Required viewing for anyone who reads a bible today…


I have now watched both films in the series and I wait with anticipation for the third one. I think anyone who watches this documentary has to walk away feeling concerned that many if not most of the evangelical churches today are studying using bibles (modern versions like NIV, NASB, NET etc) whose foundations (the Westcott and Hort Greek “Critical Text” based on Sinaiticus and Vaticanus) have been compromised by Rome. The exposure of the faulty logic, deception and omissions of the BBC documentary about the Codex Sinaiticus alone is worth the price of this documentary. I also thought it interesting how leading scholars admitted to dating manuscripts based on “instinct” rather than scientifically which in my opinion is no different than a guess. I don’t think it is a question about if Rome was involved but rather to what extent and I’m puzzled as to why many modern-day scholars are reluctant or derelict in connecting the dots. Another interesting section in this documentary is the detailed discussion about all of the forgeries that Rome has foisted upon the world and how Codex Vaticanus which was earlier rejected by Erasmus, “suddenly” became relevant thanks to the “efforts” of the Jesuit Cardinal Angelo Mai.

I cannot overstate the importance of this documentary if you are interested in bible history.

Textual Criticism: When mere men become arbiters of truth

Last year (2012) fall, at the behest of a friend of mine, I attended a men’s bible study called Solomon’s Porch at Immanuel Bible Church. The person leading the study, Andrew Potter, I recall as a very smart and knowledgeable person. Andy was going through a study on the book of Romans. I remember him asking the class how we could be certain that Paul in fact was the author of Romans especially since Tertius in Romans 16:22 writes: “I Tertius, who wrote this epistle, salute you in the Lord.” My friend raised his hand and answered the question by saying that God in the bible has promised to preserve His Word therefore we have confidence that Paul in fact wrote the letter. Andy brushed this reply aside with a “yes, but …” so it was obvious that he was looking for a better answer than what had just been offered. Continue reading