Who Faked the World’s Oldest Bible? By David Daniels l Review

Pastor Steve Waldron, New Life of Albany - Albany, Ga
David W. Daniels goes into an extensive year by year, person by person, and organization by organization look at who faked Codex Sinaiticus. Absolutely critical for Biblical textual studies. Great book! To contribute to New Life, please click the link below and press donate. God bless!

[oldtimerlee]

Have copies of most of David Daniels books on this subject. Have been following his research for a number of years. Along with that of a few other people. Am currently reading (studying) "Who Faked the World's Oldest Bible". Highly recommend it to anyone who is interested seeing a well referenced defense of the King James Bible and its underlying manuscript origins.

[TheSoulWinnersGuide]

Codex Sinaiticus pocesses
23, 000+ corrections.
Codex Vaticanus omits in the gospels alone
237 words, 452 clauses, 748 whole sentences

[percival]

Dr Daniels is very impressive and convincing.

[treybarnes]

All I had to do was read the ESV and knew something was up. When I started looking into it, I found David Daniels, and he confirmed my suspicions. You have to have faith in the Word, before you have faith in God. These new age bibles are undermining faith and creating doubt.

[gigibarrett]

King James states he designed the Bible as part of a way to have power and control

[fumastertoo]

Being the archeology, history and Bible lover that I am, this book sounds like it's right up my alley. Thanks for the heads up Pastor Waldron.

[squirrelandchick]

I recently read 'the eclesistical text' by Theodore Letis. It is a wonderfully argued defence of the Textus Receptus, and I can't recommend it enough.

[joseenriqueagutaya]

I think to be more specific the title in my opinion should be "Who Faked the World's Oldest English Bible.Of course those who know Pastor DavidW.Daniels refers to those translated using the critical text, Codex Sinaiticus, Vaticanus including of course Westcott and Hort's endorsed manuscripts.

[scotttarin]

You have to listen to and research all of the arguments. Both sides of the critical text vs. textus receptus argument have very good points and evidence. It’s important to pray and be honest about this issue and not turn this argument into yet another brick thrown to fracture and break up Christ’s church anymore than it already is. It seems that some Christians try to find more reasons to sow discord and disunity among each other.

[JHNAW]

The Eastern Orthodox monastery from which he claims to have rescued those manuscripts claims he stole them. I don't believe he found and rescued those manuscripts from the trash. I accept Scriptures of the Greek Orthodox Church. As for English translations of the Bible, regarding the KJV, I accept the canon of the original 1611, including the Apocrypha that the KJV scholars say in the KJV preface to the reader was in the Septuagint that the New Testament quotes from and that Jesus and the Apostles and the Church used and accepted. The first KJV printed with only 66 books was published in 1666. What do you get when you reject the very Church that canonized the Bible? A truncated Protestant canon of Scripture that rejects the very Septuagint that the New Testament Church accepted as the Old Testament. How many KJV-onliers are unaware that they are using the 1666 Canon, not the original 1611?