|
|
|
Bible Versions Part 2
Posted On: 10/25/2006 09:06:23
|
Mark 9:29 And he said unto them, This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer and fasting. Now the Modern Versions masqueradeing as Transalations remove the “and Fasting” here and render the text “He answered, "There is no way to get rid of this kind of demon except by prayer." The Message, or “Jesus answered, "Only prayer can force out that kind of demon." Contemporary English Version, or “And he said unto them, This kind can come out by nothing, save by prayer.” American Standard..the list goes on..not a few transalations omit this vital part of the Text. Why? One has to ask..and simply put , these modern versions will use two manuscripts to correct everything thing else. The use B and Aleph mss. To correct the mass of other Textual evidence.The KJV controversy goes beyond translation it’s a matter of Text, some have been mislead into the Translation lie and have a bible with over 2000 verses ripped away out of the New Tetament alone.In the above Text Many Bible versions give us a Lying footnote that says “Some manuscripts add and fasting” such as the NIV which says “some manuscripts Prayer and Fasting”…SOME? Now of course not everyone has Access to a Greek Text with Textual Variants listed such as United Bible Society Third Edition to confirm such a thing or some have an abridged listing of Texts such as the preface of UBS4 notes of a “select sampling”. The Reality is this; the only evidences are 2 manuscripts, both B and Aleph…now The Original Aleph doesn’t have AND FASTING, yet the Corrected one does, do ya think maybe the scribe of the original made a mistake, while the second scibe corrected that mistake?, which only Leaves us with the Fourth century Vaticanus Text B. Now of course its not alone, a fourth/fifth century Italian mss doesnt have it either(ITk), but it stands alone against all its predeccesors and followers, alone against every IT text before it and after it and during its Authorship from the Early fourth century till the Thirtenth century, How strange, isn’t it? Another support the removal of AND FASTING has is a Nineth century Georgian Text, but Here Again, the same case its fifth century predessor and tenth century successors INCLUDE it , How odd, don’t you think? And the Last Piece of Evidence we have is the Citation of CLEMENT of Alexandria, I wonder why? Is it Just because MAYBE he quoted only the part of a text that is relevant to his Discussion, PRAYER, that maybe if he was talking about FASTING he would have quoted the whole Text? Because if you Read His STROMATA hes only speaking about Prayer, he no where addresses FASTING, hummm could it be? So here they use Clement, why? Because They Assume his Bible didn’t have AND FASTING? We know TertUllians did Because in his address on Fasting he says “He taught likewise that fasts are to be weapons for battling with more direful demons”, Where did Jesus teach that? Mark 9:29! So when its all looked at we have Only one SOLID piece of Evidence to Remove this “and fasting”, the other 4 are highly questionable, so at least you have 1 text and at best 5 pieces of Evidence to remove it, against over The Rest of every textual mss with the verse from the Third century till the Fourtenth, over 40 Manuscript proofs, also every Lectionary, and every other piece of evidence that could be supplied! Yet what did the NIV say? SOME? Since when is +40 pieces SOME compared to at most 5?This is Just One Example of the Superior Text of The Authorized Version.
|
