of figuring out which Bible to use.

[@michaelarango7782]

Irwin Archer read the Quran, now I have a headache

[@big_bawss]

@@michaelarango7782 really? What specific issue do you have with the Quran.

[@dividingword]

Irwin Archer how terribly and poorly written the Quran is. How the “prophet” Muhammad had black slaves, sex slaves, and a child bride. The Quran is a joke and not the truth. You need to repent and trust in the lord Jesus Christ

[@Flagrum3]

Which version? Apparently there are almost 30 versions of the quran and all of them written decades or centuries after mohammad the false prophet. The quran was also completely revised at one point, maybe more.

[@KHAT-m8u]

NoneRighteousButONE it’s obvious that you are lying . “And poorly written “!!! you and your many changed books can not come to one verse of it .. and that poorly written book you say have many scientific facts in astronomy, anatomy, geography, chemistry, physics , psychology...etc because it’s the word of god , Search the facts if you dare . And what you got ?? in your many different books and verses contradictions to each other with so much error in both grammar and logic ?!! Say what you got ?!! Just a verses like a jungle and doesn’t make sense with pornography and violence. And if you are honest ( which I know you are not)quote the things that you mentioned with verses from the Quran not from your garbage resources and I know you are lying.. and Muhammad peace upon him who you are speaking of is the one who end the slavery from 1400 ago while you at that time were kidnapping the Africans and forcing them to be a slaves till 1865 and treated badly till this day so you don’t have the right to speak about him he taught us that there isn’t any different between any human beings only in righteousness and one of his friends and his companions is a black man (bilal May Allah be pleased with him) . While in the other hand you don’t respect or mix with the black people in churches and every one have their own church and you never stopped killing them to this day . He is the only and first one who fought for women’s right and the result of that is the first university in the world was founded by Fatima al-Fihri in 859 in Fes, Morocco by A MUSLIM WOMAN. Taught the Muslims man to respect the women he who said the heavens are under the feet of the mother he who said be kind to women and treated like queens . The Muslims man started a wars just for the honor of Muslims women’s . While your women were treated badly and as an object with no respect and lower than animals and raped and even killed just because the are women . He taught us everything , taught us to be humans and everything he did are proven in medical and sciences are healthy and correct . He who said to us be clean because it’s from the belief and the first to made Toothbrush (siwak) . And now you finally started to clean and wash your self properly just for corona. That’s why Muslims invented most of the things first and established the first hospital’s first geography first math first chemistry first physics.....and much much more While you where Sinking in darkness and we helped you by the allah will to stand on your feet and developed your country but in exchange you stole our books and destroyed our country’s and still to this day .. You can lie till the end of time but you can not change history and facts. He who prophet Jesus peace upon him preached his coming to continue the message of Allah and still in your books in the original language (Hebrew). And much much more . He and all the prophet are the greatest humans who walked the earth peace upon them all . But let me ask you two questions. first question: - if Jesus died for our sins that’s mean there is no point in heaven and hell ?!!because we are all forgiven and it doesn’t matter what religion you are from even the Christianity doesn’t matter we don’t have to follow it because we are all FORGIVEN and now we are living in Paradise not earth with doing anythings we want even killing , stealing .. etc . Second question: - we are not forgiven unless with blood sacrifice, that’s why Jesus sacrificed him self for us , so what’s the point in creating us and testing us?!! I mean he created this whole magnificent complex universe but can not forgive us only by killing him self ?!! And other story in your religion says that the Jews or Romans killed him and many other story’s of his death so ~~?!! how weak he is to be a god.

[@Usman-ng2yx]

"There is better manuscript evidence for the new testament than any other historical document" Come on now, why are you trying to deceive the people from the truth? The Quran is the only religious text that has been preserved in its entirety from the time of Revelation and has 0 contradictions. I urge you all, my brother and sisters in humanity, turn to God and praise Him alone as he so rightfully deserves and do not associate any partners to Him whatsoever. Nothing but love for you all, and may He guide all of us to the right path. ❤️

[@betawithbrett7068]

I read much of the Quran from Islamic websites using various translations and I see a god that does not love his creatures but contracting himself, sometimes promoting peace and yet other times promoting chaos, strife, war, unforgiveness, hatred, discord... unlike Jesus Christ. We have manuscripts that differ very little even from the later ones of the Textus Receptus indicating LOVE YOUR ENEMIES, and do good to them, forgive if you want forgiveness, never go to war or take up the "sword" but forgive. Never have spite or revenge but imitate Jesus who asked God his Father to forgive those that were killing him. When he resurrected, some of those who killed him turned to follow him and he forgave them, and they became Christians, learning forgiveness etc. In contrast, Mohammed shows up on the scene 600 years later and Quran and Hadith written after he died by consulting his wife and other followers. Some say centuries after he died. The NT was written by the followers of Jesus within their life times, not by someone else. As for the claim that Muslims will say Moses pointed to Mohammed because Moses said to the Israelites that a prophet from their own brethern would come. Mohammed was not an Israelite, not Jewish, so it could not be him. Jesus was Jewish and the NT testifies it was him.

[@ObjectiveEthics]

​@@betawithbrett7068 Actually the god of the old testament killed thousands of women and children read Genesis chapter 6 verses 1 - 8. And the god of the new testament was also extremely violent. Read John chapter 12 verses 40 - 53. Why all of you make claims about your various gods that are contradictory to what is actually written in your own religious texts is very strange.

[@Jordan18561]

Google 'sanaa manuscript quran'