Authentic Bible Which Version
Uploaded by
ScribdTranslationsAuthentic Bible Which Version
Uploaded by
ScribdTranslationsIn the name of God, the Clement, the Merciful
Authentic Bible, which version?
Since nothing can surpass the weight of the Divine Writing, according to Paul's teaching in
2 Timothy 3:16 states that: "All Scripture is inspired by God"
We can rely on this statement which rests on a fundamental principle.
what is the Divine authenticity of a text presented as such.
The Quran is quite clear on this point in Surah 4,82 where it is reminded that a Divine text
"If it came from other than Allah, they would certainly find many contradictions in it!".
But this point is not the main subject of this challenge posed to Christians. It is now
asked these believers, if they are sincere in their faith, to answer a single small
question (divided into 4 points / subsections) which will be a real challenge for them.
Which Bible is the real and only authentic Word of God?
To do this, we will rely on the testimony and the rule of the book of Revelation.
chapter 22,18 "I: declare to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of
This book: If anyone adds anything to it, God will strike him with the plagues.
described in this book and if someone takes away something from the words of the
free from this prophecy, God will cut off his part of the tree of life and of the
saint city, described in this book.
Some may object that it is only the book of Revelation, but the logical rule
wants us to apply it to each of the Biblical books, since let's remember, the
Christians like to point out to their opponents that the Bible is to be read in its entirety; that one cannot
do not take a verse and separate it from the rest.
We see that through this verse, one cannot add or subtract even a
a jot of the text, under penalty of ending up in Hell and no longer being listed in the Book of Life. Good
Of course, every believer must believe this, otherwise everyone would act as they please.
seems to touch or retouch the so-called Divine text and make it what he wants to make it
to align with one's passions. We will mention 4 points/questions that may raise the
Christian dilemma and placing embarrassment in consciences to awaken hearts
closed. Following the pathway of Revelation 22:18, let's present our issue very
sistered to our brothers:
Which text is the Word of God, the Majority text or the Minority text?
For those who do not know, 'the Majority Text' (or Received Text) is based on the
ancient manuscripts and was followed until the 19th century by everyone (although it remains
still some Bibles based on this text in circulation), until the arrival of the discovery of
new Manuscripts even earlier called 'the Minority text'
Here is a sample of the differences (which number in the thousands) between these two corpora:
Matthew 28:9
But as they were going to announce it to his disciples, behold, Jesus came to them.
in front of them, and...
And behold, Jesus came to meet them, and...
Mark 6:11
... shake the dust off your feet as a testimony against them. Truly, I tell you
that those of Sodom and Gomorrah will be treated less harshly on the day of
judgment that that city.
... shake the dust off your feet, so that it may serve as a testimony against them.
Mark 7:8
For by abandoning the command of God, you observe the tradition of
men, washing the pots and the bowls, and doing many other similar things.
You abandon the command of God, and you observe the tradition of
men.
Mark 9:44
Where their worm does not die, and where the fire is not quenched
TM. (This verse is completely removed) )
Mark 9:46
Where their worm does not die, and where the fire is not quenched.
TM. (This verse is completely removed) )
Luke 1:28
... I greet you, you who are favored, the Lord is with you; you are blessed among the
women.
... I greet you, you to whom a grace has been granted; the Lord is with you.
Here is a brief explanation of what the Majority text (also known as the Received Text) is:
The Received Text makes up the vast majority (90%) of the more than 5000 manuscripts.
existing Greeks. That is why it is also called the Majority Text.
The Received Text has not undergone the deletions, additions, and modifications that can be found.
in the minority text.
The Received Text serves as the basis for the first versions of the Bible: Peshitta (150 AD).
Ancient Vulgate Latin (157 AD), Italic Bible (157 AD), etc. These Bibles have
were developed about 200 years before the minority manuscripts of Egypt favored by
the Roman Church.
The Received Text adopts the vast majority of the more than 86,000 citations from the text.
sacred written by the Church Fathers.
The Received Text is not corrupted by Egyptian philosophy.
The Received Text was and remains the enemy of the Roman Church, it is used by the
reformers.
Here is a brief explanation of the text Minority (made by modern textual criticism):
The Minority Texts were the result of the work of Egyptian scribes.
Minority Texts are full of modifications; often, a simple manuscript has been
modified by numerous scribes over a period of several years: it is one thing that
the Aaronic priests and the Masoretes would never have tolerated for the transcription of
Holy scriptures.
Minority Texts omit about 200 verses from sacred texts. It's the equivalent
from the first and second epistle of Peter.
Here are now some well-known Bibles that are based on the Received Majority Text:
Annotated Bible Neuchâtel
Ostervald Bible
Bible Martin 1744
Olivetan Bible
Castellion Bible
Sword Bible
Geneva Bible
Etc... Like the world-famous American Bible, the famous 'King James' which
also based on this text.
Here are now some well-known Bibles that are based on the Minority text.
The edition of Westcott and Hort, who are two critics of the 19th century, has (cleaned) and
correct the errors of the received text (according to them and their supporters) based on the
Greek manuscripts (Codex Sinaiticus, Vaticanus etc...) and said that the Bible that emerged
The Protestant Reformation was a corrupted text containing about 6000 errors!!!!!!!
Louis Segond Bible and New Segond Bible
Bible TOB
Osty Bible
Seed Bible
Crampon Bible
Chouraqui Bible
New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures (Jehovah's Witnesses)
Jerusalem Bible
Bible Scofield
Bible Darby
- Etc... Like the American Bibles (RSV, NIV, etc....)
Now here is the important testimony of Barry Burton, a prominent biblical exegete:
The Sinaiticus is a manuscript discovered by a certain Mr. Tischendorf in
1844, in a heap of garbage from the Saint Catherine Monastery, near the mountain
Sinai. It contains almost the entire New Testament in addition to adding it
Hermas' Shepherd and the Epistle of Barnabas.
An examination of the manuscript has proven that it was very unreliable. John
William Burgon
spent years studying every available manuscript of the New
Testament.
About Sinaiticus, he writes: "On several occasions, it has been removed without
précaution 10, 20, 30, 40 mots. Des lettres, des mots et même des phrases
completes have often been written twice, or even started to be
immediately canceled; this grotesque error by which a clause is omitted
because it ends with the same words as the previous clause, it does not
occurs no less than 115 times in the New Testament
( This does mean that before 1844, Christians did not have the true Word of
Authentic God, it would have been necessary to wait for this discovery in the trash of a
monastery to discover the errors of the Bible and finally illuminate the Word of God
authentic!) He continues:
In addition to all this, we have omitted 237 words, 452 paragraphs, and 748 entire sentences from the
Gospels only. The Vaticanus was available to the translators of the "King" bible.
James' (American) who did not use it, since they knew it was unreliable.
But here is also the observation made by Reverend D. A. White, who writes what
suit (on page 41 of his book "Defending the King James Bible"):
The Westcott and Hort text modifies the Received Text in more than 5,600 places… My
personal account dates back to August 2, 1984 and, through the NEW GREEK TESTAMENT
From Scrivener, I noted 5,604 changes made to the Text received by Westcott and Hort.
in their Greek New Testament. Of these 5,604 modifications, I noted:
1,952 omissions (35%)
467 additions (8 %)
3,185 modifications (57%).
At these 5,604 places where modifications were noted, 4,366 words were added, which brings
to 9,970 the number of Greek words. This means that in a Greek text of 647 pages (p.
for example, the text from Scrivener), this represents an average of changes to 15.4 words per
page of the Received Text.
We do not grant any superiority to the 2 parties, but the observation is there and damning.
regarding the Biblical texts. We can reiterate our question which is very
determining since according to the answer (in light of Revelation 22:18), during 19
for centuries Christians have had a corrupted Bible and will go to Hell for having distorted it or
Indeed, modern Bibles and those who follow them will end up in the depths of Gehenna for having
pervert the Word of God. What a thrilling issue!
Which version of the Bible is authentic among those that exist?
We will present just one example among many to get straight to the point and always
According to the teaching of Revelation 22:18-19: I declare to anyone who hears the words of the
prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to it, God will strike him with the plagues described in this book; and
if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the tree
of life and the holy city, described in this book.…
Aside from the difference between the Majority and Minority texts that persists, let's compare several
Bibles currently on the market, to see if Christians have always maintained this
rule of the last book of the Bible: For readers and believers who would purchase "the Bible"
from Jerusalem Cerf edition 1998" for example, and well in Mark 16:9-20, the text remains the
even without any notes, neither in the introduction of the gospels, nor at the bottom of the page. It does not
does not include any parentheses either, and this reader who thinks of buying a Bible
authentic, read these words as part of the original text.
Let’s take 'the Thomson Bible Vida edition 2009', which is not an annotated Bible.
but still points out the writing problems, it is curious to find some
parentheses between these verses of Mark and a footnote indicating that‰
These verses are not found in all the Manuscripts and the Bible TOB editions of
Cerf 2004" goes even further, stating "that for the best Manuscripts, the gospel of
Marc finishes at 16.8".
In other words, these verses are later additions. The reader who is unaware of
they will take them for truthful while the truth is quite different. What a disappointment for
that sincere believer! There are an incredible number of unmentioned differences such as
those that show the falsehood of certain Bibles that are sold everywhere. We
We are in France, a very developed country, but imagine a country that does not have access to a
serious teaching, in fact he will only live in a manifest lie without realizing it
account. We can therefore reiterate our question:
Which version of the Bible is authentic among those that exist? The answer is
important since believers who follow this kind of Bible will go to Hell having introduced
verses in the Bible that did not exist originally. The footnotes are on
less honest of the textual corruption carried out in a distant past and still
current events in the biblical text.
Which of these 2 texts is the authentic Divine Word: the TM (Masoretic Text) or
the LXX (Septuagint)?
The Septuagint (LXX) was the basis (as well as a Proto-Masoretic text) of the authors of
New Testament and was widely used by the early Christians. The Bibles in
The general ones are based on the text of the LXX and the Masoretic text to establish their text.
integral and the translators must choose between the 2 texts to include a verse. But
Which of the two is the Word of God since they contain thousands of divergences between them?
them, of which here are the biggest:
The LXX contains an additional Psalm
The Hebrew text intersperses 15 additional verses in Ecclesiasticus chapter 51 between the
verse 12
The LXX adds 24 verses to the book of 1 Kings chapter 12 starting from verse 24.
The TM in Genesis 4:8 is corrupted as it says this: 'Cain said to his brother (??????).
And when they arrived in the fields..." The LXX adds where there remains a gap.
in the Masoretic text and where a verse is missing: 'Let's go to the fields' between the
two sentences.
What allows Biblical translators to combine the two or to correct the TM so that it
not to have the lesson distorted in the Bibles for sale. But the Jews have this in their writings.
gap among many that it would be tedious to mention. - Etc... We can reiterate our
question whose answer is more than important since the 2 cannot be
authentically Divine:
4/ What is the true authentic Canon?
Among these different Canons that existed and some of which still exist, we
We would like the Christian to enlighten us on the authenticity of each and which one is of course the
the only and true Divine Canon preserved by the Holy Spirit:
Catholic Canon, Protestant, Orthodox, Syriac (Peshitta), Vulgate, Septuagint, Slavonic or
Ethiopian (we could add the Muratorian Canon and many others...).
Here are the differences offered by these various Canons, and it is logical that one alone cannot
to be of Divine origin:
The books Baruch, Bel and the dragon (Greek Daniel 14), Ecclesiasticus (or Sirach), Enoch,
Ezra 3, Ezra 4, the Book of Jubilees, Judith, the Letter of Jeremiah, 1, 2, 3 and 4 Maccabees,
la prière de Manassé, les Psaumes de Salomon, Sagesse de Salomon, Suzanne(Daniel grec
And Tobit, are not part of the Protestant Canon.
