The Westcott-Hort Controversy Are there some persons who really should not be Bible Translators? Immediately the response would be, certainly, although while everyone is assured that some should not handle the scriptures, who should or should not divides widely. Traditionalists and unbelievers generally agree that only a certain order of Bible Scholars should be able to translate the Greek and Hebrew, which most mistakenly think is one greek and hebrew text. There are actually 4 main groups of texts, with lesser important groups as well. The two which receive the most attention today are: the TEXTUS RECEPTUS (the Ben Chaim OT and the Erasmus Greek) and the NESTLE-ALAND1 (under other names, but the Westcott-Hort collation and the Stuttgard OT) The Textus Receptus was collated by Erasmus(1466-1536)who although an ordained Catholic Monk found himself at odds constantly with the Holy See and the Protestants; he was a profound critic of monastic life as well. Noting differences in the Latin Vulgate of Jerome and the bible study notes of V..., a Waldensian, he began to collate every known existing piece of manuscript evidence. He was acknowledged then and now as the premiere Greek scholar of his day, and he ended with over 5000 pieces of manuscript evidence including, papyrii, bibles, hymnals, lexicons, and other evidences collected over the centuries. The result was the Textus Receptus. Others such as Eliezer and Stephanas followed with editions. The King James Bible is built upon this foundation with the Ben Chayiim Hebrew. Tyndale translated the Bible first into English, using Erasmus' Greek text. The King James has about a 90% correlation with the texts of Tyndale. The Textus Receptus remained the foundation of bible translation until the 1800s. In the latter half of the 19th century two Anglican Bishops , Westcott and Hort found favor in the Church of England to re-translate the Bible into "modern" English. This followed the discoveries of Tischendorf which we have discussed elsewhere. (Tischendorf) These men were far from evangelical believers. Dr. Gayle Riplinger in her text, New Age Versions notes that one of the mothers of these men, an evangelical believer wrote often of her fear over her son's eternal destination. While they were men esteemed in the Church of England, they were theologically distinct from the Anglican who translated the King James. Neither Westcott nor Hort saw the Bible as the inerrant Word of God. Among other problems with the men who translated the "New Greek" was their exclusion of any who favored the traditional text. While an excellent scholar should be able to approach information with absolute objectivity, it is rarely done: all bring either manifest or subliminal prejudice to the work at hand: it is the true scholar's task to arrest prejudice and discover. It is unlikely these two men were untainted by their beliefs. The Beliefs of Westcott & Hort Westcott & Hort believed in Heaven only as a State, not a literal place. (state-of-mind heaven is popular among minimal believers.) Westcott was Post-Millenial, and Hort appears amillenial with no literal return of Christ promised: " There is nothing in either this passage or others on the same subject, apart from the figurative language of Thess., to show that the REVELATION here spoken of is to be limited to a sudden PRETERNATURAL THEOPHANY. it may be a LONG AND VARYING PROCESS, though ending in a climax2 Westcott and Hort both belonged to the "Ghostly Guild", a society for investigating paranormal phenomena. This society evolved into the Society for Psychical Research, a leading New Age Advocacy, which exists for the same purposes today. Both participated in seances. Although their membership in the Ghostly Guild was not lifelong, Hort's son refers to him as a spiritualist. This was of course, even at the time diametrically opposed to Anglican doctrine. Westcott and Hort were at least for a time part of Mme. Blavatsky's inner circle: Blavatsky founded Theosophy, a resurgence of ancient Gnosticism, and interpreted extraneous non-canonical books as well. She also re-interpreted and re-translated the New Testament to fit with her more occultic beliefs. Her inner circle also include Arthur Conan Doyle, the novelist. Westcott & Hort did not believe in traditional doctrinal inerrancy of the scriptures. Both were drinkers, not forbidden in the Church of England, but one even promoted beer in an advertisement.3 KJV TOPIC SELECTION II. THE TRANSMISSION OF TWO BIBLES III. FIDEISM & THE BIBLE FOR THE COMMON MAN: SOLA SCRIPTURA VS RATIONALE IV. TISCHENDORF AND THE "OLDEST AND MOST RELIABLE" SOURCES:CREDIBILITY V. THE GREEK AND THE HEBREW VI. THE VATICAN AND THE SCRIPTURES VII. THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN BIBLES"YOU SAY TOMATO...." OR ...? VIII. WESTCOTT, HORT, & BURGON: UNHOLY OR HOLY HANDS ON THE BIBLE? IX.DID GOD KEEP HIS WORD? THE ISSUE OF SOVEREIGNTY & PRESERVATION X. COMMON ARGUMENTS: EASIER TO READ? Back to Home Next Study FOOTNOTES 1 The "Nestle-Aland" is technically just the Greek, but the Stuttgart and the Nestle go together. Nestle-Aland and subsequent versions, are essentially the WESTCOTT-HORT translations, with the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia / R. Kittel, ed. ; fully rev., K. Elliger and W. Rudolph, eds. 2nd corrected ed / W. Rudolph and HP Rüger, written by the man who Martin Buber said made "anti-Semitism theologically acceptable". 2Cited in Waite, D.A. Heresies of Westcott & Hort: