The Greatest Fraud in Christian History
The Heretical modern Bible translations
A Bible needs a good foundation and I will show that modern Bibles do not have a foundation at all by examining their validity, for the purposes of Bible translation of the three main texts used:
Codex 2472 (used in the latest Kurt/Aland Greek Text to translate Mark.
Part A the codices use.
Firstly its format shows it is a 5th Century document and not a 4th century one, using a format that was only used between 440 and 464 and the format was not used after 464 because it took up too much vellum to write and vellum was expensive.
There were also so many people who corrected this cidex that you cannot tell which is the correction to use so that it is unsafe to use it for a translation.
This was proved to be a forgery because the ink used in it was not available before the middle of the 1800’s.
It is also interesting to note they were going to verify the age of the Sinaiticus but when 2472 was exposed because of its ink being the wrong dares they withdrew the testing of Sinaiticus as if they were worried the testing would show it was a forgery.
Proof the Codex Sinaiticus is a forgery
In the early 1800’s and inventory was taken by a scholar of the manuscripts in St Catherine’s Monastery where the Sinaiticus was found. It showed it had three old Bibles none of which was the codex Sinaiticus.
Late a Serbian theologian and the Lewis sisters came to the convent and saw the codex Sinaiticus. They all said it was white with no appearance of age and obviously did not think it was authentic or they would have told the world of the discovery of this ‘ancient’ codex and achieved the fame its so called discoverer received.
Along comes Tischendorf who realises the ‘importance’ of this ‘ancient’ manuscript, unlike the three expert theologians before Him. He sends a part of the Old Testament to King Frederick in Germany. They are still there but under a different name (codex Frederickus) so people do not realise it is part of the Sinaiticus. They are white and not aged.
The few pages found in the monastery in the 1990’s were also white. As these were also white and not available when the Sinaiticus was used for Bible translation and Vaticanus was not a good codex to use one wonders what they used to translate these missing pages.
Does this mean modern Bibles cannot correct as these pages were not there when they were translated and there was no other suitable ancient text to use?
Tischendorf came back to the monastery and begged to borrow the manuscript for a month lying to the abbot that he would return it but never gave it back but sent it to the Czar of Russia who had funded his trip to the monastery. . Years later the Czar paid the monastery to recompense them for the loss of the codex its because it had been stolen by Tischendorf
Tischendorf lied about how he obtained it saying he found it and stopped it being burnt. He found it in a basket because they were stored that way and they were never burnt as the parchment was too valuable and smelled strongly when burnt. The parchment was usually scraped and reused as a palimpsest.
When Tischendorf revealed the codex to the world a month later the pages were aged and not white like when he had received them. So He had either aged them or it was a different codex to what he received.
Two people told him it was a forgery (the forger Simonedes and a person who saw him forge the codex). Another saw Tischendorf clean the codex pages with lemon juice which was also one of the ways they made documents look aged in the middle 1800’s.
Can you trust a Greek codex that was made to look aged and whose finding was lied about?
IN the Kurt Aland 7th edition codex 2472 was included as their documents to use for translation. 2472 was proved to be a forgery also and it is to be noted that after this the codex Sinaiticus was withdrawn from being tested as if they were worried it to may have been a fake.
The problem is that the documents backing this codex make up only .01% of all Greek manuscriptal which means they were considered worthless for Bible Translation. While the other 99.99% back up the King James Greek.
So they use the Vaticanus to back up the Sinaiticus but unfortunately they have over 3000 differences in the Gospels alone between and the Vaticanus corrected by 8 or more people so you cannot really determine what corrections to use for translation. It is also a 5th century text and not a 4th century text which according to their guideline is not acceptable as a text to use as a basis for translation purposes. So there is no other codex to back upmost of the Sinaiticus.
We know it is a 5th century codex because the format it is written in was only used between 440 and 464 AD
So why were these codices used?
They were used because they backed up the belief amongst many theologians that Jesus was a human who became God which is why His divinity is attacked so much in translations based on these two codices (Sinaiticus and 2472).
S0 most of modern Bibles are based on forged codices whose purpose is to remove the divinity of Jesus and alter doctrine so that the Christian Bible could be used by all faiths and religions as part of a one world religions which is why 20% of it was altered toward the purpose of removing t he divinity of Jesus.
