Philippians - a study in Textual Trickery
Most modern bible versions, like the NIV, NASB, ESV, are based on the Westcott-Hort text, which is derived primarily from two manuscripts (Sinaiticus and Vaticanus) which differ from the Traditional Text of the King James Bible in over 3000 places.
Yet these two false witnesses, Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, continually disagree with each other. The Critical Text found in Nestle - Aland, or the UBS - (United Bible Society) - continues to change more and more as new editions come out every few years.
This Greek text that forms the basis of such versions as the ESV, NASB, NIV, NET, Holman Standard, Jehovah Witness NWT and the modern Catholic versions like the St. Joseph New American bible 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible 1985 is put out under the direct supervision of the Vatican. They come right out and tell you this on page 45 of the Nestle-Aland 27th edition. They aren't even trying to hide it.
You can see the documented proof of this for yourself. I am not making this stuff up.
Undeniable Proof the ESV, NIV, NASB, Holman Standard, NET, Jehovah Witness NWT etc. are the new "Vatican Versions" Part One - the Documentation
As a result, the modern versions continue to change the underlying texts and meanings from one revision to the next. There is no settled text and no sure words of God found in the ever changing versions based on "the late$t in $cholar$hip finding$".
I recently had one modern version proponent who recommends we use 4 or 5 different bible versions, all of which disagree with each other in hundreds of places, tell me: "As Dr. Pierpoint says, the text of the New Testament is virtually 85-90% settled."
My, what a bold stand to take! The authoritative "Thus saith the LORD" has now been replaced by "What does this version say?" Most graduating seminarians today no longer believe the Bible is the inspired words of God, and this same cancer of unbelief has infected the minds of many modern day Christians.
In fact, if another Christian like myself and thousands of others, actually believes God has preserved His infallible words in the Holy Bible, also known as the King James Bible, they call us ignorant wackos, mindless fanatics and heretics - or even worse.
In the epistle to the Philippians we will see just a few examples of how Sinaiticus differs from Vaticanus, how the Critical texts continues to change, and how the meaning of the traditional readings have been altered.
Philippians 1:6 "he that hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of JESUS CHRIST."
Again Jesus Christ is the reading of the Traditional Byzantine Greek text, Sinaiticus and A, and is followed by the earlier revisions of the Revised Version 1885 and the American Standard Version 1901.
"till the day of Jesus Christ" is also the reading of the RSV, NRSV and ESV, as well as Wycliffe, Tyndale, Coverdale, Bishops Bible and the Geneva Bible. However Vaticanus reverses the name and says CHRIST JESUS, and now the NASB, NIV and Holman decided to follow Vaticanus this time and so say "Christ Jesus."
This obviously does not effect any particular doctrine (other than the inerrancy of Scripture!) but it should be noted that not even the Critical Text versions agree with each other. Some go with the Sinaiticus reading and others with Vaticanus.
This discrepancy between Sinaiticus and Vaticanus will become more important as we continue. In verses 14 through 17 we see the total lack of consistency and ever changing nature of the so called "science of textual criticism".
Philippians 1:14 How the so called "science" of Textual Criticism REALLY works
Philippians 1:14 - "And many of the BRETHREN in the Lord, waxing confident by my bonds, are much more bold to speak THE WORD without fear."
"to speak the word" (τὸν λόγον λαλεῖν) is the reading of the Majority and P46 which is the oldest remaining Greek manuscript we have. It is about 150 years older than Vaticanus or Sinaiticus.
Other Bibles that simply say "TO PREACH THE WORD" are Tyndale 1525-"speake the worde with out feare.", Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew's Bible 1549, Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, Mace N.T. 1729, Wesley's translation 1755, Worsley 1770, Webster's 1833, Living Oracles 1835, Youngs 1898, the NKJV 1982, the Third Millennium Bible 1998, Dan Wallace's NET version 2006, the NRSV, ESV 2011, NIV 2011 edition, 2011 Common English Bible, Holman 2009, and the Jubilee Bible 2010.
However Westcott and Hort adopted the reading found in Sinaiticus and Vaticanus which says "to speak the word OF GOD". "The word OF GOD" is found in the RV 1881, ASV 1901, NASB 1995, RSV, and NIV 1984 edition, but the latest UBS, Nestle-Aland critical text editions have now removed the words OF GOD from their text.
The older Nestle-Aland critical text (4th edition 1934, 21st edition 1975) had "to speak the word of GOD" (τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ λαλεῖν.) with no brackets, but the newer ones (Nestle 28th edition and the UBS 3rd and 4th edition) now have "scientifically" omitted the extra words "of God" (τὸν λόγον λαλεῖν).
So too has the 2010 SBL Greek New Testament. This textual change is not due to some "newly discovered early Greek reading" at all. They have always had the same information in front of them. They just decided to change the text...again.
Apparently the brand new ISV 2014 hasn't gotten the memo yet about this textual change, or they don't care, because they still have "to speak GOD'S word".
Even the highly imaginative textual critic Dan Wallace of NET version fame has adopted the reading of "to preach the word", which has always been in the King James Bible, and concludes saying - "the Byzantine text and a few other witnesses here have the superior reading, and it should be accepted as the original."
Now this is interesting. The reading that Dan Wallace and the latest UBS/Nestle-Aland/Vatican "scholars" now reject is the very one that is found in what these men usually accept as the "the best mss." such as Sinaiticus, Vaticanus along with a few ancient versions. Under most circumstances these modern version proponents would scream to high heaven that "to speak the word OF GOD" is most assuredly the correct reading.
Yet now they tell us that these words should be omitted from the text, even though their predecessors put them in. And all of this is done with NO new readings of ancient manuscript discoveries that have brought "new light and understanding" to the text.
No, folks, they just arbitrarily changed their collective minds and they do all this in what they like to call "the science" of textual criticism.
