The inadmissibleness of the modern Greek text for Bible translation purposes.
Modern Bible translations are primarily based on two codices: Codex Sinaiticus with some input apparently from Codex Vaticanus but from what I have studied I cannot find any real input from it but only from the Sinaiticus,
From this is derived the Greek of Westcott and Hort used as their basis for all modern translations of the bible. Unfortunately they only used as much of the Sinaiticus that backed up their beliefs changing it at times when it suited them so really there is no codex to back up their Greek apart from the fact it is based on a forged Greek codex.
Codex 2427 appeared near the end of the 19th Century and was considered the best text for Mark so was used in the Nestles 7th edition. It was based on the Vaticanus and is a forgery as well. It included Mark 16:9-21 showing this passage was originally in the Vaticanus but like the similar passage in the Sinaiticus was removed before publication of the two codices.
Why have you not heard of these facts? There is too much money being made and too many theological careers would be destroyed.
Below is the proof to show these are forgeries. All you need to do is to show the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus are forgeries and the other two documents (The Greek of Westcott and Hort used as the basis for modern bible translation and codex 2427 also by corollary) must have no basis or credibility for being used for the purpose of Bible Translation.
This is supposed to have been written by a Greek scholar. Why then does it use Latin Vulgate names from the Catholic Bible and not Greek ones from the Greek Bible? This alone shows it had to be written by a catholic theologian trying to make it look like a Greek codex. The Catholic scholar using what was the acceptable names use by The Catholic Church.
Codex 2427 was based on it so and is copy from it of Mark made in 1846 and shows that Mark 16:9-21 was in the Codex Vaticanus. Codex 2427 is based on Sinaiticus, a forgery and so is not considered useful for bible translation. It was also proved by the ink it could not have been written before 1850 as ink used in it was not available until after that date.
Tischendorf was told by the forger (Simonedes) that it was forged and a person who saw Simonedes forge it also said it was a forgery. Tischendorf was seen aging the pages by rubbing them with lemon juice, which was one way of making documents look old that was used in his time.
The codex was seen by three people before Tischendorf saw it and they did not think it of any value, especially since it was all white and appeared to be recent. So Tischendorf had to age it but unfortunately him for him there are pages from it in Germany, the monastery he stole it from and Russia and they are all white. But Tischendorf’s pages are old looking so he lied about the age of the codex as he also lied about how he got it saying it was retrieved from a pile of vellum about to be burnt and not that he begged to borrow it and never returned it.
He stole it and gave it to the Czar of Russia who gave a princely sum to the monastery he stole it from as a form of reparation. You cannot trust a person who lies about how he obtains something then ages it to make it look old who promotes something others have seen before him and realised it was of little value.
The Greek of Westcott and Hort
This was the basis of the revised version and of modern bibles. It was supposedly based on the Sinaiticus but Westcott and Hort altered it in many ways to validate their heretical beliefs. It has no real codex to back it up and they cannot use the Sinaiticus as that is a forgery which would make the Greek of Westcott and Hort of no use for modern bible translation anyway.
Why do we not hear of these things?
The person who owns the copyright of the NIV also owns the copyright for the satanic bible. He is publishing the NIV for the money and had 100000 NIV bibles destroyed that were going to Japan because they did not pay a copyright fee.
As you can see they are in it for the money and truth is irrelevant to them.
Also, How many theological careers would be destroyed if it was proven that the four codices that from the basis for modern bible translations were forgeries.
To show Satan is behind the editing and publishing of the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus you need to look at our delegated authority over Satan. When you look at the passage Mark 16:9 -21 you will see the implication by modern bibles that it is not in the originals. It was in the Vaticanus in 1846 when codex 2427 copied Mark and it was removed before publication.
It was in Sinaiticus but it was rewritten to remove it as can be seen by the reformat of the pages this text would have been on.
Why would God remove the only weapon we have over Satan and leave us defenceless against Satan?
Modern bibles have no basis for their translation and because of the money involved this truth is hidden by people in publishing. Do the research in an unbiased way and you too will find this out?