How the New Covenant Bible Was Changed in the 1500's - BibleCourts.COM Torah Observant Ultra-Orthadox Nazarene Judaism Acts 24:5 Bible Observant Followers Of Yeshua HaMashiach

The 1611 King James Bible was translated from the Textus Receptus.
The Textus Receptus is different than the previous texts.
And the King James Bible also has chnages that do not match the Textus Receptus.

This project will compare the KJV and Textus Receptus against the earlier texts to see what was changed.
However if it is believed, proven, assumed that the syriac aramaic new covenant pre-dates the destruction of the temple in 70AD, http://www.peshitta.org/initial/peshitta.html
Then when the Textus Receptus and KJV translation match with the syriac aramaic new covenant, and the earlier greek primary text does not,
In some/many cases the Textus Receptus and KJV may match the syriac aramaic new covenant better than the earlier greek texts.
If Syriac Aramaic Primacy is true, and if the Greek Critical Text was translated from Syriac Aramaic, then the Critical Text has omissions and errors.
This may mean that they textus receptus or the manuscripts used to make it, were influenced by the syrirac aramaic new covenant.
But when the Textus Receptus made in the 1500’s does not match the Greek Critical Text or the Syriac Aramaic New Covenant,
It’s clear that something was changed, added to, or removed in the 1550’s (not good).

Origin of the New Covenant Bible.

Regarding the debate by Andrew Gabriel Roth, on if the Syriac Peshitta predates the Greek Primary Texts, Andrew Gabriel Roth mentions:

Giuseppe Simone Assemani (1687–1768), a Maronite Catholic scholar and chief librarian of the Vatican Library, cataloged numerous Syriac Christian manuscripts in his multi-volume work Bibliotheca Orientalis (1719–1728). In describing Syriac Gospel manuscripts, Assemani reported the existence of colophons (scribal notes) that claimed the Gospels were written in Syriac (Aramaic) by early disciples in Edessa. Later writers have pointed to one such colophon mentioning a date given as “the year 389 of the Greeks,” which they interpret as approximately 78 AD. This claim is based on manuscript descriptions recorded by Assemani and later translations or interpretations of those descriptions.

Raw Text Sources (for citation list)

Giuseppe Simone Assemani, Bibliotheca Orientalis Clementino-Vaticana, Vols. I–IV, Rome, 1719–1728.

Wikipedia, “Giuseppe Simone Assemani”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giuseppe_Simone_Assemani

Wikipedia, “Bibliotheca Orientalis”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bibliotheca_Orientalis

Wikipedia, “Peshitta”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peshitta

Discussion of the Syriac colophon tradition and the claimed 78 AD date (later interpretive sources):
https://thecouchkumara.wixsite.com/website/post/the-ancient-aramaic-scriptures

Here are the strongest arguments for Aramaic primacy as presented or relied on by the article you pointed to (and related reasoning found on that site), based on the text of the page and the broader claims it references:

Key Arguments for Aramaic Primacy from the Source

**Eastern Aramaic Manuscripts Represent a Line of Transmission
The page promotes the idea that ancient Syriac/Aramaic manuscripts — such as the Khabouris Codex and others — preserve New Testament texts that reflect an early Aramaic original, handed down by the Church of the East since apostolic times, rather than being later translations from Greek. (The Couch Kumara)
**Tradition of Early Manuscripts Given by the Apostles
The article claims (drawing on tradition) that the New Testament was personally delivered to the Church of the East in Aramaic by the apostles in Edessa, suggesting an unbroken trajectory from 1st-century Aramaic writings to later manuscripts. (The Couch Kumara)
**Reported Early Witness from Assemani
Citing J. S. Assemani’s Bibliotheca Orientalis, the article states there was an ancient Syriac Gospel in Edessa with a colophon dated to “year 389 of the Greeks (≈78 AD),” implying a 1st-century Aramaic gospel existed and was seen by a Vatican librarian. This is treated as evidence for early Aramaic New Testament texts. (The Couch Kumara)
**Semitic Language and Church Tradition
The site highlights that Aramaic was the native language spoken by Jesus, his disciples, and the early church in the Middle East, which supports the idea that the earliest Christian writings would naturally appear first in Aramaic rather than Greek. (This is implicit in the way the site frames the material.) (The Couch Kumara)
**Multiple Manuscript Witnesses
The article lists numerous Eastern Aramaic manuscripts (e.g., Goodspeed MS 716, Yonan Codex, Paris Syr. 342, Mingana Codex) that were compared in the translation project — suggesting a textual tradition that can be traced back through centuries of Aramaic copies. (The Couch Kumara)

How These Arguments Are Typically Framed by Advocates

Proponents like the site often combine manuscript tradition, church historical claims, and linguistic context:

Historical Claim: A reported colophon (Assemani) indicating a dated Aramaic Gospel text from the 1st century. (The Couch Kumara)
Manuscript Lineage: Presenting later Syriac manuscripts as part of an unbroken Aramaic textual tradition. (The Couch Kumara)
Language Argument: Because Jesus and early followers spoke Aramaic, the original written texts would logically be in Aramaic. (General premise also used in other Aramaic primacy arguments.) (BibleAsk)

Important Scholarly Note

The mainstream academic consensus does not accept that the New Testament was originally written in Aramaic. en.wikipedia.org
Most New Testament scholars hold that the canonical books were composed in Koine Greek, with possible Aramaic sayings underlying some parts. en.wikipedia.org
There are no historical witnesses of any of the disciples writing a greek new covenant bible.
There are no historical witnesses of anyone recieving any greek texts written by the disciples.
It’s only if you assume that the disciples wrote the new covenant in greek, and delivered it to people in greek, that you can try to say they wrote it in greek.
Andrew Gabriel Roth does not deny the existance of an early Greek New Covenant, but promotes the idea that the aramaic was also early.
The ancestors of the Church of the East witnessed the Romans translating an aramaic bible into greek. http://www.peshitta.org/initial/peshitta.html
The ancestors of the Church of the East directly recieved the syriac aramaic peshitta from the disciples. http://www.peshitta.org/initial/peshitta.html
The first century manuscripts of the bible do not exist today.

