They say "Your Bible has not been corrupted". Really?

Halil Ibrahimi

Edited by Mohd Elfie Nieshaem Juferi

As-salaamu `alaykum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh;

What do the differences between Bible manuscripts reveal? This paper is divided into the following sections:

    1. They require you to produce evidence on: WHEN, HOW and WHY was the Bible corrupted
    2. Once upon a time, there was a myth about Bible manuscripts
    3. Evidence: more than 50 verses either omitted or added, hundreds of others changed
    4. Evidences from second and third century about Bible corruption
    5. Do the changes and corruptions of manuscripts affect doctrine?
    6. ?=”For God so loved the world”?

1.They require you to produce evidence on: WHEN, HOW and WHY was the Bible corrupted

My fellow countryman, Hilki Berisha, in an article published in ?The Live Paper? with the aim of evangelizing Kosovar Albanian Muslims, writes:

    Many Muslims wrongly presume that the Qur?an was revealed to replace Hebraic and Christian Holy Writ because of the alleged reason that these last scriptures were corrupted, changed and lost?

    Questions that are raised now are:

    1. When and where did the change happen?
    2. How did the change happen???[1]

And so on and so forth, continuing with Christian prominent logic of ?tell me how the original uncorrupted specific scripture read?. His brother in Christ from one anti-Islamic website makes two more specific questions:

    3. What changes were made?
    4. Where is the “original” Bible that we can compare it with to prove the change happened?[2]

We were asked these questions and we will now answer them.

“A layman in New Zealand, Evan Saddler, concerned about the formation of modern Bible versions which he believed to have been prepared from corrupted manuscripts, was challenged by a pastor concerning his competence to make such a judgment. “How many languages do you know?” asked the pastor. Mr. Saddler, a man of good humor, promptly replied, “Two! New Zealand and Australian.”

Unfazed by this humorous rejoinder, the pastor pressed his point. “How can you make yourself an expert on Bible translation if you do not know Greek or Hebrew?” Mr. Saddler replied by asking a question himself. “Do you understand Greek?” When assured that the pastor did, Mr. Saddler requested an analysis of the Greek wording upon which the New International Version translation of Matthew 18:11 was based. The pastor diligently set about his assigned task, but soon discovered that it was not easily fulfilled. Looking up from his Bible in confusion and amazement, the minister exploded, “But there is no Matthew 18:11!” His observation was correct. The tenth verse is present, and the twelfth, but the eleventh is entirely omitted. Quietly, Mr. Saddler replied, “Now what use is your knowledge of Greek when the text is missing?”[3]

A lot of noise has been raised, pro and contra on Bible corruption. You may have heard that the corruption issue is all about hearsay, prejudices and nothing else. The above-cited fragment from the book ?Modern Bible Translations Unmasked? by Dr. Russell R. Standish tells us a lot. It shows gently the ongoing war between ?King James Version Only? supporters and the rest of Christendom on the issue of which Bible version[4] to use, since the discovery of different Bible manuscripts faced us with a lot of problems and cleaned out the mythology of One Unchanged Bible. A missing verse tells us about textual corruption; it either shows that once the verse was there and than somebody removed it or opposite, the verse was never there but somebody added. But is it only a verse? If that would be the case, there would be no need to lose so much energy on that. However, what if the number is being multiplied badly and that several other changes in manuscript readings arise beside the omission/additions that may put faith in the Bible as an unchanged scripture in a real mess? You are then advised to prepare yourself in dealing with such chaos when reading what follows, for it may shatter whatever previous beliefs you may hold about the Bible.

To continue reading, download the full document [in .pdf format]

3 Comments

  1. Matt 18:11 reads thus,” For the Son of man(Jesus pbh) came to save that which was lost.”

  2. Is Matthew 18:11 missing from the NIV Bible?

    The NIV and some other Bibles leave out verses. Take for example, Matthew
    18:11 is missing in the NIV. I know that it may not have the verse, and
    that it does cross refer it to Luke. But in Rev 22:19 it says And if any
    man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall
    take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and
    (from the things which are written in this book.
    I discuss this and a number of other similar questions in my book, Reasons
    for Belief: A Handbook of Christian Evidences. You can get a copy at this
    website. The manuscript evidence used in creating the NIV was vastly
    superior to that available when the KJV was made. In 1609, when the KJV
    was created, scholars only had less than ten Greek manuscripts to work
    from, and none of them were from before AD 1000. When putting together the
    NIV, the editors had thousands of manuscripts, including complete Greek
    manuscripts from as early as AD 350, and some even older. The manuscript
    evidence to support the NIV makes this translation considerably more
    accurate than the KJV. The reason that the NIV does not include Matthew
    18:11 is that all the earliest manuscripts do not include this phrase.
    Apparently, some sort of copyist inserted this phrase in a misguided
    attempt to “fix” Matthew by making it agree with Luke. The creators of the
    NIV did not take away from the word. It was an early copier of the New
    Testament in Greek who added to the word. You should trust your NIV and
    distrust your KJV in general, although there are occasional exceptions to
    this rule.
    John Oakes, PhD

  3. very nice article. heres the best part of the pdf file:

    “A layman in New Zealand, Evan Saddler, concerned about the formation of modern Bible versions which he believed to have been prepared from corrupted manuscripts, was challenged by a pastor concerning his competence to make such a judgment. “How many languages do you know?” asked the pastor. Mr. Saddler, a man of good humor, promptly replied, “Two!—New Zealand and Australian.”
    Unfazed by this humorous rejoinder, the pastor pressed his point. “How can you make yourself an expert on Bible translation if you do not know Greek or Hebrew?” Mr. Saddler replied by asking a question himself. “Do you understand Greek?” When assured that the pastor did, Mr. Saddler requested an analysis of the Greek wording upon which the New International Version translation of Matthew 18:11 was based. The pastor diligently set about his assigned task, but soon discovered that it was not easily fulfilled. Looking up from his Bible in confusion and amazement, the minister exploded, “But there is no Matthew 18:11!” His observation was correct. The tenth verse is present, and the twelfth, but the eleventh is entirely omitted. Quietly, Mr. Saddler replied, “Now what use is your knowledge of Greek when the text is missing?”
    (“Modern Bible Translations Unmasked” Dr. Russell R. Standish Evangelist/Revivalist, Dr. Colin Standish President, Hartland College, Chapter 7 http://www.sundaylaw.net/books.....mbtu07.htm)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *