Saturday, December 31, 2011

1ST TIMOTHY 3:16 = EARLY EVIDENCE OF TRI{3}NITARIAN TAMPERING WITH THE BIBLE


LATIN TEXT: “...Hoc tempore Macedonius Constantinopolitanus episcopus ab imperatore Anastasio dicitur expulsus, tanquam evangelia falsaret ; et maxime illud apostoli dictum, Quia apparuit in carne, justificatum in spiritu. Hunc enim mutasse, ubi habet qui […] hoc est […] monosyllabum Graecum, litera mutata in […] vertisse et fecisse […] id est, ut esset Deus, apparuit per carnem. Tanquam Nestorianus ergo culpatus expellitur per severum Monachum...” - (Breviary cap. 19, by Liberatus, in Vide Baronii Annal. 510. sect. 9, as quoted on Page 76, “An historical account of two notable corruptions of scripture: in a letter to a friend.” By Sir Isaac Newton, Printed by J. Green 1841.)
[FOOTNOTE 1]: Liberati Brev. Cap. Xix.
[FOOTNOTE 2]: Vide Baronii Annal. 510. sect. 9.

ALTERNATE LATIN TEXT: “...Hoc tempore Macedonius Constantinopolitanus episcopus ab imperatore Anastatio dicitur expulsus, tamquam evangelia falsasset, et maxime illud apostoli dictum, qui apparuit in carne, justficatus est in Spiritu. Hunc enim immutasse, obi habet ΟΣ, id est, QUI, monosyllabum Graecum; litera mutata O in Θ vertisse, et fecisse ΘΣ, id est, ut esset, DEUS apparuit per carnem. Tamquam Nestorianus ergo culpatus expellitur per Servum Monachum...” - (Breviary cap. 19, by Liberatus, Notes on Some Passages of Dogmatic Importance, Samuel P. Tregelles, An Account of the Printed Text of the Greek New Testament; with Remarks on its Revision upon Critical Principles (London, 1854), pages 226-236.)

LIBERATUS OF CARTHAGE (circa. 535 C.E.): “...During this time period, Macedonius of Constantinople, an overseer, is said to be driven out by the Emperor Anasta[s]i[us], as it were, for falsifying the Gospels, and in particular that Apostle's saying: “WHO appeared in the flesh, is justified in the Spirit.” This person, for instance, has revised the Greek monosyllable [in] ΟΣ, that is, “WHO,” ; changing the letter O [by] turning it into Θ, and so manufacturing it [to read] ΘΣ, that is, as being: “GOD appeared through flesh.” [And] in consequence is expelled [and] banished{*} as though a Nestorian through Serverus the monk...” -(Breviary cap. 19, by Liberatus, Translated by Matt13weedhacker 31/12/11, [Revised 6/01/12] from the Latin text as quoted on Page 76, “An historical account of two notable corruptions of scripture: in a letter to a friend.” Printed by J. Green 1841.)
[FOOTNOTE *]: Expanded meaning or definition.

 You will notice Sir Isaac Newtons text is purposely missing the Greek lettering compared to the other text. Sir Isaac filled in the letters and emended his text based upon the following text of Hinemarus which is a later quotation from the same writer - Liberatus.

LATIN TEXT: “...Quidam ipsas scripturas verbis illicitis imposturaverunt, sicut Macedonius Constantinopolitanus episcopus. Qui ab Anastasio Imperatore ideo a civitate expulsus legitur quoniam falsavit Evangelia, et illum Apostoli locum ubi dicit Quod apparuit in carne justificatum est in spiritu per cognationem græcarum literarum Ο et Θ hoc modo mutando falsavit. Vbi enim habuit Qui hoc est ΟΣ, monosyllabum græcum littera mutata Ο in Θ mutavit & fecit ΘΣ, id est ut esset, Deus apparuit per carnem. Quapropter tanquam Nestorianus fuit expulsus...” - (Hincmari Opusc. xxxiii. Cap. 22. quoting from Liberatus, Latin text as quoted on Pages 76-77, “An historical account of two notable corruptions of scripture: in a letter to a friend.” By Sir Isaac Newton, Printed by J. Green 1841.)