The Textus Receptus (TR), Latin for “received text,” refers to a family of printed Greek New Testament editions beginning with Desiderius Erasmus’ Novum Instrumentum omne in 1516, revised in 1519, 1522, 1527, and 1535, all published in Basel by Froben.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textus_Receptus Subsequent key editions include Robert Stephanus (1550), Theodore Beza (1565–1604), the Elzevir brothers (1624–1633, where the term “Textus Receptus” first appeared), and Frederick Henry Ambrose Scrivener’s 1894 reconstruction matching the 1611 King James Version (KJV).https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textus_Receptushttps://byzantinetext.com/study/editions/scrivener/wikipedia+1

Erasmus worked primarily in Latin and Greek, using about a dozen late Byzantine manuscripts (mostly 12th–15th century), with no access to earlier uncials like Sinaiticus or Vaticanus; for Revelation 22:16–21, he back-translated from the Latin Vulgate due to lacking Greek sources.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textus_Receptushttps://www.biblicaltraining.org/learn/institute/nt605-textual-criticism/nt605-19-erasmus-and-the-textus-receptusbiblicaltraining+1

The TR differs from prior texts—early Greek papyri (2nd–4th century), uncials (4th–9th century), and versions like the Syriac Peshitta—in nearly 2,000 places, resembling the late Byzantine Majority Text but including unique readings from Vulgate influence or sparse manuscripts.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Textus_Receptushttps://bible.org/article/majority-text-and-original-text-are-they-identical It features additions absent in earliest witnesses (e.g., 1 John 5:7 Comma Johanneum, Acts 8:37), omissions or substitutions (e.g., Luke 2:33 “Joseph” vs. “his father”), and harmonizations, often expanding for clarity but diverging from pre-5th century evidence.https://carm.org/king-james-onlyism/differences-between-the-majority-text-and-the-textus-receptus/https://nickcady.org/2024/11/19/bible-translations-manuscripts-and-understanding-textual-variants/nickcady+3

This project systematically compares the TR against critical Greek (NA28) and Syriac texts book-by-book, exporting doctrinal variants to reveal how late traditions shaped the KJV base.

Many groups usually only use the KJV Bible.

These Batches are generated by Ai.

### First Batch: Differences in the Gospel of Matthew

This batch covers major textual variants in Matthew that impact meaning or theology, starting from the beginning of the book. Comparisons are made between the Textus Receptus (TR), the Syriac Aramaic Peshitta (assumed as the oldest text, using James Murdock’s 1851 public domain translation), the Crawford Aramaic New Covenant (which aligns with the Peshitta for Matthew, with no unique variants noted in this book), and earlier Greek manuscripts (represented by the Critical Text, CT, using public domain ASV readings where applicable). Instances where the KJV differs from the TR are also noted, though none in this batch significantly alter meaning. Only variants that change theology (e.g., doctrinal emphasis on salvation, Christology, or spiritual practices) are included.

Variants are listed by verse, with full verse quotes from relevant sources when the TR differs. Quotes use sacred-name renderings (Yeshua for Jesus, Meshiach for Christ, Adoni for Lord, Elohim for God) without paraphrasing or truncation. Where “commandment(s)” appears, Greek manuscripts are checked for “entole/entolas” (which they use here), so it is rendered as “Torah” or “law(s)”. “Church” is rendered as “ecclesia” where applicable (none in this batch).

#### Matthew 5:44 – Command to Love Enemies (Expanded in TR and Peshitta vs. Shorter in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: The expanded reading (TR/Peshitta) emphasizes active responses to persecution (blessing, doing good), strengthening teachings on love and non-resistance. The shorter CT reading focuses solely on love and prayer, potentially softening the call to action.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: But I say to you: Love your enemies; and bless him that curseth you; and do good to him that hateth you; and pray for them that persecute you and reproach you. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: But I say unto you, love your enemies, and pray for them that persecute you. (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: KJV uses “them which despitefully use you” (plural), while TR has singular forms in Greek; minor translation adjustment, no theological change.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### Matthew 6:13 – Lord’s Prayer Doxology (Included in TR and Peshitta vs. Omitted in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: The doxology (TR/Peshitta) adds praise to Elohim’s sovereignty, reinforcing themes of divine kingdom and glory. Its omission in CT shortens the prayer, potentially reducing liturgical emphasis on Elohim’s eternal power.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever and ever: Amen. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: And bring us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one. (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [5], [7], [22], [25]

