The problems with modern bible translations

Modern translations use a text called the” Critical Greek Text” which is based on two other Greek Codices because they are said to be the oldest codices available supposedly having been written in the fourth century A.D. and so are considered the codices closest to the original Greek texts which they believe has been lost and had not been copied correctly so that they consider the traditional Greek Text needs to be edited to restore the original sense of the text.

Primarily, they use the Sinaiticus but even then, the critical text does not follow it exactly but is altered by the editors of it to promote their heresy.

The heresy of the editor behind the new critical Greek is explained elsewhere on my website nevillesalvetti.com as well as ow the critical text   humanises Jesus to remove His divinity on earth along with the changes they made to Orthodox Christian doctrine.

On my website is a book called: The Humanisation of Jesus” which explains why they considered Jesus to be human while He was alive so that they took away his divinity and treated him as a God only after he ascended into heaven. This will be clearly seen if you read the humanisation of Jesus” and the other book on my website as well as why modern theologians think the way they do.

Codex Vaticanus

one of the reasons for choosing the Vaticanus was because it was supposedly a fourth century document. However, the text formatting show it could only have been written between 440 and 464 A.D. it is with the only period formatting style with used so it is a fifth Century document. Additionally, it uses uncials (capitals) were only used later in the Middle Ages. These two things alone remove its claim to be an early document and therefore make it not usable, according to the criteria for selecting early documents for the purposes of using a Greek text for translation purposes.

Another problem is that it uses Latin Vulgate names. It is supposedly a Greek document but does not use Greek names but the official names used in Jerome’s Vulgate Bible so obviously written by a Catholic scholar promoting their specific heresy otherwise they would have kept Jerome’s Vulgate as the Bible to use.

Also, it has been corrected by over eight people so it is difficult to work out which correction is the one to use which means you can basically choose which you want. The number of corrections show how heretical it is well as they tried to bring it back in line with orthodox doctrine.

An even greater problem, the fact that there are over 3000 differences between the Vaticanus and the Sinaiticus. So, you have two differing Greek Codexis that are different over 3000 places and you add the corrections in the Vaticanus have more than possibly 5000 different variations which makes it very hard to work out what God said without a Bible to compare it to which they do not have because they believe it no longer exists.

So, we ask the question, can man know what God is thinking?

Out thinking God

Modern theologians believe they can correct The Bible and write what God meant to say.  They have a problem because God says:

Isa_55:8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.

Isa_55:9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.

God clearly says you can never think what He is thinking without the guidance of The Holy Spirit who is the person sent to instruct us in the things of God!

(BBE)  However, when he, the Spirit of true knowledge, has come, he will be your guide into all true knowledge: for his words will not come from himself, but whatever has come to his hearing, that he will say: and he will make clear to you the things to come.

(ASV)  Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he shall guide you into all the truth: for he shall not speak from himself; but what things soever he shall hear, these shall he speak: and he shall declare unto you the things that are to come.

The Holy Spirit shows us the mind of God and without His help all we can do is surmise and try to reason what God wanted to say which God says is impossible.

As modern theologians look at the history for guidance and do not ask The Holy Spirit, they will naturally write things that God did not intend.  So, they use reason and do not listen to what The Holy Spirit wants them to write and may even be writing a worse translation and not realise it!

If they had listened to The Holy Spirit, they would not have used the critical text in the first place or even written it because it is wrong in its Christian doctrine.

The Sinaiticus

The Sinaiticus also has its problems when it comes to being considered as a text to be used for Bible Translation

the Sinaiticus was found in a Seminary on Mount Athos.  It is not known how it came to this place but it was discovered to be there in a stock take taken in the early 1800s. There is no record of it anywhere else before.

The reason for this is that it is a forgery made in the early 1800s.

A forger called Semonides was seen forging this Codex in the monastery it was found in.

Before it was “discovered” by a person called Tischendorf, it was seen by the Lewis sisters and a Serbian theologian both of whom discounted it as an early document or an important Greek text.

When they saw it, if pages were white and new, without any corrections or parts missing from the page and various places in it have a mark. shown it was forged by Semonides.

Tischendorf stole a part of the old Testament and said it to King Frederick of Prussia. This can still be seen in Germany and it is as the Lewis sisters saw it.

Tischendorf came back to the monastery and persuaded the monks to give him the rest of the Codex Sinaiticus promising to return it, which he never did.

Tischendorf immediately began to clean the pages of the Sinaiticus with a lemon juice which was the way at that time to make pages look old. He was seen doing this by people so it is a recorded historical fact.

When Tischendorf presented the Codex Sinaiticus to the world it looked old, and had parts of pages missing where Semonides had placed something to show he was forger and was completely different because of this in appearance to the Codex Tischendorf took from the monks. So, it was either a new Greek text and not the Sinaiticus or a greatly doctored version of the Sinaiticus Codex to make it look ancient and authentic.

Tischendorf was a liar so could not be trusted. He said he found the Codex in a pile of rubbish waiting to be burnt. You don’t burn vellum as it smells too much. He completely hid the fact he stole it and altered it to hide the fact it was a new Codex so it would appear to be old and be more acceptable to scholarship.

The critical text

this is the name of the Greek text based on the above two codices. Its first problem is that it is based on two forgeries so it has no real substantial basis to translate from. In other words, for the preparation of a Greek text  it no basis for it to be used. Unfortunately, modern scholarship states that it is the best Greek text to use and it forms the basis of all modern Bible translation.

They say it is the best Greek even though they don’t know what the original Greek text said so really cannot say it is the best Greek.

Given it is based on two Greek texts that were written to justify their heresy of their creators it cannot be considered to be doctrinally sound and it copies their heresies found in the two documents.

If they had the original to compare it to, they would not need to make the critical text, but because they do not have the originals, they cannot say their Greek is better than the one used by the Authorised Version. This alone make the critical text unsafe to use for the purposes of Bible Translation. Add the fact that it is based on forgeries you have even more reasons for not using it for the purposes of Bible Translation

Conclusion

when one examines the Vaticanus, Sinaiticus, and the modern critical Greek text, It is clear that they do not promote traditional doctrine or give a clearer understanding of it but promote different doctrine to traditional Christian.

It clears the Greek texts were created by people to promote their heretical doctrines which they could not use the traditional Bible to promote so created a new Greek text to back up their heretical doctrine.

This is why the critical text cannot be used for Bible translation which has been done by most modern Bibles. This has resulted in Christian doctrine being incorrectly taught in the church so that Christianity is a pale shadow of its former self in many ways.

One only has to compare the values of the young people of the early 1900s before modern translations took over to the values they have now to see how much has been lost in their morality and integrity.

Only as a traditional text is restored will Christian church be restored and only as the traditional text and its values are promoted will Christianity be restored.