HINEMARUS OF RHEIMS (circa. 9Th CENTURY C.E.): “...At one time, that which is forbidden, was imposed upon the very words of scripture,{*} [by] a certain Macedonius, an overseer at Constantinople. Who, we read,{^} was expelled from the city, therefore, by Emperor Anastasius, because of falsifying the Gospels, and this [in] the place where the Apostle says: “WHO appeared in the flesh, is justified in the spirit.” Now - through the resembalance of the Greek letters he falsely changed Ο and Θ. For where it had “WHO,” that is ΟΣ, [by putting] in a Greek monosyllable changing the letter Ο [to] Θ, [by this] he manufactures and mutates it [into] ΘΣ, that is as being: “GOD appeared through flesh.” For this reason he was expelled as a Nestorian...” - (Hincmari Opusc. xxxiii. Cap. 22. quoting from Liberatus, Translated by Matt13weedhacker 31/12/11, from the Latin text as quoted on Pages 76-77, “An historical account of two notable corruptions of scripture: in a letter to a friend.” By Sir Isaac Newton, Printed by J. Green 1841.)
[FOOTNOTE *]: Ltn., ( illicitis imposturaverunt )
[FOOTNOTE ^]: Quoting Liberatus.

LATIN TEXT: “...Tanquam Nestorianus ergo culpatus expellitur per Severum Monachum...” - (Opusculum [Book] lv. c. 17. As quoted Page 76-77, “An historical account of two notable corruptions of scripture: in a letter to a friend.” By Sir Isaac Newton, Printed by J. Green 1841.)

HINEMARUS OF RHEIMS (circa. 9Th CENTURY C.E.): “...As [being] a Nestorian, [Ltn., ( culpatus )] was condemned as corrupt and disapproved,{*} therefore, he is expelled [by] that monk Severus...” - (Opusculum [Book] lv. c. 17. Translated by Matt13weedhacker 31/12/11, from the Latin text as quoted on Page 76-77, “An historical account of two notable corruptions of scripture: in a letter to a friend.” By Sir Isaac Newton, Printed by J. Green 1841.)
[FOOTNOTE *]: Expanded meaning or definition.

There are MSS problems with this account. 

The edition of Surius, and other subsequent editions have a different reading other than Gk., ( O, OC, ΟΣ ) they have instead Gk., ( Ω, ΩΣ ) “...as/like...” etc., as a conjectural emendation to the text.

As the following quotes point out:

SIR ISAAC NEWTON (circa. 1642-1727 C.E.): “...The Greek letters here omitted are in the second edition of Surius and in those of the Councels thus inserted: “...ubi habet ΟΣ hoc est qui monosyllabum græcum littera mutata Ο in Ω vertisse et fecisse ὩΣ, id est Vt esset Deus, apparuit per carnem...” But this interpolation was surely made by conjecture...” - (Pages 76-77, “An historical account of two notable corruptions of scripture: in a letter to a friend.” By Sir Isaac Newton, Printed by J. Green 1841.)

BENTLY (DYCE'S EDITION, iij. 366): “...The editions of Liberatus, instead of Θ and ΘΣ, have Ω and ΩΣ; but it appears from Baronius, that the manuscript had no Greek letters here at all, and that they were supplied by the first editor. I have not scrupled, therefore, to correct the place, as the Latin clearly requires: for DEUS answers to ΘΕΟΣ, and the Greek monosyllable ΟΣ is in opposition to that dissyllable. And so Hinemarus in his Opusculum, chap. xviij., where he cites the same story (without doubt out of Liberatus), has it plainly, as I have put it, O in Θ vertit et fecit ΘΣ." It is important to remember this fact out of Baronius, that the MS. of Liberatus had no Greek letters; for it has been cited again and again, as if it had been said that Macedonius changed ος into ως, and this has even been put in opposition to the testimony of Hinemar...” - (FOOTNOTE 4, “Notes on Some Passages of Dogmatic Importance, Samuel P. Tregelles, An Account of the Printed Text of the Greek New Testament; with Remarks on its Revision upon Critical Principles.” (London, 1854), pages 226-236.)

