Falam Bible Thianghlim Zohhliahsalnak

TEXTUS RECEPTUS LE KING JAMES VERSION HI

RINSANTLAKBIK AN SI KO E!:

DR HRE KIO IH CAHRAM “FALAM BAIBAL THIANGHLIM HI

RINSAN A TLAK NGAINGAI MAW?” ZOHHLIAHSAKNAK

BY

BIAK LAWM THANG

  

YANGON, MYANMAR

JANUARY 2012

A SUNG THU

THUHMAIHRUAI ...............................................................................................  3

       Saya Hre Kio ih Pawmdan Langfiangternak ...........................................  3

ZOHHLIAHSAKNAK ........................................................................................  5

       Grik Bible .........................................................................................................  5

              Kutnganca “Tuan” pawl hi An ~hadeuh taktak maw? ...............  5

              Kutnganca “Tuanbik” pawl An ~hatbiklozia Langternak ..........  7

              Bible Thiam Hmuahhmuah ih Pawm mi? ....................................  13

              Erasmus le Textus Receptus ................................................................  14

                     “Beetmi”? .....................................................................................  14

                     “Telh lomi”? ................................................................................  16

                     Desiderius Erasmus ...................................................................  17

                     Erasmus ih Hman mi Grik Kutnganca .................................  18

                     Erasmus le Grik Kutnganca lakih Bangawklonakpawl .....  19

                     “Textus Receptus” timi Hmin hi “Kyaw-ngianak” men a si maw?     19

       King James Version ....................................................................................  21

              Ziangruangah KJV An Let? .............................................................  21

              Leh mi maw Rem mi deuh? .............................................................  21

              “Khuimi KJV bik?” ............................................................................  22

              Ziangah KJV ah Apocrypha a Tel? ...................................................  22

              KJV le Fundamentalist Lungput .........................................................  23

              KJV ih Rinsantlak Sinak ....................................................................  23

THUNETNAK ....................................................................................................  25

ENDNOTES ........................................................................................................  26

THUBET ...............................................................................................................  30

THUHMAIHRUAI

          December 5, 2011 ah Saya Hre Kio in, “Falam Baibal Thianghlim hi rinsan a tlak taktak maw?” timi, Saya Sui Lian Mang ih “Bible Dangdang Khaikhinnak” fakselnak a rak ngan.[1] Hi ca hi `haten siar tikah, Saya Sui ih cahram fakselnak lawng si loin, King James Version (KJV) le Textus Receptus (TR) rinsantlaklo ih thlakniamnak thu a si ruangah, Saya Hre Kio le Saya Sui karlak thu men lawng a si lo. Zumtu hmuahhmuah ih buaipitlak le buaipi ding “Khuimi Bible rinsan a tlakbik?” timi thu sawn a si. An pahnih karlak thu men a silozia Saya Hre Kio ih `awngkam ah hitin a lang, “Hitawk ih ka langter duhmi cu: Dr Sui Lian Mang ih a thlunmi Mirang Baibal King James Version hi rinsan tlak bik a si lo, tile Grik Baibal a thlun mi Textus Receptus khal hi rinsan tlak bik a si thotho lo, (a kim lo mi a um ih beetmi tla a um) tihi ka langter duhmi a si” (2); “Hih ka nganmi cahram hi Falam Baibal a hmangtu hrang lawngah a si lo; Hakha Baibal a hmangtu siesh, Saya Thang Hup ih lehmi a hmangtu, Saya Sui Lian Mang ih lehmi Baibal siartu le Mizo Baibal a hmangtu pawl khal siseh, an siar ciar ve dingah ka duhnak a si. Cule Kawl `ong in Baibal lehmi – Judson Version siartu khal in an siar dingah ka duhsak a si” (12). Hivekin Saya Hre Kio in duhsaknak kau a neih ruangah, thil umdan taktak cuai kan thlai thiam ih, thudik kan hmuhfiang thei ding beisei in tui ca hi ngan ve a si.

Curuangah, tui ca ahcun bulpak thu ah va lut loin, Saya Hre Kio ih KJV le Textus Receptus rinsantlakbik an si lo a ti mi le Falam Baibal hi “a tuanbik lamih nganmi Grik Baibal thlun ih lehhmi a si. Rintlak a si” (11) a ti mi hi a dik taktak maw, evidence hngetkhoh a um taktak maw, timi sawn hi kan hmuitin ding mi cu a si.[2] Cumi rualin Textus Receptus le King James Version ih rinsantlakbik si sawn zia langfiangter phahphah a si fawn ding. Zoih zirh/sim/ngan mi a si khalle, bih ciamciam ta zet lo cun pawm/hnawl mai loin, a thu umdan ciamciamten zoh ta tahratih evidence cuai thlai ngah ta hnu lawngah pawm/hnawl sawn ding a si, ti le minung pakhat le pakhat hi doawk a `ul lo, asinan zoih zirh/sim/ngan mi khal asile, an dik le diklo hniksak ih a dik mi pawm dingah zumtu hmuahhmuah in mawhphurh kan nei, ti kan theihhngilh lo ding hi ca ngantu in a cahawk hmaisat duh mi a si (siar Tirh 17:11; 1 John 4:1).

Saya Hre Kio ih Pawmdan Langfiangternak

          Saya Hre Kio in KJV le a hram Grik Bible Textus Receptus rinsantlakbik ih a hmuh ve lo thu a ngan mi hi tui `um lawng a si lo, vawi hnih thum lai a ngan zo.[3] Cui a ngan zo mipawl le tui `um ih a ngan mi ahhin a thu fehpidan an bangaw, an luang khat thluh. Theih awl ding zawngin a hnuai lam vekin khaikhawmsak theih a si:

1.      KJV hi Mirang Bible lakih rinsantlakbik a si lo, tlaksamnak (limitations) ziangmawzat a nei mi a si. KJV ih sirhsan mi Grik Bible Textus Receptus (TR) khal hi Grik Bible dangdang lakah rinsantlakbik a si lo, cu hnakih `hasawn an um. Curuangah Bible `awng dang ih lehnak ah KJV le TR hi sirhsan ih hman dingah a tlingbik mi an si lo.

2.      KJV le Textus Receptus rinsan an tlaklonak san ziangmawzat a um. Cupawl lakih a thupibik cu an sirhsan mi Grik kutngancapawl (manuscripts [MSS]) rinsantlak an silonak hi a si. Grik kutngancapawl lakih rinsantlakbik cu KJV ih sirhsan mi, kutnganca “tlai” pawl (late manuscripts) si loin, kutnganca tuan pawl (early manuscripts) sawn khi an si. ~awng dangin kan sim asile, kutnganca cu a kum a upat le, rinsan a tlak, a `hadeuh ih, a kum a nauhak le, rinsan a tlak lo, a `halo deuh tinak a si. Cui Grik kutnganca kum upadeuh rinsantlakbik pawl lakih hrekkhat cu, (1) Codex Sinaiticus [a], (2) Codex Alexandrianus [A]), (3) Codex Vaticanus [B]), (4) Codex Ephraemi, le (5) Codex Bezae tipawl an si. Hihi “Baibal thiam, Baibal thuhla zingzoitu pawl zozo khal in a dik an ti thluhmi thu a si” (6).

3.      Bible `awng dang ih leh mi thu ah, Grik kutnganca tuan pawl sirhsan ih leh mi Bible, `himnak ah, Good News for Modern Man ti khalih kawh mi Today’s English Version (TEV) ihsin lehsin mi “Falam Baibal Thianghlim” (FBT) tivekpawl khi, kutnganca tlai pawl sirhsan ih leh mi KJV, New King James Version (NKJV) tivek sirhsan ih lehsin mi “Thuthlung Thar” [TT] (Saya Sui ih leh mi), Textus Receptus sirhsan ih leh mi Kawl Bible [KB] (Adoniram Judson ih leh mi) tipawl hnakin rinsan an tlak sawn. FBT, le Bible dangpawl ih Bible cang, catluan, le `awngfang um kim lo mi, KJV, NKJV, TT, le KB sungih um kim thluh mipawl khi, Grik kutnganca `hasawn ih um lo mi, Grik kutnganca tlaideuh pawl ngansawngtu le zohfeltupawl (editors) ih bet cawp men mi an si. Hiti a si ruangah Falam “Baibal Thianghlim hi a tuanbik lamih nganmi Grik Baibal thlun ih lehmi a si. Rintlak a si” (11).

A ca ngan mi siar tikah Saya Hre Kio hi faktlak zet a sinak a um, cucu, a thu pawm mi khi ziangruangah a pawm timi a thei ih, cui a pawm mi cu ral`ha zetin a aupi ngamnak ahhin a si. Asinan a pawmdan a dik maw diklo ti lawngte cu, thil um taktak mi evidence thawn cuai thlai ta ciamciam ih zohhliah `ul mi a si. Hiti kan zohhliahnak ah a hnuaiih thusuhnak pahnih hi a hleicein kan hmuitin ding: (1) KJV lehnak ih hman mi Grik Bible Textus Receptus hi rinsantlaklo a si taktak maw? timi le (2) KJV hi rinsantlakbik a si lo taktak maw?

ZOHHLIAHSAKNAK

GRIK BIBLE

          Saya Hre Kio in KJV lehnak ih hman mi Grik Bible Textus Receptus hi Grik Bible dang lakah rinsantlakbik si thei loih a hmuhnak san thupibik cu, kutnganca tlaideuh pawl sirhsan ih suah mi a si ruangah a si, ziangahtile “. . . Tuan ih nganmi (early manuscripts) hi a `ha ih rintlak an si; tlai ih nganmi cabu cu rintlak an si lo, . . .” (6). Ziangruangah “tuan” ih ngan mi cu “tlai” ih ngan mi hnakin “rintlak” a si deuh? A san cu, tuan ih ngan mipawl ahcun “palhnak a mal deuh. Netalam ih nganmi (Late manuscripts) pawl cu palhnak a tam deuh; beetmi an neih phahphah `heu ruangah!” tiin simfiangnak a pe. Cuitlunah hi pawmdan hi “Leilung tlun ih Baibal thiam, Baibal thuhla a zingzoitu pawl zozo khal in a dik an ti thluhmi thu a si” (6), tiin amai hmuhdan cu leitlun Bible thiam hmuahhmuah ih hmuhdan hmel a putter. Hi zawnah kan zohhliah dingih thupi mi cu: (1) kutngnca hi a kum a upatdeuh ruangah kum nautadeuh hnakin “rintlak” a si deuh taktak maw? (2) hihi Bible thiam hmuahhmuah ih “a dik” an ti thluh mi a si taktak maw? ti le (3) Textus Receptus hi Grik kutnganca tlaideuh pawl vial sirhsan ih suah mi, rintlaklo a si taktak maw? tipawl an si.

Kutnganca “Tuan” pawl hi An ~hadeuh taktak maw?

Grik kutnganca (manuscript) thu thawn pehparin khuimi rinsan a tlakbik timi thu ah, Saya Hre Kio ih pawmdan hi thu pakhat par lawngah `humaw in a lang – cui a `humawknak cu, kutnganca “tuan” pawl khi a “tlai” pawl hnakin rinsan an tlak sawn timi ah a si. Amah roriin hihi thupibikih a ruah thu “Palitnak hi a thupibik” tiin a langter (6). Thu dang a ngan mipawl khi himi lungphum (foundation) parih hram bun mi an si. Curuangah, kutnganca “tuan” khi a “tlai” pawl hnakin rinsan an tlak sawn lo, ti langfiangter theih a si ahcun, langfiangter theih a si fawn, a inn sak mi cu amahten a cim cih ding mi a si. Asile, “tuan” ih ngan mi Grik kutnganca hi “tlai” ih ngan mi hnakin rinsan a tlak sawn taktak maw?

Hi zawnah Grik kutnganca “tuan” pawl hi “tlai” pawl hnakin rinsan an tlak deuh timi ruahnak ra suah thawknak thuanthu malten vun bih duak a duhum ding. Thuthlung Thar Grik kutnganca hi, a bu pumin siseh, a bulcawng tetein siseh, tui san ih hmuh theih ih um lai mi (extant manuscripts) ah 5000 lenglo a um, ti a si.[4] Cui Grik kutngancapawl ahcun pakhat le pakhat bangawklonak tete an um tikah, khuimi in a tirih ngan mi (autographs) a ngankhum (copied) dikbik ding ti thu hliakhlainak cu “textual criticism” asilole “lower criticism” (Bible denfelnak) tiih kawh a si ih, a hliakhlaitupawl cu “textual critics” lole “textual scholars” tiih kawh an si.[5] Cuvekih hliakhlainak ah Saya Hre Kio ih kutnganca “tuan” cu kutnganca “tlai” hnakin “rintlak” a si deuh a timi ruahnak rak thehlartu le an hnuih mithiam tamtak in an thlunbik mi cu 1881 kum ih Grik Bible The New Testament in the Original Greek suahtu Cambridge mithiam Brooke Foss Westcott le Fenton John Anthony Hort an si. Westcott le Hort thu kan lut thuk hlanah, an khawruahnak rak ciahnehtu mithiam hmaisa pawl thu tawiten vun thailang duak sehla thil umdan a feng phah deuh ding.

