The Occult Connections of Westcott and Hort

[texian]

The Occult Connections of Westcott and Hort


Almost all of the Bible translations since the late 19th century - for
the New Testament - are based upon the Greek text of Westcott and Hort
(1881). The New International Version (NIV) first published in 1978
claims to be based on the Nestle-Aland Greek Text, which is similar to
the Westcott-Hort text because it is also based on the Alexandarian
Greek texts. The Alexandarian texts are the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.
Sinaiticus was found in the trash at a religious site at the foot of
Mount Sinai in A.D.1844. Codex Vaticanus, a 4th century document, was
found in 1481 in the Vatican library in Rome, where it had apparently
been for a long time. Both Greek texts are believed to have been
created in or near Alexandaria, Egypt,

There is a strong possibility that there were 3rd and 4th century
gnostic influences upon some verses in the Greek New Testament texts -
Sianaticus and Vaticanus - used by Westcott
and Hort for their 1881 Greek text.

Dean Gotcher, the authority on the use of the dialectic in society and
in Christian discourse, on his website,

http://www.authorityresearch.com/ARTICLES_Other/Source%20of%20the%20King%20James%20Bible.htm


says "Faith does not come by hearing mans opinion of God's word (there
is no certainty, conviction, or conversion in opinions), but rather
faith comes by hearing God's word itself. It is important you know
(you are certain) that what you are hearing, reading, studying,
preaching, and teaching is God's word. "Man does not live by bread
alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the God."
Jesus quoting Deuteronomy 8:3

What eventually became entitled the Textus Receptus or the "received
text" (1633) was first presented by Erasmus (Novum Instrumentum omne,
1516). It was compiled from several manuscripts from the 'Majority
text,' i.e. the Byzantine (Syrian) text, which were a large number of
manuscripts and fragments originally protected by the eastern church
from the western church's (Roman Catholics church's) efforts to
destroy them, and therefore were not accessible to the western world
until after the 1453 conquest of Constantinople by the Ottoman Empire.
By Christians fleeing from the east into the west, these guarded
manuscripts were eventually accessible to western scholars.

Today there is a major move to confuse the Protestant Church and bring
it back under Roman Catholic rule (the "ecumenical" movement). By
discrediting the use of the Textus Receptus as God's Word, examining
(and thus negating) the Word of God in the "light" of Gnostic text,
the Protestant Church is being seduced, deceived, and manipulated,
drawn away from the preaching and teaching of sound doctrine and into
the dialoguing of mans opinions.
The Alexandrian and Origen text (Gnostic texts) are the basis for
almost all contemporary translations. Oregenes Adamantius 185-245 AD,
was a Greek, Egyptian-born Gnostic writer, teacher, & mystic, who,
with his contingent of scribes, synthesized philosophical teachings
into the scriptures (which no longer made them God's word but rather
the opinions of men, needing enlightened men thereon to interpret
them). These Gnostic texts, with their humanistic, philosophical base,
have opened the churches and seminaries up to humanistic reasoning
(higher criticism or vain speculations) and dialogue, with the
opinions of men in control of the meaning of God and His Word. Almost
all translations today carry this error (heresy).
Most Christians who detected the error of the "Church Growth
Movement," the emergent church, etc. were using translations from the
Textus Receptus (King James, Geneva, Tyndale, Luther, etc. bibles)
They discerned the compromise, i.e. the structural change of the word
of God, and the resulting humanism being practiced within the
"contemporary" church, by their having been raised in Churches using
translations from the Textus Receptus."

And - Westcott and Hort were interested
in occult phenomena according to their sons who both wrote biographies
of their fathers. Gnosticism was a source for the 19th century English
occult movement, which Westcott and Hort took part in. Now we are
seeing a revival of gnosticism and gnostic influences in the New Age
Occult movement, which has seeped over into the Christian Church.

The documentation that Westcott and Hort were very interested in the
occult is important
in understanding the motivations of this pair of Englishmen for
wanting to replace the Textus Receptus and the King James Version.
Why were they opposed to the Textus Receptus and the King James?

Why did they select two fourth century Greek texts, the Sinaiticus
Vaticanus, associated with Alexandaria, Egypt rather than some other
Greek texts?

However, we have to look at their 1881 Greek text in comparison with
the Textus Receptus to understand its problems.

Helena Blavatsky (1831-1891) was an important figure in the 19th century occult
movement in England. Several Anglican Spiritualists were part of the
occult revival that included Fenton John Anthony Hort and Brooke Foss Westcott.

Westcott and Hort were active in the British nineteenth century Ghost
Society and in the Society for Psychical Research. They were
interested in paranormal phenomena. These two
Anglican theologians created a Greek text which disagrees in many verse
wordings with the Textus Receptus Greek text, used for the King James
Version of 1611. Almost all recent New Testament translations are from
the 1881 Westcott-Hort Greek text - and not from the Textus Receptus.

The loyal followers of Westcott and Hort - the Riders on their
Wrecking Machine - will deny that the two Anglican theologians had
anything to do with the 19th century English occult revival. This is
why we should be more careful than Christians usually are in
identifying our sources for
the claim that Westcott and Hort were important figures within the
British nineteenth century occult movement.

Alan Gauld in The Founders of Psychical Research, NY:Schocken Books,
1968, p. 66, says "Cambridge professor, Fenton John Antony
Hort, Anglican clergyman, Brooke Foss Westcott . and the future
Archbishop of Canterbury, Edward White Benson, founded the Cambridge
Ghost Society in 1851."

Then Arthur Westcott tells us in Life and Letters of Brooke Foss Westcott, New
York Macmillan and Co., 1896, Vol. I, p. 118, 119, that "His devotion
with ardour is indicated in a 'Ghostly Circular' authorized by him.
'The interest and importance of a serious and
earnest inquiry into the nature of the phenomena which are vaguely
called 'supernatural' will scarcely be questioned." "His" refers to
Arthur Westcott's father, Brooke Foss Westcott.

On page 118 Arthur Westcott writes that his father Brooke F. Wesctott
said in the "Ghostly Circular" that "Many persons believe that all
such apparently mysterious occurrences are due either to purely
natural causes, or to delusions of the mind or senses, or to willful
deception. But there are many others who believe it possible that the
beings of the unseen world may manifest themselves in extraordinary
ways...If the belief of the latter class should be
ultimately confirmed, the limits which human knowledge respecting the
spirit world has hitherto reached might be ascertained with some
degree of accuracy."

Brooke F. Westcott wanted to investigate occult phenomena to see if it
could be shown to reliably exist.

Yet at least 17 verses in the Bible warn against dealing with familiar
spirits. Other texts say not to consult wizards, soothsayers,
astrologers, or diviners. Many followers of Westcott and Hort will
refuse to consider that these two
were violating Biblical law by dealing with the occult.
Ezekiel 13: 22 can be interpreted to teach that the promoters of
Westcott and Hort have "...strengthened the hands of the wicked, that
he should not return from his wicked way..." Some may be caught in the
Westcott-Hort trap,
and are boxed in so that they will not see the problems of these two
unbelieving Anglican churchmen.

W.H. Salter in his book,The Society For Psychical Research, An Outline
of It's History, London, 1948, p. 8, says "The original objective of
the Society for Psychical.Research (S.P.R,). was to conduct research
into "that large group of debatable phenomena designated by such terms
as
mesmeric, psychical and spiritualistic." Committees were organized to
examine telepathy, hypnotism, mesmeric trance, clairvoyance, ESP,
apparitions, haunted houses, and to determine the laws of physical
spiritualistic phenomena. In recognition of the important work
accomplished by Benson, Westcott and Hort -- the leaders of its
precursor, the Cambridge Ghost Society -- the S.P.R. Historical
Outline posits, "It would hardly have been possible for the new
Society to undertake an enquiry of such a kind or on such as scale if
several of its
leading members had not already gained previous experience of the
difficulties attaching to that type of investigation."

The son of Fenton Hort, Arthur Hort, in Life and Letters of Fenton
John Anthony Hort, Macmillan, 1896, Vol 1, pp. 170-172 wrote that his
father was active in "Two other societies...in both of which Hort
seems to have been the moving spirit...the other called... the Ghostly
Guild. The object was to collect and classify authenticated instances
of what are now called psychical phenomena."

Hort and his associate Westcott were both heavily involved in the
Society for Psychical Research.

There is a reference which says that the Society for Psychical
Research held seances and interviewed Helena P. Blavatsky, who is a
forerunner of the present New Age Occult movment. "In its early
stages, the S.P.R. (Society For Psychical Research) held séances in
the townhouse of Arthur Balfour of which his sister Eleanor was the
principle organizer. Various mediums of reputation were investigated
with the purpose of ruling out charlatans and determining if entities
from the spirit realm or deceased persons did in fact communicate with
the living. In 1884, Madame H.P. Blavatsky, founder of the
Theosophical Society, was interviewed by a committee of the
S.P.R....the S.P.R. was at first -- "…considerably impressed by the
evidence of Mme Blavatsky and her friends..." From: W.H. Salter, The
Society For Psychical Research, An Outline of it's History,
London,1948, pp 21-22.

