Watch this expisode on Rumble: https://rumble.com/v5f8dtv-new-testament-three-different-sources.html
When you seek wisdom and knowledge, like I have, you come into information that shatters your reality. For Christians who are not interested in taking things apart and questioning the narrative, then sticking your head in the Bible is your best bet. Do not stray. The reason is, it is better to enter the kingdom of heaven ignorant than to stumble across information that could lead you astray. For the sake of my own sanity and accountability, I need a video that explains this biblically so if anyone decides to call me a false prophet or heretic, I can refer them to this video. Let’s get things straight. I do not want to be a false prophet or heretic. I never would dream of steering people away from the Bible. I also would feel miserable if I steered someone away from Jesus Christ based on following any evidence that I have uncovered. That would bring me shame. The only reason why I became a pastor was to hold myself accountable to my actions. Any time a choice comes up, I weigh that on, would a pastor do this? It helps me, not get closer to god, but hold myself in any contempt of what the flesh wants. It has brought me closer to god however.
I can’t help but to look for data and evidence. This goes against the grain of faith but if one searches long enough, they do find evidence of a creator. But that’s not what this video is about. It’s about me trying to explain why I came to the place I am at. So you can see the reasoning behind my decision to not trust the bible as 100% the word of god. What I just said is a trigger for most. Their conditioning turns on and they tune out. I decided when I asked for a double portion of wisdom from God, that I would not abuse it. Especailly for gain, which believe me, it would be easy to start a cult from my teachings. I don’t want that. I am interested in the truth as close as we can come to it, even though it is subjective, which means it is based on personal opinions and feelings rather than on facts. I never wanted to become a pastor nor did I want to go live every night talking about consipracy therories and religion. But something inside me, call it the holy ghost or whatever, continues to drive me towards this show. So, I am going to explain this as close to my recollection as I can. It pains me deeply that what I found is the truth even in academia. But, I cannot keep silent on it because the bible does say the truth will make you free. I want nothing but freedom.
When I started researching the origins of the new testament, I did not know that there were three different versions of it. I asked Gemini AI and it says that is a misconception. The Alexandrian and Antiochene textual traditions of the New Testament are distinct. The “Sheppard’s Version” is not a recognized term in biblical studies. But my research indicates there are three and they all differ. The Vulgate latin version according to academia says St. Jerome wrote it with help of course. But they discount the found scrolls in Alexandria according to the works of Clement of Alexandria. Called The Alexandrian Codices. Clement was supposedly appointed to be the Bishop of Rome by the apostle Peter, and there is some minor controversy as to whether Clement is considered the first, second, or third Pope (Linus and Anacletus are the other two church leaders who may hold those distinctions). Clement also makes an allusion to the legendary phoenix to make a point about his belief in the resurrection. He gives a full description of the mythical creature including its long life, burial nest, and resurrection as a worm. We know of many secret societies that use this phoenix with one or two heads. To put God in with a Phoenix seems weird to me.
Origen was a prominent Christian theologian and philosopher who lived in the 3rd century AD. He is considered one of the most influential figures in the history of early Christianity.
Born in Alexandria, Egypt, Origen received a rigorous education in Greek philosophy and literature. He was deeply committed to his faith and became a prolific writer and teacher. Origen’s works covered a wide range of theological topics, including the nature of God, the Trinity, Christology, and the interpretation of Scripture.
One of Origen’s most significant contributions was his development of allegorical interpretation. He believed that the Bible contained multiple levels of meaning, both literal and spiritual. By using allegorical methods, Origen sought to uncover the deeper, hidden truths within the Scriptures.
Despite his immense influence, Origen’s teachings were not without controversy. His allegorical interpretations were sometimes criticized for being overly speculative, and he was accused of heresy by some Church leaders. However, his work continued to be studied and admired for centuries to come.
Origen’s legacy is still felt today. His theological insights and methods of biblical interpretation have had a profound impact on the development of Christian thought. In the year 400, Theophilus summoned a council in Alexandria, which condemned Origen and all his followers as heretics for having taught that God was incorporeal, which they decreed contradicted the only true and orthodox position, which was that God had a literal, physical body resembling that of a human. It is true that Origen had a few doctrinal problems, the greatest being that he believed in what is known as the apokatastasis, the notion that even the damned eventually will be reconciled to God and that everyone will end up in heaven, with hell eternally empty. Later, Origen succeeded in converting a wealthy man named Ambrose from Valentinian Gnosticism to orthodox Christianity. Ambrose was so impressed by the young scholar that he gave Origen a house, a secretary, seven stenographers, a crew of copyists and calligraphers, and paid for all of his writings to be published.
Origen found a scroll called the Shepherd of Hermas which was written by the first Roman Christian. Details around the origins of this text are notoriously hard to pin down. Surviving manuscripts and textual evidence suggest that the work was written in two or three sections, though probably over a short period of time. We don’t know if this indicates the influence of one, two or three contributors, but the idea that this was the work of a single author remains the favoured view. Who this author was, however, is a different question. The third-century theologian, Origen, suggested this Hermas was the same Hermas mentioned by Paul in Romans 16:14, but the date of the work makes such a suggestion improbable. The second-century Muratorian Canon (one of the very earliest detailed lists of New Testament books, c. AD 180) suggests Hermas was the brother of Pius, the then bishop of Rome, but aside from this reference we lack any firm evidence. As to the date, mentions in the work of the Greek Bishop Irenaeus (c. AD 180) and the Muratorian Canon indicate circulation in the late second century, and the link to Pius gives us a workable date between AD 140 and AD 154. Though some suggest dates as early as AD 70/80, the mid-second century seems most plausible. Despite little autobiographical information in The Shepherd itself, there is a clear link between the text and Rome. It’s apparent that the author lived and counted himself a member of the church there.
Much like the writings of Clement, Tertullian or Justin Martyr, The Shepherd of Hermas never claims to be Scripture itself. This was another early Christian work seeking to help believers better understand the God of the Bible, but it didn’t claim to be a part of that Bible itself. Much like great works of theology or discipleship today, we enjoy and appreciate them, but don’t call for their inclusion in our Bibles. Should we read The Shepherd today? It is certainly a confusing text, one that requires attention and at times, a fair amount of hard work. But it is equally rewarding. The author has much to say on the uniqueness and greatness of God, and on topics such as forgiveness and the challenge of living out the Christian life. Given the at times bizarre nature of Hermas’s visions and parables, perhaps the central section, the commandments, would be the best place to start (or at least to linger).
The Shepherd is not a perfect work, but it can be a helpful one. Reading it offers us valuable insight into the world of the early church. We see some of the theological questions, challenges and concerns these Christians would have faced, and the visual and literary imagery that pervaded their world. As with any early Christian text, it can require a bit of effort to work through, but it is part of a Christian historical tradition that at its best points us back to the God at the centre of that history.
Origen’s work claims there are three different translations of the new testament. Alexandria, Antioch and The Shepherd’s versions.
There are approximately 5,800 Greek manuscripts of the New Testament. In addition, there are 10,000 Latin manuscripts, and 9,300 manuscripts in other languages. Out of all this mess, Origen was able to find 3 locations. Let’s explore those areas.
Alexandria New Testamant
The Alexandrian text-type is one of the primary textual traditions used in the study and transmission of the New Testament. It is named after the city of Alexandria, Egypt, where many of the earliest manuscripts associated with this tradition were found.
Key characteristics of the Alexandrian text-type include:
Early manuscripts: Many of the earliest known New Testament manuscripts, such as Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus, belong to this text-type.
Western influence: While the Alexandrian text-type is primarily associated with Alexandria, it also reflects some Western influences, particularly in the Gospels.
Accuracy: The Alexandrian text-type is generally considered to be more accurate and closer to the original text than other textual traditions.
Influence on later translations: The Alexandrian text-type has had a significant influence on later translations of the New Testament, including the Revised Standard Version and the New Revised Standard Version.
Important to note: The Alexandrian text-type is not a single, unified text but rather a family of related texts that share common characteristics. The exact nature of the relationship between these texts is a subject of ongoing scholarly debate.
While there is no single “Alexandria New Testament” as a physical document, the Alexandrian text-type is a vital resource for understanding the transmission and interpretation of the New Testament.
Antioch New Testament
The Antioch Text-Type: A New Testament Textual Tradition
The Antioch text-type is another significant textual tradition of the New Testament. It is named after the city of Antioch, Syria, a major center of early Christianity.
Key characteristics of the Antioch text-type include:
Western influence: The Antioch text-type is heavily influenced by the Western text-type, another major textual tradition. This is particularly evident in the Gospels.
Later manuscripts: While the Alexandrian text-type is associated with early manuscripts, the Antioch text-type is often found in later manuscripts.
Controversy: The Antioch text-type has been the subject of much controversy among scholars. Some argue that it represents a distinct textual tradition, while others contend that it is simply a variant of the Western text-type.
Influence on translations: The Antioch text-type has had a lesser influence on modern translations of the New Testament compared to the Alexandrian and Byzantine text-types.
Shepherd’s New Testament
The Shepherd text-type is a relatively minor textual tradition of the New Testament. It is named after the Shepherd of Hermas, a second-century Christian work that has been preserved in various textual forms.
Key characteristics of the Shepherd text-type include:
Limited influence: The Shepherd text-type has had a limited influence on the overall transmission of the New Testament.
Western connections: It is often associated with the Western text-type, suggesting a possible connection between the two.
Specialized use: The Shepherd text-type is primarily used in the study of the Shepherd of Hermas itself and has less relevance to the overall textual criticism of the New Testament.
Scholars argue as to which of the three versions of the New Testament is canon. Origen is mostly considered a heretic because he found inconsistencies in the Alexandria and Antioch version claiming an angry God without remorse. He points out that the Shepherd’s writings, although not canon and considered by the church to be opinion, Origen may have compared the Shepherd to other biblical texts, particularly those that dealt with similar themes or motifs. This could have led him to draw parallels or distinctions between the Shepherd and canonical scripture.
It is not well known in the Christian community that Origen studied all three versions. In Alexandria, at the time of his work, there were scrolls everywhere that he searched and studied which led his philosphy of a kind god who shows mercy to the weak.
Origen’s understanding of God was complex and multifaceted. As a prominent early Christian theologian, he developed a rich and nuanced theology that drew on both Greek philosophy and biblical revelation.
Here are some key aspects of Origen’s understanding of God:
- Unity and Trinity: Origen affirmed the unity of God while also acknowledging the divine Persons of the Trinity—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. He believed that these three Persons were distinct yet inseparable aspects of the one divine essence.
- Immateriality and Transcendence: Origen emphasized God’s immaterial and transcendent nature. He believed that God was beyond the limitations of the physical world and could not be fully comprehended by human reason.
- Goodness and Love: Origen viewed God as the ultimate source of goodness and love. He believed that God’s love for creation was the driving force behind the universe and that humanity’s ultimate purpose was to participate in this divine love.
- Apophatic Theology: Origen employed apophatic theology, which emphasizes what God is not rather than what God is. He believed that human language was inadequate to fully describe God’s nature and that the best approach was to speak negatively about God, emphasizing God’s transcendence and mystery. Speaking negatively doesn’t mean to blaspheme or put down. He focuses on what God doesn’t say or do to get a better understanding of him.
Origen’s understanding of God was influenced by his Platonic philosophy and his desire to reconcile Christian theology with Greek thought. His views were not universally accepted within the early Church, and some of his ideas were later condemned as heresy. However, his contributions to Christian theology continue to be studied and debated by scholars today.
Platonic philosophy is a school of thought founded by the ancient Greek philosopher Plato. It is characterized by its emphasis on the ideal, the eternal, and the transcendent.
Here are some key concepts of Platonic philosophy:
- Theory of Forms: Plato proposed that the physical world we perceive is a mere shadow of a higher reality, the world of Forms. These Forms are eternal, perfect, and unchanging ideas that serve as models for the objects in our world.
- Dualism: Plato believed in a dualistic view of reality, distinguishing between the material world and the spiritual world. The material world is imperfect and temporary, while the spiritual world is eternal and perfect.
- Knowledge and Truth: Plato argued that true knowledge comes from understanding the Forms, not from sensory experience. He believed that the soul has innate knowledge of the Forms, which can be accessed through philosophical inquiry.
- Ethics and Virtue: Plato developed a theory of ethics based on the idea of the Good. He believed that the Good is the highest form and that living a virtuous life involves seeking to align oneself with the Good.
Platonic philosophy has had a profound influence on Western thought and has been studied and debated for centuries. It continues to be relevant today, particularly in fields such as philosophy, metaphysics, and ethics.
No, the search for knowledge does not always cross paths with pagan philosophy. While many ancient philosophies, including those of Greece and Rome, were often labeled “pagan” by later Christians, the pursuit of knowledge is a universal human endeavor that transcends religious or cultural boundaries.
Here are some examples of how the search for knowledge can be independent of pagan philosophy:
- Scientific inquiry: Scientific inquiry is based on observation, experimentation, and evidence. It is a systematic approach to understanding the natural world that is distinct from philosophical speculation.
- Religious traditions: Many religious traditions, such as Buddhism, Hinduism, and Islam, have developed sophisticated systems of knowledge and philosophy that are distinct from pagan thought.
- Indigenous knowledge: Indigenous peoples around the world have developed deep knowledge of their environments and cultures, which is often passed down through oral traditions and practices.
While pagan philosophy has undoubtedly influenced Western thought, it is important to recognize that it is not the only source of knowledge or wisdom. The search for knowledge is a complex and multifaceted human endeavor that can take many forms and be informed by a variety of sources.
The Catholic Church has a complex and nuanced view of Origen. While he is considered one of the most influential theologians of the early Church, his teachings have also been the subject of controversy and condemnation.
Here are some key points about the Catholic Church’s view of Origen:
- Early Church Father: Origen is widely recognized as one of the greatest Fathers of the Church. His writings have had a profound influence on the development of Christian theology.
- Controversial Teachings: However, Origen’s teachings on certain topics, such as the nature of sin, the afterlife, and the ultimate fate of the universe, were considered heretical by some early Church authorities.
- Condemnation: In the 6th century, the Second Council of Constantinople condemned several of Origen’s teachings, including his belief in the ultimate restoration of all things, known as “apocatastasis.”
- Rehabilitation: In more recent times, there has been a movement to rehabilitate Origen’s reputation within the Catholic Church. Some theologians argue that his teachings were misunderstood or misinterpreted by his critics.
Overall, the Catholic Church’s view of Origen is one of respect and admiration, tempered by a recognition of the controversial aspects of his theology. While his teachings are not officially endorsed by the Church, they continue to be studied and debated by scholars and theologians.
Our greatest problem that we face as the human species, is time. All it takes is 100 years to forget history. Yes, the Catholic Church played a significant role in changing the 13-month Julian calendar to the 12-month Gregorian calendar.
The Julian calendar, introduced by Julius Caesar in 46 BCE, had a 13-month year with an additional day every four years. Over time, this led to a gradual shift in the alignment between the solar year and the calendar year, causing the equinoxes and solstices to occur on incorrect dates.
In the late 16th century, Pope Gregory XIII, with the advice of astronomers, introduced the Gregorian calendar as a reform of the Julian calendar. The Gregorian calendar eliminated the 13th month, adjusted the leap year rules, and introduced a few other changes to bring the calendar back into alignment with the solar year.
While the Gregorian calendar was initially met with resistance in some parts of Europe, it eventually became the standard calendar used throughout the Western world. The Catholic Church’s role in promoting the Gregorian calendar was significant, as it was adopted by many Catholic countries and influenced the adoption of the calendar in other regions.
This isn’t common knowledge anymore. One must study history to find the changes that have been made to it. The example of the Catholic church changing time offers a school of thought. If they can change time, can they change scripture? They played an enormous role in choosing one of 3 new testmanent writings. Especially when they formed the septuigent.
The Septuagint is a Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, made in the 3rd century BCE. The exact circumstances of its creation are not entirely clear, but it is generally believed to have been a joint effort by Jewish scholars in Alexandria, Egypt.
There is no single person who can be credited with “finding” the Septuagint. It was a collective effort that took place over time. However, there are a few key figures who are associated with its creation:
- Philo of Alexandria: A Jewish philosopher who lived in Alexandria during the 1st century CE. Philo often cited the Septuagint in his writings, indicating that it was already in use during his time.
- Origen: A Christian theologian who lived in the 3rd century CE. Origen compiled a monumental work known as the Hexapla, which included the Hebrew text of the Bible, three Greek translations (including the Septuagint), and two other versions. Origen’s work helped to preserve and popularize the Septuagint.
While there is no single “finder” of the Septuagint, these and other scholars played important roles in its creation and preservation. This means the Catholic church chose their own way for the canon bypassing a lot of Origen’s work. The Catholic church chose much of his work Hexapla for the old testament but bypassed anything he worked on for the New Testament.
My argument is something happened around the year 300 AD and evidence seemed to be collected, hidden and stored. This is right when the Roman Empire collapsed, ironically. The crisis resulted in such profound changes in the empire’s institutions, society, economic life, and religion that it is increasingly seen by most historians as defining the transition between the historical periods of classical antiquity and late antiquity. This is also the dawn of the dark ages where history seemed to be less documented. Historians have a very hard time finding any information between the year 300 and 1,000.
