Monday, May 8, 2017

Pierced for our trangessions (debating a jew over messianic prophecies involving piercing)

I was on facebook,  I was debating other topics but this one came up when a Jewsih woman started debating me on the translation of "Lucifer".  This woman converted to Christianity for 40yrs before going apostate back to Judaism. I decided that this prophesy of Jesus being pierced in prophecy was worthy of publication.  here are excerpts on the topic.  (psalm 22 and zechariah 12 are key focused)
Jewish lady: Matt SIngleton You might start with a correct translation. If you did, you'd know that verse 16 does not say "pierced".
Correctly translated:
(Psa 22:16) (22:17) For dogs have encompassed me; a company of evil-doers have inclosed me; like a lion, they are at my hands and my feet.
This Psalm is most definitely David.
As for your "complete" scripture.
Please do not attach your bible to mine and call it complete.
However, if you really want to go there, I was a born-again, spirit filled Christian for 40 years. I call those years as a "believer" my desert wanderings. I studied with some pretty important ministers of the time. You see, I was one of the original Jesus Freaks. Would you believe I even lived in a Missionary training school where I studied to street evangelize and I was good at it! Yep, I led hundreds of "lost" souls to Jesus.
But I'm Jewish and sooner or later, G-d awakens the Jewish soul, calls to them to return and opens their eyes to the truth.

LikeShow more reactions
· Reply · May 6 at 1:35am
Matt SIngleton
Matt SIngleton They were not literal lions. What does "like a lion they are at my hands and feet mean? you think they were licking him? LOL.
No, Lions with big teeth and big claws, "pierce" and they did not remove the lion metaphor entirely from the passage."13 They gaped upon me with their mouths,as a ravening and a roaring lion." They made it more understandable to an english reader with the translation "pierced".

"This Psalm is most definitely David. "
Ad hoc
Ye that fear the Lord, praise him;
all ye the seed of Jacob, glorify him;
and fear him, all ye the seed of Israel."
who is the "Seed" of Israel?
gal. 3:16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ."
Obviously, I am happy hat you told people about Jesus for 40 years.
But you have disproved the claim that you were a spirit-filled believer, you were merely partnering with the Holy Spirit. heb. 6:4-6
If you believed then you believe. because to believe is to know and you don't stop knowing the truth.
matthew 7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

You think you will find solace in an incomplete Bible?
You have "scriptures" but they are waiting for the Word completed.
Deuteronomy 18:15 The Lord thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken; "
This is a prophet like unto Moses. the other prophets were secondary to His revelation of the Law, there was new revelation that is not mosaic waitng.
Isaiah 2:2
And it shall come to pass in the last days,
that the mountain of the Lord’s house shall be established
in the top of the mountains,
and shall be exalted above the hills;
and all nations shall flow unto it.
And many people shall go and say,
Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord,
to the house of the God of Jacob;
and he will teach us of his ways,
and we will walk in his paths:
for out of Zion shall go forth the law,
and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.
And he shall judge among the nations,
and shall rebuke many people:
and they shall beat their swords into plowshares,
and their spears into pruninghooks:
nation shall not lift up sword against nation,
neither shall they learn war any more."
Now here he teaches peace. but the OT hebrews were not pacifist! 
It is new teaching which you don't have. YOU DON'T HAVE A COMPLETE BIBLE."

jewish lady: Matt SIngleton does context mean anything to you at all?  
You Christians, you see a word translated into "Pierced" in English and right away, you think it has to mean "Jesus" because he was executed on a stake. Yet many people endured the same execution. In spite of this, you ignore all the legitimate Messianic prophecies that he never fulfilled and say "oh, but here's the word "pierced", he's messiah, he's messiah, it says pierced!" What about "Seed of David"? He's not of the biological seed of David though his father. What about building the Third Temple"? The Second Temple was still standing when he was killed! What about bringing peace? He said he didn't come to bring peace!

LikeShow more reactions
· Reply · May 6 at 5:42pm
Matt SIngleton
Matt SIngleton so the son is not pierced?? lol lets see how you deal with zechariah 12:10. ( i am at work, so i cant send the link.)

LikeShow more reactions
· Reply · May 6 at 7:57pm
Matt SIngleton
Matt SIngleton btw, ps22 also includes bulls of bashon. david referenced in tons of scripture. where is he put in an attacking zoo? the dogs were talking about the romans because they were named after romulus the wolf god and are gentile unclean dogs. people are still called gods. the lions are judeans "lion of judah" are attacking just like judah betrayed joseph. the bulls of bashon is dealing either syria northern Israel or a combo since northern israel was apostate. david is writing poetically. it no doubt applies to his personal situation in a emotional way. but it applies to christ in a way fulfilled too literally.

LikeShow more reactions
· Reply · May 6 at 8:04pm
Matt SIngleton
Matt SIngleton no, jesus is biologically the seed of God the father. You didn't know jesus was the Son of God?  He is biologically jewish from his mom. His stepdad is biologically Jewish and both are bio descendants of David. He inherited royalty by adoption, to overcome the curse of Coniah. Yet through the curse of coniah his virgin birth and deity are validated. As he is a biological and inheriting son of David and yet the only begotten Son of God the father thus making him the one perfect mediator between man and God. And Jesus affirm he was not just a son of David

LikeShow more reactions
· Reply · May 6 at 8:12pm · Edited

Jewish lady:Matt SIngleton Re: "so the son is not pierced??" - obviously this psalm is not about Jesus.
You should know that the original Hebrew in this Psalm does not say "Pierced", it says "lion" and if you read the whole psalm in context, it should be obvious this is not talking about Jesus.