Notice that the RSV 1971 said "to speak the word OF GOD", but then the NRSV 1989 and the ESV now read "to speak the word"
The NRSV 1989, ESV 2001-2011, Common English Bible 2011 and NET now read: "to speak the word without fear", thus omitting the words "of God" and go back to the reading that has always been in the KJB. Perhaps their present deciding factor to now omit these extra words is P46, in spite of what Sinaiticus/Vaticanus read; but do they always follow P46? Of course not. They don't follow the readings found in P46 in 1:8, 16-17, 2:3, 15, 22, 3:3, 7, 8, 12, 18 or 4:7, 18 and 23.
Modern textual criticism has more in common with throwing darts at a dart board or perhaps the Ouija Board than it does with anything that can rightly be called "science". Manuscript D says: "to speak of God", adding "of God" but omitting "the word", and uncials F and G say "the word of THE LORD" but nobody seems to follow these.
The Catholic Connection
The Catholic versions present us with the usual confusion and irregularities, much like the modern Bible Babble Buffet versions. The 1582 Douay-Rheims and 1950 Douay read "to speak the word OF GOD". Then the 1968 Jerusalem bible changed their text and went with "to speak the word" (thus omitting "of God").
But then the 1970 St. Joseph NAB added it back again saying "to speak the word OF GOD". Then the 1985 New Jerusalem came along and once again says "to preach the message" (omitting "of God").
But wait. There's more. Now the 2009 Catholic Public Domain Version has now put the words back in the text once again, saying: "are now much bolder in speaking the Word of God without fear."
The "new" NIV of 2011 has now changed their underlying Greek texts as well (as they have done numerous times) and their English translation too. The NIV 2011 now reads: "to proclaim THE GOSPEL without fear." This is a total paraphrase, since there IS a word for "gospel", but it is not found here. The Greek word is logos which simply means "word" and not "gospel".
The Holman Standard of 2009 has likewise dropped the extra words "of God" but paraphrases it as "to speak THE MESSAGE fearlessly."
The editors of the "new" NIV 2011 have adopted a different textual reading than the old NIVs of 1973, 1978 and 1984, and they have changed something else as well. Let's contrast the NIV 1984 with the NIV 2011.
NIV 1984 edition - "Because of my chains, most of the BROTHERS IN THE LORD have BEEN ENCOURAGED TO SPEAK the WORD OF GOD MORE COURAGEOUSLY AND FEARLESSLY."
The NIV 2011 now says: "AND because of my chains, most of the BROTHERS AND SISTERS, have BECOME CONFIDENT IN THE LORD AND DARE ALL THE MORE TO PROCLAIM THE GOSPEL WITHOUT FEAR."
Did you notice that the "new" NIV has dropped the extra words OF GOD, but they have added AND SISTERS, which is not found in any text; they completely re-worded the whole verse, and they changed THE WORD (ton logon) to THE GOSPEL?
If you do not tremble at word of God (Isaiah 66:2) then these changes will seem of no importance to you. If the Holy Bible is no more than a collection of religious writings, whose content is sometimes inspiring (though not inspired), and is by no means a perfect revelation of the mind of God, then there is little reason for you not to accept the conflicting and ever changing Bible of the Month Club versions, that NOBODY seriously believes are God's infallible words.
"My son, fear thou the LORD and the king: and meddle not with them that are given to change." Proverbs 24:21
Philippians 1:16-17 - A very interesting thing has occurred in verses 16 and 17 in the NASB, NIV and ESV. They have reversed these two verses on the basis of Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. Remember, the NIV 2011 and the ESV just got done rejecting the Sinaiticus/Vaticanus reading in verse 14, but now go back to these two corrupt texts.
KJB - Philippians 1:15-17 "Some indeed preach Christ even of envy and strife: and some of good will: THE ONE PREACH CHRIST OF CONTENTION, NOT SINCERELY, SUPPOSING TO ADD AFFLICTION TO MY BONDS; BUT THE OTHER OF LOVE, KNOWING THAT I AM SET FOR THE DEFENCE OF THE GOSPEL."
ESV - "Some indeed preach Christ from envy and rivalry, but others from good will. THE LATTER DO IT OUT OF LOVE, KNOWING THAT I AM PUT HERE FOR THE DEFENSE OF THE GOSPEL. THE FORMER PROCLAIM CHRIST OUT OF RIVALRY, NOT SINCERELY BUT THINKING TO AFFLICT ME IN MY IMPRISONMENT."
The two verses of Philippians 1:16-17 are in the same order in the King James Bible, Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew's Bible 1549, Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, Mace N.T. 1729, Wesley 1755, Worsley 1770, Webster's 1833, Young's 1898, Greens literal 2000, the NKJV 1982, the Third Millennium Bible 1998 and the Jubilee Bible 2000-2010.
Even if you can't read these foreign languages, just look for the word "Christ" in verse 16; you can pick it out pretty easily.
Among foreign language Bibles that have the same verses in the same places are the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569, Cipriano de Valera 1602, the Spanish Reina Valera 1909, 1960, 1995 and Contemporánea 2011 - "16 Unos anuncian a Cristo por pelear, y no con sinceridad, pues creen que así añaden aflicción a mis prisiones; 17 pero otros lo hacen por amor, y saben que estoy aquí para defender al evangelio.", Martin Luther's German bible 1545 and German Schlachter Bible 2000 - "16 Jene verkündigen Christum aus Zank und nicht lauter; denn sie meinen, sie wollen eine Trübsal zuwenden meinen Banden; 17 diese aber aus Liebe; denn sie wissen, daß ich zur Verantwortung des Evangeliums hier liege." the French Martin 1744 and Ostervald 1996 - 16."Les uns, dis-je, annoncent Christ par un esprit de dispute, et non pas purement; croyant ajouter 17. Mais les autres le font par charité, sachant que je suis établi pour la défense de l'Evangile.", the Portuguese Almeida Corrigida E Fiel - "16 Uns, na verdade, anunciam a Cristo por contençäo, näo puramente, julgando acrescentar afliçäo às minhas prisöes. 17 Mas outros, por amor, sabendo que fui posto para defesa do evangelho.", the Italian Diodati 1649 and New Diodati 1991 versions - "16 Quelli certo annunziano Cristo per contesa, non puramente, pensando di aggiungere afflizione alle mie catene, 17 ma questi lo fanno per amore, sapendo che sono stabilito alla difesa dell'evangelo." and the Modern Greek Bible - "16. οι μεν κηρυττουσιν εξ αντιζηλιας τον Χριστον, ουχι εν καθαροτητι, νομιζοντες οτι προσθετουσι θλιψιν εις τα δεσμα μου· 17. οι δε εξ αγαπης, εξευροντες οτι ειμαι τεταγμενος εις απολογιαν του ευαγγελιου."