In addition, the Society For Psychical Research sponsored a number of
seance settings from 1889 to 1890 by spirit medium Leonora Piper of
Boston, and by Rosalee Thompson, a British spirit medium in 1897 and
1898. There are a few links on Google to these seances held by the
Society For Psychical Research. Type in the names of the two spirit
mediums above and "Society For psychical Research."

In studying the occult, the Anglican theologians and other members of
the English elite class made the occult more acceptable. This same
process seems to have happened in the seventies and eighties when
American psychologists and communications professors studied hard core
pornography. They made pornography more acceptable, not only to the
college students they showed it to, but also to others.

Psychologist Leonard Berkowitz of the University of Wisconsin and Ed
Donnerstein - another Wisconsin professor - showed a porno movie of
two men tying up and raping a
woman. This was reported in the Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology. See Donnerstein, E. & Berkowitz, L. (1981). Victim
reactions in aggressive erotic films as a factor in violence against
women. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 710-724.
Berkowitz was one of my professors at Wisconsin.

Acceptance of porno came in on the heels of the counterculture, and
was part of the process of breaking down Christian morality and
weakening the family. The Dot Com Culture on the Internet has helped
to spread acceptance of pornography. Very few people over the years
have understood the occult and satanic implications of porno.[/indent]

 

[veteran]

That all makes sense. The later Bible translations use Humanist speech in a social philosophical approach, almost like a psychologist sat in on the translation.

Philo of Alexandria was another one of the mystics at Alexandria, Egypt which had influence in the Gnostic movement at Alexandria. He is actually New Age recommended reading.

 

[Nomad]

The Occult Connections of Westcott and Hort


Almost all of the Bible translations since the late 19th century - for
the New Testament - are based upon the Greek text of Westcott and Hort
(1881). The New International Version (NIV) first published in 1978
claims to be based on the Nestle-Aland Greek Text, which is similar to
the Westcott-Hort text because it is also based on the Alexandarian
Greek texts.

We've been through this already. WH are not the basis for modern New Testaments. And no, the NA text is not based predominately on the Alexandrian text type like WH. I already pointed out the NA text is 'eclectic.' It draws on a wide range of source material.

The vast major of scholars follows the perspective that has given rise to such modern Greek texts as the United Bible Societies' 4th Edition and the Nestle-Aland 27th Edition. This approach would basically be characterized as "eclectic," in that each reading is examined on its own merits and no absolutely overriding rule is used to artificially decide every variant. - Dr. James R. White - The King James Only Controversy, p. 151, 1995 edition

. . .Its basic difference from the text of the 16th to the 18th centuries is that the new text is not based on a small group of manuscripts (selected by chance, mostly of late date and poor quality), but on a review of all the evidence that is in any way relevant to the establishing of the original text, whether Greek manuscripts as early as the second century, or versions, or writngs of the early Church Fathers in various languages - always examining the original texts while constantly reviewing the external factors which affect the value of their testimony. - Kurt Aland - The Text of the New Testament, p. 36

. . .the editorial committee (or morer precisely its majority), decided to abandon the theories of Wescott-Hort and the "Western non-interpolations" as Kurt Aland had urged consistently in personal discussion and also in numerous esays. - Kurt Aland - The Text of the New Testament, p. 33

Now on to another matter. If you want to impugn the text of WH, you should do it on a textual critical basis, not on supposed personal character or anything else some might find distasteful in WH's lives. If you insist on this fallacious course then be consistent and forsake your KJV. First, the TR was compiled by a dyed-in-the-wool Roman Catholic priest, named Erasmus. As a Roman Catholic priest he would have believed and done things that I'm sure you would find repugnant.

Erasmus' Vision Of The Church by Hilmar M. Pabel, p. 72

He (Erasmus) was quick to point out that he did not belong to Luther's camp and often professed his loyalty to the Roman Pontiff and the Roman Church. In Sept. 1520 he assured Pope Leo that he was "not mad enough to make some bold move against the supreme vicar of Christ. 85

To another correspndent he affirmed, "Assailed as I have been from so many quarters which I could name and wooed with honeyed words from others, it has never been possible to detach me from my veneration from the Church of Rome. 86

In a letter of Dec. 6, 1520 to Cardinal Lorenzo Campeggi he expressed his belief that the Roman Church does not dissent from the catholic church and declared, "I am not impius enough to dissent from the Catholic Church, I am not ungreatful enough to dissent from Leo. 87

One last thing. If you don't like the methods of modern textual criticism, then you should have a problem with how the KJV was compiled. The KJV translators did not utilize the Majority Text approach. They chose readings from the various versions of the Textus Receptus compiled by Erasmus, Stephanus and Beza. That's right, not only did Erasmus publish 5 ammended editions of his TR, Stephanus and Beza each compiled their own editions of Erasmus' work, which the KJV translators utilized. They also did not shy away from using other resources as well, including latin texts. Here's an excerpt from the preface of the original 1611 KJV, which by the way, almost no one uses any more. Most who use the KJV don't even realize that they're most likely using the 1769 Blaney revision.

Neither did we think much to consult the Translators or Commentators, Chaldee, Hebrew, Syrian, Greek or Latin, no nor the Spanish, French, Italian, or Dutch; neither did we disdain to revise that which we had done, and to bring back to the anvil that which we had hammered: but having and using as great helps as were needful, and fearing no reproach for slowness, nor coveting praise for expedition, we have at length, through the good hand of the Lord upon us, brought the work to that pass that you see. -The Translators to the Readers - Preface to the King James Version 1611, page 10

The full document can be seen here: http://www.ccel.org/bible/kjv/preface/pref1.htm

 

[veteran]

From:
http://www.deanburgonsociety.org/CriticalTexts/dbs2695.htm

"A. The purpose and intention is to deal with the false and erroneous Greek New Testament Greek text and theory promulgated by what Dean Burgon refers to as "two irresponsible scholars of the University of Cambridge." These "irresponsible scholars" are none other than Bishop Brooke Foss Westcott and Professor Fenton John Anthony Hort. Their "invention" of the new Revised Greek Text that surfaced in 1881. It is strange indeed that very few people saw as clearly as Dean John William Burgon, their fellow Anglican clergyman, that Westcott and Hort were indeed "irresponsible scholars."


B. The Relationship Between the Westcott and Hort Greek Text and the Modern So-Called "Eclectic" or "Critical" Text.Many of those who despise the Textus Receptus today and are powerful advocates of the false Revised Greek texts of Nestle-Aland or the United Bible Society have attempted to distance themselves from the Westcott and Hort Greek Text of 1881. In reality, with some minor changes, they are virtually identical. This fact is what makes this present booklet and the entire Revision Revised so powerful and so necessary. Here are some quotes from various writers about modern New Testament Greek texts and theories compared with the Greek text and theories of Westcott and Hort, showing the similarity between the two in both areas.

1. Seven Testimonies By Writers from 1914 through 1990 Stating the Similarity between the Westcott and Hort Text and Theory and that of the Current Greek Texts.

a. 1914--The Testimony of Herman Hoskier.
"The text printed by Westcott and Hort has been accepted as `the true text,' and grammars, works on the synoptic problem, works on higher criticism, and others have been grounded on this text." [Herman C. Hoskier, Codex B and Its Allies--a Study and an Indictment, (1914), Vol I, p. 468.
b. 1964--The Testimony of J. H. Greenlee.
"The textual theories of W-H [Westcott & Hort] underlies virtually all subsequent work in NT textual criticism." [J. H. Greenlee, Introduction to New Testament Textual Criticism, (1964), p. 78]
c. 1979--The Testimony of D. A. Carson.
"The theories of Westcott and Hort . . . [are] almost universally accepted today. . . . Subsequent textual critical work [since 1881] accepted the theories of Westcott and Hort. The vast majority of evangelical scholars hold that the basic textual theories of Westcott and Hort were right and the church stands greatly in their debt." [D. A. Carson, The King James Version Debate, (1979), p. 75]
d. 1980--The Testimony of Wilbur N. Pickering.
"The two most popular manual editions of the text today, Nestles-Aland and U.B.S. (United Bible Society) really vary little from the W-H [Westcott & Hort] text." [Dr. Wilbur N. Pickering, The Identity of the New Testament Text, (1980), pp. 42 (DBS#556 for a gift of $12.00 + $4.00 S&H)].
e. 1987--The Testimony of John R. Kohlenberger.
"Westcott and Hort . . . all subsequent versions from the Revised Version (1881) to those of the present . . . have adopted their basic approach . . . [and] accepted the Westcott and Hort [Greek] text." [John R. Kohlenberger, Words About the Word, (1987) p. 42]
f. 1990--The Testimony of Philip W. Comfort.
"But textual critics have not been able to advance beyond Hort in formalizing a theory . . . this has troubled certain textual scholars. " [Philip W. Comfort, Early Manuscripts and Modern Translations of the New Testament, (1990), p. 21]
g. 1990--The Testimony of Bruce Metzger.
In 1990, Dr. Kirk D. DiVietro, a Baptist Pastor, wrote to Dr. Bruce Metzger about how he and the other members of the Nestle-Aland and United Bible Societies Committee began their work on their New Testament Greek Texts. Dr. Metzger replied to him as follows:

"We took as our base at the beginning the text of Westcott and Hort (1881) and introduced changes as seemed necessary on the basis of MSS evidence."​

This documentation is found in Metzger's own handwriting in DBS #2490-P, p. 272 in The Dean Burgon Society (1978--1994) Messages From the 16th Annual Meeting, August, 1994.​

2. The Conclusion and Importance to be Drawn from these Seven Testimonies. Have you ever wondered just WHY the basic Greek text of Westcott and Hort dated in 1881 is virtually identical with the basic Greek text of the present critical editions? The simple reason is that they are derived from the same basic, corrupt Greek manuscripts, namely "B" (Vatican) and "Aleph" (Sinai) and a few others that followed them."


The premise texian has raised is correct and warranted.

 

[Nomad]

The premise texian has raised is correct and warranted.

No it's not. I provided the very words of Kurt Aland who convinced his committee to abandon the textual critical theories of WH. Aland also relates in one of those quotes that the "new text", unlike that of WH, utilized an eclectic battery of textual sources. I think Kurt Aland knows better than anyone how his Nestle-Aland critical text was compiled. Your quotes are nothing more than the biased opinions of King James Onlyist or Majority Text advocates.

 

[veteran]

No it's not. I provided the very words of Kurt Aland who convinced his committee to abandon the textual critical theories of WH. Aland also relates in one of those quotes that the "new text", unlike that of WH, utilized an eclectic battery of textual sources. I think Kurt Aland knows better than anyone how his Nestle-Aland critical text was compiled. Your quotes are nothing more than the biased opinions of King James Onlyist or Majority Text advocates.

The quotes I provided are from those qualified to do comparisons of those texts, and of an Anglican (Burgon) of their era who understood the difference also.

 

[Nomad]

The quotes I provided are from those qualified to do comparisons of those texts, and of an Anglican (Burgon) of their era who understood the difference also.

More qualified than the man responsible for the text under consideration? I don't think so. I'm pretty sure Kurt Aland knows how his text was constructed.

 

[kiwimac]

Indeed. As for Westcott and Hort being involved in the occult. They formed the 'Ghostlie Guild' to ascertain whether or not the occultic fads of the time were based on actual occurrences or the work of fraudsters. This is what Westcott's son had to say about the Ghostlie Guild:

The context is from where Westcott's son discusses Westcott's short-lived involvement in the "Ghostlie Guild" when he was a young man still in university (see James May's article and Robert L. Sumner's article for more information), and the entire paragraph the quote is lifted from is as follows (bold added):

"What happened to this Guild in the end I have not discovered. My father ceased to interest himself in these matters, not altogether, I believe, from want of faith in what, for lack of a better name, one must call Spiritualism, but because he was seriously convinced that such investigations led to no good." (Life and Letters of Brooke Foss Westcott, Vol. I, p.119)​

From my site http://www.westcotthort.com/quotes_newage.html

 

[biggandyy]

Arguing with a KJOnlyist is very much like this:

If one enjoys that type of discussions, have a blast.

 

[veteran]

Just because one is aware of Wescott and Hort's deception and connection with modern Bible translations doesn't make one a KJV only student.

 

[JohnDB]

Since attacking the substance of Wescott and Hort's work isn't going to get anybody very far at all they resort to Ad-hominems...attacking those that have done the work.

Especially when it shows your ignorance on who these men really were.

Wescott was a scholar on ANE writings. His major scope of work was not the Bible itself but on the Midrash, Sifre, and Talmuds of the day and time...as well as other writings...pretty much anything but the bible because the Church had locked away all the manuscripts and offered handsome rewards for such. So the man was able to study all the other writings of that time period and was the most knowledgeable scholar about those writings. (Especially important when we read his commentary on Hebrews)

Also as he was a scholar "Outside the respectable and known political hacks" inside of the Church he was actually rather neutral on any of Christiandom's politics at that time. Where he did have his own thoughts about some issues that some find rather offensive today...it was not really outside of today's pail of orthodoxy. But his skills in translating the Bible was from years of extensive research into the shapes of the letters and character of writing that was in extant when he began to form a large section of newly translated scriptures. I know this thread is part and parcel with trying to hold to a KING JAMES only thought line...but...

 

[veteran]

No, it's not a KJV only thread, for even the more modern New King James Version has omissions and corruptions put in it, revealing what? It reveals the attempt by Christ's enemies to re-write God's Word to better fit they're goals of joining all religions of the world under their coming Antichrist. If a believer cannot see that working of today involving many of the later Bible translations, then they are prepared to be a part of the world beast kingdom and worship of its coming fake Christ.