The books of Enoch, the book of Jubilees, 3 and 4 Maccabees, the prayer of Manasseh and the
Psalms of Solomon are not part of the Catholic Canon but it contains all the others.
books that remain indicated above.
The books of Ezra 4, the book of Jubilees, Enoch, and the letter of Jeremiah are not part of.
from the Septuagint (LXX), but it contains all the other books that are still indicated.
on top.
The books of Bel and the Dragon, Enoch, the Book of Jubilees, 3 and 4 Maccabees, the prayer of
Manasseh, Suzanne (Greek Daniel 13)... do not belong to the Ethiopian Canon.
The books of Enoch, Esdras 3, Esdras 4, the book of Jubilees, 4 Maccabees, the prayer of
Manasseh, Suzanne (Daniel Greek 13)... are not part of the Syrian Canon.
The books of Bel and the Dragon, Enoch, the Book of Jubilees, the Psalms of Solomon and 4
Maccabees are not part of the Slavic Canon.
-ETC (the Orthodox Canon follows that of the Greek text of the Septuagint) Since there cannot be
only one authentic Canon, the others should be rejected as non-Divine since they have
added or removed books from the Word of God. We can reiterate our question:
Which Canon is the true authentic Canon?
Let's end with a small assortment of problems that will be our conclusion:
Which Bible should one buy? The Protestant, Catholic, or Orthodox version, or the NWT?
?
What is the true Word of God since none contain the same number of books.
or verses than others?
The response will make the 2 other groups be condemned... All the Bibles not
Are the verses purged of added verses authentic? When a verse is declared
inauthentic, it should normally be withdrawn; yet the Biblical translators the
leave in the text for the most part (and/or only include footnotes).
Here are these verses that should be out of the Bibles:
Matthew Mark Luc Jean
Matthieu 12.47 Marc 7.16 Luc 22.43-44 Jean 5.3-4
Matthew 17.21 Marc 9.43 Luc 23.18 Jean 7.53-8.11
Matthew 18.11 Marc 9.49 Luc 23.34 Jean 12.8
Matthew 20.16 Marc 11.26 Luc 24.6 Jean 13.1
Matthew 21.44 Marc 15.28 Luc 24.12 Jean 14.31
Matthias 23.13 Marc 16.9-20 Luke 24.40 Jean chapter 21
This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down. We know that his testimony is true. Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.
Jean 5.8
But also: Acts 8:37, Acts 24:6-7 and Acts 28:29
For one will scarcely die for a righteous person—though perhaps for a good person one would dare even to die.
All the Bibles in the world contain these verses; how to solve this problem at the
light of Revelation 22:18?
What to do with nearly 1 million variants (according to the great scholar Kennicott) among the
Available manuscripts?
Who says variants means text revisions and thus Hell according to the book of Revelation.
Here is a sample:
John 1:34 "And I have seen and have borne witness that this is the Son of God." A papyrus
recently found
( the p106) dating from the early 3rd century does not contain the words 'son of God' but '
chosen of God
Same in the p5 and the Codex Sinaiticus (the only Greek Manuscript dating before the 8th century)
which contains the 27 books of the New Testament). We can also find 'chosen' in
some other ancient manuscripts. What is clear is that the later scribes
they altered the text by inserting 'son of God' instead of
"God's chosen one" to make believe that John the Baptist testified that Jesus was the son of God.
Mark 1:1 "Beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, Son of God", the Codex
Sinaiticus does not contain the term 'son of God'; it is clear that there was an alteration.
somewhere.
Luke 23:53 Today we can read in Luke 23:53 that Jesus was placed in a
tomb "where no one had yet been placed." just to make sure that no one will come.
to say that someone stole his body. Some scribes added 'and laid it in a'
tomb carved in the rock
Luke 24:40 The Codex Bezae and many other ancient Latin texts do not include Luke
24,40 "And saying this, he showed them his hands and his feet."
Luke 24:3 CODEX Bezae and most Latin texts do not contain the phrase 'the
"Lord Jesus" in "they did not find the body." "Lord Jesus" is an addition.