To summarise the above
Prior to it being seen by the Lewis sisters and a Serbian theologian there was no previous knowledge of the codex Sinaiticus. It was not in a catalogue of the monastery manuscripts taken in the early 1800’s and no one seems to know where it came from. This would be true of a forged document forged between its cataloguing and it being seen by these people.
These three people said the pages were white and did not consider it of any value or they would have announced it to the world. The white vellum indicated a recent writing of it.
So three people with eminent knowledge of codices did not think it was worthwhile to tell the world about it.
Tischendorf comes along and sees it, takes some of it and sends it to King Frederick, the person who financed his trip. Nothing much was made of this manuscript. It is still in Germany and is still white but under another name so it is not associated with the Sinaiticus.
Tischendorf goes back to the monastery and begs to be given the New Testament part for a while saying he would return it.
He is seen aging the pages of the codex lying and saying he was only cleaning it. After he is finished with it the pages are aged and he does not return it but steals it and sends it to the Czar of Russia who compensated the monastery for the theft with a then princely sum.
He is told by the forger and someone who witnessed the forger writing it that is was a forgery. He refused to accept this because the codex made him famous and established his place amongst biblical scholarship. He never let truth get in the road of fact.
All his life he lied to everyone how he had found the manuscript. Can you trust someone who lies and goes against the judgment of three earlier experts that the manuscript was not old therefore not worthwhile telling the world about?
The question is as to whether the manuscript he presented to the world was the real Sinaiticus or something he forged in its place. The real one was white and he was seen cleaning the pages with lemon juice corrupting a manuscript to make it look old. It is not known if he was corrupting the white pages of the Sinaiticus or something he substituted for it instead.
If this was a normal book it would have been rejected as a phoney. So why was the supposed Sinaiticus manuscript Tischendorf found accepted as genuine when all indications are it was forged?
The changes the Codex Sinaiticus made to the traditional King James Version Text
Some of these changes were so drastic for the period that not all were used in the Revised Version based on the Sinaiticus but what was used was so bad that it had to be revised to remove even more of the changes and became the English Revised Version.
This was the second attempt to remove the true text and succeeded. The First attempt was when a mason was given the text for a year and filled the first version with Masonic symbolism. Puritans and others would not touch what they considered was an evil book and only started to use the KJV 100 years later when the pictures were removed.
It took deceit and subterfuge and a forged codex Sinaiticus to have the King James Version removed. This was the second attempt to remove the received text and was successful.
I will examine various verses where significant alteration in meanings occurred as a result of the changes in the Sinaiticus codex. Not all the changes have been incorporated in the modern bibles but what has been incorporated is significant.
The Sinaiticus is forged and all the evidence is there hidden from most Christians as it would invalidate most modern bibles as they would be based on a forgery made to endorse the belief that Jesus was not divine when born but was a human who became God by what He did. It would also mean all the changes the made by the Sinaiticus and modern translations to back this us would be invalid and these bibles would only b e useful as toilet paper.
Too much money is involved for the fact that the Sinaiticus is a fraud to get out into the public and the USA Bible publishers (who make and publish most of the modern bibles) love money too much to lose this income stream. I have the evidence on my webpage nevillesalvetti.com and there are many good videos on this subject on you tube. The best ones are by David Daniels as he proves the Sinaiticus is a forgery.
You will see this attack in the changes they made to the text of The King James Bible as I show some of the alterations made by The Sinaiticus Codex.
A problem with copyright is that you cannot use or appear to copy what another has written so all modern Bibles have additional changes to the errors of Sinaiticus, even if it is to say something with different words to what others use. This can lead to confusion in using them for Bible Study and we know that Satan is the author of confusion. This confusion shows that the translations cannot be from God or they or would say the same thing showing once again the errors of the Sinaiticus used for the translations of modern bibles.
Why was the Bibles based on the Sinaiticus not rejected by scholars?
They did not think it was a forgery or did not want to think it as a forgery. It was the age of reason in scholarship where you had to go on historical fact so the historical time of Jesus was used to judge the content of The Sinaiticus and historically there were many at the time who were human who supposedly became ‘gods’ because of what they did and so it was thought Jesus was one of them and not divine.
Besides eminent scholars backed it up and evolution was causing doubts about God so it was easy to translate the Sinaiticus the way they did.
Beside it was not aimed at the theologians of the time who had a sound knowledge of doctrine but at later generations who would believe what heretical theologians said about it and without a sound basis of doctrine believed the errors in the Sinaiticus and being told it was the best Greek translation accepted it.