Zechariah 12 is talking about a time when the Nations are gathered against Israel. In verse 9 HaShem declares He will seek to destroy the nations. He will pour out a spirit of supplication that will motivate the nations to look toward G-d.

verse 10

In verse 10 we see that they shall look upon "me" and mourn over "him"
Who is "me"
who is "him"?
This is obviously 2 different people

John 19:37
changed it to "him"

Can you explain why John changed this?
Zech 12:10 in Hebrew:
וְשָׁפַכְתִּי עַל בֵּית דָּוִיד וְעַל | יוֹשֵׁב יְרוּשָׁלַםִ רוּחַ חֵן וְתַחֲנוּנִים וְהִבִּיטוּ אֵלַי אֵת אֲשֶׁר דָּקָרוּ וְסָפְדוּ עָלָיו כְּמִסְפֵּד עַל הַיָּחִיד וְהָמֵר עָלָיו כְּהָמֵר עַל הַבְּכוֹר:
The correct translation:
"And I will pour out upon the house of David and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplications. And they shall look to Me because of those who have been thrust through and they shall mourn over him as one mourns over an only son and shall be in bitterness, therefore, as one is embittered over a firstborn son."
Note, G-d calls Israel His firstborn son:
(Exo 4:22) And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh: Thus saith the LORD: Israel is My son, My first-born.

LikeShow more reactions
· Reply · May 6 at 9:05pm
Matt SIngleton
Matt SIngleton
22:16 For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet. "
Yes. that's right they have no problem translating "pierced"
The 1985 JPS trans lation reads 17: Dogs surround me a pack of evil ones closes in on me, like lions [they maul] my hands and feet."
in the study notes of the "Jewish Study Bible"(17-19) it says "The scorners are like dogs(and lions according to NJPS) hunting prey (cf. v.14) They gloat at his death and are eager to take his possessions"

SO you see the Jewish Hebrew Scholars have no problem understanding that the Lions and dogs and bulls are metaphorical and not literal. When the Lion mauls your hands and feet it is a lion but a person. After all people can cast lots for your clothes and not lions or dogs!! ( I know, I know! the painting of the dogs with cards can fool you!)
So if the lions are metaphorical what is it that they do that can relate the lion to the attacker?? Piercing!!! They pierce with weapons, lions pierce with teeth and claws.
Now lets pivot to Zechariah 12:10
The JPS is going to habitually run away from using the translation "pierced". But the Jewish Study Bible has some interesting notes on this verse.
"..The Hebrew s ambiguous, because it may refer to a person or a group whom they have pierced although the identity of the pierced one/ones is unclear, ...." "For an understanding of the verse as pointing to the Messiah from the house of Joseph, see b. Sukkah 52a."
Nottice that they have no problem using the word pierced.
But in general Jewish translators Are scared of using the word pierced in any way specifically, for instance
prov. 12: 18 There is that speaketh like the piercings of a sword:but the tongue of the wise is health."
We see in the JPS "There is blunt talk like sword thrust but the speech of the wise is healing" not only is there no reason to not describe the stabbing of a sword as piercing, but the English is more poor than the Authorized version.
For more than a century Jews were content with the authorized version of scripture as the english Bible and used it for the english audience.
But as the nature of their doctrine they have a bias against Messianic prophecies pointing to Christ. So they use these translations in hopes of escaping that.
You see the consistent erasing of "pierced" is conspired because if the Messiah was pierced in Zechariah 12, then psalm 22 could also easily be applied tot he Son of David the Messiah After all curses and blessing spanning generations is a common theme in the Bible. So then psalm 22 being applied to the Messiah is easily literally applied to Jesus when they pierced His hands and feet and cast lots for His garments and the Jews are thus given fair warning of their betrayal and need for repentance.

Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies,…

LikeShow more reactions
· Reply · Remove Preview · 17 hrs
Matt SIngleton
Matt SIngleton "This is obviously 2 different people" oh, you mean like the Father and the Son!?!?!?
Why would Jerusalem wail over Israel's Death, Jerusalem is part of Israel, Israel can not be dead with Jerusalem around!
But yes the OT speaks to the trinity.
And especially the father and the Son.
psalm 110:1
The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand,
until I make thine enemies thy footstool."
btw, king david is sovereign over Israel so who is his Adonai talking to Messiah? Adonai the Messiah, Jesus
Back to Zech, their is no plural once we hear "only Son" because by applying it to Israel you could only argue Jacob/Israel as the singular of Israel. which makes no sense in a future predictive prophecy.
on to john.
John is writing in Greek so he is giving us a copy of Hebrew writing but a translation of it. In general I have concluded that the majority of OT scriptures dealt with by the Apostles are not expositions. The reason for this is that are not speaking by it's authority but by the authority of Christ.
They are gathering implications as opposed to searching for the meaning in the texts.
What that means is that they are bringing out a point of agreement with The OT.
When I say "God is eternal" and you say that "God has been around forever and will stay forever more" you are not copying my words exactly but you have found the implied meaning of my words.
The apostles are inspired of God so they don't need other scriptures because they are already authoritative. They are showing the fulfillment of the scriptures as completing the revelation at various points.
let's look...
john 19: 34 but one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water. 35 And he that saw it bare record, and his record is true: and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe. 36 For these things were done, that the scripture should be fulfilled, A bone of him shall not be broken. 37 And again another scripture saith, They shall look on him whom they pierced."
first, look at exodus..Ex. 12:43 And the Lord said unto Moses and Aaron, This is the ordinance of the passover: There shall no stranger eat thereof: 44 but every man’s servant that is bought for money, when thou hast circumcised him, then shall he eat thereof. 45 A foreigner and an hired servant shall not eat thereof. 46 In one house shall it be eaten; thou shalt not carry forth ought of the flesh abroad out of the house; neither shall ye break a bone thereof. 47 All the congregation of Israel shall keep it."
So John is using this verse to prove that Jesus was an acceptable sacrifice for sins, because his bones were not broken."
So John then refers to Zechariah 12:10 which applies because Jerusalem did indeed look upon him. And John is in fact right that Jerusalem looked upon Him the Messiah.
They had no clue he was prepared to be their sacrifice. Rome had no idea they were fulfilling Jehovah's Requirements. It is not like the Christians made them react that way!