On this one I tend to agree with Sir Isaac Newton over the versions of Surius and others for the following ( simple ) reasons:

O into Θ
OC = “...WHO...” into ΘC = “...GOD...”
ΟΣ = “...WHO...” into ΘΣ = “...GOD...”

It is very easy to change the letter Omicron = Gk., ( O ) into the letter Theta = Gk., ( Θ ) by putting in a single monosyllable or dash ( - ).

But it is – NOT – easy to change the letter Omega = Gk., ( Ω ) into the letter Theta = Gk., ( Θ ) by putting in a single monosyllable or dash ( - ).

The letter Omega has, not only a gap, but feet like stylistics at the bottom that would have to be removed and the gap filled in, as well as putting in the dash or Greek monosyllable ( - ) if it was to be changed so that it looked like a Theta, in the Greek word THEOS.

This does not fit properly with the description of what was actually written in the quotations above.

Ω and ΩΣ = “...AS...” or “...LIKE...”

Therefore Gk., ( Ω, ΩΣ ) is far less likely to have been the original reading of Liberatus. As Sir Isaac comments:

SIR ISAAC NEWTON (circa. 1642-1727 C.E.): “...The interpolation therefore is inconsistent and spurious and seems to have been occasioned by straining to make out Nestorianism here...” - (Pages 76-77, “An historical account of two notable corruptions of scripture: in a letter to a friend.” By Sir Isaac Newton, Printed by J. Green 1841.)

It appears from the historical accounts that Macedonius was possibly framed in an unscrupulous attempt to get his position as "Overseer" or "Bishop" during an internal power struggle in the Church. And as the possible chief instigator or at least as a party of which was Emperor Anastasius himself, as shown in the following:

VICTOR TUNNENSIS (circa. 536-566 C.E.): “...Messala V.C. Cross. Constantinopoli, jubente Anastasio imperatore, sancta evangelia tamquam ab idiotis evangelistis composita, reprehenduntur et emendantur...” - (In Chronico or The Chronicon Of Victor. As quoted Page 76-77, “An historical account of two notable corruptions of scripture: in a letter to a friend.” By Sir Isaac Newton, Printed by J. Green 1841.)

VICTOR TUNNENSIS (circa. 536-566 C.E.): “...In the consulship of Messala, the holy Gospels, by the command of the Emperor Anastasius, were censured and corrected at Constantinople, as if written by evangelists that were idiots...” - (In Chronico or The Chronicon Of Victor. Page 76-77, “An historical account of two notable corruptions of scripture: in a letter to a friend.” Translated by Sir Isaac Newton, Printed by J. Green 1841.)

VICTOR TUNNENSIS (circa. 536-566 C.E.): “...In the Consulship of Messala, at Constantinople, the holy Gospels, by the order of Emperor Anastasius, were found fault with and corrected, as if the evangelists who composed them were idiots...” - (In Chronico or The Chronicon Of Victor. Translated by Matt13weedhacker 31/12/11, from the latin text as quoted Page 76-77, “An historical account of two notable corruptions of scripture: in a letter to a friend.” By Sir Isaac Newton, Printed by J. Green 1841.)

The historical evidence tends to show that Macedonius was most likely not a Nestorian, but an actual advocate of the Constantinoplian Creed instead.

You may do your own research and draw your own conclusions.

Either way, Tri{3}nitarians, - yet again - did indeed tamper with the Bible at 1st Timothy 3:16. 

The above is CLEAR HISTORICAL EVIDENCE that the coruption of this particular scripture began - at the very least - in the 5th or 6th Centuries.