Was the Original Bible Corrupted and Restored? | The Critical Text of the New Testament Explained

Рет қаралды 2,578

Cross Bible

Күн бұрын

Пікірлер: 51

@GnosticInformant 3 ай бұрын

well done. this is by far the thoroughest deep dive on the subject of "KJV only" vs "removed verses".

@trappedcat3615 4 ай бұрын

Early church leaders existing before said oldest manuscripts quoted scripture verses and phrases omitted in said oldest manuscripts. Doing the math, I dont get why "oldest" determines what is most accurate.

@CrossBibleOfficial 4 ай бұрын

Thanks for the comment. Indeed, quotations from early Church Fathers are quite important. Of course, the "oldest" manuscripts are only relatively old from our modern perspective. And the adage that 'oldest = most accurate' has, in fact, come under a lot of scrutiny lately.

@brandonbath6097 3 ай бұрын

Who has a closer version of the original in a game of telephone…the second person in line, or the last?

@trappedcat3615 3 ай бұрын

@@brandonbath6097 Only we are talking about acts of God's providence and preservation, not similar to telephone.

@brandonbath6097 3 ай бұрын

@@trappedcat3615 you must be vaccinated

@trappedcat3615 3 ай бұрын

@@brandonbath6097 Don't me mean.

@nathanjackson3444 4 ай бұрын

20 years ago when I was a new Christian young and innocent, I was in a Christian bookshop to buy a Bible. Another customer who overheard me asking the sales clerk about Bible's, told me not to waste money on buying anything except the KJV. He admitted to being an independent Baptist pastor and stated that any Bible that is not a KJV should be thrown out and burned. I must admit that I bought a NIV, it was half the price of the KJV, but 20 years later, older and wiser, I have to agree with him. The only Bible that should ever be used in any official and public capacity, should only be the KJV. No doubt about it.

@CrossBibleOfficial 4 ай бұрын

It's also helpful to learn the Biblical languages to whatever extent is possible, in order to reduce one's reliance on translations and/or to understand the translations better. For proficient speakers of modern English (about 20% of the global population), it's helpful that the KJV is still relatively understandable. So, it's still a reasonable alternative to other translations. But that doesn't help the other 80% of the world that can't read English and thus can't actually use the KJV.

@nathanjackson3444 4 ай бұрын

@@CrossBibleOfficial there are identical translations as the KJV in their languages that they can use. Until the finding of the heretical codex sinaiticus, all translations in all languages were from the TR. People are without excuse to be using a valid Bible in their mother tongue.

@CrossBibleOfficial 4 ай бұрын

@@nathanjackson3444 As shown in the previous video 'Behind the King James', there are a number of non-English translations based on some form of the TR or, at the very least, based on the Byzantine Text. Some of these are represented on the Timeline of the Bible. So, these could be considered "valid Bibles" insofar as the TR is deemed a "valid" underlying text. But the TR is a product of the 16th and 17th centuries. Prior to that, most Bibles available were hand-copied versions of the Byzantine Text or the Latin Vulgate (not the TR). According to Wycliffe Global Alliance there are 7,394 total languages in the world, 736 of which have full Bible translations (1,658 with only the New Testament and 1,264 with portions of the Bible). New translations being produced to close the gap are based on the Critical Text, as are the vast majority of English translations produced over the last century.

@biblehistoryscience3530 4 ай бұрын

@CrossBibleOfficial , AI will make it possible to actually translate the Bible into every language, and very quickly.

@brandonbath6097 3 ай бұрын

@@biblehistoryscience3530 “AI” is programmed by humans. It’s nothing close to actual AI.

@lloydcrooks712 2 ай бұрын

One of the issues of modern textual criticism is that they have given up on finding out what the autographs were and now focus what was the text at the time the oldest manuscripts found mainly in Egypt don't even agree with themselves

@UNAJacob1985 4 ай бұрын

Im Majority Preferred so NKJV NT but ESV OT due to its use of LXX ans DSS to aid the MT

@jimiberman3464 4 күн бұрын

looking forward to the refutation of ammon hillman

@CrossBibleOfficial 3 күн бұрын

Thank you for the comment. That video will not be featured on this channel. It will be on @MythVisionPodcast. Derek Lambert will be presenting that on his channel, because he has a wider reach and his platform is better suited for old fashioned controversy. So, that should be fun and entertaining :) But make sure you subscribe here for more educational content. We're releasing a video tomorrow focused on the history of Greek and Hebrew. And it will also include details about word counts in each language, which you may find interesting if you're looking forward to the refutation of Dr. Ammon Hillman.

@jimiberman3464 3 күн бұрын

@@CrossBibleOfficial awesome, thank you for your reply. and i am subscribed! definitely looking forward to more of your content, and i'm glad to hear ammon's nonsense is going to get aired out on a channel where many of his cult frequent.

@JamesSnappJr 3 ай бұрын

18:41 - You overlooked the work of both Granville Penn and J.M.A. Scholz.