Monday, April 3, 2017

A new look at an Old Word.:The Textual Issues

Earliest text best?
              Not necessarily
 "All agree that one cannot simply take the older manuscripts and trust them, for they may conceivably be very poor copies, while later manuscripts may be good copies of excellent parents that are now lost.  For example, a tenth century miniscule may conceivably be a good copy of an excellent fourth century uncial, and therefore prove quite superior to a fifth century uncial."
The king James Version Bible debate pg. 18 D.A.Carson

Damage to the originals and early copies
 "First the text of the Bible was transmitted in the context of history.  The rise and fall of the Roman Empire, for example, is an important aspect of the transmission of the text of the Bible to our day.  So, too, is the rise of Islam and the protracted conflict between Muslim and Christian forces around the ancient city of Constantinople.  These things had a great influence upon Christians and, necessarily, upon the manuscript in their possession.  This might seem rather elementary and not worthy of noting, but scholars have put forth entire theories about the text of the Bible that seemed to be utterly oblivious of the simple facts of history and how they impacted the entire process."
James White The king James Only Controversy pg. 41-42This is a statement I totally agree with.  We need to look specifically at the history of the text transmission and the transmitters to understand how we get to the originals.  It is unfortunate that White shows very little history in his book.  He spends some time criticizing the history of Erasmus, the majority text and the kjvo camp.  Yet besides these, he never spends much time on real historic issues of the text.  He doesn't go over the history of Alexandria, or the specific Alexandrine school.  He mentioned Romans and Muslims but stopped there.  he never explains why the alexandrine text never persevered in the transmission of the text and he never discusses the ancient translations and translators in detail.  However when we are confronted with the delimma of the Majority TR not having the majority of the manuscripts: How do we account for the majority text? 

Lucian Recension?
  To account for the massive amount of Byzantine manuscripts it is generally theorized that the Byzantine Christians created the byzantine text.  They believe it was done under the heretic Lucian.
However do they have proof that this was done so historically?
Basis: A. Late date
"Before the middle of the third century, at the very earliest, we have no historical signs of the existence of readings , conflate or other, that are marked as distinctly Syrian by the want of attestation from groups of documents which have preserved the other ancient forms of text.  This is a fact of great significance, ascertained as it is exclusively by external evidence, and therefore supplying an absolutely independent verification and extension of the result already obtained by comparison of the internal character of readings as classified by inflation."
 F.J.A. Hort Introduction pg 115-119 (gathered from The Byzantine text type and New Testament textual criticism by Harry A. Sturz)
       Now we must focus on this argument, because dominant protestant NT was always the Textus Receptus. The different Bibles were Catholic Orthodox and Jewish.  So to change the text was comparable to changing the canon.  So why is God's Holy Word subject to challenge?  The first pillar of the challenge is lack of Byzantine manuscripts prior to AD300.  So if there is evidence that there are ancient Byzantine manuscripts prior to that date, then the whole motive for replacing the TR and the majority of english Bibles are KJV.  Therefore if the evidence of the book is compelling then the Alexandrine argument is grossly fraudulent.
B. conflated text
""...we are led to conclude that the hypothesis provisionally allowed [i.e., that where the Syrian text differs from all other extant ancient texts, its authors may have copied some other equally ancient and perhaps purer text now other wise lost] must now be definitely rejected, and to regard the Syrian text as not only partly but wholly derived from other known ancient texts.  It follows that all distinctively Syrian readings may be set aside at once as certainly originating after the middle of the third century, and therefore, as far as transmission is concerned, corruptions of the apostolic text."
FJA Hort introduction pg. 116
This is the capstone of the alexandrine argument.  There has to be an origin for the Byzantine text.  If the Alexandrine the true text, then there must have been a conflation,  once there is not then the reliability of that Alexandrine MS will erode.  Since historically it's reproduction disappeared.

How can you prove a conflation?
                 Answer: By the manuscripts alone
   "We are told nothing as to the amount of revision which he undertook in either Old or New Testament text, the nature of the manuscripts which he consulted, the relation of his work to the hexapla and other similar matters.  We must turn to the manuscripts which have been thought to contain the Lucian Recension"
Bruce Metzger
Here we can see the entire argument is not funded upon historical data; but instead upon critical theory or the guesswork of liberal scholars.

Where is the history?
"The silence is inexplicable: it is not what one would expect.  It seems logical  that there should be as great or greater reaction to the replacement of a whole Greek New Testament (The original language) than there was to Jerome's revision of the Old Latin (a translation).
The Byzantine text type and New Testament textual criticism by Harry A. Sturz

*It should be noted that modern critical text advocates have shied away from the lucian recension theory since they lack any historical support for it.

"I am not here arguing for or against a theory that sees the genesis of the Byzantine text as a systematic conflation of other texts, even though some conflation certainly occurred"
The king James Version Bible debate pg. 51 D.A.Carson
    However, they must still argue for the recension even though they can no longer pinpoint a single historical example.
"Most believe the Byzantine represents a later period in which readings from other text-types were put together ('conflated') into the reading in the byzantine text This is not to say the Byzantine does not contain some distinctive readings that are quite ancient, but that the readings that are unique to that text type are generally secondary or later readings.  Since the byzantine comes from a later period(the earliest texts are almost all Alexandrian in nature, not Byzantine), it is 'fuller' in the sense that it not only contains conflations of the other text types, but it gives evidence of whay might be called 'the expansion of piety'.  That is, additions have been made to the text that flow from a desire to protect and reverence divine truth's"
James White The king James Only Controversy pg.43
Here Alexandrine advocates can not even endorse the recension theory, which deniesthem the logical right to ever win the argument.

  If there is no proof of a historical recension then the text must be authentic
"A text type is either recensional or not recensional.  By "recensional"  I mean that a text has come into being by conscious revision, editing, or conflation or by change over a period of time as part of a directed developing process.  If this does not explain the genesis of a particular text, then that text is simply the copy of a copy; it is not recensional at all."
The king James Version Bible debate pg. 53 D.A.Carson

 So why is there a minority of early byzantine manuscripts?  
 As mentioned by Dr. White their was on-going persecution of Christians in the east from both the roman empire early on and the Muslims later.  It is very well possible that either Muslim or Roman occupation of the east would have to a burning of the original manuscripts as well as several other early manuscripts.  But just because there was this destruction of the ancient text doesn't mean that they were gone, once the Byzantine scholars had them.
"The first Edicts calling for the persecution of Christians came in March 303.  Diocletian ordered  the cessation of the meetings of the Christians, the destruction of the churches, the deposition of the officers of the church, the imprisonment of those  who persisted in their testimony to Christ,  and the destruction of  the scriptures by fire." 
Christianity through the centuries Earl E. Cairns pg. 92