This is why so much error is in the church today as sound doctrine has been replace by error and taught to two generations of young Christians through the NIV who did not know sound doctrine.
If the church exercised signs and wonder and th casting out of demons then reason would not have replaced faith as the evidence of The King James Greek being the correct one would have been seen But they did not believe in these which is whey they were able to delete the passage that had these in from modern bibles so that reason and knowledge is now the basis for faith and not a relationship with God exhibiting the Kingdom of God in this world.
They were able to alter phrases and imply He was no longer divine but human as I will show in the following.
I will not comment where Greek words are changed which do not appear to affect the English translation of the King James but only on where changes to the English text result.
The Gospel of Matthew
Mat 1:6 And Jesse begat David the king; and David the king begat Solomon of her that had been the wife of Urias;
Note that the second David is not mention as being a king or a descendant of King David. So two Davids are mentioned which appears to break the line of King David so that Jesus is not a descendant of King David.
The Messiah was to be a descendant of King David. If Jesus was not descended from King David He could not be The Messiah so His main role was removed by this alteration.
Mat 1:18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.
In the Sinaiticus ‘birth’ is changed to beginning. Not all Sinaiticus Greek was rendered but some translations were ignored being too controversial
If Jesus had a beginning at His birth He could not be divine but human. This is why the King James has ‘birth’ which means entrance into earthly life not s beginning of earthly life.
25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.
‘Firstborn’ is omitted which implies there could be other children before or after Him. This would man that Mary was not a virgin because she would have had sex after other children.
This affects the speciality of the birth of Jesus making it like any ot her birth.
Mat 2:17 Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying,
“By’ was changed to “through”
This implied Jeremiah was like a medium who demons speak through so that Jeremiah did not consciously speak these words. Being involved with mediums and spiritism they would have seen what Jeremiah seen as channelling and not Him speaking consciously guided by The Holy Spirit.
Mat 2:18 In Rama was there a voice heard, lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not.
The intensity of the sorrow of the women was hidden by the Sinaiticus to make the prophecy about it not seem to apply because the it was not appear to be quoted like Jeremiah said.
This negates the prophecy of Jeremiah and makes Him a medium.
In Mat 3;3 the Sinaiticus makes the same change of changing ‘by’ to ‘through’.
Matt 3:16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:
The words ‘unto Him’ were removed implying everyone saw The Spirit and it was not seen only by Jesus.
If everyone saw it then Jesus was no different to everyone else there instead of being God who alone could see these things.
You notice prophesies and the nature of Jesus is attacked in Matthew. This was because Matthew was written to the Jews who were looking for The Messiah so they had to remove as much they could that proved Jesus was the prophesied Messiah.
Mat 4:12 Now when Jesus had heard that John was cast into prison, he departed into Galilee;
Mat 4:13 And leaving Nazareth, he came and dwelt in Capernaum, which is upon the sea coast, in the borders of Zabulon and Nephthalim:
Mat 4:14 That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying,
Mat 4:15 The land of Zabulon, and the land of Nephthalim, by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles;
In verse 12 the name of ‘Jesus’ is left out so He will not be identified as the subject o f the prophecy.
Once again they are trying to hide prophecy that would prove Jesus is The Messiah.
Mat 4:23 And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people.
The Name of Jesus is removed so that no one is specifically identified as the one calling people to follow Him and doing the ministry of The Messiah.
Once again the proof that Jesus is The Messiah is hidden.
Most modern bibles have some or most of these alterations and even one work to removed or altered doctrinally or to remove the divinity or work of Jesus is to make it heretical and not infallible.
It is from this passage we have the authority to cast out demons and speak in tongues. The Sinaiticus implies this passage is not in the original bible (it puts it in the text but in the margin it implies that it is not part of the original text and says some texts leave it out). So if you think the Sinaiticus is the best version of the New Testament we have then you have no authority to cast out demons, do deliverance or peak in tongues.
Only 5 out of 1452 texts omit this passage and even then some have space for it in the text. You can see you cannot trust the translators of the Sinaiticus who lie about facts to promote their beliefs in Jesus being a man and not God and who are not able to delegate to make these changes.
Modern Bibles leave it out or imply it is not part of the original text removing our authority to cast out demons and speak in tongues. This means that Pentecostals have no authority to do these things.
1 John 5:7
This verse promotes the divinity of Jesus making Him equal with The Father and The Holy Spirit. The only reason it was removed really was because they did not believe in the divinity if Jesus. They ded this by combining v7 and 8 and by this removed Jesus and the witness in heaven.
5:7 For there are three that bear record
in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three
are one. 1Jn 5:8 And there are three
that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and
the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.
In Mark 1:1 they attacked the divinity of Jesus leaving out that He was the Son of God but it was put in Bible as it was too heretical to leave out.
1:1 The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ,
the Son of God.
They also Implied Jesus lied so that He was a sinner and could not redeem us:
5:22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother
a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his
brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou
fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
Jesus was angry twice so sinned regardless of the cause of the anger being in respect of the way they were treating God and His Kingdom.
We can only ever be angry at attacks on Jesus and His Kingdom and every other type of anger is sin.
In John 7:8 it appeared Jesus was not going to the feast but went up so apparently lied.
7:8 Go ye up unto this feast: I go not up
yet unto this feast; for my time is not yet full come.
Notice the word yet was removed so it appeared Jesus was not going up at all,
A codex that promotes Jesus as liar cannot be trusted yet the Sinaiticus is the text used by all modern Bibles not based on the KJV Greek.
In Acts 8:37 the requirement for baptism is removed so anyone can be baptised.
Act 8:36 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?
Act 8:37 And Philip said,
If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said,
I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
Act 8:38 And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.
This verse was removed by the Sinaiticus whose translators had Catholic tendencies and the Roman Catholic church teaches that Jesus had no brothers or sisters.
Mat 12:47 Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee.
This is completely removed: By its removal it is implied that unbelief is the reason for the demons not going out and not prayer and fating to remove fleshly influences and improve their clones to God.
"Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting."
This is completely removed: This is a reference to Jesus being divine so was removed because of this.
"For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost."
This is completely removed because it refers to the Lordship of Jesus as God.
Mat 21:44 And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.
This is completely removed because Jesus is passing judgment on them which only God could do.
"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation."
This is completely removed. Jesus was teaching as if He was from God and they could not have His words being necessary for salvation so removed the verse that says His teachings needed to be listened to
"If any man have ears to hear, let him hear."
Mark 9:44 and 46
This is completely removed. Hell I not a concept promoted by modern theologians and also Jesus spoke as if he had been there which only God could do.
"Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched."
Mark 9:46 This is completely removed:
"Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched."
This is completely removed: They had Catholic beliefs and only the Catholic Priest is able to forgive sins, they believe, so that you a re not able too. So this had to be removed.
"But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses."
This is completely removed. This referred to the Messiah and they did not believe Jesus was the Messiah.
"And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors."
This is completely removed. Given the preceding verse his omission seems to have no purposes.
"Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left."
These verses are removed as it showed Jesus was special as if The Father was sending His Son comfort in His trials ahead. So these verses had to be removed.
Luk 22:43 And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him.
Luk 22:44 And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground.
This is completely removed because It meant Jesus was chosen out of hatred by the Jewish religious leaders to die in a sinner’s place, something only The Messiah could do.
"(For of necessity he must release one unto them at the feast.)"
This is completely removed and appears so for no reason because the miracle of healing Jesus did is still mentioned. It does show God intervening personally in the lives of men and as many modern theologians do not believe God does this perhaps this is why it is removed.
The miracles done these days by many theologians are attributed to men being used and not direct intervention by God.
"For an angel went down at a certain season into the pool, and troubled the water: whosoever then first after the troubling of the water stepped in was made whole of whatsoever disease he had."
John 7:53-8:11 (The women caught in adultery)
This is completely removed. This picture of God’s Mercy is removed. Jesus spoke with the authority of God as he stop them implementing the Mosaic law and stoning the woman. So this had to be removed as only God could negate the requirements of The Law.
Jesus said asked who was there to condmen hwe by witnessing to her sin. She said:”:
Joh 8:11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.
Only God could say she was no longer condemned for sin which implied Jesus was God. So this passage had to be removed in its entirety.
This is completely removed. They appeared to be preaching Jesus as if He was God so this had to be removed.
"Notwithstanding it pleased Silas to abide there still."
This is completely removed. Perhaps because many blamed the Jews for the death of Jesus and removed the fact that the Romans took Jesus away implying the Jews were the ones taking Him to face Pilate.