#### Matthew 17:21 – Condition for Exorcism (Included in TR and Peshitta vs. Omitted in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: Inclusion (TR/Peshitta) emphasizes spiritual disciplines (prayer and fasting) for overcoming evil, impacting views on faith and demonic deliverance. Omission in CT removes this, potentially shifting focus away from ascetic practices.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: But this kind goeth not out, except by fasting and prayer. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: [Omitted] (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### Matthew 18:11 – Purpose of Yeshua’s Coming (Included in TR and Peshitta vs. Omitted in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: Inclusion (TR/Peshitta) explicitly states Yeshua’s salvific mission, reinforcing soteriology. Omission in CT removes this direct statement, though paralleled in Luke 19:10.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: For the Son of man is come, to vivify that which was lost. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: [Omitted] (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### Matthew 20:16 – Called and Chosen (Included in TR and Peshitta vs. Omitted in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: Inclusion (TR/Peshitta) adds emphasis on divine election and predestination. Omission in CT reduces this, affecting doctrines of calling vs. choosing.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few chosen. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: So the last shall be first, and the first last: for the called are many, but the chosen are few. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: So the last shall be first, and the first last. (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### Matthew 23:14 – Woe on Exploitation and Hypocrisy (Included in TR and Peshitta vs. Omitted in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: Inclusion (TR/Peshitta) condemns religious hypocrisy and exploitation, emphasizing ethical judgment. Omission in CT removes this specific woe, potentially softening critique of false piety.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows’ houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: Woe to you, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites: ye devour the houses of widows, under pretence that ye prolong your prayers: therefore shall ye receive greater condemnation. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: [Omitted] (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### Matthew 24:36 – Knowledge of the End Times (Omits “nor the Son” in TR and Peshitta vs. Includes in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: Omission (TR/Peshitta) avoids implying limitation in Yeshua’s knowledge, supporting full divinity. Inclusion in CT highlights Yeshua’s human limitations, affecting Christology.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: But of that day and of that hour no man knoweth, neither the angels of heaven, but the Father only. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: But of that day and hour knoweth no one, not even the angels of heaven, neither the Son, but the Father only. (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### Matthew 26:28 – Blood of the Covenant (Includes “new” in TR and Peshitta vs. Omits in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: Inclusion (TR/Peshitta) specifies the “new” covenant, emphasizing fulfillment of Jeremiah 31 and covenant theology. Omission in CT generalizes it, potentially lessening contrast with the old covenant.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: For this is my blood of the new covenant, which for the sake of many is shed for the forgiveness of sins. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: For this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many unto remission of sins. (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: KJV uses “testament” (from Latin influence), while TR Greek is “covenant”; minor translation choice.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

### Second Batch: Differences in the Gospel of Matthew (Continued)

#### Matthew 27:9 – Prophet Attribution in Fulfillment (Jeremiah in TR and Peshitta vs. Variants in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: Attribution to Jeremiah (TR/Peshitta) links to a composite prophecy (Jeremiah 18-19, Zechariah 11), reinforcing messianic fulfillment. Changes or omissions in CT (to Zachariah, Isaiah, or none) could alter perceived accuracy of prophetic reference, affecting views on scriptural harmony.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was valued, whom they of the children of Israel did value. (KJV, with “Jeremy” as Jeremiah)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by the prophet, saying: I took the thirty [shekels] of silver, a good price, at which I was valued by the children of Israel. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: Then was fulfilled that which was spoken through Jeremiah the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was priced, whom certain of the children of Israel did price. (ASV; variants include “Zachariah” in some mss like 22 syr hmg, “Isaiah” in 21, or omission of name in Φ 33 it a,b syr s,p cop bo)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### Matthew 27:16-17 – Name of the Prisoner (Barabbas in TR and Peshitta vs. Jesus Barabbas in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: “Barabbas” alone (TR/Peshitta) avoids direct name parallel, focusing on the crowd’s choice. “Jesus Barabbas” in CT creates irony of choosing between two “Yeshuas” (one meaning “son of the father”), heightening themes of substitutionary atonement and human rejection of the true Meshiach.