"All this was fulfilled in our day when we saw with our own eyes our houses of worship thrown down from their elevation, the sacred scriptures of inspiration committed in the flames in the midst of the markets, the shepherds of the people basely concealed here and there, some of them ignominiously captured and the sport of their enemies; when,also, according to another  prophetic declaration, "contempt was poured out upon their rulers, and he made them to err in atrackless by-path, and where there is no road." (ps.107:40)"Eusibius' Ecclesiastical history book 8 chapter 2 translated by C.F. Cruse

"It was in the nineteenth year of the reign of diocletian and the month of dystrus, called by the Romans March, in which the festival of our Savior's passion was at hand, when the imperial Edicts were everywhere published to tear down the churches tot heir foundations and to destroy the sacred scriptures by fire.Eusibius' Ecclesiastical history book 8 chapter 2 translated by C.F. Cruse

 Moslem take-over

"Both the eastern and the Western sections of the church were weakened by losses of people and territory to Islam, but the losses of the eastern churches were greater than those of the west.  The strong North African Church disappeared and Egypt and the Holy Land were lost.  The eastern Churches were able to do little more than hold back the muslim hordes from sweeping past Constantinople."  Christianity through the centuries Earl E. Cairns pg.169-171

"The lack of old Byzantine church buildings concerned me. At one time the city had been a lively Christian community.  Of course, there are explanations, as I realized when I took time to think about it.  The Arab conquest beginning in the seventh century, completed by the eighth, and reknewed in the ninth had a catastrophic effect upon this community, as well as throughout the mediterranean and middle east area.  Christianity here was already riddled and weakened by theological quarrels and disunity among churches and their leaders.  Then came an uneasy truce between Christianity ad islam, which could be shattered by a whim of a sultan and often was.
     The devastation and total destruction of Christian church buildings in Asia minor was complete when Seljuk Turks became masters of the whole Middle East in the eleventh century.  On their way to  capture Jerusalem in 1087, while their capital was konya, they destroyed all churches in Asia Minor in their way except the underground, hard to read Byzantine churches and chapels at Cappadocia that managed to outlive the Seljuk sacking.  It was this intolerant Moslem Turkish offensive that was to provoke the First crusade and send the crusaders off from Europe through Asia Minor to rescue Palestine and Jerusalem, then closed to Christian Pilgrimage.  So it is that no old church buildings survive in Konya today."
Traveling through turkey: An excursion into history and religion Harriet-Louise H. Patterson pg 157-158

Not only can heretics warp scriptural teaching they can tear up the manuscripts and they have historically!
"(1) In a work written by one of these authors against the heresy of Arteman, which Paul of Samosata again attempted among us, there was a narrative well-adapted to the history we are now investigating...
"(3)  "They assert" said he "that all those primitive men and apostles themselves, both received and taught these things as they are now taught by them, and that the truth of the gospel was preserved until the times of Victor who was the thirteenth Bishop of Rome from Peter.  But that from his successor Zephyrinus, the truth was mutilated.
"(4) And perchance what they say might be credible, were it not that the Holy Scriptures contradict them; and then, also, there are works of certain brethren older than Victor times which they wrote in defense of the truth, and against heretics then prevailing. I speak of Justus and Miltiades, and Tatian and Clement, and many others  in which the deity of Christ is asserted.......
"(13) To this, we will also add other extracts from the same writer respecting this sect: "The sacred scriptures " said he "have been boldly perverted by them; the rule of faith they have set aside, Christ they have renounced, not inquiring what the Holy Scriptures declared, but zealously what form of reasoning may be devised to establish their impiety...
"(15) But as to these men who abused the acts of the unbelievers, to their own heretical views, who adulterate the simplicity of faith contained in the holy Scriptures, by the wily arts of impious men; where is the necessity of asserting that they are not right in their faith?  For this purpose they fearessly lay their hands upon the holy Scriptures saying they have corrected them.
"(16) And that I do not say this against them without foundation, whoever wishes may learn; for should anyone collect and compare their copies with one another, he would find them greatly at variance among themselves.
"(17) For the copies of Asclepiodotus will be found to differ  from those of theodotus.  Copies of many you may find in abundance, altered, by the eagerness of their disciples to insert each one of their own corrections, as they call them, i.e, their corruptions.  Again, the copies of Hermophilus do not agree with these , for those of Apolonius are not consistent within themselves. For one may compare those which were prepared before by them, with those which afterwards perverted for their own objects, and you will find them widely differing....
   "For either they do not believe that the holy scriptures were uttered by the Holy Spirit, and they are thus infidels, or they deem themselves wiser than the holy spirit, and what alternative is there but to pronounce them demoniacs?"

Eusibius' Ecclesiastical history book 8 chapter 28 translated by C.F. Cruse

Age burning
"The same extreme care which was devoted to the transcription of manuscriptsis also at the bottom of the disappearance of the earlier copies.  When a manuscript had been copied with the exactitude prescribed by the Talmud, and had been dutifully verified, it was accepted as authentic and regarded as being of equal value with any other copy.  If all were equally correct, age gave no advantage to a manuscript, on the contrary age was a positive disadvantage, since a manuscript was liable to become defaced or damaged in the lapse of time.  A damaged or imperfect copy was at once condemned as unfit for use.
   "Attached to each synagogue was a 'Gheniza' or lumber cupboard, in which defective manuscripts were laid aside : and from these receptacles some of the oldest manuscripts no extant  have in modern times been recovered.  Thus far from regarding an older copy of scripture more valuable, the Jewish habit has been to prefer the newer, as being the most perfect and free from damage.  The Older copies once consigned to the 'Gheniza' naturally perished, either from neglect or from being deliberately burned when the Gheniza became overcrowded." 

Frederick Kenyan Our Bible and Ancient manuscripts
Christianity was a Jewish sect and it seems obvious that they would preserve the in the same manner through the scriptorium.

Later manuscripts may have had access to the originals(or near to the originals)
Though the originals would be burned, they would have to be preserved.  Therefore the later may have indeed simply been copies brought and preserved through the later Byzantine copies. 
   It was the understanding of Westcott and Hort.  Those manuscripts should be classified into families with similarities.  they then went from this reasoning to the assumption that those manuscripts that are alike would then be related to each other in some way or another.  But while there are noticeable similarities, can they truly guarantee a full lineage?