Bible denfelnak (textual criticism) thu ih “a tuandeuh cu rintlak a si deuh” (older reading is better) timi ruahnak ci rak tuh hmaisatupawl cu German mithiam J J Griesbach ([1745-1812] liberal theologian) le Karl Lachmann ([1793-1851] German rationalist), England mithiam Samuel Prideaux Tregelles (1812-1875), le German mithiam Constantine Tischendorf ([1815-1874] higher rationalism ih ciahneh mi) tipawl an si.[6] Griesbach cu German rationalism ih pa tiih ruah mi Johann Salomo Selmer ih tlawngta liberal theologian a si. 1774 le 1806 kum karlakah Grik Bible pathum a suah. Bruce Metzger cun Griesbach hi “Thuthlung Thar Grik text thu ih neta lam ca ngan mi hmuahhmuah lungphum (foundations) rak phumtu” a si ih, KJV ih sirhsan mi Textus Receptus pawm loih Grik Bible thar suah hmaisabiktu a si, a ti.[7] Lachmann thu ah Metzger ih simdan vek a si le, Textus Receptus hnawng thla bepbep hmaisabik tu le leitlun cabu dang denfel tikih thlun mi danpawl (principles of textual criticism) thlun tahrat ih Bible dengfel ih suah hmaisabik tu a si.[8] Curuangah amai suah mi Grik Bible hi (1831 ah first edition, 1842-50 ah second edition) “critical text” hmaisabik a si. 1857-79 kum sungih Grik Bible suahtu Tregelles hi cu Griesbach le Lachmann vek cun zumnak lamah a bese lo, asinan an khawruahdan le theory pawl a thlun thotho tu a si. 1857-79 karlakah Grik Bible a suah ve. Tischendorf hi Grik Bible vawi riat (eight editions) rori suahtu a sinak le Sinai tlang par phungki tlawng ih Grik kutnganca Codex Sinaiticus (a) hmusuaktu, Vatican library ih Grik kutnganca Codex Vaticanus (B) mipi theih ih langtertu a sinak zarah, theih lar zet mi a si. Amah hi “German higher rationalism” ih rak zirh mi le ciahneh mi (trained and influenced) a si. Hipawl hi an thiamnak lam ah faktlak hlir an si ko nan, Bible thu ahcun an zumnak a dawr zet mi, leitlun cabu dang denfel (criticism) vek fangih Bible dengfel men tu (rationalistic/natuaralistic approach), le an khawruahnak sung muril ah Bible thawtkhumnak le kilhimnak thurin (inspiratioan and preservation) a thunlut ngaingailotu an si, tihi hi zawnih hminsin ding thupi mi a si.

Hipawl ih zirhnak parah hram thla tahratin Westcott le Hort cun Thuthlung Thar kutnganca thu hliakhlainak ah theory an run phuah.[9] Cui theorypawl ih `humawknakbik pahnih cu: (1) kutnganca a hlunbik mi (oldest reading) khi a dikbik le rinsantlakbik an si, (2) a tawideuh mi (shorter reading) khi a saudeuh hnakin an `hasawn, timi a si.[10] Hivek ruahnak an neih ruangah, tui san hmuh theihih um Grik kutngancapawl lakih kum upabik Codex Sinaiticus (a) le Codex Vaticanus (B) khi rinsantlakbik ah an ruat ih, cumi thlunin Mirang Bible Revised Version ih sirhsan mi Grik Bible The New Testament in the Original Greek an rak suah. Hi ruahnak hi, riahsiatza zetin, kum zabi 19^nk, 20^nk, le 21^nk ih mithiam tampi khalin thudik ah an ruat ih an run thlun vivo. Westcott le Hort cun Codex Vaticanus hi rintlakbik ah an ruat ih, Codex Sinaiticus hi a sangtu ah an ret.[11] Hivek lungput thawn cui hlanih Bible leh mi hmuahhmuah deuhthaw ih rak thlun mi Grik Bible Textus Receptus cu an hnawl thla bepbep ih, kum sawmthum sung hivek thu zingzawi ih hna an `uantlang hnuah, a tlunih kan tarlang zo mi Grik Bible thar kha 1881 kum ah an run suah. Hi an Grik Bible thar hi (a tawizawngin W&H Text kan ti ding) lehhnuih United Bible Societies ih run suah mi The Greek New Testament (a tawizawngin UBSGNT; tu ahcun 4<sup>th</sup> edition tiang a thleng zo) le Nestle-Aland ih suah mi Novum Testamentum Graece (a tawizawngin NANTG; tu ahcun 26<sup>th</sup> edition tiang a thleng zo) ih sirhsan mi bulhrampi a si. Hi UBSGNT le NANTG hi United Bible Societies cun Bible lehnak ih sirhsan dingah tha a pek mi an si (cf 6). Hi zawnah hmuhfiang dingih thupi zet pakhat cu, “Falam Baibal Thianghlim” le santhar Mirang Biblepawl (modern Versions; `himnak ah, theih lar deuh mi NIV, NASV, TEV tvk) ih sirhsan mi Grik Bible UBSGNT le NANTG hi rinsan an tlak maw tlak lo timi cu an pa W&H Text le an pu Codices Vaticanus le Sinaiticus (kutnganca dang mallai khal rawn cih an si nan, hi pahnih hi an thlunbik mi a si ruangah) rinsan an tlak maw timi parah tampi a `humaw, timi hi a si.

Kutnganca “Tuanbik” pawl An ~habiklozia Langternak

          Westcott le Hort ih textual theory `humawknak thupibik – a tawizawngin “hlunbik `habik” – Saya Hre Kio in mithiam hmuahhmuah ih pawm mi thudik vekih a sim mi hi dik vekih a lang theinak lai a um, asinan a taktakah a dik lo mi a si. ~awng dangin kan sim asile, Grik kutnganca thu ahcun hlunbik le `habik hi kut kaiaw in an fehtlang kher lo, tinak a si. Cui thu cu a hnuai lam vekin a tawizawngin langfiangter theih a si.

          1. Pakhatnak ah, Bible cu ngan `heh a si hnu kum rei lo te sungah rinum zetih ngansawngtu le kilhimtu an um laiah, tisiattu asilole tibawrhhlawhtu (intentioanal corruption) an rak um thawk ve zo ruangah kum upa ti men cun rinsantlak sinak a pe thei lo. Fuller in Bible tibawrhhlawhnak rak suahnak thu ah hitin a ngan,

Tirhthlahpawl an thih hnu kum zakhat sung lala ah, Irenaeus in Gnostic zirhnak pawmtu Marcion thuhla ah hitin a sim, "Cuiruangah Marcion le a dungthluntupawl khal Cathianghlim tibawrhhlawh dingin an pumpeaw ih, cabu hrekkhat cu an pawm lo lellel, thuthang`ha Luke le Paul ih Cakuatpawl cu tawite ah an can ih, cuti an titawi mi cu, hipawl lawng hi a dik tiih pawm tlak (authentic) an si, an ti."[12]

Burgon khalin hitin a ngan ve, "[Bible] tibawrhhlawhnak cu tikcu tuan zet ihsin a rak thawk zo a bang. . . . kawhhran ih nunnak (the life of the church) a rak thawk hmaisatbik lai ihsin a diklo mi (errors) a thupten an rak lut rero zo siin a lang."[13]

Bible ngan `heh hnu kum rei lote sung lala ihsin tibawrhhlawhtupawl an rak um zo hi mangbang ding cu a si lo, ziangahtile Setan in Thu Nung (the Living Word [Jesuh]) a do neh thei lo ruangah, a hmuitin mi cu Ngan Thu (the Written Word [Bible]) lamah a `hawn. Curuangah Bible ngansawng vivonak thu ahhin tiva bangawlo pahnih an luang tinak a si: (1) ngansawngdan dik (normal/faithful transmission), le (2) ngansawngdan diklo (abnormal/unfaithful transmission). An ngansawng mi cu Pathian thawtkhum mi Cabu a si ti zum hngetin rinum zetih rak ngansawngtu an um laiah (hipawl ih ngan mi hmanah tipalh “unintentional corruption” a um thei laiah), minung cabu menmen vekah ruat tahratih dawngdah zetih ngansawngtu asilole tisiat hrim tumtu (intentional corruption) khal an rak um ve. Hi ruangah kutnganca dik/rintlak, le diklo/rintlaklo an rung suahnak a si. Hivek thil `ihnung thleng ding an rak hmuh cia ruangah zirhtu diklo pawl lakah ralringtei um dingin tirhthlahpawl cun zumtupawl vawi tampi ralrinnak an rak pe (siar Tirh 20:27-32; Gal 1:6-12; 2 Tim 3:1-4:4; 2 Pet 2:1-2; 1 John 2:18-19; 2 John 7-11; Jude 3-4, 16-19; Thup 22:18-19).

Kutnganca hlunbik an `habik timi ruahnak hi UBSGNT le NANTG an pahnih zohfelnak ih rak tel ve tu Kurt Aland hmanin a hnawl zo mi a si:

Kutnganca hlunbik in a sung thu (text) a nei `habik kher lo tihi cu tarlang rero hman a `ul lo. ~himnak ah, P⁴⁷ cu Thuphuan bu (Apocalypse) a bu pumin asilole a bu pum zikte tel kutngancapawl lakah kum upabik a si, asinan a `habik cu a si lo lawlaw.[14]

Trinitarian Bible Society ih Bible thuhla tam zet ngantu Anderson ih thu`himnak pek mi hin tui kan rel rero mi thu hi a fiangter zet:

Kum 3000 ah Mirang Bible pakhat sar a si ih, cucu kum 1970s ih ngan mi a rak si ti bang sehla. Hi Bible hi sar a si laiih Bible um mipawl lakah a hlunbik a si ih, hi Bible hi kum 3000 hrawngih Khristianpawl ih hman mi Bible thawn hmun za tam takah an dangaw si bang sehla. Bible dengfeltu thiam tak pawl cun an tidan (method) `ha taktak hmangin, hi Bible hi a khuahlan zet zia, a cahmai umtudan ihsin a `hatzia, a cahnah an hman mi le a pianzia an tuahdan ihsin an rak fimkhur le uluk zet zia, a kawm an tuah `hatdan, tipawl nasa takin an simfak ko ding ti cu suangtuah theih mai a si. Asinan, hi khuahlan cabu sirhsanin tulai `awng phun dangdang ah Bible an vun let thawk ngaingai tikah, Khristianpawl in hi Bible hi Jehovah Witnessespawlih "New World Translation" a rak si tariai ti an vun hmuhsuah tikah cun an `ansanpawl (arguments) cu an cim sadarh thluh ding.[15]

A tlunih tarlang mi ihsin a fiang mi cu, kutnganca “tuan” pawl khi an kum upatnak lawng rori zohin rinsantlakbik ah ret an theih lo, timi a si. Hiti ti tikah an kum upat thu hi thupitnak nei lo vekih hnawl thlak pumhlum ding tinak a si lo, thu dangdang zoh cem cih tengteng a `ul, tinak sawn a si. Kutnganca rinsan tlak le tlaklo tahnak ah, Westcott le Hort san laiih mithiam Burgon ih rak sim mi hi tuisun ni tiang khalah a dik ringring lai:

(1)  Grik kutnganca dang in an lungkimpi maw (Copies)?

(2)  Khuahlan ih rak leh mi Bible dang in an lungkimpi maw (Versions)?

(3)  Khuahlan kawhhran palepawl ih ca ngan mi in an lungkimpi maw (Fathers)?[16]

Cipciar deuhin hitin a simfiang bet:

(1) An khuahlan maw (antiquity or primitiveness)?

(2) Lungkimpitu/theihpitu an nei maw, a tam maw (consent of witnesses, or number)?

(3) An dikzia langtertu dangdang an um maw, asilole, leitlun huapih hman mi an si maw (variety of evidence, or catholicity)?

(4) A lungkimpitupawl cu rintlak an si maw, asilole, an cuai a rit maw (respectability of witnesses, or weight)?

(5) Hman peh vivo mi an si maw, asilole, a cat lo mi thuanthu an nei maw (continuity, or unbroken tradition)?

(6) A cahlawm pumpi asilole a kiangkap thu in an dikzia a nemhnget maw (evidence of the entire passage, or context)?

(7) A sung thu ah teh umzia nei mi a si maw (internal considerations, or reasonableness)?[17]

Hi tahfungpawl thawn tah tikah, Westcott le Hort in siseh, mithiam dangdang in siseh, an kum upat ruangih rinsantlakbik ih an ruah mi Codex Vaticanus (B), Codex Sinaiticus (a), Codex Alexandrinus (C), le Codex Bezae (D) (Alexandrian texts) tipawl hi an sam thla lawlaw ih, khat lamah Textus Receptus ih sirhsan mi kutngancapawl Byzantine texts cu an tling ta lawlaw, ti a lang.

2. Pahnihnak ah, hlunbik an `hatbik lo thu hi a pawnleng menih thlirnak si loin, a sung thu taktak zoh tikah a langfiang mi a si. Saya Hre Kio in kutnganca phun dangdang thu a ngannak ah kutnganca “`habik,” “tuanbik” le “rinsantlak bik” ih a ret mi cu: (1) Codex Sinaiticus, (2) Codex Alexandrinus, (3) Codex Vaticanus (4) Codex Ephraemi,  (5) Codex Bezae, le a dang mallai an si (7-9). Hi panga hi “tuanbik” an si a ti mi thu ahcun el ding a um lo; an zaten kum zabi 4^nk-5^nk ih ngan mi hlir an si. Asinan “`habik” le “rinsantlak bik” an si a ti mi thu hi cu amai pawmdan men a si ih, a tlunih kan tarlang zo mi tahfungpawl thawn tah tikah a diklo mi a si.

Hi kutnganca panga ngunngaih zetih rak zohtu (a taw-lu rak lettu) Burgon cun “rinsantlak lo bik” ah a ruat ve thung. A hleicein Codex Sinaiticus le Codex Vaticanus hi an besebik a ti.[18] A ti dik maw? A dik tiah kan ruat. Wescott le Hort san laiih textual scholar langsarbik lakih tel ve Scrivener khalin Codex Sinaiticus hi `haten a zohhliah hnuah 1864 kum ah A Full Collation of the Codex Sinaiticus timi cabu a suah ih, hi Codex hi rem rero zo mi, cahmai kip ah a malbik minung pahra laiih remnak kutneh a lang mi kutnganca a si, a ti.[19] Burgon in hi Codex panga pawl a zohfiang thluh hnuah a ti bet mi cu, hi Codexpawl hi tui san kutnganca hmuh theih ih um hmuahhmuah lakah za ah sawmkua le pakua tlukin an lungkimpi lo ih, cuitlunah anmah le anmah lala khal an lung a rual thei lo. A hleicein Sinaiticus le Vaticanus ih bangawklonak thu ah, “a ngaingai ahcun hi pahnih ahhin a sangsangten cang hnih ti thlepthlepih an bangawknak hnakin, a sangsangten cang hnih an bangawklonak hmuh a awl sawn,” a ti.[20] Hoskier khalin hi Sinaiticus le Vaticanus hi a zohtawn (compared) vivo ih, Thuthang`ha pali sung lawng hmanah hmun 3,000 lenglo ah an dangaw, a ti ve.[21]

Hi thu hi fiangsin dingah Burgon ih tah`himnak pek mi pakhat ten vun sang sehla. Saya Hre Kio ih “`habik” le “rinsantlak bik” a ti mi Codex Sinaiticus (a), Codex Alexandrianus (A), Codex Vaticanus (B), Codex Ephraemi (C), le Codex Bezae (D) hi Burgon in a rak zoh depdep thluh zo ih, rinsantlak an si lo zia langternak ah Luke 11:2-4 ih “Bawipai Thlacam” thu hi tah`himnak a pe. Hi cang thum te sungah (Falam Baibal thawn zoh`him hnik):

(1)  D in “midangpawl bangin umzia nei lo mi sal nawlh rero hmang hlah uh: ziangahtile mi hrekkhat cun tampi an sal ruangah theihsak si cuang dingah an ruat. Asinan nannih cun thla nan cam tikah . . . “ timi Matt 6:7 ta a bet.