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: (16) And they had then a notable prisoner, called Barabbas. (17) Therefore when they were gathered together, Pilate said unto them, Whom will ye that I release unto you? Barabbas, or Yeshua which is called Meshiach? (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: (16) And they had then in bonds a noted prisoner, who was called Bar-Abas. (17) And when they were assembled, Pilate said to them, Whom will ye, that I release to you, Bar-Abas, or Yeshua who is called Meshiach? (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: (16) And they had then a notable prisoner, called Jesus Barabbas. (17) When therefore they were gathered together, Pilate said unto them, Whom will ye that I release unto you? Jesus Barabbas, or Jesus who is called Christ? (ASV, with “Jesus Barabbas” in Θ f¹ 700* syr s,pal arm geo²)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### Matthew 27:35 – Fulfillment of Prophecy in Crucifixion (Included in TR and Peshitta vs. Omitted in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: Inclusion (TR/Peshitta) explicitly ties the event to Psalm 22:18, emphasizing prophetic fulfillment and Meshiach’s suffering. Omission in CT removes this direct link, potentially reducing emphasis on Old Testament typology in the passion narrative.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: And they crucified him, and parted his garments, casting lots: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: And when they had crucified him, they divided his garments by lot: that what was spoken by the prophet might be fulfilled: They divided my garments among them; and upon my vesture they cast the lot. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: And when they had crucified him, they parted his garments among them, casting lots. (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### Matthew 27:41 – Groups Mocking Yeshua (Includes Pharisees in Some TR/Byz vs. Elders in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: Inclusion of “Pharisees” (some TR/Byz) broadens critique to include that group, reinforcing Yeshua’s opposition to hypocrisy. CT’s “elders” focuses on Sanhedrin leadership, potentially narrowing the scope of religious condemnation.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: Likewise also the chief priests mocking him, with the scribes and elders, said. (KJV; some Byz mss add “and Pharisees”)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: In like manner the chief priests mocked him, with the Scribes and Elders and Pharisees. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: In like manner also the chief priests mocking him, with the scribes and elders, said. (ASV; “scribes and elders” in א A B L Θ f¹ f¹³ 33 652 700 892 it aur,ff¹ g¹ l vg co sa mss,bo mss mae-1)
– **KJV vs. TR**: KJV omits “Pharisees” while some TR/Byz include it; minor expansion in some sources.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### Matthew 27:49 – Piercing of Yeshua’s Side (Omitted in TR and Peshitta vs. Included in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: Inclusion (CT) places the piercing before death, adding evidence of humanity/divinity via water and blood (paralleling 1 John 5:6-8), but conflicts with John’s post-death timing. Omission (TR/Peshitta) avoids this, maintaining narrative harmony and focusing on mockery alone.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: The rest said, Let be, let us see whether Elias will come to save him. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: But the rest said: Desist; let us see if Elijah will come and save him. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: But the rest said, Let be; let us see whether Elijah cometh to save him. [And another took a spear, and pierced his side, and there came out water and blood.] (ASV, with addition in א B C L U etc.)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### Matthew 28:6 – Reference to Adoni (Included in TR and Peshitta vs. Omitted in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: “Adoni” (TR/Peshitta) affirms Yeshua’s divine lordship in the resurrection context. Omission in CT uses “he,” potentially softening Christological emphasis on his exalted status.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Adoni lay. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: He is not here; for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where our Adoni was laid. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: He is not here; for he is risen, even as he said. Come, see the place where he lay. (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### Matthew 28:9 – Narrative of the Women’s Journey (Included in TR and Peshitta vs. Omitted in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: Inclusion (TR/Peshitta) adds detail to the women’s obedience and encounter, emphasizing immediate post-resurrection events. Omission in CT streamlines the narrative, potentially reducing focus on discipleship and witness.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: And as they went to tell his disciples, behold, Yeshua met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him by the feet, and worshipped him. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: And lo, Yeshua met them, and said to them: Hail, ye. And they approached, and laid hold of his feet, and worshipped him. (Murdock; note: Peshitta omits the introductory phrase in some renderings, but aligns with TR inclusion in Murdock context)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: And behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and took hold of his feet, and worshipped him. (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