"But the chief captain Lysias came upon us, and with great violence took him away out of our hands,"
This is completely removed. The Jew had been told by Paul that Jesus had brought salvation to the Gentiles because they had rejected Jesus and they went away pondering what Jesus had said. This meant they were actually considering if Jesus has been The Messiah. This meant they were not longer antagonistic to Jesus and so may have become a follower. This had to be removed as it showed the Jews in a positive light.
"And when he had said these words, the Jews departed, and had great reasoning among themselves."
Romans 16:24 This is completely removed as Grace is attributed to Jesus because He is God and able to give Grace to people.
"The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen."
Many other adjustment to verses and words are made which are too numerous to mentioned which ia why I stopped examining verse by verse.
The Sinaiticus is rife with heretical readings and to see them all I suggest you buy “The Doctored New Testament by D. A. Waithe Jr which has the text of the Sinaiticus in with all the alterations it made to the King James Text.
As the Sinaiticus is a forgery this chapter is only relevant for the Vaticanus.
1. The Test of Antiquity
Which text is the oldest?
Being the oldest text does automatically make it a better text. Even though the Vaticanus is over 1400 years old, the received text (used for the King James version) is mentioned in documents that are just as old if not older. The fact that they are quotes from the Bible and not actual codices like the Sinai and Vatican Codices does not invalidate their witness to the antiquity of the received text. In fact the writings of the church ‘fathers’ were written well before these two eclectic codices were written and are 2 or more to 1 in favour of The traditional received Greek test.
2. The Test of Numbers
How many copies are there surviving of each text.
This not a good test today with the advent of printing but in the days when documents were hand written (as these were), people only copied that which was best. The test of numbers in regards to existing documents goes to the received text where, at the time of Dean Burgin, 5210 of the 5255 manuscripts were of the received text. One wonders why modern translators have limited themselves to such a small body of evidence (45 Manuscripts roughly) to use as a basis of the sacred text of The Bible.
3. Variety as a test of truth
Are there many different variations in the existing texts used for the translations?.
The received text is found throughout the Roman world and mainly agree with each other while the critical text used for modern translations reflects the bias of their writers and which differ appreciably from each other at times is found only in Egypt which would indicate it was a local phenomena attached to the beliefs of people in a specific area unlike the received text which was accepted throughout the rest of Christendom.
On this basis the received text wins again.
4. Respectability or weight of truth
How reliable is the text.
The Vaticanus fail this Test as they disagree with the received text in over 3000 places in the New Testament. They cannot both be right so one has to be a false witness and possibly both, depending on how much error is them. There is little or no problem with the receive text in this area. As evidence of the correctness of the received test is its uniformity in spite of the number of manuscripts available and it is to be noted that it has been used from the time of the apostles till now while the critical text disappeared for 1450 years and was ignored by the majority of Christians. So the critical text was not respected as being reliable and was ignored.
The critical text loses again.
5. Continuity as a test of truth
The received text has continuity from the time of when the Gospels were first being written to the time the King James Translation was made and later. The Vaticanus was written between 440 and 464 AD used for two- three centuries then forgotten for over 1100+ years.
These Vaticanus is the only document that has a chance of being used (the Sinaiticus is a forgery). It fails the continuity test which shows the Byzantine texts on which the received texts were based were considered scripture from the writings of the apostles until the King James was published and through this translation are still continuing on unbroken till the current date while the Vaticanus was filed away as being useless.
The Critical text fails again
6. Content as a test of truth.
Is the text true to the doctrinal meaning of the passage or does it translate differently in different passages, according to what the translator or editor believes should be there. Because of its omissions the critical text is not doctrinally sound at times as a result of words, phrases or passages partly omitted, left out, altered or translated unusually. It fails this test while the received text is consistent in its usage and translation.
7. Internal evidence as a test of truth
The received text has no need to be corrected and so you will not find manuscripts with doctrinal corrections. There are adjustments to correct a spelling or miscopied word and the correction will agree with the other Byzantine manuscripts. There are also no verses that contradict each other as there are in every bible version based on the erroneous modern Greek text of Westcott and Hort or on Greek texts developed from it.
The purpose of it all
The reason Jesus is humanised so that He is like any other religious founder is so that there is a commonality of the Christian Bible to holy books of other religions and other religions can identify Jesus with their religion’s founders. This is necessary for there to be a one world religion prepared for the antichrist made up of all religions that agree to a degree that they can worship together when the antichrist appears on the world stage.