"Hardly any have been copies from any of the rest.  On the contrary, they are discovered to differ among themselves in countless unimportant particulars: and ever here and there  single copies exhibit idiosyncrasies, which are altogether startling and extraordinary.  There has therefore demonstrably been  no collusion- no assimilation to an arbitrary standard, no wholesale fraud.  It is certain that every one of them represents a MS., or a pedigree of MSS., older than itself."
Traditional text of the Holy Gospels pg 46-47 Dean John Burgeon

In other words, if all the byzantine manuscripts were from one common plot, then they would have been exactly alike.  Yet they all have spelling errors,and word order errors that are in totally different areas.  So while they are the same in the words they write, and therefore showing one text type; they are so different in grammatical errors that they had to be independent of each other, otherwise this would have been corrected.

  Here Dr. Wilbur Pickering Argues for the power of the majority of witnesses.
"Even Hort acknowledged the presumption inherent in superior numbers. 'A theoretical presumption indeed remains that a majority of extant documents is more likely to represent a majority of  ancestral documents at each stage of transmission than vice versa.' The work of those who have done extensive collating of MSS has tended to confirm this presumption. Thus Lake, Blake, and New found only orphon children among the MSS they collated, and declared further that there were almost no siblings each MS is an 'orphan child'.  This means that they are independent witnesses, at least in their own generation."
Wilbur Pickering The identity of the New Testament text pg 130, 131
  Pickering catches Dr. Hort admitting that the fact that a text is reproduced in the majority (like over 90%!) would make one naturally assume that the text has more ancient roots.  Pickering finds several Biblical Scholars who conclude that the genealogical theories are debunked.

How closely related are they? D.A. Carson argues

"What recent studies have shown, I think, is that the four classic text-types are too neatly isolatedPerhaps we are forced to conclude that most early manuscripts are mixes.  If so the boundaries between text types becomes hazy, like the change from color in a rainbow; but it still does not follow that the concept text types is entirely dispensable, any more than we could dispense with colors  of the rainbow, or argue that those colors can not be distinguished from another.
The king James Version Bible debate pg. 109 D.A.Carson
   Carson is arguing against the Majority Text position of Wilbur Pickering.  Pickering has debunked the idea of isolated genealogical text type families.  In other words, the idea that the scribes were isolated from each other and had no choice in what text type to copy.  Carson tries to rebound that the text type families still exist and they were detectable.
  However, here is where the modern textual critic has found itself trapped.  If these scribes were aware of alternative readings, then the vast majority of them chose to reject the alexandrine  text type.

  When you have any type of hand-craft, the skill usually revolves around the region: or those who are more closely linked to the christian.  For instance, I would rather eat Mexican food from my new Mexican aunt June than Taco Bell any day of the week! (but she would eat at Taco bell sometimes anyway.)
  There are two regional directions of authenticity to look for in regards to the preservation of the New Testament text.  First, is the Jewish scribal tradition of preservation and then next is the location of the original manuscripts.
As shown elsewhere in the book, the byzantine text was influenced by the school of Antioch.  Antioch was not only a powerful early church with a decent reputation, it also had a huge scribal influence. The Jew and the Jewish Christians would not tolerate poorly constructed biblical texts as authoritative.
  Finally, the majority of the original manuscripts of the New Testament hovered across Asia minor all the way into the 2nd century.
''Come now who would indulge a better curiosity, if you would apply it to the business of salvation, run over the apostolic churches. In which the very thrones of the apostles are still pre- eminent in their places. in which their own authentic writings are read. uttering the voice and representing the face of each severally. Achaia is very near you, [in which] you find Corinth. Since you are not far from Macedonia, you have Phillipi: (and there too) you have the Thessalonians. Since you are able to cross to Asia. Ephesus. Since. more over. you are close}' upon Italy you have Rome, from which there comes even into our own hands the very authority (of the Apostles themselves). How happy is it's church, on which the apostles poured forth their blood!" Tertullian On Persecution against heretics 208AD

What is significant about this statement is that the location of the original manuscripts is centered around the area of the byzantine text family and was preserved at least up to 200AD. Could it not be conceivable that copies of the originals being made by local Asians have exact copies that would last until the next century when we had the first preserved major Byzantine manuscripts?

"Speaking in terms of regions, Asia Minor may be safely said to have had twelve (John, Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians, 1 and 2 Timothy, Philemon, 1 Peter, 1 and 2 and 3 John and Revelation) Greece may be safely said to have six (1 and 2 Corinthians, Philippians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians and Titus in Crete), Rome may have safely been said to have two (Mark and Romans)- as to the rest, Luke, Acts and 2 Peter  were probably held by either Asia Minor or Rome; Matthew and James by either Asia Minor or Palestine; Hebrews by Rome or Palestine;while it is hard to state even a probability fo rJude it was quite possibly held by Asia Minor, Taking Asia Minor and Greece together, the Aegean area held the autographs of at least eighteen(two-thirds of total) and possibly as many as twenty-four of the twenty seven New Testament books; Rome held at least two and possibly up to seven; Palestine may have held up t three; Alexandria(Egypt) held none!  The Aegean region clearly had the best start and Alexandria the worst. (Identity pg. 111.)Wilbur Pickering "Can Anything good come out of [Egypt]?"
     While Alexandria Egypt was hundreds of miles away and across the Mediterranean. Why would they be the only ones to copy the manuscript down exactly?  Not only that, but it had no apostolic heritage, and was infested with many varieties of heretics.  (the gnostics, monophysites, Arians, subordinationists etc.)  Who by the way are not fluent in the new Testament Greek!
"To copy a text by hand in a language you do not understand is a tedious exercise- it is almost  impossible to produce a perfect copy.  you virtually have to copy letter by letter and constantly check your place (It is even more difficult if there is no space between the words and no punctuation, as was the case with the N.T. text in the early centuries.)  But if you can not understand the text it is very difficult to remain alert. Consider the case of p66.  This papyrus manuscript is perhaps the oldest (c.200) extant manuscript of any size (it contains most of John). It is one of the worst copies we have.  It has an average of roughly two mistakes per verse- many being obvious mistakes, stupid mistakes, nonsensical mistakes.  I have no qualms in affirming that the person that produced p66 did not know GreekHad he understood the text he would not have made the number of and sort of mistakes that he did." Wilbur Pickering "Can Anything good come out of [Egypt]?" 

Majority text

"A theoretical presumption indeed remains that the majority of extant documents is more likely to represent a majority of ancestral documents at each stage of transmission than vice versa."
"As of 1994 Kurt and Barbara Alund produced their latest combined statistics of extant manuscripts of the New Testament and estimated there to be 5,656 Greek manuscripts of the New Testament in varying form.  However in 1967, Kurt Aland provided additional analysis of existing manuscripts.  At that time, he noted a total of 5,255 New Testament manuscripts of varying form,  Of that number 5,210 manuscripts supported the received text.  In his 26th edition of the Nestle'-Aland Greek Text, Aland considered 5,210 manuscripts to belong to the received text group.  Or to put it another way, he determined that only forty-five of those 5,255 manuscripts were something other than the recieved text.  It was from those forty five manuscripts that the 26th edition of the Nestle'-Aand text was produced.  Therefore in 1967, 99percent of all existing manuscripts favored the recieved text and only 1 percent supported the critical textThat percentage has changed only slightly in the intervening years as other manuscripts have been discovered."
David H. Sorenson Touch not the unclean thing**
    Now there have been several critics who have argued against the majority text argument.  Many argue that if numbers  is the main way of criticism, then we should look at the latin text.which has over 10,000 copies.
  First of all, few if any kjvo's and majority text critics operate on number arguments alone.  Secondly, a large number of Latin manuscripts can lead us toard what the latin text says, but it can never be the primary means of understanding Greek so long as we have Greek text to compare it with.  They do have the ability to weigh in and witness to text families.  But they are subjective and do not have as high an authority in the issue.  Third, we know that Jerome openly revised the traditional Latin text and so it is naturally more of a secondary text.
  The Latin does have a definite place and witness, just not primarily in the text debate.  The KJV and early English Translations do rely heavily on the Latin and vulgate in translational issues however, proving that the KJV wasn't ignorant of other biblical texts.

Unity vs disunity of the text
 "J.H. Ropes describes the quality of the codex: Codex Siniaticus is carelessly written, with many lapses of spelling due ti the influence of dialectal and vulgar speech, and many plain errors, and crude vagaries. Omissions by homoeoteleuton abound, and there are many other careless ommissions.  All these gave a large field for the work of correctors, and the manuscript does not stand by any means on the same level of workmanship as B."
 Paul D. Wegner The Journey from the Texts to the Translations

Western text
"There is considerable scholarly dispute about this text type.  Some scholars hold that the Western text is the creation of a group of scribes whose work developed ina more rather than less confusion as each generation of scribes toiled without knowledge or care, A few contend for an individual scribe at the heart of the tradition.  Others argue that the text type is not homogenous enough to be a true textual recension, and postulate that the manuscripts classified under the "Western" rubric sprang from fairly wild and undisciplined  scribal activity."
D. A. Carson The King James Bible Debate pg. 26-27

Caesarian text
"The text type probably originated in egypt and may have been brought in Caesarea by Origen.  It boast a unique mixture of Western(above) and Alexandrian (below) readings, prompting some scholars to question the value of calling it a text type."
D. A. Carson The King James Bible Debate pg.27
  So essentially we have  a small minority text that still has more disagreements than it's competitor, even though the majority texts is 1oo times larger!

"At the close of the second or beginning of the third century, parts of the New Testament began to circulate in Syria in what is called the Old Syriac version."
Ancient translations Peshitta pg. 26, 30 The Bible in Translation Bruce Metzger

"Therefore, Peshitta should not be confused with the 5th century Bible revisions in Aramaic and new versions which were made from Greek.  None of those new Revisions and versions made by the Monophysite Bishops in the 5th century has ever been accepted by the Church in the East."
Preface to the Holy Bible from Ancient manuscripts[Peshitta} George M. Lamsa Itala pg. 30

"Noteworthy Old Latin Readings frequently agree with the Greek text of the codex Bezae and the Old Syriac." Pg. 30 The Bible in Translation Bruce Metzger
  It has been said by a few KJV advocates that the Antiochan School sent missionaries out west to give them ancient copies of the New Testament.  That the Old Itala copies were from this group of missionaries and that copies existed in Africa(such as donatist) and North Italy.  The North Africans were devout conservative Anabaptist like Christians who would eventually be wiped out by the muslims.  Yet the North Italians  would later move to the alps being known as the Voudois, later revealing themselves as the Waldensians of the dark ages.  Preserving the Greek Manuscript later named Codex Bezae after they donated it to the reformer Theodore Bezae.  The Old Latin would soon be the basis of their french Waldenses Bible.  So with one with one sentence Metzger has opened up a can of worms supporting the Textus Receptus!
  Now I want to be honest, there are several spurious  Old Latin manuscripts, but that should not disqualify the witness of the ones in agreement with Syriac.

"The codex Argentus(the Silver Codex) of the early sixth century is a delux copy of the four gospels, written with silver ink on the purple parchment...
"The order of the gospels is the so-called western order (Matthew, John, Luke, Mark). like that of two fifth century Greek manuscript (Codex Bezae and Codex Washingtonianus), a few of the older Peshitta manuscripts and a considerable number of Old Latin manuscripts."
pg. 39 The Bible in Translation Bruce Metzger
  Here we have another example of an ancient manuscript in agreement more with the traditional text.

"More manuscripts of the Armenian version are extant today than those of any other ancient version, with the exception of the Latin Vulgate...
"MOst scholars have been impressed by several types of evidence pointing to a close affinity between the Armenian and the Greek text."

pg. 41-42 The Bible in Translation Bruce Metzger
     By the way, the Greek text here is obviously Byzantine. 