Luke 24:6 The Bezae codex and the majority of other Latin texts do not include the phrase
from Luke 24:6
He is not here, but he has risen.
Christians do not realize the difficulty they are in.
Which text of the Acts of the Apostles is truly inspired by God, the Western text or the
Oriental text?
Here are the differences they contain and opinions are very divided as to which one
is the authentic one (several hypotheses have been put forward): (this census was established by E.
Delebecque in his book The Two Acts of the Apostles, prefaced by Father Ceslas Spicq, in
1986
-325 identical verses out of 1007 in total
-681 changes
-525 additions
-162 suppressions
One of the two must be eliminated and those who have followed him are in Hell according to Revelation 22:18.
Some books were not canonized and recognized as authentic until several centuries later.
after their written submissions.
The Christians who eliminated them are therefore in Hell according to the Apocalypse (which itself is the
last book canonized in 397 only.
Here is another quote from the book of Sheikh Rahmatullah al-Hindi 'Manifestation of the Truth'
", which provides a review of the statements of Christian scholars of his time (1860), the age
distinguished from the critical awakening of the Bible: (let us remember that these views have not changed since )
The Epistle to the Hebrews, the 2nd Epistle of Peter, the 2nd and the 3rd of John, the Epistle of
James, that of Jude, the Apocalypse of John, and some passages from the 1st Epistle of
Jean were attributed, without proof, to the Apostles and were considered questionable
until 363. The aforementioned passages from John's Epistle are still considered interpolated by
the most distinguished critics of our time, as we will see later; and all
these various writings are not found in the Syriac translation. All the Churches of
Arabia rejected the 2nd Epistle of Jude and the Apocalypse; the Syrian Church also did.
constantly refused to recognize them, as will be seen from what follows. It is read in Horne
(vol. 11. p. 206, ed. of 1822): "The second Epistle is not found in the Syriac translation."
from Peter, the Epistle of Jude, the 2nd and 3rd Epistles of John, and the Apocalypse of John. He
also missing in this translation, verses 2 to 11 of chapter 8 of the Gospel of
John and the 7th verse of the 5th chapter of the 1st Epistle of John.
The Syrian translator must have omitted all those books because they did not seem enough to him.
authentic.
Ward says (p. 37): "Rogers, one of the most distinguished Protestant theologians, gives us
the names of several scholars who reject the following books as apocryphal: the Epistle
to the Hebrews, the Epistle of James, the 2nd and 3rd Epistles of John, the Epistle of Jude, and the
Apocalypse of John. Doctor Bliss also says that until the time of Eusebius the books
were not all considered authentic and supports that the Epistle of James, the one
The Epistle of Jude, the 2nd Epistle of Peter, the 2nd and 3rd Epistles of John are not from these Apostles.
The Epistle to the Hebrews remained doubtful for a long time. The Syrian churches never wanted
to recognize these books, and the Churches of Arabia followed their example.
Lardner says in the 4th volume of his works (p. 175-): 'Cyril and the Church of Jerusalem'
of their time do not recognize the Apocalypse of John and the name of this book is not found
not in the catalog of canonical books written by him.
The same author says (loc. cit. p. 323): "The Apocalypse of John is not found in
the old Syriac version; neither Bar-Hebraeus nor James of Edessa wrote of
commentary on this book." And Ebedjésu omitted the 2nd Epistle of Peter from his catalog, the
2nd and 3rd of John, the Epistle of Jude, and the Apocalypse of John; and this is also the opinion
of Syrians.
The Catholic Herald (vol. VII. p. 206, ann. 1844) says: 'Rose says (p. 161) that several
Protestant theologians do not accept the authenticity of the Apocalypse of John, and the
Professor Ewald has irrefutably proven that the Gospel of John, the Epistles and
The Apocalypse cannot be by the same author.
These books were considered inauthentic for centuries and were not
canonized only as the Councils progressed.
We can reiterate to conclude our main question:
Which version of the Bible is the true and only Word inspired by the Holy Spirit?
Article written by my brother Abdoul-Karim al-Fransawy said Walahi and published on the
blog of my friend Salik Al-Hanif