(2)  B le a in “kan,” le “vancung ih um mi” timi `awngfang 5 an hlawn.

(3)  D in “hmin” timi hlanih definite article “the” a hrelh ih, “kan parah” timi a bet ih, “na uknak” timi a umnak a `hawn.

(4)  B in “van ih na duhnak tuah a si bangin, leitlun khalah tuah si ve seh” timi a hlawn. Hi `awngfangpawl a in a nei kim thluh nan “khal” (also) hmaiah “cutin” (so) a bet, “leitlun” timi hmaiih definite article “the” a hrelh ih, hi zawn ah A, C, le D thawn an bangaw.

(5)  a le D in “pe” timi hi a form an thleng.

(6)  a in “ni tin” timi hmaiih definite article “the” a hrelh.

(7)  D in “day by day” aiah “this day” a ret, “sual” aiah “leiba” a thleng, “ziangahtile kanmah rori khal” (for we ourselves) timi aiah “kannih khalin” (as also we) a ret.

(8)  a in `hen thum `hen hnih tluk D a lungkimpi ih “as also [we] ourselves” a ti ve.

(9)  D cun “kan parih lei batu hmuahhmuah” (every one that is indebted to us) aiah “lei in batupawl” (debtors) a ti.

(10) B le a cun a netabik ih “thil `halo lak ihsin in hum aw” timi hi an hlawn ih, hi zawnah A, C, le D an kalh.[22]

Hi kutnganca “tuanbik” panga hi hi cang malte sung hmanih an thurual thei lo zia hin, thu dang rel tel lo hmanah, rinsantlak an si lo zia fiang tukin a langter a si. Hi tlunah, Burgon ih sim mi a tlunih langter zo bangin, Grik kutnganca hmuahhmuah lakih za ah sawmkua tlunin an lungkimpi fawn lo! Curuangah thil um taktak mi evidence cun a tlunih kutnganca hlun panga pawl hi “tuanbik” si khal hai sehla “`habik” le “rinsantlak bik” an si thei hrimhrim lo timi a khihhmuh a si.

          Tah`himnak pakhatten vun bet hrih sehla. Tubaite kum rei tuk hrih lo ah Magdalen College, Oxford University ih um kutnganca hlun an sar mi a um. A hmin ah Magdalen GR 17 an ti. Hi thu hi Baptist Reformed Fellowship Journal in 1996 ah a than. Hi kutnganca hi an mit rori ih Jesuh Khrih rak hmutupawl (eyewitnesses) san laiih ngan mi, AD 60 lole cumi hlanih ngan mi a si ding, tiah mithiampawl in an zum. Hi kutnganca hi a bulcawngte a si ih, Matt 26:7-8, 26:10, 14-15, 22-23, 32-33 lawng a tel. Mithiampawl in `haten an zoh tikah, Textus Receptus thawn phun khat a si ih, kutnganca “tuan” (a tlunih tarlang zo mi) thluntu NANTG thaw cun an dangaw lawlaw, ti a si. A hleicein Matt 26:22 ih `awngfang netabik pali ih W&H Grik Bible le Textus Receptus thawn an zohtawn tikah, GR 17 le Textus Receptus hi an bangaw thlepthlep ih, GR 17 le W&H cu an lungrual thei lo ti a lang: GR 17 – legein auto hekastos auton; TR - legein auto hekastos auton; W&H – legein auto heis hekastos.[23] UBSGNT khalah W&H vek cekciin a um. An danawknak hi Grik zir lo hrang khalah hmuh theih mai a si. Hi kutnganca GR 17, kum zabi 1^nk ih ngan mi cun, “kutnganca tuan” “rintlak bik” tiih mi hrekkhat ih an ruah mi kutngancapawl (a tlunih tarlang zo mi) thlun ih suahmi Grik Bible hnakin Textus Receptus a lungkimpi sawn tariai. Hi hin khat lamah Textus Receptus ih rintlak sizia a hngetter sinsin ih, khat lamah kutnganca “tuan” pawlih rintlak silozia a langfiangter deuhdeuh.

          Cuitlunah, theihtlak zet thil pakhat leh cu, hi kutnganca panga le a dang mallai (Alexandrian manuscripts) thlun ih suah mi UBSGNT le NANTG (TEV, NIV, NASV pawlih sirhsan mi) le kutnganca tamsawn (Byzantine texts) thlun ih suah mi Traditional Text ti khalih kawh mi Textus Receptus (KJV ih sirhsan mi) hi hmun tampi ah an dangaw, timi hi a si. Jack Moorman in NANTG (26^th edition) le KJV lehnak Textus Receptus bangawklonak hi a zaten a siar thluh ih, hmun 8,000 ah an bangaw lo a ti. Curuangah a cabu hmin ah “8,000 Differences between the NT Greek Words of the King James Bible and the Modern Versions” a ti.[24] Hi bangawlo a timi hi a hrekkhat cu a `awngfang bangaw nan a ngandan bangawlo tete tla an si ih, a hrekkhat cu a tican dangaw viarviar, Bible cang/catluan/`awngfang kim lo viarviar tivek tla an si. Hi hin kan khawruahnak ah thu ziangtal in sim thei lo maw?

          3. Pathumnak ah, kutnganca “tuan” pawl hin nemhngettu an tlasam. “Nemhngettu” kan ti tikan kan sim duh mi cu: (1) Grik kutnganca ih lungkimpinak, (2) Bible rak leh hmaisat mipawl ih lungkimpinak, le (3) kawhhran palepawl ih lungkimpinak tipawl hi a si.

Thailang zo bangin, tui san ah Grik kutnganca 5,000 lenglo a um. Cupawl lakah Saya Hre Kio ih kutngaca “tuan” le “`habik” a ti mi Alexandrian text type lungkimpitu cu malte ngaingai (a small minority) an si ih, Textus Receptus rung suahnak Byzantine text type lungkimpitu cu a tamsawn ngaingai (the vast majority) an si.[25] Grik kutngancapawl hi a tlangpithuin an suahkehnak le a sung thu zohin mithiampawl in phun li laiah an `hen.[26] Asinan a taktakah thupiih an ruah mi le an buaipi mi cu Byzantine text-type le Alexandrian text-type hi an si. Hi kutngancapawl hi ca namnak khawl a suah hnu ahcun khawl in an run nam ih, cumi ah Byzantine text-type aiawhtu cu Textus Receptus a si; Alexandrian text-type aiawhtu cu W&H Text, UBSGNT, le NANTG an si. D A Waite ih hliakhlaidan vek a si le, Grik kutnganca (papyrus, uncials, cursives, lectionaries telin) 5255 lakah Textus Receptus lungkimpitu cu 5210 an si laiah, W&H (UBSGNT le NANTG khal a huap cih) lungkimpitu cu 45 lawng an si.[27] Hihi zatek in kan `uat asile, Textus Receptus lungkimpitu 99%, W&H lungkimpitu 1% tiah a suak.

Cuvek thothoin, khuahlan ih Bible rak leh mipawl ah siseh (a hrekkhat tla cu Codex Sinaiticus le Codex Vaticanus tipawlin khawvang an hmuh hlan khuapi ih rak leh mi an si), khuahlan kawhhran palepawl in ca an rak ngan mi sungih Bible cang an lak mi, asilole, an khihhmuh mipawl khalah siseh, W&H, UBSGNT le NANTG hnakin Textus Receptus in lungkimpitu a nei tamsawn ngaingai ti a takram ah a lang. ~himnak ah, Codex Sinaiticus le Codex Vaticanus leitlun ih an pian hlanpiih (hi pahnih hi 350-400 AD hrawngih ngan mi an si) `awng dang ih rak leh mi Bible, Peshitto Syriac Bible (150 AD hrawngih leh mi), Old Latin asilole Vetus Itala Bible (kumzabi 2^nk ih leh mi), Curetonian Syriac (Aramaic) Bible (kum zabi 3^nk ih leh mi), Gothic version (kum zabi 4^nk ih Ufilas ih leh mi) tipawl hin a tlangpithuin Textus Receptus an lungkimpi.[28]

Cuitlunah, kawhhran palepawlin an ca ngan mi sungih Bible cang an hman mi le an khihhmuh mipawl khalah Textus Receptus lungkimpitu hi a tamsawn an si thotho.[29]  ~himnak ah, kutnganca “tuan” pawl an suah hlanih ca rak ngan zo tu Justin Martyr (100-165 AD), Irenaeus (130-200 AD), Alexandria khaw mi Clement (150-215 AD), Tertullian (160-220 AD), Hippolytus (170-236 AD) tipawl hin Textus Receptus thawn a bangaw mi Bible an rak hmang.[30] Burgon in kawhhran palepawl ca ngan mi sungih Bible cang hman mipawl (quotations) a khawngkhawm ciamco ih, cabu ih a suah man hlanah a thih ruangah a rualpi Edward Miller in a run suahsak. Cumi ah Miller in 400 AD hlanih Grik le Latin kawhhran palepawl ca ngan mi sung ihsin Byzantine text (KJV suahnak) lungkimpitu hi 2,630 a si ih, a dang pawl (Alexandrian, Western le Caesarian) lungkimpitu cu 1,753 lawng a si a ti. Cuitlunah Bible cang thupideuh sawmthum a zoh tikah Byzantine text lungkimpitu hi 530 an um laiah, khat lam lungkimpitu cu 170 lawng a si.[31] Himi ihsin a fiang mi cu, khuahlanpi ihsin Byzantine text (TR le KJV suahnak) hi zumtu a tamsawn ih rak hman rero zo mi, lalnak rak cotu Bible a si, timi hi a si.

Curuangah mi hrekkhat ih kutnganca “tuan” le “rinsantlak bik” an ti mipawl hin Grik kutnganca tamsawn (overwhelming majority) ih lungkimpinak, Bible leh hmaisat mipawl ih lungkimpinak, le kawhhran palepawl ih lungkimpinak an nei mal, an tlasam ngaingai a si. Hihi rinsantlak an silonak langtertu a si lo ah ziang a si ding?

4. Palitnak ah, kutnganca “tuan” pawl hi 1800s hlan kulh sung hmuahhmuah ah leitlun huap zumtupawl ih rak hman mi an silonak hi “rinsantlak bik” an si theilonak a si. Saya Hre Kio in “`habik” le “rinsantlak bik” a ti mi Grik kutnganca panga pawl hi kum 1800s AD hnu lawngih leitlun huap zumtu mipi siar theih ih rung suak fang an si. Hipawl hi “rinsantlak bik” an si ahcun, cui hlan zumtupawlin “rinsantlak lo” Bible lawnglawng an rak hmang tinak a si ding ih, cucu Pathian ih Bible in peknak san thawn siseh, a taktak ih thil rak cang mi thawn siseh, a kalhaw mi a si. Pakhatnak ah, Bible cu minung hnenih Pathian phuansuahawknak netabik le famkim, zumnak le nuncan thu ih thuneitu sangbik a si ruangah, zumtu a falepawl in kan neih, kan siar, kan theihthiam, le kan nunpi ding hi Pathian ih duh mi a si, ti cu sim tam hman `ul lo mi a si (siar Matt 24:35; 1 Pet 1:23, 25). Hi hin Bible kan kut ih a um a `ulzia a langter. Pathian in a tirah a Thu hi thawtkhum in (2 Tim 3:16; 2 Pet 1:21) a mipawl hnenah a rak pe lawk nan, cucu himten kilkhawi vivo loin, kum zabi 18 sung lai a diklo mi Bible a mipawl a hmangter ih, 1880s kum hnu lam lawngah a dik mi a hmangtersal timi hi cu a ruah men khal ruah ngam ding ci a si lo. Asinan hi cekci hi Saya Hre Kio ih thu fehpidan in a khihhmuh mi (implied) a si fawn! Pahnihnak ah, leitlun huap zumtu mipi vangtlang in san a pehpeh ah an rak hmanbik mi Bible cu kutnganca “tuan” pawl (Alexandrian texts) si loin, Textus Receptus rung suahnak kutnganca “tlai” (Byzantine texts), tui san ih hmuh theih kutnganca tamsawn pawl (the vast majority) hi an si sawn tihi thuanthu ah el theih loih a lang zo mi a si. ~awng dangin kan sim asile, kutnganca “tuan” pawl cu 1800s kum hnu lam lawngih run hman phahphah an si laiah, kutnganca “tlai” pawl cu tikcu tuan zet ihsin tuisun ni tiang san a pehpeh ih rak hman tluansuak mi a si.[32]

5. Pangatnak ah, kutnganca “tuan” pawl hi `etsiat loih an dam ringring mi hin rinsantlak an sinak hnakin rinsantlak an silonak a langter sawn. Bible ngansawng vivonak ah a ngansawngtupawl in an ngan `heh tikah an zoh`him mi a hlun cu an tisiat ta `heu, tihi Bible thu hliakhlaitupawl ih hmuhsuah mi a si. Cuti an tisiat lawng si loin, an hman tam mipawl cu an `et cingcing ih, cutin a thar an ngansawng vivo. Curuangah zumtu hmaisa pawlin rinsantlak ih an zum mi an ngansawngsin vivo mipawl cu kum upa ngaingai um loin, kum note deuh lawnglawng an umnak khal a si. Khat lamah rinsantlaklo ih an ruah mi kutngancapawl cun siar le ngansawng vivo an hlawh ve lo; tikcu ziangmawcan sung cu an hung lar lawk `heu nan, a rei tikah hnawn le hngilh in an um.[33] Hi ruangah hin a si Alexadrian text type kutnganca hlun pawl hi tui san ih hmuh ding an malnak. Curuangah, a netnak ahcun, Pathian ih lamhruainak in, rinsantlak le a dik mi kutngancapawl in nehnak an co sawn ih, cutin tui san tiangah tampi hmuh theih le hman reroin an um lanta.

Ruah bet ding um lai mi cu, hlunbik an sinak lawng rinsantlakbik ih ruattu cun Bible ih mizia a ngainep tuk, timi hi a si. Leitlun calai menmen fehdan ahcun hlunbik `habik timi hi dik vekih a langnak a um, ziangahtile a hlundeuhpawl in a thardeuhpawl hnakin a tirih ngan mi an ngankhum dikdeuh `heu ruangah a si. Asinan hi thu hi Bible ngansawngnak thu ah laklut thluh a theih lo tihi a Bible ih mizia lala in fiang tukih in sim mi a si. Cui umzia cu, leitlun cabupawl cu Pathian ih thawtkhum mi, Pathian in zumtupawl hrangih lo theih loih an neih `ul mi ih a pek mi an si lo ruangah kilhim vivo dingin thu a kam lo; asinan Bible cu Pathian ih thawtkhum mi (2 Tim 3:16; 2 Pet 1:21; Matt 5:18), amai hmin hnak hmanih a cawisan sawn mi (Sam 138:2) a si ruangah le zumtupawl hrangah lo theih loih kan `ul mi kan zumnak le nundan tahawknak le thuneitu sangbik a si ruangah, hloral loih kilhim (preserve) kumkhua dingah thu a kam mi a si (Sam 12:6-7; Matt 5:18; 24:35).

Cuitlunah, a ngaingai ahcun kutnganca hliakhlainak ah “tuan” vs “tlai” tiih khaikhin hrimhrim hi a dik tawk lo mi a si. Westcott le Hort lam rak `ang, Revised Version lehnak ih chairman rak `uantu Bishop Ellicott hmanin Textus Receptus (TR cu “Received Text” ti khalin kawh a si) thu ah “Received Text cithlahtu hmaisabik cu tui kan neih mi kutnganca lakih upabik pawl [Sinaiticus le Vaticanus tvk] hnakin a upatsawn lo hmanah, a si lo bikah khukhri tal cu a si hrimhrim,” a ti.[34] Curuangah thu umdan taktak sawn cu, Trinitarian Bible Society ih an ti vekin, “tuan” le “tlai” ti si loin (“not between an ancient text and a recent one”), “tuan” veve phun hnih (“two ancient forms of the text”), phun khat cu rak hnawl zo mi le tampi ngansawng lo mi, a dang phun khat cu kawhhran in a rak pawm ih a kilhim mi, tampi a ngansawng mi le a hman peh vivo mi, ti sawnin khaikhin ding a si.[35]

Bible Thiam Hmuahhmuah ih Pawm mi?

          “Tuan ih nganmi” (early manuscripts) hi a `ha ih rintlak an si; tlai ih nganmi cabu cu rintlak an si lo . . .” timi hi “leilung tlun ih Baibal thiam, Baibal thuhla zingzoitu pawl zozo khal in a dik an ti thluhmi thu a si,” tiah Saya Hre Kio in a ngan (6). Kutnganca “tuan” pawl khi rintlak an si timi ruahnak a rak suahdan, le cui ruahnak a diklo thu cu tawiten a tlun lamah kan langter zo. Hitawkah kan zoh bet duh mi cu “Baibal thiam” hmuahhmuah ih pawm mi a si maw? timi hi a si.

          Ngan zo bangin, kutnganca thu ah “hlunbik `habik” timi ruahnak hi Westcott le Hort hlan ihsin a rak thawk zo nan, a vawrhlartubik taktak cu anmah pahnih an si. Westcott le Hort ih ruahnak hin an lehhnuih Bible thiam tamtak a run ciahneh. Liberal sungkua lakah hi ruahnak in ram a lak hi cu mangbang ding a um lo. Asinan riahsiatza zetin, hi ruahnak hi B B Warfield in conservative sungah a luhpi ih, cumi cu Presbyterian ah J Gresham Machen, Southern Baptist ah A T Robertson, Dallas Theological Seminary ah Lewis Sperry Chafer, Bob Jones University ah Charles Brokenshire tipawl hmangin a darhzaisin vivo. Cutin santhar mithiam tamtak a ciahneh (influenced) vivo. Asinan hivek ruahnak hin Westcott le Hort san lala ihsin dotu a rak nei zo. ~himnak ah, culai san ih (kum zabi 19<sup>bk</sup>) textual scholar langsarbik lakih tel, Westcott le Hort khalin an upat zet mi F H A Scrivener le John William Burgon, Edward Miller, Herman Charles Hoskier tipawl hin Westcott le Hort ih thu fehpidan hi an rak pawm lo zo, thil um taktak mi evidence thawn fehtlang theiin an hmu lo. Burgon ih Westcott le Hort a elnak cabu The Revision Revised tla cu zohman in an letkir thei lo; a kawk vekin an rak kawk nan, evidence a pek mi le a `ansan taktak (arguments) an rak el neh thei lo, tuisun ni tiang a hmun lai.

Hipawl san hnu ahhin Textus Receptus humnak malte a dai deuh lawk. Asinan Burgon ih ca ngan mipawl hin lungphum a rak phum hnget tuk zo ruangah, cuti dai lanta thei ding a si lo. Harvard mithiam Edward F Hills in Textus Receptus humnak cabu “The King James Version Defended” le “Believing Bible Study” 1956 le 1967 kum ih a suah hnu ihsin “TR Revival” a rung suak thar sal ih, cucu tuisun ni tiang a dai nawn lo. Mithiam langsar zetzet David Otis Fuller, Alfred Martin, James Jasper Ray, David Cloud, Dell Johnson, J Michael Bates, Theodore P Letis, Peter Van Kleeck, David W Daniels, Dean Burgon Society ih D A Waite le Jack Moorman tipawl, Trinitarian Bible Society ih G W Anderson, D E Anderson, le Malcolm H Watts tipawl, Timothy Tow, Jeffrey Khoo, Paul Ferguson, Ian R K Paisley tvk pawlin (hi ca ih ngan thluh cawk lo midang tampi thawn) “hlunbik `habik” timi ruahnak ih diklozia le W&H/UBSGNT/NANTG ih rintlak silozia an run hmufiang deuhdeuh ih, Textus Receptus le KJV nasa takin an run hum. TR le KJV humnak video, online, cabu le cahram hi siar cawk lo khawpin a tam. Leitlun Bible lakah TR le KJV tlukih thikse zetih humnak calai nei tam Bible an um zik lo. Curuangah TR le KJV hi Pathian ih a pek mi laltohkham ihsin hnuhthlak tumtu khuahlan ihsin an suak `heu nan, tui san tiangah hlawhtling zetin an hnukthla ngaingai thei lo.

Erasmus le Textus Receptus

          Textus Receptus thu thawn pehparin a tlunih kan ngan mi ah rinsantlak a sizia ziangmawcan a fiang zo. Hitawkah Erasmus thu kan zoh hlanih malte vun thailang bet duh mi cu, Saya Hre Kio in Textus Receptus sungih um mi Bible cang hrekkhat pawl hi rinsantlakbik kutnganca ih tel lo lehhnuih run “beet” cawp men mi an si a ti mi, le “KJV ih thlunmi Grik Baibal lakah AD 1000 hlan ih nganmi pakhat hman an um lo” a ti mi hi a si (6-9).

          Textus Receptus sungih Bible cang/`awngfang hrekkhat pawl hi “beet” cawp men mi an si timi thu thawn pehparin ruah dingih thupi mi cu, a tirih ngan mi (autographs) zoh`him ding a um nawn lo tikah, mi hrekkhat ih “beet” cawp an timi khi anmai ruahnak men (pure speculation) a si ih, khat lam ah “beet” mi an ti mipawl khi a diksawn mi an si thei ih, a kim lo mipawl khi ngansawng hrelh mi a si thei ve, tiin ruah theih ve (equally reasonable) a si. Curuangah “beetmi” siih zum ruangah, asilole, “hrelh mi” siih zum ruangah rintlak/rintlaklo tiin thu thlu mai loin, cui “beet” le “hrelh mi” ah khuimi deuhin nemhngettu (witness) an nei hngetkhohdeuh timi sawn hi kan zawtfel `ul mi a si. Hi thu ah a tlun lamih kan ngan zo mi in “a phi” (answer) a pe zo – Textus Receptus cu Grik kutnganca za ah sawmkua hnakih tamin an nemhnget, Bible rak leh hmaisat mi tamsawn in an nemhnget, khuahlan kawhhran palepawl ih ca ngan mi tamsawn in an nemhnget, tiin.

“Beetmi”?

          Tu ah Saya Hre Kio in “beetmi” le “telh lomi” rinsantlaklo ih a thlak mi Bible cangpawl hi tawiten vun zoh duak hrih sehla (cf 9-10).

(1)  Matt 6:9-13 – “Uknak le huham le sunlawinak cu a kumkhua in nangmai ta a si. Amen.” Hi thu ah Saya Hre Kio in “hmaisabik le a `habik timi Grik Baibal pawl ah a um lo. . . . a tlailam ih nganmi Grik Baibal sung lawngah a tel; a tuanbik Baibal sungah a tel lo. Curuangah kan lehmi Baibal ah kan telh lo” a ti (9). UBSGNT le NANTG khalin an telh ve lo. Saya Hre Kio cun “hmaisabik le a `habik timi Baibal pawl ah a tel lo” a ti nan (`habik a ti mi hi `habik kan tipi ve lo ti thu cu tanta hrihin), Edward F Hills[36] cun, “Hi Bawipai Thlacam cemnak hi kutnganca W (kum zabi 4^nk lole 5^nk ih ngan mi) le Sigma le Phi (an pahnihin kum zabi 6^nk ih ngan mi) telin Grik Thuthlung Thar kutnganca zate deuhthaw ah hmuh a si (Legg ih simdan vek cun, a zate hmuahhmuah lakah pahra lawngah a tel lo). Kum zabi 4^th ih ca Apostolic Constitutions timi khalah a tel ih, hi thu simfiangnak a tuah `heu tu Chrysostom (345-407) le hi thu a lasawngtu (quotes) Pelusium khaw mi Isidore hnen ihsin nemhngetnak a um bet fawn,” a ti.[37] Cuitlunah, Syriac Version pathum Peshitta, Harclean, le Palestinian khalah a tel, a ti.[38] Grik kutnganca lakah hi thu a telhlotu cu Aleph, B, D, S, le minuscule kutnganca paruk lawng an si, tiah Legg cun a ti.[39] Curuangah a tlunih thupawl sirhsanin Matt 6:13b thu hi Textus Receptus le KJV ih a tel vekin a dik mi a si.

(2)  Tirh 9:6 – “cule khur phah le mangbang in Paul cun, ‘Bawipa, ziangso tuahter i duh?’ tiah a sut.” Hihi tui san ih hmuh theih Grik kutnganca sungah a tel lo timi hi a dik. Erasmus in Latin Bible Vulgate ihsin a leh mi a si thu hminsinnak a tuah. Asinan hi ruangah a diklo mi ih thlak mai ding a si maw? Hills cun hi thu hi Latin Vulgate le khuahlan theihpitu hrekkhat ih a tel thu a thailang ih, hi cang lawng si loin hivek phun cang dang hrekkhat thu thawn kawmin hitin ruahnak a pe: “Erasmus in Textus Receptus sungih a telh mipawl hi a diklo mi an si rori maw? Hitin thu fehpi ding kan si hrimhrim lo. . . . Latin Vulgate sungih ta Textus Receptus sungih telh mi malte pawl hi Latin `awng hmangtu Kawhhran hmangih kilhim mi a dik mi (genuine readings) an si.”[40] Tui san ih hmuh theih Grik kutnganca ah a um lo nan Vulgate sungih a um ruangah, Jerome in Grik kutnganca ihsin a rak let, ti khal hi ruah tel ding mi a si.

(3) 1 John 5:7 – “Vancung ah Pa, Thu le Thlarau Thianghlim an um: hi pathum hi pakhat an si.” Hi thu ah “Grik Baibal khui hmanah a um lo. Erasmus ih beetmi a bang” (10) a ti mi hi cu amai zumhmang thil men a si ih, a diklo lawlaw. Metzger hmanin 1 John 5:7-8 hi kum zabi 12^nk ih Greg 88, kum zabi 16^nk ih Tisch w 110, kum zabi 14^nk ih Greg 629 tipawl ah an tel a ti.[41] Hills khalin kutnganca 61 (15^nk lole 16^nk ih ngan mi) ah siseh, Codex Rabianus ah siseh, 88 le 629 ah siseh, a tel thu a tarlang.[42] Jeffrey Khoo khalin hi thu hi “Grik kutnganca um lai mi pariat ah hmuh a si ih, a si lo bikah cupawl lakih panga tal cu kum zabi 16^nk hlan ih ta an si,” a ti ve.[43] Cuitlunah Tertullian (AD 155-220) le Cyprian (AD 200-258) tipawl ih rak hman mi Latin Bible Old Latin khalah a tel.[44]

(4) Thuphuan – Thuphuan cabu thu ah Saya Hre Kio in hitin a ngan, “Erasmus ih hmanmi Grik Baibal Thuphuan cabu cu 1100-1200 AD ih nganmi a si ih cumi cabu pakhatte (only one manuscripts) lawng a nei. Cuih cabu sungah Thuphuan cabu ih netabik caang ruk a um lo. Thup 22:15 tiang lawng a um.) Curuangah amah Erasmus in Latin Baibal Vulgate sung ta kha Grik ah a let ih cumi cu Textus Receptus sungah a telh” (10). Hi zawnah theih dingih thupi mi cu, Thuphuan kutnganca hi a tam lo hrimhrim, a tamsawn cu a kimih um lo mi a bulcawng tete an si, timi hi a si. Curuangah Bible bu dang vekin duhthusam ih kutnganca rawnkhawm ding a um lo hrimhrim. Saya Hre Kio in Erasmus ih Thuphuan kutnganca hman mi cu kum zabi 12^nk ta a si, a ti mi khal hi a dik. Asinan ruah tel ding mi cu, Erasmus in hmun kerkawm phungki tlawng tivek le hnawmpung sung vekih hman loih rak um ringring men mi kutnganca “tuan,”[45] Pathian in leitlun huap zumtupawl ih hman theih ih a ret mi si lo pawl hmang loin, culai san zumtupawl hman theih ih rak um Grik kutnganca a hmang sawn, timi hi a si. Thuphuan cang netabik paruk Latin ihsin Grik ah a let timi thu ahcun, a rak let ngaingai a si hmanah, hi thu hi ruah cem cih a thupi ding: Erasmus san lai ahcun thu thei deuh cin Khristianpawl cun a tirih rak ngan mi Bible cu Pathian in a pakhatnak ah culai san ih hman mi Grik Bible ah, a pahnihnak ah culai san ih hman mi Latin Bible ah a kilhim (providentially preserved) a si, tihi an rak zum tlangpi mi (common faith) a si; Erasmus khal kha himi zumnak in a ciahneh ih, cucu Grik Bible a suahnak ah Pathian in a hmang a si, tihi.[46] Cuitlunah, Hoskier cun Latin ihsin Grik ih leh hnakin Erasmus in Grik kutnganca 141 a hmang a si sawn ding, tiah a ti.[47]

(5) Thup 5:14 – “Amah cu kumkhua in kumkhua tiang a nung.” Hi thu hi Saya Hre Kio cun “khuitawk Grik Baibal sung hman ah a um lo” a ti nan, Hoskier cun Codex 57, 137, le 141 ah a um, a ti.