 

[biggandyy]

But those so called deceptions have been debunked for nearly a century now. All you are doing is tilting at windmills of the past.

 

[prism]

Veteran,
Just out of 'spectator' interest can you give me 3 clear instances of translational differences where the work of WH leads to your above assertion of ' joining all religions of the world under their coming Antichrist'.

 

[kiwimac]

I shouldn't think so!

 

[Nomad]

Veteran,
Just out of 'spectator' interest can you give me 3 clear instances of translational differences where the work of WH leads to your above assertion of ' joining all religions of the world under their coming Antichrist'.

I wouldn't hold my breath. He can't give you even one. There is no such evidence.

 

[veteran]

http://www.biblicalresearchreports.com/smallniv.php

 

[kiwimac]

More rubbish.

Just because one is aware of Wescott and Hort's deception and connection with modern Bible translations doesn't make one a KJV only student.

What 'deceptions' were those?

 

[aspen]

Arguing with a KJOnlyist is very much like this:

If one enjoys that type of discussions, have a blast.

AMEN

 

[veteran]

Here's some examples of differences between modern translations like the NIV translation from the Nestle-Aland/UBS (NU) Greek text vs. the Textus Receptus used for earlier Bible translations. These following use the Textus Receptus (Received Texts also called Majority Texts) - the 1611 KJV Bible, German Luther Bible, Tyndale version, Bishop's Bible, Coverdale Bible, Geneva Bible, the Great Bible, A Literal Translation of the Bible (J.P. Green), Matthew's Bible, Quaker Bible, Young's Literal Translation, etc.


Following are examples of what later Bible versions left out when using the 1881 Greek text of Wescott and Hort.

"Manuscript Evidence Given by the UBS Greek Text

Here you can see for yourself the manuscript evidence that the other side gives as the reason why, for what they have removed and changed in the Greek text. It is one thing to read one of their books and hear them give the reasonings in general and ambiguous terms. It is another to see the actual manuscript evidence that is given for yourself. These are the only early Greek manuscripts that NU Greek text quotes that did not have the reading.

The following is the manuscript basis that the United Bible Society's Greek text gives as the basis for why they did not include the words, phrases and verses in the NU Greek text. This information is taken from the foot notes in the UBS 3rd Edition Greek Text and the companion book, A Textual commentary on the Greek New Testament by Bruce Metzger. That book explains why something was removed, added or changed in the NU Greek text.

Each manuscript is identified by a letter, number or a combination of a letter and a number such as C, 085, or p35. The date of the manuscript is beside it so that for each passage you can tell at a glance the age that they give for each manuscript.
In this section I have stated what was removed, followed by all the Greek manuscripts through the eighth century that are listed in the two above mentioned books as the basis for why it was removed or changed in the NU Greek text.

There are a number of things for you to observe in this section:

1. Notice that the two main manuscripts given as the basis for removing something from the Word of God are the manuscripts Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. But notice that they do not always have the same reading. The Sinaiticus and Vaticanus do not always have the same word, phrase, or verse removed. Notice that they are not identical manuscripts.
2. Notice how only a few manuscripts support a word, phrase, or verse being removed.
3. Notice how the same Greek manuscripts are not listed for each verse.
4. • It illustrates what John Burgon stated that the main manuscripts used to change God's Word, Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, A, C, and D do not read the same. He only found one place where they all five agreed together in respect to a "various" reading. A "various" reading being a reading that is different from the majority of manuscripts.
   • It indicates a significant amount of subjectivity on the part of the compilers of the NIV's Greek text (The NU Greek text) as to what would be removed. These manuscripts are not identical. They do not read the same as each of the others.
5. Observe how most of the manuscript evidence is around 300 or more years after most of the original manuscripts of the New Testament were written. If you think back to what has happened since 1701, you soon realize that 300 years is not very close to the originals. The manuscript evidence used to change the words of the Bible is not as ancient as the NIV supporters make it sound.
6. Note the frequency of no manuscript documentation for something being removed. Of the 60 passages listed here, 28 of them - that is almost half of the passages, do not have any documentation by the UBS 3rd edition Greek text for why it was removed from the Word of God! The UBS 3rd edition Greek text has considerable documentation for phrases with variant readings where it was decided to keep the traditional reading. It surprised me how often it left out documentation when it removed something significant.
7. Notice for yourself that there has never been a single ancient Greek manuscript that reads the same as the NIV's Greek text! You will not find a single manuscript that is listed for every verse!