Pope Adrian IV was born Nicholas Breakspear around 1100 AD. This is when I believe the Breakspear family took control over the catholic church. Even though Adrian was an English Pope, with roots tracing back to England and Ireland, I do believe they changed their name from the Ghibellines which were the German Hohenstaufen dynasty. The catholic church started in 30 AD and it appears Constantine around the year 300 turned it upside down. In 325, Constantine, Emperor of Rome, made Christianity legal in the Roman Empire. I have loads of information on how this man changed history for the worse. That will come in the form of another podcast. My point throughout all this information is, every 100 years we lose the truth. We are told that God’s word stayed true, but which word? Alexandria’s which came from Egypt? Antioch which came from outside of Jeruselem? Or the Shepherd’s version which is in Italy?
We are told to trust the septuigent.
The Septuagint is a Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, primarily created in the 3rd century BCE in Alexandria, Egypt.It was commissioned by Ptolemy II Philadelphus, the ruler of the Ptolemaic Kingdom.
The process of creating the Septuagint was complex and involved several steps:
- Selection of translators: Ptolemy II assembled a group of Jewish scholars from Jerusalem to translate the Hebrew Bible into Greek. These translators were known as the “Seventy” (hence the name “Septuagint”).
- Division of labor: The translators were divided into groups of six, each responsible for translating a specific section of the Hebrew Bible.
- Translation and review: Each group worked independently to translate their assigned portion. Once completed,their translations were reviewed and compared to ensure consistency and accuracy.
- Finalization and approval: The final version of the Septuagint was approved by the Jewish community in Alexandria and presented to Ptolemy II.
The Septuagint played a crucial role in the spread of Judaism and Christianity. It made the Hebrew Bible accessible to a wider audience and facilitated the development of Greek-speaking Jewish communities.
Yes, there has been significant controversy surrounding the Septuagint. One of the most prominent debates revolves around its relationship to the Masoretic Text, which is the standard Hebrew text of the Old Testament.
Here are some key points of contention:
- Differences in text: The Septuagint often contains variations from the Masoretic Text, including additional verses,different wordings, and alternative readings. These differences have led to scholarly debates about which text is more accurate and reliable.
- Canonical implications: The Septuagint includes several additional books that are not found in the Masoretic Text,such as Tobit, Judith, and 1-4 Maccabees. This has raised questions about the canon of the Old Testament and which books are considered divinely inspired.
- Early Christian use: The Septuagint was the primary Old Testament text used by early Christians, and it influenced the development of the New Testament. This has led to debates about the extent to which the Septuagint’s interpretation of the Old Testament shaped the early Church’s understanding of Jesus and his mission.
Despite these controversies, the Septuagint remains an important and influential text in the history of Judaism and Christianity. It offers valuable insights into the interpretation and transmission of the Hebrew Bible, and its study continues to be a subject of ongoing scholarly research.
Fine, this is the old testament compromise. But the new testament has three sources and all are different. We are told to take the catholic’s word for it. I don’t. The septuigent also came together during the year 300. Something fishy happened around that time where the old testmament had to be secure via institutions and the new tastament has little information on it’s original manuscripts. The church tells us man passed down a lot of it from word of mouth. Ummm. no. The telephone experiment proves we can’t keep our stories straight so why beleive institutions do? And lastly, none of Paul’s original writings, whom wrote 2/3rds, were ever found, that we know of. Isn’t that strange? His ministry spanned right when the roman catholic church started. In fact, the year it started was the year Paul wen’t out ministering. Could the roman catholic church have started based on a lie? I have so many questions.
But it’s all of this information that I have gathered above that makes me quesiton what is given to us as sound doctrine. Origen proved there are hundreds of different versions of the new testament and 3 that are as close to the truth. I personally would appreciate reading and studying all of them instead of taking any institutions word for it. If this is still the devil’s playground, then we have to be just as wise as he is. This means we can’t blindly follow what is told to us as truth even when I have proved there are other versions of the bible that scholars do not talk about. The dead sea scrolls only backup the old testmanent and the septuigent which we can all agree on, but the New Testament was given to us as a trust us, we know what we are doing. Origen was outcasted for saying what I am saying. Why are we worshipping an angry god? I personally refuse to worship a schizophrenic god that changes his mind all the time and says he regrets making man. I am not leaving the faith. I am questioning dynasties, churches and institutions based on the fact that they could easily make a change and 100 years later, no one remembers except for scholars.
sources
Gemini AI
https://www.insightoftheking.com/the-alexandrian-codices.html
https://tyndalehouse.com/explore/articles/scripture-and-the-shepherd-of-hermas