(6) Efesa 3:14 – “Kan Bawipa Jesuh Khrih.” Hi thu ah Saya Hre Kio in, “Hmaisabik nganmi Grik Baibal le khuitawk Grik Baibal sung khal ih a um lo ruangah kan Baibal ah kan telh lo,” a ti (10). “Hmaisabik nganmi Grik Baibal” a ti mi hi a simfiang lo nan, rinsantlaklo a si mi Alexandrian text-type sungih Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Vaticanus, le A, B, C tipawl an si a zumum. Hipawl rinsan an tlaklo thu cu a tlun lamah kan ngan zo. “Khuitawk Grik Baibal sung khal ih” um lo vekih a sim mi hi cu a diklo pumhlum mi a si. UBSGNT (4^th revised edition) hmanin cahmai hnuai lamih “textual apparatus” ah kutnganca a², D, F, G, y 075, 104, 424, 436, 459, 1241, 1852, 1881, 1912, 2200, 2464, le Byzantine texts pawlih a tel thu, le khuahlan kawhhran palepawl ih ca ngan mi khalih a tel thu a tarlang.[48] Cuitlunah khuahlan Bible leh mipawl ih nemhngetnak tampi um bet lai fawn. Curuangah hihi Grik kutnganca ih um lo Erasmus ih “beet” cawp men mi a si hrimhrim lo; TR le KJV sungih a um vekin, Grik kutnganca, Bible leh hmaisat mi, le kawhhran palepawl ih nemhngetnak a nei mi, a dik mi (genuine reading) a si sawn, tiah kan zum.

(7) Rom 8:1 – “Tisa duhnak thawn a feh lotu, asinain thlarau duhnak thawn a fehtu.” Hi thu ah Saya Hre Kio in, “Hmaisabik Grik Baibal ah a um lo; cu ruangah kan Baibal ah kan telh lo,” a ti hnuah a zaten khaikhawmin, “Hipawl hi Grik Baibal ah a um lo nain Erasmus ih telhmi hrekkhat pawl an si,” a ti (10). Hi Bible cang thawn pehparin, “Hmaisabik Grik Baibal ah a um lo” a ti mi hi khuimi cekci a si ti a simfiang lo. Ziangkhal va si sehla, “hmaisabik” asilole “tuanbik” Grik kutngancapawl khi rinsantlak an sibik lo, timi a tlun lamih evidence thawn kan langfiangter zo mi, kan vung mangsal a si ahcun, hi `ansan (argument) hin ruah a fawm tel lo ti a lang. Cuitlunah, hi Bible cang sungih cahlawm hi UBSGNT (4^th revised edition) hmanin Grik kutnganca a², D²,  33^vid, 104, 424, 459, 1175, 1241, 1912, 1962, 2200, 2464, le Byzantine kutngancapawl, Bible leh hmaisat mi hrekkhat le kawhhran palepawl ih ca ngan mi hrekkhat ah TR le KJV ih a tel vek cekciin a tel thu a tarlang.[49]

“Telh lomi”?

(1) Matt 24:36 – “Fapa in siseh.” Hi thu ah Saya Hre Kio in, “Hmaisa bik ih nganmi sungih a tel ruangah kan Baibal ah kan telh”; asinan KJV lettupawl cun “an taanta, an telh lo,” a ti (10). Hi cahlawm hi Grik kutnganca Aleph, B, D, Theta tvk ah a tel ko nan, Grik kutnganca tamsawn ih a tel lo ruangah kutnganca nemhngettu a hlawhsam zet mi a si. Cuitlunah, TR in Bible sungih um taktak lo mi “beet” phun vekih an sim mi hi, hi zawn ahcun kutnganca “tuan” pawlin an “beet” si sawn ding a bang, ziangahtile “Fapa in siseh (a thei lo)” timi hi Mark 13:32 thawn thurual dingih “beet” cawp mi si ding a bang sawn. “Curuangah, hihi Traditional Text [asilole TR] ih bet mi si loin, Aleph B D Theta tvk pawlih aiawh mi Western le Alexandrian texts pawlih culrual mi (harmonization) a si sawn ti a fiang,” tiah Hills cun a ti.[50]

(2) Tirh 4:25 – “Thlarau Thianghlim hmangin.” “Grik Baibal a tuanbik ih nganmi sungih a tel ruangah kan Baibal sungah kan telh,” tiah Saya Hre Kio in a ti (10). Hi zawnih theih `ul mi cu Textus Receptus, Majority Text, le kutnganca tamsawn ahcun a tel lo mi a si, tihi a si. Curuangah hrelh mi hnakin fiang seh tiih “beet” mi a si thei sawn lo maw? A thu umdan zoh tik khalah hiti zawng a hawi sawn lo maw?

(3) Tirh 16:7 – “Jesuh . . .” Hitawk khalah Saya Hre Kio ih “a tuanbik ih nganmi Grik Baibal” a ti mi hi rinsantlak an si thei lo tiih kan langter zo mi a, A, B, C, D tvk pawl kha an si. Erasmus le KJV lettupawl ih hrelh men mi si loin, Textus Receptus, Majority Text,[51] le kutnganca tamsawn ih tel lo hrimhrim mi a si. Fiang dingih “beet” mi a si thei thotho lo maw?

(4) Rom 8:28 – “Pathian cun . . .” Hitawkih Saya Hre Kio in, “Hmaisabik lam ih nganmi Grik Baibal ih a um ruangah kan Baibal ah kan telh,” a ti mi hi thudik siin a lang lo. Ziangahtile UBSGNT (4^th revised edition) hmanin “Pathian cun” timi telhtu kutnganca cu P⁴⁶, A, B 81, tipawl lawng an si ih, Saya Hre Kio in hmun dangih a rinsan zet mi B, a, C, D tipawl hmanin hi zawn ahcun Textus Receptus le kutnganca tamsawn lungkimpi in “Pathian cun” timi an telh lo thu a tarlang.[52] Curuangah “Pathian cun” timi tel lo mi hi a dik mi a si sawn ih, tel mi sawn khi fiang seh tiih “beet” mi a si thei sawn lo maw?

(5) 1 Pet 2:2 – “. . . rundam mi nan si ding.” Hi khal hi Saya Hre Kio cun, “. . . hmaisabik le a `habik timi Grik Baibal sungih a um ruangah kan Baibal ah kan telh,” a ti thotho (10). Hi thu ah UBSGNT (4^th revised edition) cun zianghman hminsinnak a pe lo. Asinan tubaiteih suak thar Grik Bible pakhat cun “rundam mi nan si ding” timi telhtu kutnganca cu Codex Vaticanus a si thu a tarlang.[53] Hi cahlawm hi Codex Vaticanus, UBSGNT, le NANTG ahcun a tel nan, Textus Receptus, Majority Text, le kutnganca tamsawn ahcun a tel lo, tihi hi zawnih theih ding thupi a si.

A tlunih tarlang mi Bible cangpawl khal ahhin Textus Receptus le KJV sungih ta vek hi kutnganca “tuan” pawlah tel lo hmansehla, kutnganca dang tampi ah a tel mi, Bible leh hmaisat mipawl le khuahlan kawhhran palepawl ih ca ngan mi khalih nemhnget mi an si ruangah, zumtupawl in khuahlan ihsin an rak siar rero mi lakih tel an si ti a lang ih, rinsantlak an si.

Desiderius Erasmus

          Erasmus thu hi mawi lemloin Saya Hre Kio in a ngan (cf 6-7). Mi zo cio khalin tlinlonak kan neih cio ruangah, thu dang a rel mi hi cu tanta hrihin, Grik kutnganca thuhla ih Erasmus nun ih kan zoh ding thupi sawn mi cu, Grik Bible zohfeltu dingah (edit tuahtu dingah) mitling (qualified) a si maw, timi hi a si. Mitling si ding cun Bible a zumnak ah rinhmaih ding um lo mi a si a `ul ih, a thiamnak in a tlin a `ul fawn. Hi thu pahnih ah Erasmus cu sawisel ding um lo mi a si. Amah duhlotupawl hmanin a thiamnak thu ah sawisel ding an thei lo. Tulai “mithiam” hrekkhat bangih Bible sawisel hnuaihni le Bible ah “palhnak a um” ti pawl a si fawn lo. Fimkhur zetih hna`uantu a si thu a `uan kutneh ah a lang. “[K]hawl ih nam mi Grik Thuthlung Thar zohfelnak (editing) hna`uan `uan dingah Erasmus hnakih mitling (better prepared) Europe pumpi ah zohman an um lo,” tiah Hills cun a ti.[54] Curuangah hi hna`uan thupi `uansuaktu dingah Pathian in a hril ih a hman mi a si tihi thu kan fehpitdan ding a si sawn lo ding maw?

Erasmus ih tlin le tlinlo thu ah sawiseltupawlih an sawh `heu mi cu, “humanist” a si, ti le Roman Catholic a si, tihi a si. Humanist a si ti hi el ding a um lo. Asinan cui a humanist sinak cun Grik Bible a zohfelnak a tisiat maw ti hi ngai thupit sawn ding mi a si. Hi thu ah Hills cun thulai hawlin hitin a ngan, “[Erasmus hi] humanist a si tihi thu tampi ah a dik, curuangah a khawruahdan ah a Khristian tluansuak ringring lo, asinan Thuthlung Thar Bible a zohfel taktaknak ah `halo khawpin a humanism in a tibuai (affected) ti langter theih mi a um lo.”[55] Roman Catholic a si, ti thu ahcun, 1516 kum ih Grik Bible hmaisabik a suah laiah Protestant Kawhhran Tuah`hatnak (Reformation) a rak thawk hrih lo ruangah (ziangahtile Kawhhran Tuah`hatnak cu kum 1517 ihsi rung thawk lawng a si) zo cio khal Roman Catholic an rak si cio. Martin Luther ih kawhhran tuah`hatnak dung a rak thlun lohli thei lo lawk nan, sung lam ihsin Roman Catholic rak dotu a si ih, a netnak ahcun Kawhhran Tuah`hatnak dung a run thlun, tihi a thuanthu ah a lang.[56] Erasmus in 1517 kum Kawhhran Tuah`hatnak hlan te 1516 kum ngelcel ih Grik Bible a rak suah man khal hi thil cang hruak “accident” men si loin, Pathian ih “providence” a si sawn, ti khal hi ruat tel cih phah dingih thupi mi a si. A san cu, Kawhhran Tuah`hatnak ih `ulbik mi cu Pathian Thu Bible a si ih, cui Bible lakih rinsantlakbik mi cu `awng dangih leh mi si loin `awnghram Grik Bible a si fawn.

Erasmus ih Hman mi Grik Kutnganca

Hi thu ah Saya Hre Kio in Erasmus ih “hmanmi Grik Baibal hi AD 1000 hlan ih nganmi pakhat hman a tel lo,” a ti (7). Ngan zo bangin, hihi “rinsantlaklo” le “`awn`ai” ih a thlaknak san khal a si. Thuthlung Thar text thu rori thlur ih ThD tiang Harvard ihsi rak ngahtu Edward F Hills cun thuanthu dang deuh a nei. A hnuaiih ta hi cumi khaikhawm mi a si.[57]

Erasmus cu Grik Thuthlung Thar zohfel dingih Basel a ra thlen tikah, a hman theih ih rak um cia Grik kutnganca panga a hmu. Cupawl cu: (1) 1 (kum zabi 11^nk ih ngan mi), (2) 2 (kum zabi 5^nk ih ngan mi), (3) 2ap (kum zabi 12^nk-14^nk ih ngan mi), (4) 4ap (kum zabi 15^nk ih ngan mi), le (5) 1r (kum zabi 12^nk ih ngan mi) tla an si. Hi panga lakah a pahnihnak hi kum zabi 5^nk ih ngan mi a si ti hminsin aw. Kutnganca dang teh a hmang maw? A hmang ti khihhmuhnak (indications) a um. Erasmus hin Grik Bible a suah hlan 1505-6 ah Latin `awng in Bible a rak let zo. Hi `um ah Grik kutnganca a hman mi thu theih a si lo nan, a rak hmang ih, hminsinnak tete (notes) a rak tuah tiih zum lo a theih lo. Grik Bible suah dingih Basel a feh tikah hi a hminsinnak tuah mipawl hi a ken a zumum. Cuitlunah Erasmus hin a khualtlawnnak kip ah Grik kutnganca a hawl phah vivo ih, a san (borrow) thei mi pohpoh hnen ihsin a sang vivo, tihi theih cio mi a si. Curuangah a Grik Bible suah mi Textus Receptus cu Basel ih a hmuh mi kutngancapawl sirhsanbik ih suah mi a si ko nan, a ngah theinak hmun kip ihsi a rak lak cia mipawl a hmang tel cih.

