The Papyri and James White.
James White makes some very inaccurate claims in his criticisms of the King James Bible in his defense of the Vatican supervised Critical Text versions like the constantly changing ESV, NASB, NIV, etc.
We will clearly see in this study how the modern Versions like the ESV, NASB, NIV continue to change from one edition to the next; they do not even agree with each other, and the Vatican supervised Critical text upon which they are based is in a constant state of flux and change.
In his book, The King James Only Controversy, he states on page 195, “Every papyrus manuscript we have discovered has been a representative of the Alexandrian text-type.” And on page 197, he tells us, “An examination of the early New Testament translations reveals they were done on the basis of Alexandrian type manuscripts.”
Mr. James White, who SAYS he believes “the Bible IS the infallible words of God”, but will NEVER show you a copy of this infallible Bible he professes to believe in, is just flat out wrong.
The papyri, all of which come from Egypt (Alexandria) represent a localized New Testament text that is significantly different from the New Testament seen in other parts of the world that eventually became the textual basis of the Reformation Bibles in all languages. The papyri are earlier than Sinaiticus and Vaticanus by about 150 to 200 years, but they are often a mixed bag of contradictory readings and many of them side with those found in the King James Bible and other Reformation bibles rather than with modern versions like the ESV, NASB and NIV.
We will look at some concrete, representative examples of papyri readings in this study.
As far as the early translations “done on the basis of Alexandrian type manuscripts” (as James White tells us) this is simply not true. Ancient versions like the Old Latin, the Latin Vulgate, the Gothic and the Syriac Peshitta are much more like the King James Bible - including many whole verses, phrases and individual words - than they are like the ESV, NASB, NIV group.
The website KJV Today tells us in their excellent article “Aren’t older manuscripts more reliable?” - “However, the antiquity of these manuscripts is no indication of reliability because a prominent church father in Alexandria testified that manuscripts were already corrupt by the third century.
Origen, the Alexandrian church father in the early third century, said: "...the differences among the manuscripts [of the Gospels] have become great, either through the negligence of some copyists or through the perverse audacity of others; they either neglect to check over what they have transcribed, or, in the process of checking, they lengthen or shorten, as they please."
(Bruce Metzger, The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration, 3rd ed. (1991), pp. 151-152).
In this little study we will look at just a few of the examples where the Alexandrian papyri are mixed bag readings that sometimes side with what we find in the King James Bible rather than the Critical Text versions.
Mark 7:6 “He ANSWERED and said unto them”. The verb answered -αποκριθεις - is found in P45 as well as the Majority, A and D, but Sinaiticus and Vaticanus omit it and so do the ESV, NASB, NIV, NET etc.
Mark 7:35 -“ And STRAIGHTWAY (ευθέως - immediately) his ears were opened.” This is the reading found in P45, the Majority and the TR, but is omitted by Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.
Westcott and Hort originally omitted the word from their text, and so did the Nestle 4th edition 1934 and the Nestle 21st edition 1975, but now in the 27th and 28th editions of the Critical Text they put the word back in but with [brackets].
The Vatican supervised Critical Text versions don’t even agree among themselves. The ASV, NASB, NIV and ESV omit the word “immediately” but Dan Wallace’s NET version and the Holman Standard include it.
Luke 10:41-42 "And Jesus answered and said unto her, Martha, Martha, thou art careful about many things, BUT ONE THING IS NEEDFUL, and Mary hath chosen that good part, which shall not be taken away from her."
"but one thing is needful" is the majority reading of all texts including P45, P75 and Alexandrinus, but a curious thing happens when we look at both Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. Instead of saying "but one thing is needful", these two "oldest and best" read: "but few things are needful, the one". ONLY the NASB from 1960 to 1977 and the Amplified version read: "BUT ONLY A FEW THINGS ARE NECESSARY, REALLY ONLY ONE, for Mary has chosen the good part."
Not even the RV, ASV, RSV, NRSV, ESV, NIV 1982 edition, ISV read as does the NASB from 1963 through 7 revisions to 1977. Ah, but then in 1995 the NASB scholars decided to go back to the other reading of "but one thing is needful" and so now the 1995-2020 NASBs read like all the others.