### Third Batch: Differences in the Gospel of Mark

This batch covers major textual variants in Mark that impact meaning or theology, starting from the beginning of the book. Comparisons are made between the Textus Receptus (TR), the Syriac Aramaic Peshitta (assumed as the oldest text, using James Murdock’s 1851 public domain translation), the Crawford Aramaic New Covenant (which aligns with the Peshitta for Mark, with no unique variants noted in this book), and earlier Greek manuscripts (represented by the Critical Text, CT, using public domain ASV readings where applicable). Instances where the KJV differs from the TR are also noted, though none in this batch significantly alter meaning. Only variants that change theology (e.g., doctrinal emphasis on salvation, Christology, or spiritual practices) are included.

Variants are listed by verse, with full verse quotes from relevant sources when the TR differs. Quotes use sacred-name renderings (Yeshua for Jesus, Meshiach for Christ, Adoni for Lord, Elohim for God) without paraphrasing or truncation. Where “commandment(s)” appears, Greek manuscripts are checked for “entole/entolas” (which they use in some Mark verses like 7:8-9, but no variants listed here affect those), so no changes apply in this batch. “Church” is rendered as “ecclesia” where applicable (none in this batch).

#### Mark 1:2 – Attribution of Prophecy (Prophets in TR vs. Isaiah in CT and Peshitta)
– **Theological Impact**: TR’s “prophets” accurately reflects the composite quote (Malachi 3:1 and Isaiah 40:3), supporting scriptural harmony. CT/Peshitta’s “Isaiah” attributes it solely to one prophet, potentially raising questions about prophetic accuracy or inerrancy.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: As it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: As it is written in Isaiah the prophet: Behold I send my messenger before thy face, who shall prepare thy way. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: even as it is written in Isaiah the prophet, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, Who shall prepare thy way. (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### Mark 9:29 – Condition for Exorcism (Includes Fasting in TR and Peshitta vs. Omitted in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: Inclusion (TR/Peshitta) emphasizes ascetic practices like fasting alongside prayer for spiritual warfare, impacting doctrines of faith and deliverance. Omission in CT focuses solely on prayer, potentially reducing emphasis on physical discipline.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: And he said unto them, This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer and fasting. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: He said to them: This genus cannot be expelled, except by fasting and prayer. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: And he said unto them, This kind can come out by nothing, save by prayer. (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### Mark 11:26 – Condition for Forgiveness (Included in TR and Peshitta vs. Omitted in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: Inclusion (TR/Peshitta) reinforces reciprocal forgiveness as essential for divine pardon, strengthening ethical and soteriological teachings. Omission in CT removes this explicit link, potentially softening the conditional aspect of prayer and forgiveness.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: But if ye will not forgive, your Father who is in heaven will also not forgive you your offences. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: [Omitted] (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### Mark 15:28 – Fulfillment of Prophecy in Crucifixion (Included in TR and Peshitta vs. Omitted in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: Inclusion (TR/Peshitta) explicitly connects Yeshua’s death to Isaiah 53:12, emphasizing messianic fulfillment and substitutionary atonement. Omission in CT removes this direct tie, potentially lessening Old Testament prophetic emphasis in the passion narrative.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: [And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith: He was reckoned with the ungodly.] (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: [Omitted] (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### Mark 16:9-20 – The Long Ending (Included in TR and Peshitta vs. Omitted in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: Inclusion (TR/Peshitta) provides detailed resurrection appearances, the Great Commission with emphasis on baptism for salvation (v16), miraculous signs for believers (e.g., casting out demons, speaking in tongues, handling serpents, healing), and Yeshua’s ascension, reinforcing doctrines of faith, evangelism, and ongoing miracles. Omission in CT ends the Gospel abruptly at 16:8, potentially altering views on post-resurrection authority, soteriology, and charismatic gifts.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: (9) Now when Yeshua was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils. (10) And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept. (11) And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not. (12) After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country. (13) And they went and told it unto the residue: neither believed they them. (14) Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen. (15) And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. (16) He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. (17) And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; (18) They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover. (19) So then after the Adoni had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of Elohim. (20) And they went forth, and preached every where, the Adoni working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: (9) And at the dawn of the first day of the week, he arose; and he appeared first to Mary Magdalena, from whom he had expelled seven demons. (10) And she went and announced [it] to them that were with him, who were mourning and weeping. (11) And they, when they heard [that] he was alive, and had been seen by her, did not believe [it]. (12) After this he appeared, under another aspect, to two of them as they walked and went into the country. (13) And these went and told the rest; but they would not believe them (14) And at last, he appeared to the eleven as they reclined at table; and he reproved their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not those who had seen him alive. (15) And he said to them: Go ye into all the world, and proclaim my tidings in the whole creation. (16) He that believeth, and is baptized, liveth; but he that believeth not, is condemned. (17) And these signs shall attend them that believe: In my name, they will expel demons; and they will speak with new tongues; (18) And they will take up serpents; and if they should drink a deadly poison, it will not harm them; and they will lay hands on the sick, and they will be healed. (19) And Yeshua our Adoni, after he had conversed with them, ascended to heaven, and sat on the right hand of Elohim. (20) And they went forth and preached everywhere; and our Adoni aided them, and confirmed their discourses by the signs which they wrought. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: [Omitted; Gospel ends at 16:8: And they went out, and fled from the tomb; for trembling and astonishment had come upon them: and they said nothing to any one; for they were afraid.] (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

### Fourth Batch: Differences in the Gospel of Luke

This batch covers major textual variants in Luke that impact meaning or theology, starting from the beginning of the book. Comparisons are made between the Textus Receptus (TR), the Syriac Aramaic Peshitta (assumed as the oldest text, using James Murdock’s 1851 public domain translation), the Crawford Aramaic New Covenant (which aligns with the Peshitta for Luke, with no unique variants noted in this book), and earlier Greek manuscripts (represented by the Critical Text, CT, using public domain ASV readings where applicable). Instances where the KJV differs from the TR are also noted, though none in this batch significantly alter meaning. Only variants that change theology (e.g., doctrinal emphasis on salvation, Christology, or spiritual practices) are included.

Variants are listed by verse, with full verse quotes from relevant sources when the TR differs. Quotes use sacred-name renderings (Yeshua for Jesus, Meshiach for Christ, Adoni for Lord, Elohim for God) without paraphrasing or truncation. Where “commandment(s)” appears, Greek manuscripts are checked for “entole/entolas” (which they use in Luke 10:27, but no variants affect it here), so no changes apply. “Church” is rendered as “ecclesia” where applicable (none in this batch).