Cuitlunah, hi zawnih ruah tel ding mi cu, a hmaisa lamih langter zo bangin, Erasmus ih hman mi kutngancapawl kha “tlai” khalsehla an suahkehnak (ancestor) taktak cu tulaiih kutnganca “tuan” ti mipawl hnakih kum nauta cuang lo a si ruangah, “tlai” ti menin “rinsantlak lo” ih thlak theih lo mi a si, tihi a si.

Erasmus le Grik Bible lakih Bangawklonakpawl

          Kum 1800s hnu lamih run hmuhsuah mi kutnganca “tuan” pawl kha Erasmus kut ah a rak thlen man hrih lo ruangah, “rinsantlak” le “`habik” um cingih hmang man lo, le “rinsantlak lo” le “`awn`ai” pawl lawng hman vekin Saya Hre Kio in a ngan (7-11). Hihi thudik tluansuak si theiin a lang lo. Ziangahtile, cui kutnganca “tuan” pawl cu a hman theihin an rak um hrih lo nan, cui kutnganca “tuan” pawl le “tlai” pawl lakih bangawklonak um mi tete pawl (variant readings) hi a rak theih zo thu a Grik Bible suah mi dung lamih simfiangnak a pek mi ah a lang. Cui simfiangnakpawl cu Grik Bible a suah hlan ihsi a rak timlam cia mi a si fawn. ~himnak ah, kutngancapawl lakih bangawklonak um mi thubuaideuh Matt 6:13 ih Bawipai Thlacam (tlunih kan simfiang zo mi), Matt 19:9-20 ih milian tlangvalpa le Jesuh’i biakawknak, Mark cemnetnak thu (Mark 16:9-20), Luke 2:14 ih vancungmipawl ih hla, Luke 22:43-44 thu, John 7:53-8:11 ih uiret lai kaih mi nu thu, 1 Tim 3:16 ih Jesuh Khrih ih Pathian sinak thu, tivek thubuaipawl hi Erasmus in a rak buaipi zo ih, fimkhur zetin simfiangnak a pe.[58] Hivek simfiangnak hmanah a fimkhur zet a si ahcun, Bible sung thu taktak ahcun a fimkhur sinsin ti rinhmaih ding a um lo. Himi ihsin a lang mi cu, Erasmus in Textus Receptus a suah laiah kum 1800s hnu lam lawngih rung lar thar kutnganca “tuan” pawl (kutnganca malte lawngih lungkimpi mi) a hmang lo nan, hi kutnganca “tuan” pawl le Byzantine texts pawl lakih thubuai um mipawl thei cia cingin Byzantine texts pawl (kutnganca za ah sawmkua hnakih tam ih lungkimpi mi) a rak thlun sawn thotho, timi hi a si.

Cuiruangah, kerkawm ah hman loih kum zabi 18 sung lai rak um ziar men mi, 1800s hlanah zumtu mipi kut ih rak um lo, cui hnu lam lawngih run hman phahphah fang men mi, kutnganca tamsawn thaw khalih lungrual thei lo, kutzung siar tham tluk fangih mal kutnganca “tuan” pawl hi “rinsantlakbik” le “`habik” an si tiih zum hnakin, an kum nauta hmansehla an thuanthu Tirhthlahpawl san tiang zawt vivo a theih mi, san a pehpeh ah leitlun huap zumtu mipipawl in an rak hmanbik mi, tui san tiang khalih cuai thei lo, kutnganca tamsawn ngaingai khalih lungkimpi mi Textus Receptus hi rinsantlakbik a si, tiih zum hi thil um taktak mi evidence in a khihhmuh mi le thil awm-angsawn (more reasonable) hrimhirm a si lo maw?

         

“Textus Receptus” timi Hmin hi “Kyaw-ngia” nak men a si maw?

“Textus Receptus” hmin ra suahnak thu ah, Saya Hre Kio cun thu dang tel lo “kyaw-ngia” nak menmen ihsi ra suak phunin a ngan (11-12). Hihi kil khat lawng zoh ih sim mi awkam a si. Khat lamah “kyaw-ngianak” a tel tihi rinhmaih ding a um lo, asinan khat lam lala ahcun a dik ve hrimhrim mi a si. Hiti kan ti tikah mi hmuahhmuah pakhat hman hrelh loin an pawm thluh tinak a si lo. Hi Grik Bible pawmlotu an um ve ko ding. Asinan hi Grik Bible hi Elzevir in “Textus Receptus” timi hmin a pek hlan ihsin cui san mipi ih rak pawm tlangpi mi (commonly accepted) a si ih, cui hnu khalah, langter zo bangin, Westcott le Hort in 1881 kum ih Grik Bible an run suah hlan kulh sungah nehnak cotu bik a si peh vivo thotho. Elzevir khan thil rak si rero zo mi zohin hmin a pe a si sawn. Cuiruangah “kyaw-ngianak” rim a namnak lai um khalsehla, khat lamah a tlangpithuih a dik ve hrimhrim mi a si ruangah Pathian ih “providence” in a si, tiih ruah ding a si ko. Cuitlunah zumtu pakhat in “kyaw-ngia” duh ruang menah Bible sungah thu diklo a ngan ngam (ti palh pang dah ti lo) tiih ruah hrimhrim hi khawruahdan dik a si thei ding maw?

KING JAMES VERSION

          “King James Verion” timi thuhlu hnuaiah Saya Hre Kio in KJV suah thawknak thu le KJV ih “tlaksamnak” a ti mi ziangmawzat a ngan. Cumi lak ihsin pahnih thum te vun cung tahratin zohhliahsaknak kan neih duh mi cu: Ziangruangah KJV an rak let?, Leh mi maw rem mi deuh? Khuimi KJV bik? Ziangah KJV ah Apocrypha a tel? tipawl hi an si.

Ziangruang KJV An rak Let?

          KJV an rak lehnak san thu ah Saya Hre Kio cun Bible tampi a suah zo ruangih “hnok hnuaihni mi reh seh, ti duhnak” ih leh mi siin a rel (3). Hihi a diknak lai a um nan, a kimcang deuh lo ih, KJV lehnak san taktak a langfiangter fawn lo. KJV let dingih thurawtnak a rak suahnak taktak cu, “hnok hnuaihni mi reh seh, ti duhnak” men lawng si lamlam loin, a rak um zo mi Mirang Biblepawl `awnghram Hebru le Grik thawn tah`him tikah duhthu an sam tawk lo ruangah `awnghram thawn a dengaw mi Bible neih duh ruangah a si sawn. Hihi Hampton Court ih thu reltlangnak an neih `um ih Siangpahrang James hnenih KJV let dingih thu rak bur hmaisabiktu Puritan John Reynolds ih `awngkam ah siseh, thutitluknak an tuah mi ah siseh, Bible leh tikih an thlun ding dan an tuah mi ah siseh, fiangten a lang mi a si.

Pakhatnak ah, John Reynolds ih `awngkam cu: “. . . a pariatnak Henry le a paruknak Edward in ram an uk laiih [hman] an sian mi [Bible] pawl cu a `halo mi (corrupt) le ~awnghram (Original) thawn a dengaw lo mi an si ruangah, Bible thar let dingah . . .” (Hihi theih awl ding zawngih leh mi a si. A Mirang vek cekci cun hitin a si: “. . . there might be a new translation of the Bible, because those which were allowed in the reigns of Henry the eight, and Edward the sixth, were corrupt and not answerable to the truth of the Original.”).[59] Pahnihnak ah, thutitluknak an tuah mi ah hitin a lang: “~awnghram Hebru le Grik thawn a rualaw theibikin Bible pumpi let dingah; . . .”[60] Pathumnak ah, KJV leh tikih an thlun ding dan hleinga sungih pakhatnak ah Bishop Bible thlunbik ding an ti nain `awnghram Bible thawn an thurualawk lawngah (as the Truth of the original will permit) timi in ramri an khang.[61] Hihin KJV an rak leh laiih an tumtah mi taktak cu `awnghram Hebru le Grik thawn a dengaw mi Mirang Bible `ha neih an duh ruangah a si, theih hawi ding um loin a langfiang zet.

Leh mi maw Rem mi deuh?

          “KJV lettu pawl in a zatein KJV Baibal hi a thar in an let thluh, tiah mi tampi ih kan ruah `heumi cu a dik lo. . . . A thar teih lehmi Baibal, tin a phaw ih an nganmi cu a dik lomi a si. Mi in KJV hi lei hai seh ti duhnak ih nganmi a si” (3). KJV an leh laiah a hlanih rak um zo mi Biblepawl an rawn, an thlun phahphah ti cu theih cio mi a si. A hleicein William Tyndale ih leh mi tla cu za ah sawmriat tlun an thlun. Asinan hiti Bible um cia an thlun phahphah ruangah KJV hi a thar ih leh mi a si lo lamlam lo. An leh mi taktak cu `awnghram Hebru le Grik a si ih, cui `awnghram le Mirang Bible rak um cia pawl an bangawknak (an rak leh diknak) lawngah an thlun fang a si. Hi ruangah “a thar ih leh mi” a silonak ding san a um hrimhrim lo. Mirang `awng ih Bible rak um hnuaihni zo mi hin KJV `hasin dingin a bawm men sawn a si. Cuitlunah, KJV phaw ahhin “a thar tei leh mi” ti lawngin an ngan lo, “Bible leh hmaisat mipawl thawn ngunngaih zetih zohtawn le rem mi” (“. . . & with the former Translations diligently compared and revised, . . .” ) ti an telh.

“Khuimi KJV bik?”

          KJV hi vawi ziangmawzat rem mi (revised) a si ti thu ah el ding a um lo. Ruah ding mi sawn cu, hi “rem” timi hi ziangvek remnak a si, timi hi a si. KJV an rak remdan phun hnih a um: (1) khawl ih nam sual mi rem mi (printing errors), le (2) Mirang cafang kawmdan thlengawk (changes in the English language) ruangih rem mi, tiin. ~himnak ah, Saya Hre Kio in cahmai 4 ih KJV “tlaksamnak” a tarlang mi Matt 26:36 ih “Jesuh” aiih “Judas,” Exodus 14:10 vawi thum ngan mi, Exo 20:14 ih “lo” hrelh mi, Matt 25 ih “Fala pahra tah`himnak” aiih “Cabit tah`himnak” tipawl hi leh sual mi si loin, khawl ih nam sual mi (printing errors) men hlir an si, ti a fiang. Hivek tipalh mipawl hi KJV lettupawl lakih pahnih Samuel Ward le John Bois in an rak rem. 1617 kum ah an rem `heh. A phun hnihnak cu, cafang ngandan rem mi a si. Khuahlan ahcun verb dungah “e” bet an hmang, “v” aiah “u” an ngan, “s” aiah “f” tvk. ~himnak ah, tulaiih “fear” cu 1611 KJV ahcun “feare,” “moved” cu “mooued,” “evil” cu “euil,” “also” cu “alfo” tvk. Hivek Gothic le German cafang kawmdan danglam pawl hi 1762 kum ah an rem thluh ih, 1769 kum ah khing rih lam thu reldan (weights, measures, coins) khal an rem (updated) thluh. [62] Hi khawl ih nam palh mi le cafangkawmdan thleng mi tete vek hi a tican danglam thluh koih thleng mi, asilole leh sual mi vek phunin uak tukih rel ding ci an si lo.

Saya Hre Kio in KJV ih “palhnak an remmi thawngkul (20000) a um” tiah William Kilburne in a ti (3), a ti mi, le American Bible Society in “thawng kul hluanli (24000)” bangawklonak a um,[63] an ti, a ti mi khal hi 1611 KJV le tulai KJV a thawk ihsin a cem tiang tah`him thluh tu D A Waite ih hmuhsuah mi thaw cun a bangaw lo zet. Waite cun Semtirnak ihsin Thupuan tiangah hna ih ngai tikih awsuah dangawlo (`himnak ah, “blind” le “blinde”) tel loin, hna ih theihtheih cin ah KJV ih `awngfang 791,328 sungah 421 lawng thleng mi a um; himi sung khalah a tamsawn cu awsuah danglamter thei cafang kawmdan thleng mi men (`himnak ah, “toward” ihsin “towards” ah, “burned” ihsin “burnt” tvk) an si ih, thleng titlak ngaingai cu 136 lawng a um, a ti.[64]

A tlunih kan tarlang mi vek KJV remnak hmuahhmuah cu 1769 kum ah `heh thluh a si ih, hihi tui san ih kan hman mi KJV a si. Danawknak pipa a um lo. Curuangah tui san ih KJV hi 1611 ih KJV thawn a sung thu taktak ah a bangaw mi an si, ti theih a si. “Khuimi KJV bik?” tiih buaipitlak ngaingai a tling lo.

Ziangah KJV ah Apocrypha a Tel?

KJV an leh laiih Apocrypha an rak leh tel le an run suah mi khalih an telh thu hi Saya Hre Kio cun KJV ih “tlaksamnak” pakhat siin a hmu. “An leh tikah Roman Catholic Kawhhran ih Baibal “Apocypha” khal an telh; Protestant Baibal hnakin cabu 15 a tam deuh. (RC Kawhhran hotu pakhat Jerome hman in AD 420 hrawngah Latin Baibal Vulgate a leh tikah hi Apocrypha hi a telh lo mi a si.)” (4).

Hi zawnih ruah tel ding thupi mi cu, Apocrypha rak telhtu hi KJV lawng a si lo, culai san ih Bible, `himnak ah, Wycliffe Bible le Geneva Bible tivekpawl khalin an rak telh ih, Protestant Bible hmuahhmuah ihsin Apocrypha telh nawn lo hi tidan tlangpi (norm) a rung sinak cu kum zabi 19^th lawngin a si, timi hi a si. Cuitlunah KJV lettupawlin Apocrypha hi thawtkhum mi (inspired) Bible ah an ruat hrimhrim lo, an leh tik khalah fimkhur zetin an let lo. Curuangah Scrivener cun, “Apocrypha cun 1611 ih Bible remtupawl le an hlanih mipawl hnen ihsin fimkhur zetih ngaihsaknak a hlawh lo ti cu Bible thiam (Biblical scholars) pawlih theih cio mi a si . . .” a ti.[65]

KJV le Fundamentalist Lungput

          KJV thu a ngannak a thawk lamah Saya Hre Kio in, “’Fundamentalist’ hrekkhat lungput cu, ‘KJV siar lo, Baibal dang siar ding a si lo, KJV lawng hi a dikmi, Pathian thawtkhum mi a si”; “anmah pommi le hmuhmi ih tlun ah midang hmuhmi cu an pom lo lawng a si lo; Satan ta tluk ah an ruat. . . . An lungput hi phundang deuh a si,” tiin fundamentalist lungput a hmuhdan a tarlang (2). Cuitlunah fundamentalistpawl cun Bible urkang an hmang ti tla a telh ih, “cuti ih lungput le nun cu Khristian lungput le nun ah Fundamentalist hrekkhat pawl cun an ruat. Pathian ih fialmi tluk ah an ruat,” a ti bet (3). Hi zawnah thu pahnih tawiten thailang duh ve mi a um.

Pakhatnak ah, fundamentalism thuanthu zoh tikah, fundamentalist hrekkhat pawl cu an feh luantuk `heu ngai. Hihi el ding a um lo. Asinan hivek luantuk lungput le fehdan hnihkhat hi fundamentalist hmuahhmuah lungput a si hrimhrim lo ih, fundamentalist dang pawl lala ih pawmpi lo mi le pawi ti zet mi a si, ti hi cu hmuhsakawkpi sehla a `ha zet ding. Fundamentalist lakah thil umdan ciamciamtei zoh ih cuai thlaitu, evidence hngetkhoh zet sirhsan ih pawmtu tampi an um. Fundamentalist lungput ngaingai cu ziang thu hmuahhmuah ah, zumnak le ni tin nun thu ah siseh, thuneitu sangbik, thutawp simtu, tahawknak ding cu sualtheilo le sualtello Pathian Thu Bible lawng a si, timi hi a si.

          Pahnihnak ah, “KJV lawng hi . . . Pathian thawtkhum mi a si” an ti, a ti mi te hi. Hi zawnah theih dingih thupi zet mi cu, ziangvek Bible, ziang `awng ih leh mi khal va si sehla, leh mi (translation) pohpoh cu, ziangtlukih `ha le Pathian hman mi a si khalle, Pathian ih thawtkhum mi an si lo, tihi a si. Bible ih zirh mi thawtkhumnak cun a tirte ih Pathian pek mi `awnghram Hebru le Grik (autographs) lawng a huap (2 Tim 3:16), `awng dang ih leh mi a huap thei lo. Curuangah `awng dang ih leh mi, `himnak ah KJV tivek hi “Pathian thawtkhum mi a si” titu cu mi hnihkhat te ngaingai, Peter Ruckman le a hopawl vial an si ih, pawmdan diklo a si. Fundametalist le KJV `antupawl lala in hihi an do rero mi a si.[66]

KJV ih Rinsantlak Sinak[67]

          Leitlun ih Bible leh mi tamtak um mi lakah khuimi khi rinsan a tlakbik ti khaikhinnak ah thil a sinak ngaingai hmufiang thei ding cun, asilole thudik pem thei ding cun, lo theih loih zoh tel ding mi thil a malbik ah pali a um. Cupawl cu: (1) Bible lehnak ih hman mi Hebru le Grik Bible (the underlying texts), (2) Bible lettu[pawl] ih tlinnak (qualification of the  translator[s]), (3) Bible lehdan (method of translation), le (4) Leh suak taktak mi (final product) tla an si. Hi pali hi `hen theih loih sihcihaw thluh an si. Bible lettu cu ziangtlukih mithiam le tling siin lehdan dik thlun khal sehla, a sirhsan mi Hebru le Grik (asilole Mirang Bible) rinsan a tlak lo ahcun, a lehsuak mi cu Bible `ha le rinsantlak a tling thei lo ding. Cuvek thothoin, a sirhsan mi Hebru le Grik Bible cu ziangtlukin `ha khalsehla, a lettu cu mi tling lo a si ih, lehdan dik a thlun lo a si ahcun, a lehsuak mi cu ziangti hmanin Bible `ha le rinsantlak a si thei lo ve ding. Hi cuailung pali thawn cuai thlai tikah, KJV cu Mirang Bible lakah a cuai a ritbik mi, Bible `ha le rinsantlak a si, ti a lang. Ziangahtile KJV cu, a tlun lamih langter zo bangin, a sirhsan mi Hebru le Grik Bible a `ha, a lettupawl cu England ram pumpi ih mithiam filawr hlir an si lawng si loin Pathian mi an sinak ah le Bible thurin an pawmdan ah sawisel ding um lo hlir an si ih, an lehdan ah lehdan dik (verbal/formal equivalence) an thlun fawn tikah, an lehsuak mi cu Bible `ha maksak “ro tling” lawlaw a si.

          KJV a suahnak hi tu cun kum 400 a luan zo. 2011 kum kha kum 400 a kimnak a si. Cumi sunlawihnak ah England ram ih Trinitarian Bible Society tla cun 2011 kum sung hmuahhmuah KJV thuhla simnak hmun dangdang ah thla tin an nei vivo. Cabu le cahram khal tampi an suah. America khalah Dean Burgon Society in Collingswood ah KJV kum 400 kim lungawi thu simnak a tuah. Ram dangdang khalah kawhhran dangdang in hivek an tuah hnuaihni. American Congress pi rori hmanin KJV hi America rak hngawr neh zet tu a sizia an theihpinak le an lungawinak ca an suah (2011 kum ih 112^th Congress thu suah mi “thubet” ah siar aw). KJV cu a suah thawk ihsin tuisun ni tiang dodaltu tam zet lakah le a lalnak cuh tumtu Bible tam zet lakah Pathian in a humhim ih, dinhmun danglam zet a pek mi, mangbangza ih thlawsuah a pek mi, le minung thawng tamtak nunnak hngawrtu ih a hman mi Bible a si ringring lai.

THUNETNAK

          A tlunih kan ngan mi ihsin a langfiang mi cu, tui san ih hmuh theih Grik kutnganca “tuan” pawl khi a “tlai” pawl hnakin rinsantlak an si sawn lo, tihi a si. Kutnganca “tlai” ti mipawl khi an suahkehnak thuanthu zawt vivo tikah kutnganca “tuan” ti mipawl hnakin an “tlai” taktak cuang lo. Cuiruangah kutnganca “tuan” le “tlai” tiih khaikhin hrimhrim hi a dik tawk lo mi a si. Cuhnakin kutnganca “tuan” veve, phun bangawlo, tiin khaihin sehla an sinak dik a lang sawn. Cuitluanah, Grik kutnganca cu an kum upat le nauhak men lawngin zoh loin, Grik kutnganca dang ih nemhngetnak, Bible rak leh hmaisat mipawl ih nemhngetnak, le khuahlan kawhhran palepawl ca ngan mi ih nemhngetnak tipawl thawn zohtawn sawn ding a si ih, hitin cuaithlai tikah Grik kutnganca kum upa mallai sirhsan ih suah mi (khawl ih nam mi) Grik Bible W&H Text, UBSGNT, NANTG tipawl (Falam Baibal rung suahnak) hnakin Grik kutnganca kum nauta le a tamsawn sirhsan ih suah mi Textus Receptus hi rinsantlaksawn ngaingai a si, ti fiangten a lang. Himi in (thu dang rel tel lo hmanah) “Falam Baibal Thianghlim hi rinsan a tlak ngaingai maw?” timi thusuhnak “aphi” (answer) a pe cih tiah kan ruat. KJV cu, hi rinsantlak Grik Bible Textus Receptus ihsin zohmanih zuam theih rual loih dik le mawi in rak leh mi a si ruangah, Mirang Bible lak ahcun rinsan a tlakbik mi Bible a si. Cuvek thothoin, hi Textus Receptus le KJV ihsin `awng dang ih leh mi Bible khal, a lettu(pawl) in dik zetin a(n) let a si ahcun, rinsantlak a si ve fawn ding. A tawinak cun, Grik Bible ah Textus Receptus a `habik ih, Mirang Bible ah KJV a `habik. Cucu thu hngetkhoh (strong evidence) in a nemhgnet mi a si. Hivek Bible `ha Textus Receptus le KJV ihsin dik le mawi zetih leh mi kan `awng in suak thei lohli hram seh, tihi zumtupawl in kan zuam ding le kan thlacam ding a si lo ding maw?

          A siartu hmuahhmuah Pathian in malza lo sawm cio hram seh.

January 28, 2012

Yangon, Myanmar

---

ENDNOTES

[1] Stephen Hre Kio, “Falam Baibal Thianghlim hi rinsan a tlak ngaingai maw?” (PDF), http://chinlandtoday.info/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Falam-Baibal-Thianghlim-hi-Rinsan-a-tlak-ngaingai-maw.pdf  ah siar theih a si. Hi ca hi December 5, 2011 ih a rak ngan zo mi a si nan, tui ca ngantu cun January 11, 2012 lawngah a siar ngah. Saya Sui Lian Mang ih “Bible Dangdang Khaikhinnak” khal hi November 26, 2011 ih a rak ngan mi a si hmang nan, tui ca ngantu cun January 12, 2012 lawngah a siar ngah. A netadeuh hi online ah siar theih a si: http://chinlandtoday.info/2011/11/bible-dangdang-khaikhinnak/ Hi ca pahnih hi tui ca ngantui kut a thlen tlaideuh ruangah duh vekin tui ca hi a suah lohli thei lo ih, cumi ah theihthiamsak dingah zangfah a lo dil duh.

Hmin kawhawkdan thu ah Kawlram ahcun Pathian hna`uantu cu “Saya” tiin kan kawhawk tlangpi ruangah, hi ca sung ahcun “Saya” ti lawng hman vivo a si ding. Phun dang ah ruah ding a si lo.

[2] Falam Baibal rinsan a tlak taktak le taktak lo thu kimcang deuh ih siar duhtui hrangah tui cangantui ngan mi Mirang `awng in siar ding a um: Biak Lawm Thang, Examination and Evaluation of Falam Chin Revised New Testament under the Textus Receptus and King James Bible, ThM Thesis (Singapore: Far Eastern Bible College, 2008).

[3] Stephen Hre Kio, Baibal Leh Daan (Guam: np, 1995); “Is King James Bible the Best English Version?” Zomi Theological College Annual Magazine (1998): 41-48; “Falam Baibal sungah ‘Caang Pumpi Hrelhmi’ A Um Maw?” Vankau Arsi (2002): 33-39.

[4] Hihi theih awl ding zawngih ngan men mi a si. Kutnganca hmuhsuah mi hi a karh vivo ih, Grik kutnganca paziat a um ti thu ah mithiampawl in an zohsobik mi, kutnganca nasa zetih hliakhlaitu (textual critic) German mithiam Kurt Aland le Barbara Aland cun 1967 kum ah 5,255 a um an ti lawk nan, 1989 kum ahcun 5,488 tiang hmuhsuah zo siin an rel. Kurt and Barbara Aland, The Text of the New Testament: an Introduction to the Critical Editions and to the Theory and Practice of Modern Textual Criticism, 2^nd ed, 1989, cited by Malcolm H Watts, The Lord Gave the Word: A Study in the History of the Biblical Text (London: Trinitarian Bible Society, 1998), 17. 1983 kum ih United Bible Societies ih suah mi The Greek New Testament (4^th edition, Introduction, 5-22) cun 5,490 umin a tarlang. Hi kutngancapawl hi a bu pum hlir si loin a bulcawng tete tivek an si ih, an pian khal a bangaw thluh hai lo.

[5] Mi hrekkhat in Grik kutnganca 5000 lenglo um mi hi pakhat hman a bangaw mi an um lo an ti `heu. Hihi uar luan tuk thu (overstatement) a si, ziangahtile zovek mithiam hmanin a zate ngaingaiih zohtawn (compared) thluhtu an um lo. A taktak ahcun a bangaw cekci mi (identical) khal an um ve. Kutnganca thu nasa zetih hliakhlaitu Wilbur Pickering in amah rori ih hmuahsuah mi ah bangaw thlepthlep an um thu hitin a ngan: “Down with carnards! In graduate school (theology) I was taught that no two MSS of the NT are identical in text. If we consider a book at a time, which I take to be the only reasonable demand, the statement is not true. Taking only the MSS that I myself have collated (copies in my possession), I have fourteen with an identical Text for Philemon, seventeen for 2 John, sixteen for 3 John, twelve for Jude, five for Titus and 2 Thessalonians, three for Galatians, Colossians and 1 Thessalonians, and two for Ephesians, Philippians, James and 2 Peter. As I collate more MSS these numbers can only go up. The shortest books have the highest scores because the copyists didn’t have time to get tired or bored. For all that, the care with which the monks did their work is impressive. I invite all who read this to join me in exposing this canard,” online at http://evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.com/. Cited in Jeffrey Khoo, The Bible Stands: Textual Reception or Textual Criticism? unpublished lecture note (Singapore: Far Eastern Bible College, 2008), 139.

[6] Hi zawnah Germany ram hi, Pathian ih phuansuakawknak Bible cu zumnak le nuncan thu ih tahawknak dik umsun le thuneitu sangbik a si timi, Bible ih dinhmun diktak, a laltohkham ihsin a hnukthlatu liberalism le rationalism (minung khawruahnak le fimnak rori thupibik ih rettu) rak keuhsuahnak bupi a si ti kha hngilh lo sehla, thil umdan kan hmuhfiang bet phah a zumum.