But wait. There's more to the story.
The older Nestle-Aland texts used to read: "but FEW THINGS are needful, THE ONE", but now have once again changed their NA critical texts to read as does the King James Bible. But now that the latest Nestle-Aland critical texts have gone back to the KJB reading, the brand new NIV 2011 edition has gone back to the other reading that the latest NASBs and the Critical Text itself just rejected! It just gets better and better, doesn't it?
NASB 1963-1977 editions - “But ONLY A FEW THINGS ARE NECESSARY, REALLY ONLY ONE, for Mary has chosen the good part, which shall not be taken away from her.”
NASB 1995, 2020 editions - “But ONLY ONE THING IS NECESSARY, for Mary has chosen the good part, which shall not be taken away from her.”
NIV 1973, 1978 and 1982 editions - "BUT ONLY ONE THING IS NEEDED. Mary has chosen what is better, and it will not be taken from her."
NIV 2011 edition - "BUT FEW THINGS ARE NEEDED - OR INDEED ONLY ONE. Mary has chosen what is better, and it will not be taken from her."
Did you notice that both the NASB and the NIV changed THE TEXT from one edition to another, AND that they REVERSED THEIR CHOICES? What is going on here in Bible Babble Buffet Land?
In John 3:28 we read Jesus's words saying: "Ye yourselves bear ME witness", and so read P66, Vaticanus, A and D, along with the NASB and ESV, but Sinaiticus and P75 omit this word and so do the NIV, the Holman Standard and Dan Wallace’s NET version.
In John 3:31 the Majority, Vaticanus and P66 say "he that cometh from heaven IS ABOVE ALL", but Sinaiticus original and P75 omit these words.
John 4:1 - KJB, ASV 1901, RSV 1946-1971, NASB 1995-2020, “When therefore THE LORD (ο κυριος) knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John…”
NIV, ESV, NET - “Now when JESUS (Ἰησοῦς) learned that the Pharisees had heard that Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples than John”
The reading of THE LORD is that found in the Majority of all remaining Greek manuscripts as well as the earliest P66 correction and P 75, A, Vaticanus, C, E, F, G, H, K, L, Delta, Pi, Psi, and the ancient Syriac Sinaitic, Coptic Sahidic, Ethiopian, Georgian and Slavonic versions.
Originally even Westcott and Hort went with THE LORD as did the Nestle 4th edition 1934 and the Nestle-Aland 21st edition 1975. But sometime between the 21st and the 27th the Vatican supervised textual editors just changed their minds and decided to go with JESUS, which is the reading found in Sinaiticus and D.
So many of the Vatican Versions are not even following the so called “oldest and best manuscripts” here.
The only consistent thing about the new Vatican Versions is their inconsistency.
In John 4:51 we read: "...his servants met him, AND TOLD HIM, saying THY son liveth." P75 and Vaticanus omit the words "and told him" and the NASB and Holman Standard omit them too, but they are found in the Majority of texts, Sinaiticus and P66 and are included in the NIV, ESV.
"THY son liveth" is the Majority reading, as well as that of P66 correction, but P75, Sinaiticus and Vaticanus read HIS son lives, and so too the NASB, NIV, ESV.
John 5:17 - "But JESUS answered them...". So read the Majority, P66, A, C, and D and the NIV, but P75, Sinaiticus and Vaticanus omit "Jesus" and the NASB and Dan Wallace’s NET version simply says "he".
This may seem minor, but the inconsistency is seen in John 5:19 where again we read: "Then answered JESUS and said unto them...". This time the word JESUS is in the Majority, P66 and A, while Vaticanus and P75 omit the word JESUS again, but this time the NASB and the NET version decided to keep it in. They just reversed themselves in their "scientific" method of textual criticism.
John 5:30 "but the will of THE FATHER which hath sent me." So read the Majority and P66, but Sinaiticus and Vaticanus omit "the Father" and so do the NASB, NIV and ESV.
