What Hort and Westcott Believed

by Dr. Ken Matto

Over the past few months I have been bringing you comparisons of the Textus Receptus with the Hort-Westcott Greek text. We have seen both massive and subtle differences between the two texts. Modern theologians and the majority of pastors have placed their trust in the modern versions as being the most accurate translations based on the two manuscripts Vaticanus and Sinaiticus. These two manuscripts are theorized to have been written in the 4th century. Vaticanus and Sinaiticus differ from each other in over three thousand places. There is no harmony between the two manuscripts which underlie all the modern versions.

Now in this weekly supplement, I want to list the beliefs of the two professors who were the driving force in 1871 to revise the King James Version. From the outset the project of a language revision was a ruse. There never intended to be a revision of the King James language. All along Hort and Westcott had planned to supplant the Textus Receptus and use the Alexandrian texts to produce an entirely new Bible. It is necessary to know what these two professors believed so you will know why they replaced the Textus Receptus. By knowing their beliefs, you will gain needed knowledge as to why the Revised Version of 1881 was produced.

Whenever you speak of the work of any translation, knowing the belief system of the translators will give you insight into that translation. The King James translators started in 1604 with 54 but by reason of sickness and death, the end count was 47. Every translator of the King James Bible were solid born again Christians, including King James who authorized the translation. King James had nothing to do with the translation. The men who were chosen were tops in their field of languages. Here are just three examples:

Bishop Lancelot Andrews - Proficient in 20 languages including Greek Hebrew, Chaldee and Syriac and conversant in 15 of those languages

William John Bois - His father taught him Hebrew at age 5 and by time he was 6, he could write it. At the age of fifteen, he was a student at St. John’s college, Cambridge. (At 5 years old, I was playing with Lincoln Logs and Lionel trains.)

Dr. Miles Smith - He had a knowledge of Greek and Latin fathers and an expert in Chaldee, Syriac, Arabic, and Hebrew.

These are the men that James White, Stewart Custer, D.A. Carson, Bruce Metzger, Kenneth Barker, Don Wilkins, and other modern translators believe that they are smarter than. These guys do not have 1/100 of the knowledge that the King James translators possessed. That is because the modern translators bask in their education and self-esteem, while the King James translators were all godly men who basked in Calvary.

Some of the modern translators of today:
Robert Bratcher - Good News Bible - Disbelieved the first three chapters of Genesis
Edgar Goodspeed - Revised Standard Version - Disbelieved in the deity of Christ and disbelieved the miracles of Christ.
Martin Woudstra - New International Version - Had oversight of the entire Old Testament - Sodomite
J.B. Phillips - New Testament in Modern English and NASB Interlinear Greek-English New Testament by Zondervan - Necromancer - Believed that C.S. Lewis appeared to him on his TV set a few days after the death of Lewis.
Philip Schaff - 1901 American Standard Version - Chairman - Sought the reuniting of the Protestant Church with Rome, had an audience with Pope Gregory the XVI.
Carlo Martini - United Bible Societies Greek New Testament - Jesuit Cardinal of the Roman Catholic Church

Now let us be honest, is God going to hand His holy Word over to unbelievers, necromancers, Roman Catholics, Roman Catholic sympathizers, Sodomites, or people who disbelieve the actual text of Scripture? This is small as you will see what Hort and Westcott believed. Keep in mind the modern theologian and Pastor revere what these two say concerning textual criticism. If they didn’t, then the King James Bible would be in every church instead of the modern perversions. If your church uses modern versions, then it is a Hort and Westcott church, regardless of denomination.

The only way to gain a perspective as to what Hort and Westcott believed is to read direct quotations from them.

(James 3:12 KJV) Can the fig tree, my brethren, bear olive berries? either a vine, figs? so can no fountain both yield salt water and fresh.

Brooke Foss Westcott (1825-1903)
Fenton John Anthony Hort (1828-1892)


Atonement of Christ
“The fact is, I do not see how God’s justice can be satisfied without every man’s suffering in his own person the full penalty for his sins.” (1)

“Certainly nothing can be more unscriptural than the modern limiting of Christ’s bearing our sins and sufferings to His death; but indeed that is only one aspect of an almost universal heresy. (2)

(1) Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York, 1896), Vol. 1, p. 120

(2) Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York, 1896), Vol. 1, p. 430


Baptismal Regeneration
“…at the same time in language stating that we maintain ‘Baptismal Regeneration’ as the most important of doctrines…the pure ‘Romish’ view seems to me nearer, and more likely to lead to, the truth than the Evangelical.”

Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York, 1896), Vol. 1, p. 76


Bible
“I am very glad to have seen both your note and Lightfoot’s - Glad too that we have had such an opportunity of openly speaking. For I too “must disclaim setting forth infallibility” in front of my convictions. All I hold is, that the more I learn, the more I am convinced that fresh doubts come from my own ignorance, and that at present I find the presumption in favour of absolute truth- I reject the word infallibility-of Holy Scripture overwhelming.”

Westcott, Arthur, Life and Letters of Brooke Foss Westcott, (New York, 1903), Volume 1, P. 207


Communism
“I have pretty well made up my mind to devote my three or four years up here to the study of the subject of communism.” (1)

“I can only say that it was through the region of pure politics that I myself approach Communism.” (2)

(1) Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York, 1896), Vol. 1, p. 130

(2) Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York, 1896), Vol. 1, p. 138


Creation
“No one now, I suppose, holds that the first three chapters of Genesis, for example, give a literal history---I could never understand how anyone reading them with open eyes could think they did---yet they disclose to us a Gospel. So it is probably elsewhere.”

Westcott, Arthur, Life and Letters of Brooke Foss Westcott, (New York, 1903), Volume 2, P.69


Eden
“I am inclined to think that no such state as “Eden” (I mean the popular notion) ever existed, and that Adam’s fall in no degree differed from the fall of each of his descendants, as Coleridge justly argues.

Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York, 1896) Vol. 1, P.78


Evangelical Christianity
“Further I agree with them [authors of Essays and Reviews] in condemning many leading specific doctrines of the popular theology…Evangelicals seem to me perverted rather than untrue. There are, I fear, still more serious differences between us on the subject of authority, and especially the authority of the Bible.”

Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York, 1896) Vol. 1, p.400 - This letter was written to Rev. Rowland Williams, 10/21/1858. - True Christians had rebuffed the Oxford movement (also known as the Tractarians) which was a movement to bring the Church of England under the authority of Rome. Hort embraced the Oxford movement.


Evolution
“But the book which has most engaged me is Darwin. Whatever may be thought of it, it is a book that one is proud to be contemporary with…My feeling is strong that the theory is unanswerable. If so, it opens up a new period.”

Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York, 1896), Vol. 1, Pages 414-416


The Greek Text of the King James Bible
“I had no idea till the last few weeks of the importance of texts, having read so little Greek Testament, and dragged on with that villainous Textus Receptus…Think of that vile Textus Receptus leaning entirely on late MSS [manuscripts]; it is a blessing there are such early ones.

Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York, 1896), Vol. 2, p. 211


Heaven
(1) “No doubt the language of the Rubric is unguarded, but it saves us from the error of connecting the Presence of Christ’s glorified humanity with place; ‘heaven is a state and not a place.’”

(2) “Yet the unseen is the largest part of life. Heaven lies about us now in infancy alone; and by swift, silent pauses for thought, for recollection, for aspiration, we cannot only keep fresh the influence of that diviner atmosphere, but breathe it more habitually.”

(3) “We may reasonably hope, by patient, resolute, faithful, united endeavour to find heaven about us here, the glory of our earthly life.”

Westcott, Arthur, Life and Letters of Brooke Foss Westcott, (New York, 1903), Volume 2
(1) Page 49
(2) Page 253
(3) page 394


Hell
“Certainly in my case it proceeds from no personal dread; when I have been living most godlessly, I have never been able to frighten myself with visions of a distant future, even while I ‘held’ the doctrine.”

Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York, 1896), Vol. 1, p. 122


Mariolatry
(1) “After leaving the Monastery, we shaped our course to a little oratory which we discovered on the summit of a neighboring hill…Fortunately, we found the door open. It is very small, with one kneeling-place, and behind a screen was a ‘Pieta’ the size of life (i.e. a Virgin and dead Christ)…Had I been alone, I could have knelt there for hours.”

(2) “It is smaller than I expected, and the colouring is less rich, but in expression it is perfect. The face of the virgin is unspeakably beautiful. I looked till the lip seemed to tremble with intensity of feeling---of feeling simply, for it would be impossible to say whether it be awe or joy or hope---humanity shrinking before the divine, or swelling with its conscious possession. It is enough that there is deep, intensely deep, emotion such as the mother of the Lord may have had.”

(3) I have been persuaded for many years that Mary-worship and ‘Jesus’ worship have very much in common in their causes and results.

Westcott, Arthur, Life and Letters of Brooke Foss Westcott, (New York, 1903), Volume 1
(1) Page 81
(2) Page 183

(3) Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York, 1896), Vol. 1, p. 81 - This was a letter written to Westcott on October 17, 1865.



Satan
(1) “Now if there be a devil, he cannot merely bear a corrupted and marred image of God; he must be wholly evil, his name evil, his every energy and act evil. Would it not be a violation of the divine attributes for the Word to be actively the support of such a nature of that?”

(2) The Word upholds his existence, not his evil. That is in himself; that is the mysterious, awful possibility implied in his being a will. I need scarcely say that I do not mean by this acknowledgement of an evil spirit that I acknowledge a material devil. But does anyone?

Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York, 1896), Vol. 1,
(1) Page 121
(2) Page 50

---

http://www.historicist.com/necromancers/necromancers.htm

I want to draw your attention to the above website which the Lord let me come across just a few days ago. Hort & Westcott were not only unbelievers but necromancers as well. There is not one word written anywhere in their memoirs or biographies that either of them ever became saved. Please keep in mind that the majority of pastors, theologians, and Christians give unwavering support to these two occultists. (Lev 19:31 KJV) Regard not them that have familiar spirits, neither seek after wizards, to be defiled by them: I am the LORD your God.

Back

...

...

...