#### Luke 2:14 – Angels’ Proclamation at Birth (Good Will Toward Men in TR and Peshitta vs. Men of Good Will in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: The TR/Peshitta reading emphasizes universal divine favor and peace to all humanity, supporting inclusive soteriology. The CT reading limits peace to those favored by Elohim, potentially implying election or merit-based grace.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: Glory to Elohim in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: Glory to Elohim in the highest [heavens]; and on earth, peace, and good hope for men. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: Glory to God in the highest, And on earth peace among men in whom he is well pleased. (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### Luke 2:33 – Reaction to Simeon’s Prophecy (Joseph in TR and Peshitta vs. Father in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: “Joseph” (TR/Peshitta) preserves distinction from biological fatherhood, reinforcing virgin birth and Christology. “Father” in CT could imply Joseph as father, potentially blurring divine paternity.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: And Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: And Joseph and his mother were astonished at those things which were spoken concerning him. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: And his father and his mother were marvelling at the things which were spoken concerning him. (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### Luke 4:4 – Temptation Response (Full Quote in TR and Peshitta vs. Shorter in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: Inclusion (TR/Peshitta) stresses dependence on Elohim’s word for sustenance, enhancing doctrine of scripture’s sufficiency. Omission in CT shortens, potentially reducing emphasis on verbal inspiration.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: And Yeshua answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of Elohim. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: And Yeshua replied, and said: It is written, that not by bread only, doth man live; but by every word proceeding from the mouth of Elohim. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: And Jesus answered unto him, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone. (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### Luke 4:8 – Temptation Response (Includes Rebuke in TR vs. Omitted in CT and Peshitta)
– **Theological Impact**: Inclusion (TR) adds direct confrontation with Satan, emphasizing authority over evil. Omission (CT/Peshitta) focuses on worship command, potentially softening rebuke’s intensity.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: And Yeshua answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Adoni thy Elohim, and him only shalt thou serve. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: Yeshua replied, and said to him: It is written, Thou shalt worship the Adoni thy Elohim, and him only shalt thou serve. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: And Jesus answered and said unto him, It is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### Luke 9:55-56 – Rebuke of Disciples (Included in TR and Peshitta vs. Omitted in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: Inclusion (TR/Peshitta) highlights Yeshua’s salvific mission over destruction, reinforcing mercy and atonement theology. Omission in CT removes this, potentially altering focus on judgment vs. grace.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them. And they went to another village. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: And he turned and rebuked them, and said: Ye know not of what spirit ye are. For the Son of man hath not come to destroy souls; but to quicken [them]. And they went to another town. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: But he turned, and rebuked them. And they went to another village. (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### Luke 11:2-4 – Lord’s Prayer (Full Version in TR and Peshitta vs. Shorter in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: Full version (TR/Peshitta) includes heaven address, will of Elohim, and deliverance from evil, enriching prayer’s theological depth on sovereignty and protection. Shorter CT omits these, potentially simplifying liturgical and doctrinal elements.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: And he said unto them, When ye pray, say, Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth. Give us day by day our daily bread. And forgive us our sins; for we also forgive every one that is indebted to us. And lead us not into temptation; but deliver us from evil. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: And he said to them: When ye pray, say: Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name; thy kingdom come; thy pleasure be done, as in heaven, so on earth. Give us daily the bread we need for subsistence. And remit our sins, as we also remit to our debtors: and bring us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: And he said unto them, When ye pray, say, Father, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Give us day by day our daily bread. And forgive us our sins; for we ourselves also forgive every one that is indebted to us. And bring us not into temptation. (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### Luke 17:36 – Parable of the Taken and Left (Included in TR and Peshitta vs. Omitted in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: Inclusion (TR/Peshitta) expands eschatological teaching on separation at judgment, emphasizing readiness. Omission in CT removes this, though paralleled in Matthew, potentially affecting rapture or end-times doctrines.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: Two men will be in the field; one will be taken, and the other left. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: [Omitted] (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### Luke 22:43-44 – Agony in Gethsemane (Included in TR and Peshitta vs. Later Addition in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: Inclusion (TR/Peshitta) depicts Yeshua’s human suffering and divine support, balancing Christology (humanity/divinity). Marking as later in CT questions authenticity, potentially affecting views on incarnation and atonement.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him. And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly: and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: And an angel from heaven appeared to him, to strengthen him. And he was in fear; and he prayed earnestly; and his sweat was like drops of blood; and it fell on the ground. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: [Marked as later addition; some omit] (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### Luke 23:17 – Custom of Release (Included in TR and Peshitta vs. Omitted in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: Inclusion (TR/Peshitta) explains Passover custom, clarifying substitutionary theme in passion narrative. Omission in CT removes context, potentially obscuring legal and prophetic fulfillment.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: (For of necessity he must release one unto them at the feast.) (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: For it was the custom, that he should release one at the festival. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: [Omitted] (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### Luke 23:34 – Prayer for Forgiveness (Included in TR and Peshitta vs. Later Addition in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: Inclusion (TR/Peshitta) exemplifies intercession and forgiveness, central to atonement and ethics. Marking as later in CT questions historicity, affecting doctrines of mercy and ignorance in sin.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: Then said Yeshua, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do. And they parted his raiment, and cast lots. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: And Yeshua said: Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do. And they divided his garments, [and] cast the lot upon them. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: And they cast lots, dividing his garments among them. [First sentence marked as later] (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### Luke 24:51 – Ascension (Included in TR and Peshitta vs. Omitted in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: Inclusion (TR/Peshitta) affirms bodily ascension, supporting resurrection theology and exaltation. Omission in CT shortens, potentially diminishing emphasis on Yeshua’s heavenly reign.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he was parted from them, and carried up into heaven. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: And it occurred, while he blessed them, that he was separated from them, and ascended to heaven. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he parted from them. (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### Luke 24:53 – Disciples in Temple (Praising and Blessing in TR and Peshitta vs. Praising in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: Expanded (TR/Peshitta) adds blessing, enhancing worship theology post-ascension. Shorter CT focuses on praise, slightly reducing liturgical nuance.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: And were continually in the temple, praising and blessing Elohim. Amen. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: And they were continually in the temple, praising and blessing Elohim: Amen. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: And were continually in the temple, blessing God. (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

### Fifth Batch: Differences in the Gospel of John

This batch covers major textual variants in John that impact meaning or theology, starting from the beginning of the book. Comparisons are made between the Textus Receptus (TR), the Syriac Aramaic Peshitta (assumed as the oldest text, using James Murdock’s 1851 public domain translation), the Crawford Aramaic New Covenant (which aligns with the Peshitta for John, with no unique variants noted in this book), and earlier Greek manuscripts (represented by the Critical Text, CT, using public domain ASV readings where applicable). Instances where the KJV differs from the TR are also noted, though none in this batch significantly alter meaning. Only variants that change theology (e.g., doctrinal emphasis on salvation, Christology, or spiritual practices) are included.

Variants are listed by verse, with full verse quotes from relevant sources when the TR differs. Quotes use sacred-name renderings (Yeshua for Jesus, Meshiach for Christ, Adoni for Lord, Elohim for God) without paraphrasing or truncation. Where “commandment(s)” appears, Greek manuscripts are checked for “entole/entolas” (which they use in John 13:34, 14:15, etc., but no variants listed here affect those), so no changes apply in this batch. “Church” is rendered as “ecclesia” where applicable (none in this batch).

