On Missing Verses and Modern Bible Versions
I hear from members something that is nagiging reason for them not to accept modern Bible versions dahil sa meron itong mga "missing verses" and they think na translators intended to remove verses to corrupt the Bible or to hold to their Theological biases, pero this is not the case. firstly, these can also be called "added verses" to describe it's nature rather than "missing verses". these are verses that are missing in Bible versions that was translated after the King James Version, which are contained in the King James Version of the New Testament: Matthew 17:21; 18:11; 21:44; 23:14; Mark 7:16; 9:44, 46; 11:26; 15:28; Luke 17:36; 22:43-44; 23:17; 24:12, 40; John 5:4; Acts 8:37; 15:34; 24:7; 28:29; Romans 16:24. these verses exist in the King James Version of the Bible (which is the official Bible of the Church) but is omitted in other versions of the Bible. ang ilan sa mga ito is being debated among scholars. the missing verses ay for the reason that these verses are not authentic at na ang mga ito was added to the text of the Bible.
One also should not na hindi lahat ng New Testament manuscripts or Greek text of the New Testament are identical and read the same. ang mga books at that time are subject to human error for these are written down by hand. no work of antiquity was perfectly transmitted. the King James Version of the Bible was based on the Textus Receptus which was produced by Dutch scholar and humanist, Desiderius Erasmus and the text was later updated in it's printing and was used by translators of the King James Version. ang manuscripts that were used to produce this Greek text of the New Testament is limited and sometimes unreliable. may mga readings ito that were later added pero ang mga ito ay hindi nacocontain in manuscripts that exist before ang Textus Receptus.with modern Textual criticism ay ang mga ito ay na-ommit in bible versions that are produced after ang King James Version. biblical scholarship is not well developed back then at the times ni Erasmus ay may limited access sila sa mga manuscripts dahil iilan palang ang kanilang nadiscover. today ay we have discovered lots of them and we have also manuscripts that are old as from the 4th century, the 3rd century, and the 1st century, e.g ang Codex Vaticanus, Codex Sinaiticus, P45, P1, P75. scholars now compare those different manuscripts available to us to determine what likely is the original reading. we call this ang critical method and ang Bible versions that are translated today to what we call ang critical text, e.g ang Nestle-Aland text.
Ang changes sa manuscripts may vary. ang ilang changes ay dahil sa misspellings and some might missed words. others are intended kagaya ng scribes that changed or added a word to explain a word or meaning ng isang verse from his/their perspective. some ay intended to be marginal notes for the purpose of explaining the text at na para hindi malito ang reader but late scribes will add these marginal notes to the text itself. one possible example at commonly used example ay ang John 5:4 sa story of Jesus Christ healing a sick man sa Sabbath day where ang point also for it not being authentic ay ang vocabulary. this appears in the King James Bible but was missing in other bible versions. In the New American Bible (Revised Edition), it notes on John 5:4 that:
" Toward the end of the second century in the West and among the fourth-century Greek Fathers, an additional verse was known: "For [from time to time] an angel of the Lord used to come down into the pool; and the water was stirred up, so the first one to get in [after the stirring of the water] was healed of whatever disease afflicted him." The angel was a popular explanation of the turbulence and the healing powers attributed to it. This verse is missing from all early Greek manuscripts and the earliest versions, including the original Vulgate. Its vocabulary is markedly non-Johannine." (Note on Jn. 5:4, The New American Bible, Revised Edition [Confraternity For Christian Doctrine, 1970, 2011])
The New English Translation notes the following on John 5:4:
" 5:3 [9] tc The majority of later mss (C3 Θ Ψ 078 Ë1,13 Ï) add the following to 5:3: “waiting for the moving of the water. 5:4 For an angel of the Lord went down and stirred up the water at certain times. Whoever first stepped in after the stirring of the water was healed from whatever disease which he suffered.” Other mss include only v. 3b (Ac D 33 lat) or v. 4 (A L it). Few textual scholars today would accept the authenticity of any portion of vv. 3b–4, for they are not found in the earliest and best witnesses (Ì66,75 א B C* T pc co), they include un-Johannine vocabulary and syntax, several of the mss that include the verses mark them as spurious (with an asterisk or obelisk), and because there is a great amount of textual diversity among the witnesses that do include the verses. The present translation follows NA27 in omitting the verse number, a procedure also followed by a number of other modern translations." (Note on Jn. 5:4, The New English Translation [Biblical Studies Press LLC, 1996-2007])
Dr. Bruce Metzger in his Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament also notes the following on textual decisions:
" 5.4 omit verse {A}
Ver. 4 is a gloss, whose secondary character is clear from (1) its absence from the earliest and best witnesses (î66, 75 a B C* D Wsupp 33 itd, l, q the true text of the Latin Vulgate syrc copsa, bomss, ach2 geo Nonnus), (2) the presence of asterisks or obeli to mark the words as spurious in more than twenty Greek witnesses (including S L P 047 1079 2174), (3) the presence of non-Johannine words or expressions (κατά, καιρόν, εμβαίδω [of going into the water], έκδέχομαι, κατέχομαι, κίνεσις, ταραχή, δήποτε, νόσημα — the last four words only here in the New Testament), and (4) the rather wide diversity of variant forms in which the verse was transmitted." (Comment on Jn. 5:4, Bruce M. Metzger: A Textual Commentary On The Greek New Testament [Stuttgart Germany, United Bible Societies, Deutsche Bibelgesellshcaft, 1995])
Philip Comfort commented:
" This portion (5:3b-4) was probably not written by John, because it is not found in the earliest manuscripts (P66 P75 א B C* T), and where it does occur in later manuscripts it is often marked with obeli (marks like asterisks) to signal spuriousness (so Π 047 Syrh marking 5:4). The passage was a later addition--even added to manuscripts, such as A and C, that did not originally contain the portion. This scribal gloss is characteristic of the expansions that occurred in gospel texts after the fourth century. The expansion happened in two phases: First came the addition of 5:3b--inserted to explain what the sick people were waiting for; and then came 5:4--inserted to provide an explanation about the troubling of the water mentioned in 5:7. Of course, the second expansion is fuller and more imaginative. Nearly all modern textual critics and translators will not accept the longer portion as part of the original text. NASB and HCSB however continue to retain verses in deference to the KJV tradition." (Philip W. Comfort, New Testament Text and Translation Commentary: Commentary on the variant readings of the ancient New Testament manuscripts and how they related to the major English translations [Carol Stream, Illin.: Tyndale House Publishers, 2008], 273)
Ang missing verses are not removed for Theological reasons but only to represent what the New Testament authors wrote originally. this does not mean na hindi reliable ang Bible or na hindi tayo gagamit ng modern Bible versions. the Bible was gone through corruption as a book that has gone through human hands and subject to error, but we have available manuscripts and will discover more and to compare it to know what best represents the original writings of biblical authors.
__________________
Like and support our Facebook page and message us for your questions and get answers on : Facebook.com/ldswarriors2000
Visit our blog at : Ldswarriors2000.blogspot.com
Visit my Quora profile at : Quora.com/Nika0604
