- Over the past few months I have been bringing
you comparisons of the Textus Receptus with the Hort-Westcott Greek text. We
have seen both massive and subtle differences between the two texts. Modern
theologians and the majority of pastors have placed their trust in the modern
versions as being the most accurate translations based on the two manuscripts
Vaticanus and Sinaiticus. These two manuscripts are theorized to have been
written in the 4th century. Vaticanus and Sinaiticus differ from each other in
over three thousand places. There is no harmony between the two manuscripts
which underlie all the modern versions.
Now in this weekly supplement, I want to list the beliefs of the two professors
who were the driving force in 1871 to revise the King James Version. From the
outset the project of a language revision was a ruse. There never intended to be
a revision of the King James language. All along Hort and Westcott had planned
to supplant the Textus Receptus and use the Alexandrian texts to produce an
entirely new Bible. It is necessary to know what these two professors believed
so you will know why they replaced the Textus Receptus. By knowing their
beliefs, you will gain needed knowledge as to why the Revised Version of 1881
was produced.
Whenever you speak of the work of any translation, knowing the belief system of
the translators will give you insight into that translation. The King James
translators started in 1604 with 54 but by reason of sickness and death, the end
count was 47. Every translator of the King James Bible were solid born again
Christians, including King James who authorized the translation. King James had
nothing to do with the translation. The men who were chosen were tops in their
field of languages. Here are just three examples:
Bishop Lancelot Andrews - Proficient in 20 languages including Greek Hebrew,
Chaldee and Syriac and conversant in 15 of those languages
William John Bois - His father taught him Hebrew at age 5 and by time he was 6,
he could write it. At the age of fifteen, he was a student at St. John’s
college, Cambridge. (At 5 years old, I was playing with Lincoln Logs and Lionel
trains.)
Dr. Miles Smith - He had a knowledge of Greek and Latin fathers and an expert in
Chaldee, Syriac, Arabic, and Hebrew.
These are the men that James White, Stewart Custer, D.A. Carson, Bruce Metzger,
Kenneth Barker, Don Wilkins, and other modern translators believe that they are
smarter than. These guys do not have 1/100 of the knowledge that the King James
translators possessed. That is because the modern translators bask in their
education and self-esteem, while the King James translators were all godly men
who basked in Calvary.
Some of the modern translators of today:
Robert Bratcher - Good News Bible - Disbelieved the first three chapters of
Genesis
Edgar Goodspeed - Revised Standard Version - Disbelieved in the deity of Christ
and disbelieved the miracles of Christ.
Martin Woudstra - New International Version - Had oversight of the entire Old
Testament - Sodomite
J.B. Phillips - New Testament in Modern English and NASB Interlinear
Greek-English New Testament by Zondervan - Necromancer - Believed that C.S.
Lewis appeared to him on his TV set a few days after the death of Lewis.
Philip Schaff - 1901 American Standard Version - Chairman - Sought the reuniting
of the Protestant Church with Rome, had an audience with Pope Gregory the XVI.
Carlo Martini - United Bible Societies Greek New Testament -
Jesuit Cardinal of the
Roman Catholic Church
Now let us be honest, is God going to hand His holy Word over to unbelievers,
necromancers, Roman Catholics, Roman Catholic sympathizers, Sodomites, or people
who disbelieve the actual text of Scripture? This is small as you will see what
Hort and Westcott believed. Keep in mind the modern theologian and Pastor revere
what these two say concerning textual criticism. If they didn’t, then the King
James Bible would be in every church instead of the modern perversions. If your
church uses modern versions, then it is a Hort and Westcott church, regardless
of denomination.
The only way to gain a perspective as to what Hort and Westcott believed is to
read direct quotations from them.
(James 3:12 KJV) Can the fig tree, my brethren, bear olive berries? either a
vine, figs? so can no fountain both yield salt water and fresh.
Brooke Foss Westcott (1825-1903)
Fenton John Anthony Hort (1828-1892)
Atonement of Christ
“The fact is, I do not see how God’s justice can be satisfied without every
man’s suffering in his own person the full penalty for his sins.” (1)
“Certainly nothing can be more unscriptural than the modern limiting of Christ’s
bearing our sins and sufferings to His death; but indeed that is only one aspect
of an almost universal heresy. (2)
(1) Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New
York, 1896), Vol. 1, p. 120
(2) Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New
York, 1896), Vol. 1, p. 430
Baptismal Regeneration
“…at the same time in language stating that we maintain ‘Baptismal Regeneration’
as the most important of doctrines…the pure ‘Romish’ view seems to me nearer,
and more likely to lead to, the truth than the Evangelical.”
Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York,
1896), Vol. 1, p. 76
Bible
“I am very glad to have seen both your note and Lightfoot’s - Glad too that we
have had such an opportunity of openly speaking. For I too “must disclaim
setting forth infallibility” in front of my convictions. All I hold is, that the
more I learn, the more I am convinced that fresh doubts come from my own
ignorance, and that at present I find the presumption in favour of absolute
truth- I reject the word infallibility-of Holy Scripture overwhelming.”
Westcott, Arthur, Life and Letters of Brooke Foss Westcott, (New York, 1903),
Volume 1, P. 207
Communism
“I have pretty well made up my mind to devote my three or four years up here to
the study of the subject of communism.” (1)
“I can only say that it was through the region of pure politics that I myself
approach Communism.” (2)
(1) Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New
York, 1896), Vol. 1, p. 130
(2) Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New
York, 1896), Vol. 1, p. 138
Creation
“No one now, I suppose, holds that the first three chapters of Genesis, for
example, give a literal history---I could never understand how anyone reading
them with open eyes could think they did---yet they disclose to us a Gospel. So
it is probably elsewhere.”
Westcott, Arthur, Life and Letters of Brooke Foss Westcott, (New York, 1903),
Volume 2, P.69
Eden
“I am inclined to think that no such state as “Eden” (I mean the popular notion)
ever existed, and that Adam’s fall in no degree differed from the fall of each
of his descendants, as Coleridge justly argues.
Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York,
1896) Vol. 1, P.78
Evangelical Christianity
“Further I agree with them [authors of Essays and Reviews] in condemning many
leading specific doctrines of the popular theology…Evangelicals seem to me
perverted rather than untrue. There are, I fear, still more serious differences
between us on the subject of authority, and especially the authority of the
Bible.”
Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York,
1896) Vol. 1, p.400 - This letter was written to Rev. Rowland Williams,
10/21/1858. - True Christians had rebuffed the Oxford movement (also known as
the Tractarians) which was a movement to bring the Church of England under the
authority of Rome. Hort embraced the Oxford movement.
Evolution
“But the book which has most engaged me is Darwin. Whatever may be thought of
it, it is a book that one is proud to be contemporary with…My feeling is strong
that the theory is unanswerable. If so, it opens up a new period.”
Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York,
1896), Vol. 1, Pages 414-416
The Greek Text of the King James Bible
“I had no idea till the last few weeks of the importance of texts, having read
so little Greek Testament, and dragged on with that villainous Textus
Receptus…Think of that vile Textus Receptus leaning entirely on late MSS
[manuscripts]; it is a blessing there are such early ones.
Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York,
1896), Vol. 2, p. 211
Heaven
(1) “No doubt the language of the Rubric is unguarded, but it saves us from the
error of connecting the Presence of Christ’s glorified humanity with place;
‘heaven is a state and not a place.’”
(2) “Yet the unseen is the largest part of life. Heaven lies about us now in
infancy alone; and by swift, silent pauses for thought, for recollection, for
aspiration, we cannot only keep fresh the influence of that diviner atmosphere,
but breathe it more habitually.”
(3) “We may reasonably hope, by patient, resolute, faithful, united endeavour to
find heaven about us here, the glory of our earthly life.”
Westcott, Arthur, Life and Letters of Brooke Foss Westcott, (New York, 1903),
Volume 2
(1) Page 49
(2) Page 253
(3) page 394
Hell
“Certainly in my case it proceeds from no personal dread; when I have been
living most godlessly, I have never been able to frighten myself with visions of
a distant future, even while I ‘held’ the doctrine.”
Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York,
1896), Vol. 1, p. 122
Mariolatry
(1) “After leaving the Monastery, we shaped our course to a little oratory which
we discovered on the summit of a neighboring hill…Fortunately, we found the door
open. It is very small, with one kneeling-place, and behind a screen was a
‘Pieta’ the size of life (i.e. a Virgin and dead Christ)…Had I been alone, I
could have knelt there for hours.”
(2) “It is smaller than I expected, and the colouring is less rich, but in
expression it is perfect. The face of the virgin is unspeakably beautiful. I
looked till the lip seemed to tremble with intensity of feeling---of feeling
simply, for it would be impossible to say whether it be awe or joy or
hope---humanity shrinking before the divine, or swelling with its conscious
possession. It is enough that there is deep, intensely deep, emotion such as the
mother of the Lord may have had.”
(3) I have been persuaded for many years that Mary-worship and ‘Jesus’ worship
have very much in common in their causes and results.
Westcott, Arthur, Life and Letters of Brooke Foss Westcott, (New York, 1903),
Volume 1
(1) Page 81
(2) Page 183
(3) Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New
York, 1896), Vol. 1, p. 81 - This was a letter written to Westcott on October
17, 1865.
Satan
(1) “Now if there be a devil, he cannot merely bear a corrupted and marred image
of God; he must be wholly evil, his name evil, his every energy and act evil.
Would it not be a violation of the divine attributes for the Word to be actively
the support of such a nature of that?”
(2) The Word upholds his existence, not his evil. That is in himself; that is
the mysterious, awful possibility implied in his being a will. I need scarcely
say that I do not mean by this acknowledgement of an evil spirit that I
acknowledge a material devil. But does anyone?
Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York,
1896), Vol. 1,
(1) Page 121
(2) Page 50