Your Modern Version is Roman Catholic

 

By Dr. Ken Matto

 

There is one thing that Satan and his minions can always count on and that is the fact that 99% of all Christians will never check anything out before they buy, accept, or defend. The most prominent confirmation of this is proven in the Modern Version Only movement which really began to escalate from 1959 with the New American Standard Version. There were some modern versions before this but the NASV seemed to be the catalyst for the Modern Version Only movement. Then in 1973 came the New International Version. In 1979 came the New King James Version. In 1989 came the New Revised Standard Version. In 2001 came the English Standard Version. In 2003 came the Holman Christian Standard Version.  In 2011 came the updated New International Version.  In 2016 came the updated English Standard Version.  In 2017 came the Christian Standard Bible.

 

The one that started this whole Bible debacle was the Revised Version of 1881 which was not an update of the King James Bible but a replacement of the Textus Receptus underlying the King James Bible with a critical text. It did not gain wide acceptance at the time but the seed was planted and it became the source for all the modern versions.  The two main manuscripts which supported the Hort-Westcott critical text were two manuscripts which differed in the Gospels in 3,036 places alone. They were Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, two Roman Catholic Manuscripts. The Vaticanus was discovered in the Vatican library in 1475 and was given to the King James Translators but they rejected it because of the massive corruption.  Erasmus of Rotterdam also rejected it in 1516 when he created his first edition Greek Text.  There is no history of this manuscript before 1475 so it could also be a counterfeit.

 

The second manuscript which underlies the modern versions is the Sinaiticus which was allegedly discovered in St. Catherine’s Monastery in 1844 by Constantine Tischendorf which has now been proven to be a 19th century counterfeit. It was supposedly in a pail of ready to be burned papers for heat when he rescued it and eventually published it in 1859, the same year that Darwin published his “Origin of Species.” These were used as two major attacks against the King James Bible. The Sinaiticus was written in the 1840’s by Constantine Simonides who was an expert in creating the illusion of old manuscripts.  There was collusion between Tischendorf and Simonides.  After Sinaiticus was written it was darkened with tea however they failed to darken 21 leaves of the manuscript and today they are still extremely white in color.  So how could all the leaves of the manuscript be dark except 21 of them?  Tischendorf presented his manuscript to Pope Pius IX (1846-1878) and received favor from him. 

 

The Roman Catholic Church now had two manuscripts which were used by Hort and Westcott to create the critical text which would become the underlying text for all the modern versions. In 1898, a man named Eberhard Nestle created his first edition of the Novum Testamentum Graece which was made up of Tischendorf’s manuscript, Hort and Wetscott’s text, and Weymouth’s text. In 1901, he replaced the text of Weymouth with the 1894 text of Bernhard Weiss. This first replacement tells you that this text was destined to become an eclectic text or rather a “pick and choose text.” It was a text which would never be settled but always be in flux meaning there would never be a final version. This is the reason that 139 years later we still have new versions coming on the scene which differ from the previous ones or other contemporary versions. This is the reason that those in the modern version camp can never tell you which Bible is God’s completed or perfect word, simply because they do not have one.

 

Now at this juncture I want to mention a quote taken from the 27th edition of the Nestle-Aland Greek text giving undeniable proof that the modern versions are Roman Catholic in origin. While there may be Protestant translators on each of the Bible Versions, they are ancillary to the supervision which is under the Vatican. Am I making this up? The following quote can be found and verified on page 45 of the 27th edition of the Nestle-Aland Greek Text.

 

Before I publish the quote, it is important to know that one of the Editors which worked on both the 27th edition of the Nestle-Aland text and the 4th edition of the United Bible Societies Greek Text was a man named Carlo Martini who was a Jesuit Cardinal. This means that they did not only use the Roman Catholic manuscripts but they had a Roman Catholic Cardinal as an editor.  Do you honestly think that he would allow anything to be published which would cast doubt upon the validity of the Roman Catholic Church?

 

“In 1955 K. Aland was invited to participate in an editorial committee with M. Black, B. M. Metzger, A. Wikgren, and at first A. Vö ö bus, later C.M. Martini (and from 1982 B. Aland, and J. Karavidopoulos) to produce The Greek New Testament, an edition of the Greek text with a critical apparatus of selected passages designed for the use of professional Bible translators throughout the world (1st. ed. 1966, 2nd ed. 1968). Work on both editions continued for some while in parallel. The intensive cooperation of the committee through the years proved so fruitful and stimulating to the participants that K. Aland decided to contribute his preliminary work toward a new text of Novum Testamentum Graece to the preparation of the Greek New Testament. The texts of both editions then proceeded to grow together so that eventually the 26th edition of Novum Testamentum Graece (1979) and the third edition of The Greek New Testament (1975) shared the same basic text.

 

These two editions were originally planned for different purposes, and they differ accordingly. The Greek New Testament was designed for translators, and while its critical apparatus is restricted to selected passages, the information on the textual tradition in these passages is as complete as possible. These passages are most often those in which modern versions are found to differ, and translators need to be aware of the reasons for their differences. Novum Testamentum Graece, in contrast, seeks to provide the reader with a critical appreciation of the whole textual tradition. Its apparatus is correspondingly more extensive, devoting particular attention to the transmission of the text in the early period. For this purpose, however, exhaustive detail is neither nor would it be useful (cf. below pp. 50*-51*).

 

The text shared by these two editions was adopted internationally by Bible Societies, and following an agreement between the Vatican and the United Bible Societies it has served as the basis for new translations and for revisions made under their supervision. (Emphasis mine) This marks a significant step with regard to interconfessional relationships. It should naturally be understood that this text is a working text (in the sense of the century long Nestle Tradition): it is not to be considered as definitive, but as a stimulus to further efforts toward defining and verifying the text of the New Testament. For many reasons, however, the present edition has not been deemed an appropriate occasion for introducing textual changes.”

 

If you take a look at what is in bold print you will plainly see that they hide nothing. The Greek text behind the modern versions are under the supervision of the Vatican. All modern versions use these Greek texts which means that what you have in your Bible and what is omitted is decided by the Roman Catholic Church. This is why the modern versions are very Vatican friendly and why they agree with the Roman Catholic versions. You can reject what is written but you cannot make the truth go away because anyone can check out what I have re-typed from the Nestle Aland 27th edition.