The very same manuscripts that were rejected in verse 14 are now followed by the same UBS text and the RSV, NIV, NASB, ESV, Holman and all Catholic versions like the Douay-Rheims, the St. Joseph NAB 1970 and the 1985 New Jerusalem versions.
They reverse verses 16 and 17 and read: "Some, to be sure, are preaching Christ even from envy and strife, but some also from good will: THE LATTER DO IT OUT OF LOVE, KNOWING THAT I AM APPOINTED FOR THE DEFENSE OF THE GOSPEL; THE FORMER PROCLAIM CHRIST OUT OF SELFISH AMBITION RATHER THAN FROM PURE MOTIVES, THINKING TO CAUSE ME DISTRESS IN MY IMPRISONMENT."Philippians 1:26
"That your REJOICING may be more abundant in Jesus Christ for me by my coming to you again."
All texts are the same here, and "your rejoicing" is the reading of the KJB, Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew's Bible 1549, the Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, Lamsa's translation of the Syriac Peshitta 1933, Webster's 1833 translation, Wesley's translation 1755 and the NKJV 1982.
The NIV 1984 edition was fine here with "your JOY" but the "new" NIV of 2011 changed this to "your BOASTING". The NASB says: "so that YOUR PROUD CONFIDENCE in me may abound in Christ Jesus through my coming to you again." And the ESV has: "So that in me you may have ample CAUSE TO GLORY in Christ Jesus, because of my coming to you again."
Rejoice or Be Proud?
In the true Holy Bible boasting in oneself is never commended as a good thing. Pride is always condemned in the King James Bible as being a sin. The new versions however have completely turned this around.
"Pride and arrogancy...do I hate" Proverbs 8:13
"When pride cometh, then cometh shame; but with the lowly is wisdom. Proverbs 11:2
"Pride goeth before destruction" Proverbs 16:18
"This know also that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be...boasters, proud...heady, highminded" II Tim. 3:1-4. "not of works; lest any man should boast." Ephesians 2:9
Compare the KJB with the NASB, NIV, ESV in these. Galatians 6:4 KJB "then shall he have REJOICING in himself"; NASB "he will have REASON FOR BOASTING in regard TO himself"; NIV "he can TAKE PRIDE IN HIMSELF"; ESV "his REASON TO BOAST will be in himself alone"
James 1:9 KJB "Let the brother of low degree REJOICE in that he is exalted."
NASB "the brother of humble circumstances IS TO GLORY in his high position";
NIV "the brother in humble circumstances OUGHT TO TAKE PRIDE IN his high position."
ESV "let the lowly brother BOAST in his exaltation."
2 Corinthians 1:12, 14 KJB "For our REJOICING is this...by the grace of God we have had our conversation in the world...we are your REJOICING, even as ye also are ours in the day of the Lord Jesus."
NASB "For our PROUD CONFIDENCE is this...we are YOUR REASON TO BE PROUD, as you also are ours..."
NIV "Now this is our BOAST...YOU CAN BOAST OF US just as we will BOAST OF YOU in the day of the Lord Jesus."
ESV "For OUR BOAST is this...on the day of our Lord Jesus YOU WILL BOAST OF US AS WE WILL BOAST OF YOU."
Philippians 1:26 KJB "That your REJOICING may be more abundant in Jesus Christ for me by my coming to you again."
NASB "so that YOUR PROUD CONFIDENCE in me may abound"
I would hope that you can see that Rejoicing is not the same as proud confidence.
The NIV 1984 edition read: "So that through my being with you again YOUR JOY in Christ Jesus will overflow on account of me."
But the NIV 2011 now reads: "So that through my being with you again YOUR BOASTING in Christ Jesus will abound on account of me."
ESV "So that in me you may have ample CAUSE TO GLORY in Christ Jesus, because of my coming to you again."
Philippians 2:16 KJB "that I may REJOICE in the day of Christ, that I have not run in vain, neither laboured in vain."
Also reading "that I may REJOICE in the day of Christ" are Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535, the Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, Young's literal, Webster's translation 1833, the NKJV 1982, KJV 21st Century Version 1994 and the Third Millenium Bible 1998.
NASB: "in the day of Christ I may have REASON TO GLORY because I did not run in vain"
NIV: "in order that I MAY BOAST in the day of Christ that I did not run or labor for nothing."
ESV "THAT I MAY BE PROUD that I did not run in vain"
God's Word Translation 1995 "Then I CAN BRAG on the day of Christ that my effort was not wasted and that my work produced results."
On the day of Christ, when we finally see the full glory of God Almighty, we will not be standing around boasting of our accomplishments and patting one another on the back and telling them how proud we are of them. Nobody will be boasting or proud of his personal accomplishments in the day of the Lord Jesus. Instead we will all be flat on our faces worshipping the Lamb who alone is worthy to receive praise, honour and glory, and rejoicing in all that He has done in and through His vessels of mercy, which He had afore prepared unto glory.
To see a much more in depth study on how the modern versions promote PRIDE AS A VIRTUE, you can read it here -
The Similarity of Modern Versions with the Jehovah Witness Version
Philippians 2:5-7 "thought it not robbery to be equal with God"
"Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form (morphe) of God, THOUGHT IT NOT ROBBERY TO BE EQUAL WITH GOD: BUT MADE HIMSELF OF NO REPUTATION, and took upon him the form (morphe) of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men."