To remove subjectivity on my part in the selection of verses to use as examples, I chose the first 30 verses in each of the two most important sections: the Deity of Jesus Christ and His Lordship, and Salvation and the Judgment. One would assume that verses in these sections would be the best documented with manuscript evidence because of the significance of what is being removed or changed.

* indicates an entire verse that was removed.
** indicates that they give no manuscript basis for why it was removed from their Greek text!


The Deity of Jesus Christ and His Lordship

Matt. 1:25 removed - "firstborn" (From "And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS")
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
071 5th/6th centuries

**Matt. 13:51 removed "Lord" (from "Jesus saith unto them, Have ye understood all these things? They say unto him, Yea, Lord.")
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!
Matt. 19:16 removed - "Good" (From "And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?")
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
D 5th/6th centuries
L 8th century

Matt. 19:17 removed - "God" (From "And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments") Also, part of v.17 is changed because "good" was removed in v. 16.
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
L 8th century

Matt. 22:32 "God" is changed to "He" implying that Jesus did not consider Himself as
God.
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
W 5th century
L 8th century

**Matt. 23:8 removed - "even Christ" (from "But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ ; and all ye are brethren.")
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!
Matt. 24:36 adds "nor the Son" (To "But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only")
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
D 5th/6th centuries

Matt.27:24 removed - "just" (From "When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it.")
Vaticanus 4th century
D 5th/6th centuries

Matt. 28:6 removed - "Lord" (from "He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay")
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century

Mk. 9:24 removed - "and said with tears, Lord," (From "And straightway the father of the child cried out, and said with tears, Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief.")
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed!

Lk. 2:33 "Joseph" is changed in the NIV's Greek to "the child's father" implying that Joseph was Jesus' father. ("And Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him.")
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
D 5th/6th centuries
W 5th century

**Lk. 2:43 "Joseph and his mother" is changed in the NIV's Greek to "his parents", implying Joseph was Jesus' father. ("And when they had fulfilled the days, as they returned, the child Jesus tarried behind in Jerusalem; and Joseph and his mother knew not of it.")
They give no manuscript basis for why this was changed in their Greek text!

**Lk.4:41 removed - "Christ" (from "And devils also came out of many, crying out, and saying, Thou art Christ the Son of God. And he rebuking them suffered them not to speak: for they knew that he was Christ.") (Christ means Messiah)
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!

**Lk. 7:31 removed - " And the Lord said" (from "And the Lord said, Whereunto then shall I liken the men of this generation? and to what are they like?")
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!

Lk. 9:35 removed - "beloved" (from "And there came a voice out of the cloud, saying, This is my beloved Son: hear him.)
added - " whom I have chosen"
p45 3rd century
p47 3rd century
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
L 8th century
(over 2,200 Greek manuscripts have "beloved" and do not have "whom I have chosen")

**Lk. 22:31 removed - "And the Lord said" (from "And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat:")
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!

**Jn. 1:27 removed - "is preferred before me" (from "He it is, who coming after me is preferred before me, whose shoe's latchet I am not worthy to unloose.")
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!

Jn. 3:13 removed - " which is in heaven" (from "And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.")
p66 2nd/3rd centuries
p75 3rd century
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
W 5th century
L 8th century
(over 2,000 Greek manuscripts have "which is in heaven")

Jn. 6:69 "And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God." (KJV) is changed to "We believe and know that you are the Holy One of God." (NIV)
p75 3rd century
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
C 5th/6th centuries
W 5th century
L 8th century

**Jn. 8:24 added - "the one I claim to be" ("I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am the one I claim to be, you will indeed die in your sins." NIV)
They give no manuscript basis for why this was added to their Greek text!

**Jn. 8:28 added - "the one I claim to be" ("So Jesus said, "When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am the one I claim to be and that I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me. NIV)
They give no manuscript basis for why this was added to their Greek text!

**Jn. 8:35 "The Son abideth forever" is changed to "a son belongs to it forever" ("And the servant abideth not in the house for ever: but the Son abideth ever." KJV)
They give no manuscript basis for why this was changed in their Greek text!

Jn. 8:38 "My Father" is changed to "the Father" ("I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that which ye have seen with your father." KJV)
p66 2nd/3rd centuries
p75 3rd centuries
Vaticanus 4th century
C 5th century
L 8th century

Jn. 9:35 "Son of God" is changed to "Son of man" ("Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when he had found him, he said unto him, Dost thou believe on the Son of God?" KJV)
p66 2nd/3rd centuries
p75 3rd centuries
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
D 5th/6th centuries
W 5th century

**Jn. .16:16 removed - "Because I go to the Father" (From "A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again, a little while, and ye shall see me, because I go to the Father.")
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!

Acts 2:30 removed - "according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ" (From "Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne")
p74 7th century (It gives apparent support for this to be removed)
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
A 5th century
C 5th century

**Acts 3:26 "his Son Jesus" is changed to "his servant" ("Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities." KJV)
They give no manuscript basis for why this was changed in their Greek text!

Rom. 6:11 removed - "our Lord" (from "Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.")
p46 2nd/3rd centuries
Vaticanus 4th century
A 5th century
D 5th/6th centuries

Rom. 14:10-12 "Judgment seat of Christ" is changed to " judgment seat of God" ("But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ." KJV)
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
A 5th century
C 5th century
D 5th/6th centuries


Salvation and the Judgment

**Matt. 9:13 removed - "to repentance" (from "But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.")
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!

*Matt. 18:11 removed the entire verse - "For the son of man is come to save that which was lost."
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
L 8th century

Matt. 20:16 removed - "for many be called, but few chosen" (From "So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few chosen.")
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
L 8th century
085 6th century

**Matt. 22:13 removed - "and take him away" (from "Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.")
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!

**Matt. 24:42 "hour" is changed to "day" (in "ye know not what hour your Lord doth come." KJV)
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!

Matt. 25:13 removed - "wherein the Son of man cometh" (from "Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh.")
p35 ? no date given
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
A 5th century
C 5th century
D 5th/6th centuries
L 8th century
W 5th century
047 8th century

Mk. 1:14 removed - "of the kingdom" (From "Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came in to Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God")
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
L 8th century

**Mk. 2:17 removed - "to repentance" (From "When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.")
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!

**Mk. 4:12 removed - "sins"; also "converted" is changed to "turn" (From "That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.")
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!

**Mk. 6:11 removed - "verily I say unto you, it shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city." (From "And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city")
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!

Mk. 9:44 removed the entire verse - "where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched" v.45 removed - "into the fire that never shall be quenched:" (From "And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:") v.46 the entire verse is removed - "where their worm dieth not and the fire is not quenched."
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
C 5th century
L 8th century
W 5th century

Mk. 10:24 removed - "for them that trust in riches" (From "And the disciples were astonished at his words. But Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them, Children, how hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God!")
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century

*Mk. 11:26 removed the entire verse - "But if you do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses."
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
W 5th century

Lk. 9:55,56 removed - "and said, ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of Man is not come to destroy men's lives but to save them." (From " But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them. And they went to another village")
p45 3rd century
p75 3rd centuries
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
A 5th century
C 5th century
W 5th century
L 8th century

*Lk. 17:36 the entire verse is removed - "Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left"
p75 3rd centuries
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
A 5th century
W 5th century
L 8th century

**Jn. 3:15 removed - "should not perish" (From "That whosoever believeth in him should not
perish, but have eternal life.")
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!

**Jn. 4:42 removed - "the Christ" ((From "And said unto the woman, Now we believe, not because of thy saying: for we have heard him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world.")
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!

Jn. 6:47 removed - "on me" (From "He that believeth on me hath everlasting life")
p66 2nd/3rd centuries
p75 3rd centuries
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
C 5th century

**Acts 2:41 removed - "gladly" (From "Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.")
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!

*Acts 8:37 removed the entire verse - "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"
p45 3rd century
p74 7th century
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
A 5th century
C 5th century

**Acts 19:10 removed - "Jesus" From "And this continued by the space of two years; so that all they which dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greeks")
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!

Acts 24:15 removed - "of the dead" (From "And have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust.")
p74 7th century
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
A 5th century
C 5th century

**Rom. 1:16 removed - "of Christ" (from "For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.")
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!

Rom. 9:28 removed - "For he will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness" (From "For he will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness: because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth.")
p46 2nd/3rd centuries
Sinaiticus 4th century
Vaticanus 4th century
A 5th century

**Rom. 10:15 removed - "that preach the gospel of peace" and "of good things" (Is. 52:7) (From "And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things! ")
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!

Rom. 11:6 removed - "but if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work." (From "And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.")
p45 3rd century
Sinaiticus 4th century
A 5th century
C 5th century
D 5th/6th centuries

**I Cor. 5:7 removed - "for us" (From "Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us")
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!

**I Cor. 9:18 removed - "of Christ" (From "What is my reward then? Verily that, when I preach the gospel, I may make the gospel of Christ without charge, that I abuse not my power in the gospel.")
They give no manuscript basis for why this was removed from their Greek text!

From http://www.biblicalresearchreports.com/smallniv.php



The omissions are self-evident that Hort and Wescott's text includes an agenda by men.