[7] Bruce M Metzger, The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption and Restoration, 2^nd ed (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1968), 119, 121. Hipa hi tulai mithiam tampi in an hlirso zet mi a si ih, hi a cabu khal hi Bible tlawng tampi ah textual criticism thu ih “standard” tluk deuhthaw hialih an hman zet mi a si. Saya Hre Kio tla cun hipai ca ngan mi A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament cu “Khuimi so a hmaisabik ih nganmi  . . . a si tiih an zingzoinak le cuai an thlaimi pawl fianternak ah cabu an ngan mi lakih a `ha bikmi” a ti. Stephen Hre Kio, Khristian Thupom (Yangon: Falam Baptist Pawlkom, 2006), 13, footnote. Asinan Metzger hi mithiam pakhat cu si khal sehla, rinsan a tlak ngaingai lo mi a si. ~himnak ah, 1 John 5:7 thu thawn pehparin, Erasmus in Textus Receptus a rak suah laiah, hi Bible cang tel mi Grik kutnganca pakhat hman a neih lo ruangah a rak telh lo lawk nan, lehhnuah hi Bible cang tel mi Grik kutnganca pakhat te sarsuah a si ahcun telh leh dingin thu a rak kam; cule cuvek kutnganca cu run hmuhsuah a si – asilole a telh ding duh tuk ruangah midang in an tuah hrim, tiin thuanthu a phuah. Hihi mi hrekkhat cun thudik ah an ruat ih, an aupi ciamco. Curuangah santhar Bible tampi ah, Falam Baibal telin, hi cang hi an telh lo. Asinan Erasmus thuhla thei zettu (Erasmian expert) Leiden University ih Henk J de Jonge in a ca ngan mi “Erasmus and the Comma Johanneum” timi ah Metzger ih thuanthu phuah mi hin sirhsan zianghman a neih lo thu fiang tukin a run ngan. Curuangah Metzger in lehhnuih a suahsal mi 3<sup>rd</sup> edition ahcun a cabu sungah a rem duh lo nan footnote (p 291) ah Erasmus le John 5:7 thu hi “rem a `ul ding” (needs to be corrected) tiin a rak tisual thu a run phuang. Cf Jeffrey Khoo, “Bruce Metzger and the Curse of Textual Criticism,” The Burning Bush 15/1 (January 2009): 41-45.

[8] Ibid, 124.

[9] Cf J Harold Greenlee, Introduction to New Testament Textual Criticism (Grand Rapids: Wm B Eerdmans, 1964), 77. Westcott le Hort cun “intrinsic probability,” “transcriptional probability” tivek theory an phuah. Asinan hi theorypawl hi zumhmang thil (pure guesswork), thil um taktak mi in a lungkimpi lo mi an si.

[10] A pahnihnak khal hi a dik mi a si thotho lo. Asinan hi thu cu Saya Hre Kio in a ngan tel lo ruangah hi ca ah kan dai tel lo ding.

[11] An zumdan hitin an ngan: “. . . it is our belief (1) that readings of aB should be accepted as the true readings until strong internal evidence is found to the contrary, and (2) that no readings of aB can safely be rejected absolutely, . . . especially where they receive no support from Versions or Fathers.” B F Westcott and F J A Hort, Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1882), 225. Cited by George Skariah, The Biblical Doctrine of the Perfect Preservation of the Holy Scriptures, ThD dissertation (Singapore: Far Eastern Bible College, 2005), 37.

[12] David Otis Fuller, ed, Which Bible? (Grand Rapids: Institute For Biblical Textual Studies, 1990), 2.

[13] John William Burgon, The Causes of the Corruption of the Traditional Text, cited in D A Waite, A Brief Summary of the Causes of the Corrupton of the Traditional Text (Collingswood NJ: The Bible for Today Press, 1997), 3.

[14] Kurt Aland, "The Significance of the Papyri for Progress in New Testament Research," The Bible in Modern Scholarship, ed J Philip Hyatt, 333, cited in Fuller, Which Bible?, 27, footnote.

[15] G W Anderson, What Today's Christian Needs to Know About the Greek New Testament (London: Trinitarian Bible Society, 1994), 4.

[16] John William Burgon, The Revision Revised: A Refutation of Westcott and Hort’s False Greek Text and Theory (Collingswood: Dean Burgon Society Press, reprinted, nd), 8-10.

[17] Cited by Edward F Hills, “The Magnificent Burgon” in Which Bible? ed, Fuller, 92.

[18] Amai ngandan vek cekci cun, “a B . . . are . . . most scandalously corrupt copies extant: – exhibit the most shamefully mutilated texts which are anywhere to be met with: – have become by whatever process (for their history is unknown), the despositories of the largest amount of fabricated readings, ancient blunders, and intentional preservations of Truth: – which are discoverable in any known copies of the Word of God.” Burgon, Revision Revised, 16.

[19] Cf Jeffrey Khoo, Kept Pure in All Ages: Recapturing the Authorised Version and the Doctrine of Providential Preservation (Singapore: Far Eastern Bible College Press, 2001), 49-51.

[20] Burgon, Revision Revised, 16.

[21] Cited by D A Waite, Defending the King James Bible: A Fourfold Superiority (Collingswood: The Bible For Today Press, 2002), 59.

[22] Burgon, Revision Revised, 34-6.

[23] Cited in Khoo, Kept Pure, 67-68.

[24] J A Moorman, 8,000 Differences Between the NT Greek Words of the King James Bible and the Modern Versions (Collingswood: The Bible For Today, 2006).

[25]Kutnganca thuanthu zoh tikah, Textus Receptus asilole Traditional Text ti khalih kawh mi rung suahnak Byzantine texts pawl hin kutnganca phun dang pawl (Alexandrian, Western tvk) lakah khuahlan lai ihsin lawn theih lo mi dinhmun, asilole nehnak laltohkham an rak co tihi el theih loih a lang mi a si. 1800s laiih Textus Receptus rak hua zettu Westcott le Hort cun hi thu hi a simfiang ngaihnak an theih lo ruangah “Syrian Recension” asilole “Lucan Recension” timi thuanthu an phuah. Kum zabi 4^nk ah Antioch asilole Antioch kiangah kawhhran hruaitu palepawl tawnkhawmawknak an nei ih, cui `um ah kutnganca dang pawl cu hnawl thluhin Textus Receptus lungkimpitu Byzantine kutngancapawl lawng an pawm ih kawhhran ih hman ding “official text” ah an can; hi ruangah hin a si tui san ih um lai kutnganca tamsawn khi Byzantine texts an sinak, tiah an ti. Asinan hi thuanthu ih thubuai um mi cu, kawhhran thuanthu ngankhumnak khui hmanah hivek a rak um dah thu ngan mi a um lo, timi hi a si. ~awng dangin kan sim asile, hi thuanthu hin “historical evidence” a tlasam, tinak a si. Hihi thil danglam zet cu a si ding, ziangahtile kawhhran palepawlin cutlukih a thupi mi (ziangahtile Khristiannak ah Bible hnakih thupi a um lo) thu an rak rel si sehla, ngankhumnak (record) um hrimhrim dingih mawi a si, a san cu kawhhran ih thupi hlapi dang relkhawm mipawl ngankhum ih an um thluh ruangah. Hivek nemhngettu nei lo thuanthu an rak phuahnak hi Textus Receptus huatnak le evidence hlawhsam zet cingih Alexandrian kutnganca (Aleph, B tipawl) hramhram ih `an an duh ruangah siin a lang. Curuangah santhar mithiam tampi cun hi zawnah Westcott le Hort ih thu hi an pawmpi thei nawn lo. Burgon tla cun hi thuanthu hi Hort ih “mang man mi” men a si, a ti phah hngehnge.

[26] A dang pahnih cu: (1) Western text type, le (2) Cesarean text type an si.

[27] Waite, Defending the King James Bible, 56.

[28] Ibid, 56.

[29] Ibid, 56-58.

[30] Watts, 21.

[31] Edward Miller, “The Antiquity of the Traditional Text” in John William Burgon, The Traditional Text of the Holy Gospels Vindicated and Established (London: George Bell and Sons, 1896), 121. Cited in Watts, 22.

[32] “Phahphah” ka tinak cu, 1800s hnu lam khalah a hmanglotu an tam tuk lai ruangah a si. Textus Receptus hi Tirhthlahpawl san ihsin tui san tiang hman peh vivo a si thu D A Waite in “historical evidences” 37 a pe. Cf Waite, Defending the King James Bible, 44-48.

[33] Edward F Hills, Believing Bible Study, 2^nd ed (Des Moines IA: Christian Research Press, 1984), 34.

[34] The Revisers and the Greek Text of the NT by Two Members of the NT Company, 11, 12, cited in The Divine Original (London: Trinitarion Bible Society, nd), 9. Paranthesis added.

[35] Ibid.

[36] Edward Freer Hills hi America ram ih tlawng hminthangbik lakih tel Yale University ihsin “Latin and Phi Beta Kappa” dinhmun tiangih degree rak ngahtu a si lawng si loin, Bible tlawng ih ThM a ngah hnuah “New Testament text criticism” rori zirin ThD tiang Harvard ih rak ngahtu a si. “Latin and Phi Beta Kappa” timi cu kan `awng cun “thiam filawr cungcuang” ti tluk a si ih, rampi in a tlawngkainak hmuahhmuah cawm thluh ding tiangih an duh mi tinak a si.

[37] Edward F Hills, The King James Version Defended (Des Moines IA: Christian Research Press, 1984), 146-7. Hills in hi thu hi Grik kutnganca hrekkhat, Bible leh hmaisat mi hrekkhat le kawhhran palepawl hrekkhat ih an telhlonak san kimcang deuhin 147-150 ah a simfiang.

[38] Ibid, 148.

[39] Cited in Ibid, 149.

[40] Ibid, 200-1.

[41] Metzger, 101-2.

[42] Hills, KJV Defended, 209.

[43] Khoo, Kept Pure, 87.

[44] Ibid. 1 John 5:7-8 thu thukdeuh ih hliakhlai bet duhtu hrangah 1 John 5:7-8 humnak cabu `ha maksak cu, Michael Maynard, A History of the Debate Over 1 John 5:7-8 (Tempe AZ: Comma Publications, 1995) a si.

[45] Kutnganca “tuan” tiih mi hrekkhat ih an hlirsoh zet mi Codex Vaticanus cu Pope ih library sungih hman loih rak um ringring mi a si; Codex Sinaiticus cu St Catherine phungki tlawng hnawmpung sung ihsin Tischendorf in a sar mi a si. An pahnihin kum 1800s hnu lam lawngih mipi hmaiih rung lang fang an si; cui hlan an thuanthu theih a si lo, rak hman mi an si fawn lo. Cf Burgon, Revision Revised, 319, 342-3; David W Daniels, Answer to Your Bible Version Questions (Ontario: Chick Publications, 2003), 145-55; Biak Lawm Thang, “Codex Sinaiticus (a) le Codex Vaticanus (B),” Sola Scriptura (April 2005): 13-24.

[46] Hills, Believing Bible Study, 192-3.

[47] Cited in Ibid, 199.

[48] UBSGNT, 660.

[49] UBSGNT, 538.

[50] Hills, Believing Bible Study, 97.

[51] “Majority Text” timi cu, Zane C Hodges le Arthur L Fastad ih suah mi, The Greek New Testament According to the Majority Text, 2^nd ed (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1985) Grik Bible a si.

[52] UBSGNT, 541.

[53] Tigran Aivazian, ed, H KAINH DIAQHKH, The New Covenant: The Greek New Testament, Stephanus 1550 Received Text with 7798 Textual Variant Notes, Containing All the Readings of Four Printed Editions (London: Bibles.org.uk, 2005), 434.

[54] Hills, Believing Bible Study, 191.

[55] Ibid, 189.

[56] Ibid.

[57] Hills, Believing Bible Study, 193.

[58] Hills, Believing Bible Study, 194.

[59] C P Hallihan, The Authorised Version: A Wonderful and Unfinished History (London: Trinitarian Bible Society, 2010), 43.

[60] Mirang `awng cun hitin a si: “That a translation be made of the whole Bible, as consonant as can be to the original Hebrew and Greek; . . .” Laurence M Vance, A Brief History of English Bible Translations (Pensacola: Vance Publications, 1993), 25.

[61] Ibid, 25-27.

[62] Jeffrey Khoo, KJV Questions & Answers (Singapore: Bible Witness Literature Ministry, 2003), 13.

[63] Ibid, 5.

[64] Waite, Defending the KJB, 238.

[65] Scrivener ih ngandan cekci cu: “It is well known to Biblical scholars that the Apocrypha received very inadequate attention from the revisers of 1611 and their predecessors, . . .” Cited in Khoo, KJV Q&A, 14.

[66] Cf Jeffrey Khoo, “Non-Ruckmanite Answers to Anti-KJV Questions,” The Burning Bush 17/1 (January 2011): 18-41.

[67] Hi thulu hnuaiih thu hi, tui `um thu ih laimu ngaingai a si lo ruangah a tawizawng te lawngin ngan a si. A `ul a si le, kimcang deuhin kan ngan leh ding.

THUBET

112TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION

H. CON. RES. 38

Recognizing the 400th anniversary of the publication of

the King James Version of the Bible.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 12, 2011

Mr. ADERHOLT (for himself and Mr. RAHALL) submitted

the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Recognizing the 400th anniversary of the publication of

the King James Version of the Bible.

Whereas the King James Version of the Bible was the first

English language Bible to be published in the United States;

Whereas the King James Bible, also called the Authorized

Version, has made a unique contribution in shaping the English

language, including hundreds of common everyday expressions;

Whereas the language of the King James Bible has entered into the very culture of the United States through a myriad of poetry, speeches, sermons, music, songs, and literature;

Whereas the teachings of the Scriptures, particularly read from the King James Scriptures, have inspired concepts of civil

government contained in our founding documents, and subsequent laws;

Whereas public officials on all levels of governments, including presidents, have taken their oath of office with the King James Bible;

Whereas many national leaders, have paid tribute to the

surpassing influence of the Bible in the United States development, among them the words of Democratic President Andrew Jackson, calling it ‘‘the rock upon which our republic rests’’;

Whereas Republican President Ronald Reagan also said of the King James Bible, ‘‘Indeed, it is an incontrovertible fact that all the complex and horrendous questions confronting us at home and worldwide have their answer in that single book’’;

Whereas in the history of the United States, the King James

Bible has played a significant role in the education of countless

individuals, families, and societies;

Whereas the King James Bible, the most printed and widely

distributed work in history, is now in its 400th year of publication;

Whereas in 2011, the 400th anniversary of publishing the King James Bible will be celebrated in churches, public events, and conferences with further research, discussions, speeches, and sermons; and

Whereas the King James Bible’s relevance and contributions continue to formatively influence the United States: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

concurring), That Congress—

(1) recognizes the 400th anniversary of the Authorized King

James Version of the Bible being published;

(2) recognizes its lasting influence on countless families,

individuals, and institutions in the United States; and

(3) expresses its gratitude for the influence it has bestowed upon

the United States.