#### John 1:18 – Description of the Son (Only Begotten Son in TR and Peshitta vs. Only Begotten Elohim in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: The reading “only begotten Son” (TR/Peshitta) emphasizes unique sonship and relational aspect with the Father, supporting doctrines of divine paternity. “Only begotten Elohim” in CT heightens direct divinity, potentially strengthening high Christology but altering emphasis on filial relationship.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: No man hath seen Elohim at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: No man hath ever seen Elohim; the only begotten Elohim, he who is in the bosom of his Father, he hath declared [him]. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten God, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### John 3:13 – Son of Man’s Heavenly Presence (Included in TR and Peshitta vs. Omitted in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: Inclusion (TR/Peshitta) affirms Yeshua’s omnipresence and divine nature, reinforcing Christology of simultaneous heavenly and earthly existence. Omission in CT removes this, potentially limiting emphasis on his pre-existence and divinity.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: And no one hath ascended to heaven, but he that descended from heaven, the Son of man who is in heaven. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: And no one hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended out of heaven, even the Son of man. (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### John 5:3-4 – Angel at the Pool (Included in TR and Peshitta vs. Omitted in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: Inclusion (TR/Peshitta) introduces angelic intervention in healing, impacting doctrines of providence and supernatural aid. Omission in CT shifts focus solely to Yeshua’s authority, potentially emphasizing direct divine healing over mediated miracles.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: (3) In these lay a great multitude of impotent folk, of blind, halt, withered, waiting for the moving of the water. (4) For an angel went down at a certain season into the pool, and troubled the water: whosoever then first after the troubling of the water stepped in was made whole of whatsoever disease he had. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: (3) And in these were many infirm people, blind and lame and withered, awaiting the moving of the waters. (4) For an angel, from time to time, descended into the baptistery, and moved the waters; and he who first went in, after the moving of the waters, was cured of whatever disease he had. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: (3) In these lay a multitude of them that were sick, blind, halt, withered. (4) [Omitted] (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### John 6:69 – Peter’s Confession (Son of the Living Elohim in TR and Peshitta vs. Holy One of Elohim in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: “Son of the living Elohim” (TR/Peshitta) reinforces messianic sonship and divinity, aligning with parallel confessions (e.g., Matthew 16:16). “Holy One of Elohim” in CT emphasizes sanctity, potentially softening explicit divine filiation in Christology.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: And we believe and are sure that thou art that Meshiach, the Son of the living Elohim. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: And we believe, and know, that thou art the Meshiach, the Son of the living Elohim. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: And we have believed and know that thou art the Holy One of God. (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### John 7:53-8:11 – Woman Caught in Adultery (Included in TR and Peshitta vs. Omitted in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: Inclusion (TR/Peshitta) illustrates mercy, forgiveness, and non-condemnation, central to soteriology and ethics against legalism. Omission in CT removes this, potentially reducing emphasis on grace and Yeshua’s authority over judgment.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: (7:53) And every man went unto his own house. (8:1) Yeshua went unto the mount of Olives. (8:2) And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them. (8:3) And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, (8:4) They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. (8:5) Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? (8:6) This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Yeshua stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. (8:7) So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. (8:8) And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground. (8:9) And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Yeshua was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. (8:10) When Yeshua had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? (8:11) She said, No man, Adoni. And Yeshua said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: (7:53) And they went every one to his own house. (8:1) And Jesus went to the mount of Olives. (8:2) And in the morning he came again to the temple; and all the people came to him, and he sat down and taught them. (8:3) And the Scribes and Pharisees brought forward a woman, who had been taken in adultery; and they made her stand in the midst. (8:4) And they said to him: Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. (8:5) And in the law, Moses commanded that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? (8:6) This they said, tempting him, so that they might have [whereof] to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and wrote [upon] the ground. (8:7) And as they continued asking him, he straightened himself up, and said to them: Whoever among you is without sin, let him first cast a stone at her. (8:8) And he stooped down again, and wrote on the ground. (8:9) And they who heard [it], being convicted by their conscience, went out, one by one, beginning with the eldest; and the woman was left, she alone, where she had stood in the midst. (8:10) And Jesus raised himself up, and saw no person but the woman; and he said to her: Woman, where are they, thy accusers? Hath no one condemned thee? (8:11) And she said: No one, my Lord. Jesus said to her: Neither do I condemn thee; go thou, and henceforth sin no more. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: [Omitted] (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### John 8:59 – Yeshua’s Escape (Included in TR and Peshitta vs. Omitted in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: Inclusion (TR/Peshitta) depicts miraculous passage through the crowd, emphasizing divine protection and authority. Omission in CT simplifies, potentially reducing focus on supernatural intervention in Christology.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: Therefore they took up stones to cast at him: but Yeshua hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: And they took up stones to stone him. But Yeshua concealed himself, and went out of the temple, and passed along among them, and went away. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: They took up stones therefore to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple. (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

### Sixth Batch: Differences in the Gospel of John (Continued)

This batch continues from John 9:1 onward, covering major textual variants in the remainder of John that impact meaning or theology. Comparisons are made between the Textus Receptus (TR), the Syriac Aramaic Peshitta (assumed as the oldest text, using James Murdock’s 1851 public domain translation), the Crawford Aramaic New Covenant (which aligns with the Peshitta for John, with no unique variants noted in these chapters), and earlier Greek manuscripts (represented by the Critical Text, CT, using public domain ASV readings where applicable). Instances where the KJV differs from the TR are also noted, though none in this batch significantly alter meaning. Only variants that change theology (e.g., doctrinal emphasis on salvation, Christology, or spiritual practices) are included.

