There are only two sources of manuscripts, and one is corrupted. The Majority Text consists of about 5000 manuscripts, which only the Traditional Texts uses for their translation. The other manuscript source is the Minority Text, which uses only a few, but ancient manuscript copies for their translations.
No. That is not true. Why would anyone believe that the Majority Text contained no variants? And why favor the Majority Text over another Text family? Who is to say that the Majority Text represents the autographs more faithfully than some other text family?
Secondly, you seem to have the wrong idea about the Greek Editions of the New Testament. All of the text families are represented in the editions of the Greek New Testament.
And finally, translators of the New Testament don't mindlessly translate a Greek edition of the New Testament Verbatim. The job of a translator is to give the readers of one language access to the ideas and thoughts of the author, who is using another language to communicate.
One sample of many corrupted passages is "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men." This is an angels blessing to all people to have peace and good will toward all.
The corrupted translations all say “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among those with whom he is pleased!" This is limiting the angels blessing to only those who please God, and not to all. Pretty big mistake, which is only one of very many passages changes like this one.
How do you know it's a mistake? Why do you favor the first over the second? Which is more likely to be original? Was the angel attempting to write a Hallmark Card? Or did the angel intend to convey a blessing on the shepherds and the shepherd's kinsmen? What does the word "peace" indicate in this context? Freedom from war or the end of hostilities with God? It seems to me that the second translation is more likely.
Another significant change is in Jn 3:13, which is suppose to read, "no man hath ascended up to heaven, but He that came down from heaven, even the Son of Man which is in heaven." In the modern translations omit the phrase "which is in heaven," which detracts from the Deity of Christ's omnipresence, being in heaven while on earth.
Again, we can ask whether the first is more likely than the second. Did Jesus rise and ascend into heaven eventually? Yes. But this idea has no predicate in this context. The statement is a complete non-sequitur. Jesus, the one who is speaking, is NOT speaking from heaven. He is talking to Nicodemus, and both of them are on Earth. It makes no sense for the son of man, who is speaking on earth to a man on the earth, to say, "which is in heaven."
The translator is not denying the deity of Christ. The translator is making sense of the conversation.
Nestle-Aland used the same corrupted manuscripts from the works of Westcott and Hort, who were occultists.
Again, on what basis do you decide that the Nestle-Aland is corrupted? From my point of view, it removed corruption.
"Along with Bishop Edward White Benson, Westcott and Hort founded the Ghostly Guild. This club was designed to investigate ghosts and super- natural appearances. The club was based upon the idea that such spirits actually exist and appear to men. According to
The Encyclopedia of Occultism and Parapsvchologv, the members of the Ghostly Club would "relate personal experiences concerned with ghosts.
This club would eventually become the Society for Psychical Research. According to James Webb in The Occult Underground and W.H. Solter, The S.P.R. - An Outline of It's History, this club became a major factor in the rise of spiritualism among the elite of English society in the late 1800's. Many leading occult figures belonged to the Society." part XI, 3rd and 4th paragraph
This sounds like the enemy speaking. The enemy uses character assassination to discredit opponents. Now, who am I to believe? Someone who uses the tools of the enemy, e.g. character assassination, or those who give a reasoned defense?