@CrossBibleOfficial 3 ай бұрын

Thanks again James. I'm very blessed to have such attentive viewers who diligently watch my videos and provide such nuanced constructive criticism. The Timeline of the Bible feature did already include "Scholz's Greek New Testament," even though I chose not to mention it in this video. It pains me to omit so many great works in the video for the sake of brevity. But the Timeline is meant to give a somewhat more complete picture, albeit still not an exhaustive list. In terms of Granville Penn, I'm not convinced that his work warrants inclusion in the Timeline of the Bible, since that feature includes manuscripts and full-fledged Bibles. But if you think I'm missing anything on the Timeline, do let me know. Thanks.

@JamesSnappJr 3 ай бұрын

10:00 - WRONG. You overlooked the Alexander Campbell's Living Oracles, based on Griesbach's compilation. (And Abner Kneeland's work.)

@CrossBibleOfficial 3 ай бұрын

Thanks again for the helpful feedback, and again with the prominent capital letters that refuse to be ignored :) Campbell and Kneeland's work were overlooked in the Timeline of the Bible. They are now included near the Revised Version. However, even though Griesbach is considered as the starting point of what Bruce Metzger deems the "Critical Period", Lachmann is considered to be the first complete break with the Received Text. So the Timeline still format Griesbach, Living Oracles and Kneeland's work as part of the Received Text tradition, whereas if the scholarship in the latter part of the 19th century (Lachmann, Tregelles, Westcott-Hort, etc) is considered "modern scholarship" from the perspective of the late 19th-century compilers of the Revised Version, then the statement you flagged at the 10-minute mark still holds. However, it was admittedly imprecise and I have added a correction to that timestamp to clarify, based on your feedback. Thanks again.

@claysindledecker6476 3 ай бұрын

I don’t just use one translation. I use KJV NIV Youngs Literal and Coordinate Literal New Testiment. Using the concordance gives a better understanding of the Greek and the KJV and NIV helps me actually read the Bible lol

@evangelistbrianbaker Ай бұрын

This a very good techinque. But I use the KJV as the foundation and then compare it others.

@JamesSnappJr 3 ай бұрын

7:26 - WRONG. Tischendorf claimed that the monks told him that they had tossed out PARCHMENTS. There is no mention of anything involving PAPYRUS. Fix your video please.

@CrossBibleOfficial 3 ай бұрын

Thank you James for the kind comment, especially with those attention-grabbing capital letters! :) You're absolutely right! For some reason, despite the fact that I had "PARCHMENTS" in mind, I used the word "PAPYRUS" instead. Unfortunately, KZbin does not allow videos to be fixed, per se, which would be a handy feature. However, they do allow content creators to post corrections to videos at key timestamps, which pop up at the earliest marker. So, your helpful suggestion has been incorporated as a correction for the record. Thanks again for the feedback.

@IXXILordFibonacciIXXI 3 ай бұрын

So Ethiopian bible is not older than greek? Hamitic i heard ?

@michaelogrady232 4 ай бұрын

Sounds like orc mischief to me! Jerome's Vulgate was translated from manuscripts now lost to time. To me, it is the most authoritative because it is not based on the corrupted Masoretic Text.

@CrossBibleOfficial 4 ай бұрын

Unfortunately, Jerome's Vulgate is also lost to time :(

@michaelogrady232 4 ай бұрын

@@CrossBibleOfficial I have not heard of this.

@derekk1 4 ай бұрын

@@CrossBibleOfficialis the Wycliffe Bible not based on Jerome’s vulgate?

@CrossBibleOfficial 4 ай бұрын

@@derekk1 If you visit the Cross Bible website, check out the Timeline of the Bible feature at crossbible.com/timeline. There you'll find Jerome's Vulgate in the bottom left in the 4th century. Click on the 'Note' button on the top right to open up a window with additional details. There you'll find a more detailed explanation.

@CrossBibleOfficial 4 ай бұрын

@@michaelogrady232 If you visit the Cross Bible website, check out the Timeline of the Bible feature at crossbible.com/timeline. There you'll find Jerome's Vulgate in the bottom left in the 4th century. Click on the 'Note' button on the top right to open up a window with additional details. There you'll find a more detailed explanation.

@E-pistol Ай бұрын

The Bible is a Catholic book ♥

@CrossBibleOfficial Ай бұрын

Fun fact! Catholic (καθολικός) means "general" or "universal" in Greek :)

@E-pistol Ай бұрын

@@CrossBibleOfficial , one accord one body one mind, on a lampstand for everyone to see, known, findable ♥

@jamessheffield4173 4 ай бұрын

Why some have problems with Reasoned eclecticism. I John 5:7 is found in a majority of the Latin, but not the Greek so out it goes. Good will towards men Doxology in Matthew Without cause God manifest in the flesh Are a majority in the Greek but not in the Latin, so out they go The PA and Mark 16:9-20 are a majority in both the Greek and Latin so out they go. Even the “not yet” found in the two of the earliest(P66.P75) in John 7:8 some throw out. If as an orthodox Christian you don't see a problem, what would you see as a problem?

@CrossBibleOfficial 4 ай бұрын

The reason why so many (small 'o') orthodox Christians don't see a problem is because they are convinced that those textual variants are less original than the alternative readings derived from reasoned eclecticism. So, even though one side may view these recent changes as 'corruption', the other side views them as 'restoration'.

@jamessheffield4173 4 ай бұрын

@@CrossBibleOfficial Agreed. Would be nice if both sides would dialog, instead of being in our own bubbles. Blessings.