John 5:44 - "and seek not the honour that cometh from GOD only." Here Vaticanus, P66 and P75 all unite in omitting the word GOD, yet it is in Sinaiticus, A and D and this time the NASB, NIV, ESV and NET include it too!
This means they are NOT following the oldest known Greek manuscripts here.
John 7:8-10 Is Jesus Christ a liar?
John 7:8-10 Here we read of Jesus telling his brethren to go up unto a feast and He says: "I go NOT up YET unto this feast; for my time is not yet full come. When he had said these words unto them, he abode still in Galilee. But when his brethren were gone up, then went he also up unto the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret." He did in fact go up to the feast.
Vaticanus, as well as P66, 75, and the majority of all texts read as does the KJB with: "I go not up YET unto this feast", and so do the Revised Version 1881, Geneva, Tyndale, Bishops', Coverdale, the NIV, Holman Standard, the 2005 ISV (International Standard Version), Young, Weymouth, Rotherham's Emphasized Bible 1902.
However Sinaiticus says: "I DO NOT GO to this feast", and so do the NASB, ASV, RSV, ESV and Wallace's NET version thus making our Lord a liar. The fickle nature of this so called "science" is also seen in that Westcott and Hort originally read "NOT YET" and so did the previous Nestle-Aland critical texts up until a few years ago. But the more recent ones have "scientifically" changed to now read "I do NOT go to this feast."
And once again these modern versions are rejecting the oldest known Greek reading.
See the whole study here -
John 7:8-10 Did Jesus lie or tell the truth?
Daniel Wallace's NET version has the Lord saying He is NOT going to the feast, and then going. But the thinking of such "scholars" is revealed in his own footnotes where he says: " Most mss (66,75 B L T W 070 0105 0250 1,13, sa), including most of the better witnesses, have "not yet" here. Those with the reading "not" (ouk) are not as impressive ( D K 1241 al lat), but "ouk" is the more difficult reading here, especially because it stands in tension with v. 10."
So, in other words, because it absurdly makes our Lord Jesus a liar, it must be right!
John 7:39 "...for the HOLY Ghost was not yet given". So read the Majority of Greek texts, plus P66 correction and Vaticanus. However Sinaiticus and P75 omit the word "holy" and so too do the NASB, NIV, ESV.
John 8:28 - "Then said Jesus UNTO THEM, When ye have lifted up..." The words "unto them" are found in the Majority, P66, P75, and Sinaiticus, but Vaticanus omits them and this time the NASB, NIV and NET go with the Vaticanus reading instead and omit the words, once again not going with the oldest known Greek reading.
BUT the ESV along with the Holman Standard and the ISV 2014 include the reading and say: “So Jesus said TO THEM, When you have lifted up the Son of Man…”
John 8:39 - "IF YE WERE Abraham's seed, YE WOULD DO the works of Abraham."
The words "if YE WERE" (Εἰ ἦτε) are in the subjunctive mood in the Majority and C texts, and this means that they are NOT Abraham's seed. It is a contrary to fact construction. It's like the song - "IF I WERE a rich man..." But I'm not. Or "If I WERE you, I would marry that girl." But I am not you.
However Sinaiticus and Vaticanus read in the indicative mood "If YOU ARE Abraham's children" (ei este). This means that they could be his children or they were his children. Yet Jesus clearly told them that they were not the children of God but of the devil.
Then in the second part of this verse the words "YE WOULD DO" (epoiete) again implies "contrary to fact" and agree with the previous verb in the subjunctive mood. So read the Majority, P75 and Sinaiticus, plus the Vaticanus correction.
However Vaticanus original and P66 read "YOU DO" (poiete) in the indicative mood, and make it a command "DO". The older Westcott-Hort, Nestle-Aland texts used to read "DO" (poieite - ποιεῖτε). I have hard copies of the Nestle 4th edition 1934 and the 21st edition 1975 and both clearly say DO ποιεῖτε. This is the reading of P66 and Vaticanus original.