  Admittedly a revised work because of the differences among Itala Bibles.  Jerome was nervous about a revision.  He used the LXX and some Hebrew along with a text that was Western or Alexandrine Greek. This is discussed  in the Chapter "the Catholic connection"

Georgian"In spite of some legendary concerning miracles by Nino, historians are inclined to accept the date of about the middle of the fourth century for the introduction of Christianity among the Georgians..."Apart from such traditionalists it is generally accepted that at the least the gospels some other parts of the New Testament had were made available in written form for Georgian Christians by about the middle of the fifth century...
"It is debated whether the translation was made from the Greek, Armenian, or Syriac."

pg. 43-44 The Bible in Translation Bruce Metzger
  Here we see a 5th century manuscript. By the fact that there are 3 contenders for the translation, it is obvious the text used was traditional /Byzantine.  Though Bruce obviously go into detail about this fact.
"By the fifth or sixth century, portions of the Bible were translated into Ethiopic (for Ge'ez as ethiopic is called; see fig15.5)[sic], probably by monophysite monks (i.e. they held that Christ had only one nature) who fled to Ethiopia due to persecution by Byzantine rulers.  It was through the influence of these monks that Coptic  and Ethiopic churches came to be monophysite."
 Paul D. Wegner The Journey from the texts to the translations
    So here we have a translation that does not lean "Byzantine text" even critics admit that it was translated by heretical Monophysites.

Which majority?
Many oppose to a KJVO position would argue that this is an out of balance minority.  After all while the majority of the Greek text.  The western text has stronger support in the Latin tradition and their 10,000 ancient copies of the Latin text.  However if we are going to consider this line of reasoning, then we must look to the majority of all the ancient manuscripts, period. Then you will find many ancient language translations that more than out number the Latin text like the Syrian, Armenian and Gothic text which support Byzantine Readings.  Yet since we keep the Greek text as our primary text source we must focus upon it, and that is obviously dominate Byzantine.

Textual examples

Matthew 6:13Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)
13 And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen. "
  The reformation doctrine Sola Gloria Deo meaning "The Glory to God alone" is central to this verse. Yet the catholic Bibles early on with Jerome denied this text.  Finis Dake nottices that "out of over 500 codices only 8 omit it" (Dake Annotated Reference Bible)
Scholars have noticed the Biblical quality of this verse and it's relation to David's prayer.
1 Chronicles 29:11Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV) 11 Thine, O Lord, is the greatness, and the power, and the glory, and the victory, and the majesty: for all that is in the heaven and in the earth is thine; thine is the kingdom, O Lord, and thou art exalted as head above all."

Mark 9:43-48Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV) 43 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: 44 where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. 45 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: 46 where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched. 47 And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire: 48 where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched."

Mark 16:9-20Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV) 9 Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils. 10 And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept. 11 And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not. 12 After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country. 13 And they went and told it unto the residue: neither believed they them. 14 Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen. 15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. 16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. 17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; 18 they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover. 19 So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God. 20 And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen.

Mark 16:1-8Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV) 16 And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him. 2 And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun. 3 And they said among themselves, Who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulchre? 4 And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away: for it was very great. 5 And entering into the sepulchre, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, clothed in a long white garment; and they were affrighted. 6 And he saith unto them, Be not affrighted: Ye seek Jesus of Nazareth, which was crucified: he is risen; he is not here: behold the place where they laid him. 7 But go your way, tell his disciples and Peter that he goeth before you into Galilee: there shall ye see him, as he said unto you. 8 And they went out quickly, and fled from the sepulchre; for they trembled and were amazed: neither said they any thing to any man; for they were afraid.

Mark 16:9Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV) 9 Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.
"He told you.  And going out quickly, they fled from the tomb, held and then trembling and ecstasy; and no one nothing they told; they were afraid for. having risen and early on the first day of the week, He appeared first to Mary Magdelene, from whom He had cast seven devils."
(Mark 16:8-9 Jay P. Green ultra literal translation)

Mark 16:10-14Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV) 10 And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept. 11 And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not. 12 After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country. 13 And they went and told it unto the residue: neither believed they them. 14 Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.

"Tregelles(1854) admitted "that arguments on style are often very fallacious, and that by themselves prove very little'"
Edward Hills The King James Bible Version defended ch. 6 e.

Mark 16:15-20Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV) 15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. 16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. 17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; 18 they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover. 19 So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God. 20 And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen.

"Serious doubt exist as to whether these verses belong to the gospel of Mark.  They are absent form important early manuscripts and display certain peculiarities of vocabulary. style and theological content that are unlike the rest of Mark.  His Gospel probably ended at 16:8, or it's original ending has been lost."
NIV Study Bible
"For the promise did announce one and another God , but one and the same; under various aspects, however many titles.  For varied and rich in attribute is the Father as I have already shown in the book preceding this; and I shall show [the same show] from the prophets themselves in further prophets themselves in the further course of this work.  Also towards the conclusion of his gospel, Mark says, "So then, after the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, he was received up into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of God:" confirming what had been spoken by the prophet:"The Lord said to my Lord sit thou on my right hand until I make thy foes Thy footstool" Thus God and the Father are one and the same; He who was announced by the prophets, and handed down by the true gospel; whom we Christians worship and love. with the whole heart, as the maker of heaven and earth, and of all things therein."
Irenaeus against heresies chapter 6

Judgement about the authenticity of canonical writings was based on the idea that the tradition of the church in this matter was trustworthy in general, although it could be wrong in detail.  The scholars did not accept the tradition uncritically; they did their best to verify whether books in question were actually written by Apostles or by those on touch with apostles.  As long as there was uncertainty about apostolic authorship.  There was reluctance to accept books as canonical.  Thus St. john's gospel was not readily accepted at first, and it was only after Irenaeus gave what was thought sufficient proof of it's authorship by John that it's canonicity was established."
A concise History of the Catholic Church by Thomas Bokenkotter pg 34

What is significant about this statement is that the location of the original manuscripts is centered around the area of the byzantine text family and was preserved at least up to 200AD. Could it not be conceivable that copies of the originals being made by local Asians have exact copies that would last until the next century when we had the first preserved major Byzantine manuscripts?"

 John 1:18Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV) 18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.

John7:53 And every man went unto his own house. 8 Jesus went unto the mount of Olives. 2 And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them. 3 And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, 4 they say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. 5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? 6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. 7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. 8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground. 9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. 10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? 11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

Acts 7:30Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)
30 And when forty years were expired, there appeared to him in the wilderness of mount Sina an angel of the Lord in a flame of fire in a bush.
Acts 7:30New American Standard Bible (NASB)
30 “After forty years had passed, an angel appeared to him in the wilderness of Mount Sinai, in the flame of a burning thorn bush.
Exodus 3:2Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV)
And the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush: and he looked, and, behold, the bush burned with fire, and the bush was not consumed.
Exodus 3:2New American Standard Bible (NASB)
The angel of the Lord appeared to him in a blazing fire from the midst of [a]a bush; and he looked, and behold, the bush was burning with fire, yet the bush was not consumed.

/1 Timothy 3:16Authorized (King James) Version (AKJV) 16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
"There is much to be said in defense of the kjv rendering of 1 timothy 3:16 as 'God was manifest in the flesh.' In fact I prefer this reading and feel that it has more sufficient support from the greek manuscripts."
James White The King James Bible Controversy pg. 207

1 john 5:7
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."
Manuscript evidence
 "Although modern scholarship stresses Wycliff's reliance on Vulgar readings, a later revision of the work done by John Purvy which brought the translation back in tune with Jerome makes it evident that Wycliffe had access to some Old Latin Manuscripts.  Purvey's later defection to Rome sheds added light on the issue."
Final Authority William P. Grady pg 123(referring to R.W. Thompsons Life of Jesuits)

"While the Greek textual evidence is weak, the Latin textual evidence  for the Comma is extremely strong.  It is in the vast majority of the Old Latin manuscripts which outnumber the Greek manuscripts."
Dr. Thomas Holland Crowned with Glory 2000
  "Although not found in most Greek manuscripts, the Johanine Comma is found in several.  It is contained in 629(fourteenth century), 61(sixteenth century) 918 (sixteenth century) 2473(seventeenth century), and  2318(eighteenth century), it is also in the margins of 221(tenth century), 635(eleventh century), 88 (twelveth century), 429(fourteenth century) and 636 (sixteenth century)"Dr. Thomas Holland Crowned with Glory

"Nevertheless, being a minority reading does not eliminate it as genuine.  The critical text considers the reading of Iesou(of Jesus)  to be the genuine reading instead of Iesou Christou (of Jesus Christ) in John 1:7.  Yet Iesuo was is the minority reading with only twenty-four manuscripts supporting it
Dr. Thomas Holland Crowned with Glory

"The famous manuscript Vaticanus (written about AD 325-350 and considered by many modern scholars to be the most important manuscripts in existence) is believed to have been in the Vatican sometime before 1475.
The polyglot text itself, however, shows no dependence on vaticanus."
Pg. 228 A Visual History of English Bible Daniel Brake

H.J. de Jonge...
  "I have checked again Erasmus words ' quoted by erika rummel and her comments on them in her book 'Erasmus' Anotations.  This is what Erasmus writes [on] in his liber tertius quo respondet.... Ed. Lei: Erasmus first records that Lee had approached him with neglect of the MSS.  of 1 John because Er(according to Lee) had consulted one MS.  Erasmus replies that he certainly not used only one MS., but many copies, first in England, then in Brabant, and finally at Basil.  He cannot accept, therefore, Lee's reproach of negligence and impiety"

"Is it negligence and impiety , if I did not consult  manuscripts which were not in my reach?  I have at least assembled  whatever I could assemble.  Let Lee produce a Greek MS.  Which contains what my edition does not contain and let him show the manuscript was within my reach.  Only then can he reproach me with negligence in sacred matters."
Michael Maynard (Maynard, A history of the debate Over 1 John5:7-8 p. 383 Comma Publications Tempe Arizona 1995.)

"As to it's being wanting in some manuscripts, as the alexadrine and others, it need only be said that it is to be found in many others, it is an old british copy, and in the complutesian edition, the compilers of which use of  various copies: and out of the sixteen copies of Robert Stephens', nine of them had it: and as to its not being cited by ancient father's, this can be not be anceint proof of spuriousness of it since it might be an original copy, though no tint the copies used by them,  tbhrough the carelessness of unfaithfulness of transcribers; or it might be in their copies and not cited in them, they having Scripture enough without it to defend the doctrine of the trinity, and the divinity of Christ; and yet afterall, certain that it is, that it is cited by many of them; by 
Fulgentius in the beginning of the sixth century, against the Arians, without any scruple of hesitation; and Jerome, as had been observed before has it in his translation made in the larger part of the fourth century in his epistle to Eustochium prefixed to his translation of the canonical epistles,he complains of the omission by unfaithful interpretors.  It is cited by Athanasius about the year 350; and before him by Cyprian in the middle of the third century, about the year 250; and it is referred to by Tertullian about the year 200;  and which was within a hndred years, or a little more, of the writing of the epistle: which may be enough to satisfy anyone of the genuiness of the passage:  and besides there never was any dispute over it till Erasmus left it out of the first edition of his translation of the New Testament; and yet He himself upon the credit of the old British copy before mentioned it into another copy of his translation."  
John Gill, An Exposition of the New Testament

"..(he has not been consistent( in the way he has happened upon his terms; for after using Three in the masculine gender he adds three words which are neuter, contrary tot the definitions and laws  which you and your grammarians have laid down.  For what is the difference between putting a masculine Three first, then adding  One and One and One in the neuter, or after a masculine One and One and One to use the Three not in the masculine but in the neuter, which you yourselves disclaim in the case of Deity?"
Fifth Orientation of the Holy Spirit Gregory Naziansus

1 John 5:
Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God? This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one. If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son. 10 He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son. 11 And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. "

john 5: 30 I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.
31 If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true. 32 There is another that beareth witness of me; and I know that the witness which he witnesseth of me is true. 33 Ye sent unto John, and he bare witness unto the truth. 34 But I receive not testimony from man: but these things I say, that ye might be saved. 35 He was a burning and a shining light: and ye were willing for a season to rejoice in his light. 36 But I have greater witness than that of John: for the works which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me. 37 And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape."

John 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.
There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe. He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world."Total deletions 2886 words, this is slightly more words than 1&2 Peter combined. (Gathered from Catherine Carmichael for Pastor Jack Moormon "Modern Bible VErsions the dark secret") 7% of the New Testament has word alterations between the two texts. Also Modern Versions have disagreements with roughly 5% of the OT! So how much f the Bible do you believe?