The phrase "thought it not robbery to be equal with God", as found in the King James Bible, clearly teaches that Jesus Christ was in fact God.
Notice the comments of a couple of orthodox commentators.
"thought it not robbery to be equal with God" the Father; for if he was in the same form, nature, and essence, he must be equal to him, as he is; for he has the same perfections, as eternity, omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, immutability, and self-existence: hence he has the same glorious names, as God, the mighty God, the true God, the living God, God over all, Jehovah, the Lord of glory… the same works of creation and providence are ascribed to him, and the same worship, homage, and honour given him: to be "in the form of God", and to be "equal with God", signify the same thing, the one is explanative of the other: and this divine form and equality, or true and proper deity, he did not obtain by force and rapine, by robbery and usurpation, as Satan attempted to do, and as Adam by his instigation also affected;
" He thought it not robbery to be equal with God; did not think himself guilty of any invasion of what did not belong to him, or assuming another’s right. He said, I and my Father are one, Jn. 10:30. It is the highest degree of robbery for any mere man or mere creature to pretend to be equal with God, or profess himself one with the Father. This is for a man to rob God, not in tithes and offerings, but of the rights of his Godhead."
"Thought it not robbery to be equal with God" is not only the reading of the King James Bible but also of Tyndale, the Geneva Bible, Young's, Hebrew Names Version, Lamsa's translation of the Syriac Peshitta, Third Millenium Bible, Webster's 1833 translation, Wycliffe, and the NKJV 1982 edition.
By being equal to God, Jesus Christ was not stealing or taking something that did not belong to Him. He was and is equal to God the Father.
However many modern versions give us a rendering that means the exact opposite. I am presently in a discussion with a Jehovah Witness who, of course, denies that Jesus Christ is God. He says: "As for Philippians 2:6, the ambiguity is simply one that is shared by many translators and exegetes. The Harper Collins Study Bible NRSV states that some of the key words used here "had puzzled interpeters" and are "problematic."
The New World Translation, which the JWs use, says: "although he was existing in the form of God, gave no consideration to a seizure, namely, that he should be equal to God."
Then he proceeds to show the readings found in many modern versions.
NASB " did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped"
Revised Standard Version "did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped"
New Jerusalem Bible "did not count equality with God something to be grasped"
Emphatic Diaglott "yet did not meditate a Usurpation to be like God"
21st Century Free " he never even considered the chance to be equal with God."
Revised Version "counted it not a prize to be on an equality with God."
Goodspeed "he did not grasp at equality with God."
NKJV 1979 edition "did not consider equality with God something to be grasped."
NIV "did not consider equality with God something to be grasped".
To get a clearer idea of just how different in meaning the phrase is, "thought it not robbery to be equal with God" from "did not consider equality with God something to be grasped" compare the following statements.
"The black man thought it not robbery to be equal with the white man." In other words, he was not stealing something that did not belong to him; he is equal to the white man.
"The black man did not regard equality with the white man a thing to be grasped." He didn't even try and thought it way beyond him.
The meaning found in the NASB, NIV, NKJV 1979 edition, ESV, RSV is totally different from the one found in the King James Bible and others which reveal the full deity of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Another change in meaning is found in verse 7 where we are told that Christ "MADE HIMSELF OF NO REPUTATION". This is one of those "ambiguous, problematic" passages that the JW guy says has puzzled interpreters. The verb used here has variously been translated as "to be made void", "to be made of none effect", "to be in vain" and "made of no reputation". The King James translators got it right and many other versions give us a nonsensical reading.
Other Bibles that exhort us to follow the example of Christ, who made himself of no reputation, are Tyndale, the Geneva Bible, NKJV 1982 edition, Lamsa's translation of the Peshitta, Webster's, the KJV 21 and the Third Millenium Bible. Wycliffe says: "He lowered Himself".
However instead of "made himself of no reputation", the NIV, NASB, RSV, and NKJV 1979 edition again match the NWT of the JWs. They say Christ "emptied himself" (NASB, NKJV 79, RSV, NWT) or "made himself nothing" (NIV). Now if Christ made himself nothing or emptied himself, there was NOTHING THERE. If I empty a box, what remains? Nothing.
The Lord Jesus Christ was not empty or nothing when He came to earth. He was full of grace and truth. In Him dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. But He did make Himself of no reputation. He was born in a stable, from a common and poor family; He came not to seek His own glory but that of His Father, and He often told others He had healed to tell no one. When the multitudes wanted to make Him king, He departed into a mountain alone. How different from our sinful tendency to want to be recognized, make a name for ourselves, and have others look up to us as some great one.
Not all bibles teach the same thing. Many modern versions continually downgrade the glory and deity of our Lord Jesus Christ. The King James Bible exalts the Lord Jesus Christ to His rightful place as "God manifest in the flesh" 1 Timothy 3:16. Compare the NASB, NIV and NWT here for such an example. See also Romans 14:10, 1 John 5:7, 1 Cor. 15:47 and Luke 23:42.
"Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow...and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."
For a more in depth study on these verses see
In the remainder of this chapter we will see more examples of how Sinaiticus differs from Vaticanus. These are the two "oldest and best" we always hear about, and are responsible for the thousands of changes made in most modern versions.
"Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not AS (´ws) in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling."
This little word "as" (´ws) is found in the Majority of all texts, P46, Sinaiticus and A, and is included in the NASB, RSV, and ESV. However this word is omitted in Vaticanus, and also omitted in the NIV, and NRSV. Notice how the RSV includes it, then the NRSV omits it, then again the next revision of the ESV includes it once more. No new manuscripts were discovered during this time; they just willy-nilly go back and forth between their "oldest and best", which are neither the oldest nor the best.
Philippians 2:15 "among whom ye shine as LIGHTS IN THE WORLD".
This phrase is "phosteres en kosmo" and is correctly translated as "lights in the world" by the KJB, NKJV, NASB, RSV and ESV. But the NIV 1984 edition gives us the fanciful rendering of "as STARS IN THE UNIVERSE." The "new" NIV of 2011 has changed this to read: "you will shine among them as STARS IN THE SKY."
"For he longed after you all, ** and was full of heaviness, because that ye had heard that he had been sick."
This is the reading of the Majority, TR and Vaticanus. It is followed by most versions, including the NASB, ESV and NIV. However, Sinaiticus, A and C (the rest of the Alexandrian group of texts) add "he longed after you all TO SEE YOU ALL". The NASB footnotes "some ancient manuscripts read: 'to see you all'."
"Because for the work of CHRIST he was nigh unto death, not regarding his life, TO SUPPLY your lack of service toward me."
"the work of CHRIST" is the reading of the Majority, TR, P46, and Vaticanus. It is followed by the NKJV, NASB, ESV and NIV. But again, Sinaiticus and A read "the work of THE LORD", while C omits both Christ and the Lord, and says "because for the work, he was nigh unto death."
Not only do Sinaiticus and Vaticanus differ between Christ and the Lord in this verse, but the verb TO SUPPLY is totally different in both. The UBS text does not contain any notes telling us what these two actually read. Most manuscripts correctly read "supply" as anapleroose, but Vaticanus has pleroosee (to complete - which is what the NASB says, in spite of the fact the RV, ASV, NKJV all read "to supply") and Sinaiticus has anaplesoosei (shall supply). The NIV paraphrases the whole verse as usual.
"For we are the circumcision, WHICH WORSHIP GOD in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh."
We who, even though Gentiles, have savingly believed in the Person and work of our Lord Jesus Christ, are called the true circumcision. We worship God in the spirit, that is, in our inner being. Compare Romans 2:29 "But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God."
The reading of "which worship God in the spirit" is found in many Greek manuscripts, ancient versions and church fathers. It is found in Sinaiticus correction, C, D original, P, Psi, many Old Latin copies, the Syriac Peshitta, Harclean, Gothic, Armenian and Ethiopic versions.
That we WORSHIP GOD is the reading of Wycliffe, Tyndale, Geneva, Bishop's, Great bibles, the NKJV, Young's, Spanish Reina Valera, even the Douay, the Hebrew Names Version and also the Amplified version.
However, the NASB, NIV, ESV have a different reading based on different texts. They read: "we are the circumcision, we who worship BY THE SPIRIT OF GOD, and glory in Christ Jesus." There is a difference between "worshiping God in the spirit", and "worshiping by the Spirit of God".
The reading of the NASB, NIV, ESV comes from Sinaiticus original, before it was corrected, Vaticanus and Alexandrinus. P46 omits the word "God" altogether. Again, we see the Alexandrian texts in total disagreement among themselves, yet these are the ones responsible for most of the changes and omissions from the Traditional Texts.
"I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ JESUS." Here Vaticanus omits the word JESUS, but it is found in Sinaiticus and in the majority, and this time the NASB, NIV include it.
"Brethren, I count NOT myself to have apprehended...
NOT (ou) is the reading of the Majority and Vaticanus, and is also followed by the RSV, NRSV, ESV, as well as the KJB and NKJV.
However again Sinaiticus differs not only from the majority but also from Vaticanus. It says: "I do NOT YET count myself to have apprehended..." and both the NASB, NIV follow Sinaiticus this time saying "not YET". It is of interest that the latest UBS text has gone back to the KJB reading, so the NASB, NIV are again "out of date" with the "latest in scholarship".
"Nevertheless, whereto we have already attained, let us walk by the same RULE, LET US MIND THE SAME THING."
This whole last part has been omitted from the NASB, NIV, ESV, because not found in the Egyptian manuscripts of P46, Vaticanus and Alexandrinus.
However all these words are in the Majority of Greek texts including Sinaiticus correction as well as K, L, P, Psi and the Syriac Peshitta and Harclean ancient versions.
Other mss. like D have all the words in them but in a slightly different order, and thus the confusion among the Catholic versions. And there is a wide variety of ways the versions have translated this verse.
The older Douay-Rheims 1582 and Douay 1950 read much like the KJB with - "Still in what we have attained let us be of the same mind, and let us also continue in this same rule." Wycliffe's bible 1395 also read this way.
Bibles that read like the King James Bible here are Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535, The Great Bible 1540, Matthew's Bible 1549, the Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva bible 1587, Wesley's N.T. 1755, Worsley N.T. 1770, Haweis N.T. 1795, The Thompson bible 1808, Julia Smith Translation 1855, Young's 1898, the NKJV 1982, World English Bible 2000, Complete Apostle's Bible 2003, Jubilee Bible 2010, the Hebrew Names Version 2014 and the Modern English Version.
"let us walk by the same RULE, LET US MIND THE SAME THING." is the reading of the Reformation bibles in all languages including the German, Spanish, Italian, French, and Portuguese.
It is also the reading found in The Modern Greek Bible - Πλην εις εκεινο, εις το οποιον εφθασαμεν, ας περιπατωμεν κατα τον αυτον κανονα, ας φρονωμεν το αυτο.
Philippians 3:19 “whose God is their belly”
KJB - “Whose end is destruction, whose God is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things.”
Some King James Bible critics claim there is a mistake in Philippians 3:19 because the KJB says “whose God is their belly”, and they tell us that the word God should be spelled with a small “g” instead of a capital G.
They tell us that the true God is spelled with a capital G and the false gods are spelled with a small “g”.
It is true that the false gods are spelled with a small “g”. But the case in Philippians 3:19 is different. No one seriously thinks that one’s belly is a false god like Baal or Ashtaroth (1 Samuel 7:3-4) or Dagon or Milcom (1 Kings 11:5)
But in Philippians 3:19 these people had put their own bellies as the center of their affections and in the place of the true God. The reference is not to some pagan dieties or false gods of wood or stone. That is why the capital G is used.
Not only does the KJB capitalize the word God here but so also do the following Bible translations - Tyndale 1624, Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549, the Bishops’ bible 1568, the Douay-Rheims N.T. 1582, the Geneva Bible 1587, The Beza N.T. 1599, The Bill Bible 1671, Whiston’s N.T. 1745, Worsley N.T. 1770, Haweis N.T. 1795, The Thomson Bible 1808, The Improved Bible 1809, Webster’s bible 1833, The Pickering N.T. 1840, The Longman Version 1841, The Commonly Received Version 1851, the Julia Smith Translation 1855, American Bible Union N.T. 1858, Sawyer N.T. 1858, The Revised New Testament 1862, Noyes N.T. 1869, The Smith Bible 1876, The Sharpe Bible 1883, The Revised English Bible 1877, the Twentieth Century N.T. 1901, Rotherham’s Emphasized Bible 1902, the Weymouth N.T. 1902, the Godbey N.T. 1902, The Improved Bible 1913, The Riverside N.T. 1923, Lamsa’s 1933 translation of the Syriac Peshitta, The Wade N.T. 1934, The Word of Yah Bible 1993, the 21st Century King James Version 1994, The Lawrie N.T. 1998, God’s First Truth Translation 1999, The Tomson N.T. 2002, The Revised Geneva Bible 2005, The Mebust Bible 2007 - “whose El is their belly”, The Faithful N.T. 2009, The Hebraic Transliteration Scriptures 2010 - “whose Elohim is their belly”, the Jubilee Bible 2010, the New American Bible 2010, The Work of God’s Children Bible 2011, the Lexham English Bible 2012 - “whose God is the stomach”, The Bond Slave Version 2012, The Biblos Bible 2013 - “whose God is their belly”, The Open English Bible 2014 “their appetites are their God”.
Philippians 3:21 - "our VILE body"
Some bible agnostic named Matias G. posted - “I used to be KJB Only. But thankfully I was brought to see KJV has errors, and exited that delusion. I cannot now name any version in any language which is 100 % error-free. KJV has so many demonstrable errors in its NT that your boasting of it is comical. Example: "vile body" in Philippians - problematic to say the least. And what of the deplorable fact that the unregenerate KJV translators submitted to an unregenerate king's ungodly translation rules which reflected his demonic high-churchian sentiments? KJV Onlyism is a doctrine of demons, to put it briefly.”
Obviously this man has gone a long ways (in the wrong direction) since he used to believe in an inerrant Bible. Now he is filled with ignorance, hatred, foolishness and pride and he has NO infallible Bible in any language to believe in himself or to recommend to anyone else.
Let’s take a look at his criticism of Philippians 3:21 where the KJB (and many others as we shall soon see) says referring to our Lord Jesus Christ “Who shall change our VILE body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.”
The particular Greek word used here is #5014 tapinosis. It is translated as “low estate” - “he hath regarded the LOW ESTATE of his handmaiden” (Luke 1:48). “humiliation” in Acts 8:33 when describing how sinful men treated our Lord when they crucified him. “He was led as a sheep to the slaughter…in his HUMILIATION his judgment was taken away”. Please notice that it was sinful man that “humiliated” the Lord Jesus, not God. God does not humiliate people. He HUMBLES them, but He does not humiliate.
The word is use the third time here in Philippians 3:21 where Christ will change our VILE body that it may become a glorious one like He now has. And the 4th time the word is used is in James 1:10 where it tells us that the rich should rejoice “in that he is MADE LOW.”
What does the English word “vile” mean? As with virtually all words, whether English, Greek or Hebrew, it has several shades of meaning. Some of the meanings of the English word vile are “lowly, mean, degrading, of poor quality and even sinful.
And what do the Greek lexicons tell us this word means? Well, very much the same things. I have a hard copy of Liddell and Scott's Greek-English Lexicon, 17th edition 1887. On page 691 they tell us the word means “lowly, mean, abject, base, VILE". And in a good sense it means "humble or lowliness."
This present body we now live in has been affected by the ravages of sin. It is subject to disease, decay and death. In comparison to the glorious, resurrected new body we will someday have, it can rightly be considered to be “vile” by comparison.
Not only does the King James Bible refer to “our VILE body” here in Philippians 3:21, but so too do the following Bible translations -
Philippians 4:6 KJB - “BE CAREFUL for nothing; but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto God.”
NJKV (ASV, ESV, NET, NIV, NASB) - “BE ANXIOUS for nothing, but in everything by prayer and supplication, with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known to God.”
There is nothing necessarily wrong with the NKJV or others that change the words “BE CAREFUL for nothing” to “BE ANXIOUS for nothing.” But I wanted to deal with the criticism of those who tell us that the King James Bible is either wrong or confusing in this verse.
Most people today do not believe that ANY Bible in any language (including “the” Greek and Hebrew) IS or ever was the complete and inerrant words of God. So instead of being Bible believers, they have turned into Bible Rummagers who “like the way it reads” over here in that version, and “prefer” the way it might read over there in that version. But they don’t believe that ANY of the Bibles out there are actually the inerrant words of God.
And, as a society in general, we have been dumbed down and don’t realize that most words in any language, be it English, Greek, Hebrew, Spanish, French, Italian or German, are capable of carrying a wide variety of meanings that change depending on the context.
The English word “CAREFUL” has more than one meaning. And so does the word “ANXIOUS”.
The context of the word determines the meaning. Here in Philippians 4:6 as well as in places like Luke 10:41 where Jesus says to Martha: “Martha, Martha, thou art CAREFUL and troubled about many things”, the word literally means - FULL OF CARE, or concern.
That meaning in English is not even “archaic”.
The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language
Gives us 4 different definitions of this word - CAREFUL
1. Attentive to potential danger, error, or harm; cautious: was careful when crossing the street; a careful answer.
2. Thorough and painstaking in action or execution; conscientious: a careful search; careful art restorers.
3. Protective; solicitous: Be careful of his feelings.
4. Full of cares or anxiety: "Thou art careful and troubled about many things" (Luke 10:41).
Internet Dictionary Wordnik - Careful
Webster’s 1828 Dictionary had this to say about the word “careful”
1. Full of care; anxious; solicitous.
Martha, thou art careful and troubled about many things. Luke 10.
2. Provident; attentive to support and protect; with of or for.
Thou hast been careful for us with all care. 2 Kings 4.
What could a careful father more have done. Dryden.
In present usage careful is generally followed by of; as, careful of health.
3. Watchful; cautious; giving good heed; as, be careful to maintain good works; be careful of your conversation.
4. Filling with care or solicitude; exposing to concern, anxiety or trouble; full of cares.
Likewise the word “ANXIOUS” also has more than one meaning. It can mean either “full of care” or “to be looking forward to something with excitement” or “eagerly or earnestly desirous of doing something.”
Now, obviously this second definition of “anxious” - “looking forward to something with excitement” - does not fit the context of Philippians 4:6 and neither does the definition of “careful” as “watchful, cautious, or giving good heed to” fit the same passage.
Just try to use a little common sense.
Not only does the King James Bible say “BE CAREFUL for nothing” but so do the following Bible translations - Tyndale 1534, Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, Wesely’s N.T. 1755, Darby 1890, The Word of Yah 1993, Tomson New Testament 2002 - “BE NOTHING CAREFUL”, The Evidence Bible 2003 = “BE CAREFUL FOR NOTHING”, Bond Slave Version 2009, Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, “BE CAREFUL for nothing”
Douay Rheims 1582, The Work of God’s Children Illustrated Bible 2011 - “Be nothing solicitous”
KJV 21st Century 1994 - “Fret not about anything”
Interlinear Greek New Testament 1997 (Larry Pierce) - “BE CAREFUL about nothing”
Bible in Basic English 1961 - “Have no cares”
International Standard Version - “Never worry about anything”
Concordant Group Version 2007, Complete Jewish bible, Holman 2009 - “Do not worry about anything”
God’s First Truth 1999 - “BE NOT CAREFULL: but in all things show your petition unto God in prayer and supplication with giving of thanks."
Philippians 4:13 KJB - "I can do all things through CHRIST which strengtheneth me."
The NIVs are inconsistent (surprise!). Though the English version of the NIV omits the word "CHRIST" yet the NIV Spanish version, Nueva Versión Internacional 1999 contains it - "Todo lo puedo en CRISTO que me fortalece."
The Early Church Fathers 38 Volume Set Digital Version
254 A.D. ORIGEN DE PRINCIPIIS -- REST OF BOOK III CHAP. II.--ON' T HE OPPOSING POWERS.
p 1805 "I can do all things through Christ, who strengtheneth me;"
254 A.D. ORIGEN AGAINST CELSUS -- REST OF BOOK VIII CHAP. LXX.
p 2115 "I can do all things, through Christ Jesus our Lord, which strengtheneth me."
254 A.D. ORIGEN'S COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN: BOOK I
38. CHRIST AS PARACLETE, AS PROPITIATION, AND AS THE POWER OF GOD.
p 4522 "I can do all things through Jesus Christ who strengtheneth me."
401 A.D. THE THIRTEEN BOOKS OF THE CONFESSIONS OF ST. AUGUSTIN, BISHOP
OF HIPPO: BOOKS X & XI CHAP. XXXI. p 4779 I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me."
401 A.D. THE THIRTEEN BOOKS OF THE CONFESSIONS OF ST. AUGUSTIN, BISHOP OF
HIPPO: BOOKS XII & XIII CHAP. XXVI. p 4818 I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me."
401 A.D. THE CONFESSIONS OF SAINT AUGUSTINE, ANOTHER TRANSLATION (BOOKS
X & XI) CHAPTER XXXI p 4896 I can do all things through Christ that strengtheneth me.
347-407 A.D. HOMILIES OF ST. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM ON THE EPISTLE OF ST. PAUL THE APOSTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS, HOMILY XV. PHILIPPIANS iv. 10--14. p 10265 "I can do all things in Christ that strengtheneth me."
337-338 A.D. FESTAL LETTERS VI, VII & X TO XIII LETTER X. For 338. Coss. Ursus and Polemius; Pr'f. the same Theodorus, of Heliopolis, p 12456 'I can do all things through Christ Who strengtheneth me;'
386 A.D. ST. CYRIL OF JERUSALEM: CATECHETICAL LECTURES, LECTURES XVII TO XXIII
LECTURE XXI. (ON T HE MYSTERIES. III.) ON CHRISM. 1 JOHN ii. 20--28.
p 13445 I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me
KJB - "The grace of OUR Lord Jesus Christ be with YOU ALL. AMEN."
ESV -"The grace of THE Lord Jesus Christ be with YOUR SPIRIT."
In this short verse alone, there are three significant textual variants. God did not inspire them all. The textual differences are between either "OUR Lord Jesus Christ" versus "THE Lord Jesus Christ". Number two is between "with YOU ALL" versus "with YOUR SPIRIT", and the third one is the ending of "AMEN" or nothing at the end.
The Traditional Reformation Greek text that underlies the King James Bible is η χαρις του κυριου ημων ιησου χριστου μετα παντων υμων αμην
The Westcott-Hort/UBS/Nestle-Aland/Vatican critical text is quite different with η χαρις του κυριου ιησου χριστου μετα του πνευματος υμων
The word OUR (ημων) is found in many mss. including P46 which is the oldest remaining Greek manuscript we know about. It dates to about 200 A.D. and is 150 years older than Sinaiticus or Vaticanus, which omit this word. So, the new versions do NOT always follow the oldest reading. P46 also contains the word AMEN, yet the modern Vatican versions also omit this word from their texts as well. So much for "the oldest reading is best" mantra we so often hear from the bible agnostics.