BUT the Majority of all texts as well as the traditional Reformation Bibles, the TR, Sinaiticus, P75 and Vaticanus correction read "YE WOULD DO the works of Abraham." ἐποιεῖτε = ye would do. This means that they were not doing them, and that is because they were not the true children of Abraham.
John 8:54 - "it is my Father that honoureth me; of whom ye say, that he is YOUR God." YOUR God is found in Sinaiticus, Vaticanus and P66 original, and in the NIV, RV, ASV, Douay, RSV, NKJV and of course the KJB.
However P75 and P66 third correction read OUR God, and so the NASB, ESV, NET and Holman Standard now read: "of whom you say, He is OUR God."
John 8:57 - "Thou art not yet fifty years old, and HAST THOU SEEN ABRAHAM?" So read the Majority, Vaticanus and P66, but P75 and Sinaiticus actually read: "AND HAS ABRAHAM SEEN YOU?"
John 9:38 - "And he said, Lord, I believe. And he worshipped him." This entire verse is omitted by Sinaiticus original and P75, yet it is found in the Majority, Vaticanus and P66. So far as I know, only Daniel Wallace proposes getting rid of this entire verse. It is still found in the NASB, NIV.
John 10:8 - "All that ever came BEFORE ME are thieves and robbers." The words BEFORE ME are in Vaticanus and P66 and the NASB, NIV, ESV but Sinaiticus and P75 omit them.
John 10:26 - "But ye believe not, because ye are not my sheep, AS I SAID UNTO YOU." So read the Majority of texts including P66, A and D, but Sinaiticus, Vaticanus and P75 omit these words and so do the NASB, NIV.
John 12:1 - "came to Bethany, where Lazarus was WHICH HAD BEEN DEAD." So read the Majority, D and A and P66. But Sinaiticus and Vaticanus omit these words and so do the NASB, NIV.
John 13:18 - "He that eateth bread WITH ME hath lifted up his heel against me." So read the Majority of texts including P66, A, D and Sinaiticus. However Vaticanus reads "he that eats MY bread" and so do the NASB, NIV.
John 14:17 - "for he dwelleth with you, and SHALL BE in you." The future tense verb is found in the Majority and P75 and Sinaiticus. So read the NASB, NIV. However Vaticanus and P66 have a present tense verb which would make the sentence read: "for he dwells with you, and IS in you."
John 16:27 - "because ye have loved me, and have believed that I came out from GOD." So read the Majority, Sinaiticus correction, P 5 which dates from the 3rd century, A and the NIV, ESV, NRSV and Holman. However Vaticanus and D read THE FATHER and so does the NASB and the RSV.
John 17:12 - "While I was with them IN THE WORLD (Sinaiticus and Vaticanus omit “in the world” and so too the NASB, NIV) I KEPT THEM IN THY NAME; THOSE that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost..."
"THOSE THAT THOU GAVEST ME I have kept" is the Majority reading, A and D, but Vaticanus has a very different reading and the NASB, NIV have adopted this, saying: "While I was with them, I was keeping them in Your NAME WHICH YOU HAVE GIVEN ME." In the meantime, Sinaiticus original and P66 omit the words "those thou gavest me" from the text entirely.
These are the ever changing Greek manuscripts that form the textual basis of the modern Vatican supervised Critical Greek text that is the basis of such constantly being modified versions like the ESV, NASB, NIV, NET, Jehovah Witness NWT and the modern Catholic bible versions.
None of them agree all the way through with any of the others, either textually or in meaning, and NOBODY seriously believes that any of them are the complete and inerrant words of God.
Related Topics -
James White - the Protestant Pope of the new Vatican Versions.
Undeniable Proof the ESV, NIV, NASB, Holman Standard, NET, Jehovah Witness NWT etc. are the new "Vatican Versions"
This shows some of the real textual differences between the Reformation Bibles like the King James Bible and the modern Vatican Versions.
The ESV, NIV, NASB, Jehovah Witness NWT and modern Catholic bibles are the new Vatican Versions. Part Two.
ALL of grace, believing the Book - the King James Holy Bible,
Will Kinney
Return to Articles