Variants are listed by verse, with full verse quotes from relevant sources when the TR differs. Quotes use sacred-name renderings (Yeshua for Jesus, Meshiach for Christ, Adoni for Lord, Elohim for God) without paraphrasing or truncation. Where “commandment(s)” appears, Greek manuscripts are checked for “entole/entolas” (which they use in John 13:34, 14:15, etc., but no variants affect those here), so no changes apply. “Church” is rendered as “ecclesia” where applicable (none in this batch).

#### John 9:4 – Works of the Sender (I in TR vs We in CT and Peshitta)
– **Theological Impact**: “I” (TR) emphasizes Yeshua’s singular divine agency in performing Elohim’s works, reinforcing unique Christological authority. “We” (CT/Peshitta) includes communal involvement (e.g., disciples), broadening responsibility in ministry and potentially shifting focus from exclusive messianic role to shared discipleship.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: It behooveth us to do the works of him that sent me, while it is day; the night cometh, when no one can work. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: We must work the works of him that sent us, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work. (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### John 9:35 – Object of Belief (Son of God in TR and Peshitta vs Son of Man in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: “Son of God” (TR/Peshitta) stresses divine sonship and messianic identity, enhancing Christology of eternal divinity. “Son of Man” (CT) evokes Danielic eschatological themes and humanity, potentially balancing incarnation but softening direct emphasis on divine filiation.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: Yeshua heard that they had cast him out; and when he had found him, he said unto him, Dost thou believe on the Son of Elohim? (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: Yeshua heard that they had cast him out; and he found him, and said to him: Dost thou believe on the Son of Elohim? (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: Yeshua heard that they had cast him out; and finding him, he said, Dost thou believe on the Son of man? (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### John 9:38 – Act of Worship (Included in TR and Peshitta vs Omitted in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: Inclusion (TR/Peshitta) depicts explicit worship of Yeshua, affirming his divinity and supporting doctrines of adoration due to Elohim alone. Omission in CT removes this, potentially reducing evidence for Yeshua’s divine status in the narrative.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: And he said, Adoni, I believe. And he worshipped him. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: He said: My Adoni, I believe: and he fell down, and worshipped him. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: [Omitted] (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### John 14:14 – Prayer Directed to Yeshua (Includes “me” in TR and Peshitta vs Omitted in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: Inclusion of “me” (TR/Peshitta) directs prayer explicitly to Yeshua, reinforcing his divine role in answering petitions and Trinitarian intercession. Omission in CT generalizes the promise, potentially emphasizing prayer to the Father and altering views on direct invocation of Yeshua.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it. (KJV; Greek TR includes “me”)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: And if ye shall ask of me, in my name, I will do [it]. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: If ye shall ask anything in my name, that will I do. (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: KJV omits explicit “me” in English, while TR Greek has it; minor translation choice, no theological change.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### John 16:16 – Reason for Seeing Again (Includes Phrase in TR and Peshitta vs Omitted in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: Inclusion (TR/Peshitta) ties the “not seeing” and “seeing again” to Yeshua’s ascension, clarifying post-resurrection and eschatological themes. Omission in CT leaves ambiguity, potentially affecting interpretations of resurrection appearances and return.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again, a little while, and ye shall see me, because I go to the Father. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: A little while, and ye will not see me; and again a little while, and ye will see me; because I go to my Father. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: A little while, and ye behold me no more; and again a little while, and ye shall see me. (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### John 17:12 – Protection Context (Includes “in the world” in TR and Peshitta vs Omitted in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: Inclusion (TR/Peshitta) specifies protection during earthly ministry, emphasizing temporal guardianship. Omission in CT generalizes, potentially broadening to eternal protection but reducing historical specificity in high priestly prayer.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: While I have been with them in the world, I have kept them in thy name. And I have preserved those thou gavest me; and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scriptures might be fulfilled. (Murdock)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: While I was with them, I kept them in thy name which thou hast given me: and I guarded them, and not one of them perished, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled. (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

#### John 21:25 – Closing Amen (Included in TR and Peshitta vs Omitted in CT)
– **Theological Impact**: Inclusion (TR/Peshitta) adds a solemn affirmation, reinforcing the Gospel’s completeness and liturgical use. Omission in CT ends more abruptly, with minimal impact on theology but affecting textual finality.
– **TR/KJV Reading**: And there are also many other things which Yeshua did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen. (KJV)
– **Peshitta/Crawford Reading**: And there are also many other things, which Yeshua did; which, if they were all written out, the world [itself], as I suppose, would not suffice for the books that would be written. (Murdock; some Peshitta editions include Amen)
– **CT/Earlier Manuscripts Reading**: And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself would not contain the books that should be written. (ASV)
– **KJV vs. TR**: No difference.
– **References**: [1], [4], [7], [22], [25]

(more coming in the future)

Other sources:

Here are the raw URLs for every distinct link mentioned so far in this thread:

How the New Covenant Bible Was Changed in the 1500’s

Raw Text Sources (for citation list)

Key Arguments for Aramaic Primacy from the Source

How These Arguments Are Typically Framed by Advocates

Important Scholarly Note