The reading of OUR Lord Jesus Christ is that of many Greek manuscripts including P46, the Textus Receptus and is found in the Greek texts of Erasmus, Stephanus 1550, Beza, Elziever, Scrivener 1894 and in the Modern Greek Bible - Η χαρις του Κυριου ημων Ιησου Χριστου ειη μετα παντων υμων· αμην.
YOU ALL ( παντων υμων) is found again in the majority, Sinaiticus correction and the Syriac Peshitta, but the texts followed by Westcott-Hort read "YOUR SPIRIT" and so the ESV, NASB, NIV, RV, NET, RSV, the Jehovah Witness New World Translation and the Catholic versions.
Finally the last word in this book is AMEN. Amen is found in the majority of texts as well as Sinaiticus and P46 but Vaticanus omits the final word "Amen". The NASB, RSV, ESV omit AMEN, but the NIV keeps it, but with a footnote "some manuscripts do not have Amen."
The Catholic Connection
Among the Catholic versions we see the usual confusion. It is the Jesuit's counter Reformation goal to destroy faith in the written words of God as the final authority - or what they call "The Paper Pope of Protestantism". They want to discredit the Bible as being the reliable and 100 % true words of God, and they have largely succeeded in their efforts among most Christians today.
The earlier Douay Rheims of 1610 as well as the Douay Version of 1950 both read "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit. Amen." They kept the word "OUR" and "AMEN", but changed "with YOU ALL" to "with YOUR SPIRIT". This is the reading of the Latin Vulgate and the Clementine Vulgate - "Gratia Domini nostri Jesu Christi cum spiritu vestro. Amen."
Then the more modern versions like the St. Joseph New American Bible 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible 1985 read like the NASB, ESV, NET, Holman Standard Vatican Versions with "The grace of THE Lord Jesus Christ be with YOUR SPIRIT." They now remove the word OUR and AMEN, and go with "YOUR SPIRIT" instead of "with YOU ALL".
But wait. They are not done yet. Now the 2009 Catholic Public Domain Version has come out and it goes back to reading "The grace of OUR Lord Jesus Christ be with YOUR SPIRIT. AMEN." Once again the add the words "OUR" and "AMEN" but keep the change from "YOU ALL" to "YOUR SPIRIT".
Agreeing with the Traditional Reformation text of "The grace of OUR Lord Jesus Christ be with YOU ALL. AMEN." are Tyndale 1524 - "The grace of oure lorde Iesu Christ be wt you all. Amen", Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew's Bible 1549, the Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587 - "The grace of our Lord Iesus Christ be with you all, Amen.", Theodore Beza's English translation 1599, the King James Bible, Worsley Translation 1770, Thomas Haweis N.T. 1797, Webster's 1833 Translation, the Etheridge 1849, Murdock 1852 and Lamsa's translations of the Syriac Peshitta all agree with the KJB reading, the Living Oracles 1835, Julia Smith Bible 1855, the NKJV 1982, Third Millennium Bible 1998, the Apostolic Bible Polyglot English 2003, the Third Millennium Bible 1998 and the Jubilee Bible 2000-2010.
Many foreign language Bible also read as does the KJB. This IS the Reformation Bible Text. Among them are Luther's German Bible 1545 and the German Schlachter Bible of 2000 - "Die Gnade unsers HERRN Jesu Christi sei mit euch allen! Amen.", the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569, Cipriano de Valera 1602 and the Spanish Reina Valera's 1909-2011 - "La gracia de nuestro Señor Jesucristo sea con todos vosotros. Amén.", the Afrikaans Bible 1953 - "Die genade van onse Here Jesus Christus sy met julle almal! Amen.", the Italian Diodati 1649 and La Nuova Diodati 1991 - "La grazia del Signor nostro Gesù Cristo sia con tutti voi. Amen.", the French Martin 1744 and French Ostervald 1996 - "La grâce de notre Seigneur Jésus-Christ soit avec vous tous, Amen.", the Finnish Bible 1776 -"Meidän Herran Jesuksen Kristuksen armo olkoon kaikkein teidän kanssanne, amen!", the Russian Synodal Version 1876 - "Благодать Господа нашего Иисуса Христа со всеми вами. Аминь."
Also reading as the KJB are the Czech BKR Bible - "Milost Pána našeho Jezukrista se všemi vámi. Amen.", the Albanian Bible - "Hiri i Zotit tonë Jezu Krisht qoftë me ju të gjithë. Amen.", the Portuguese A Biblia Sagrada and the Almeida Corregida -"A graça de nosso Senhor Jesus Cristo seja com vós todos. Amen." the Tagalog Ang Salita ng Diyos Bible - "Ang biyaya ng ating Panginoong Jesucristo ay sumainyong lahat. Siya niawa!", the Dutch Staten Vertaling Bible - "De genade van onzen Heere Jezus Christus zij met u allen. Amen.", the Hungarian Karoli Bible - "A mi Urunk Jézus Krisztusnak kegyelme legyen mindnyájatokkal! Ámen.", and Smith and van Dyke's Arabic Bible - نعمة ربنا يسوع المسيح مع جميعكم آمين. كتبت الى اهل فيلبي من رومية = The grace of OUR Lord Jesus Christ be with YOU ALL. AMEN."
In the small epistle of Philippians, we have seen that the so called oldest and best manuscripts of Sinaiticus and Vaticanus differ from each other in the following verses. Philippians 1:1; 1:6; 1:23; 2:12; 2:26; 2:30; 3:3; 3:12; 3:13: 3:16; 4:13 and 4:23. Yet this small book is one in which Sinaiticus and Vaticanus agree more often than in many other of the New Testament books. In many others they disagree with each other far more often and more radically, yet these are the two main manuscripts that are responsible for the omission of some 3,000 words from the New Testament of the King James Bible.
Return to Articles - http://brandplucked.webs.com/articles.htm