They Dare Call This Science!

HomeBound says "I like it a lot".

Thank you saint for the encouragement. What I am attempting to show through these studies is that the so called "science" of textual criticism, is as scientific as throwing darts at a target.

Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, the "earliest and most reliable" are actually the among the most corrupt texts in existence. They constantly disagree with each other and the noted scholars of today can't seem to get their act together either. They continually disagree with each other and what one adds the other takes away.

They have no settled text and no inspired, inerrant Bible. The NASB, NIV, and the NKJV too, are continually changing - especially the "scholarly" NASB.

The "science" of textual criticism is a farce and the proveable errors found in all the modern versions are abundant. They are false witnesses and not the true Holy Bible.

This is a spiritual battle and only God can open our eyes to see the truth of this matter and give us faith that He meant what He said about preserving His inspired words of truth and life.

The Whateverists promote a multitude of conflicting versions, and when we have at least two conflicting sources of "Final Authority", then they come along as the arbiter and judge to set up their own minds and understanding to decide which one is right - thus becoming themselves the Final Authority.

Praise God He has given you eyes to see and ears to hear.

In His sovereign grace,

Will K

 

John 10

John 10:17-18 "Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. No man TAKETH it from me, but I lay it down of myself."

Here obviously the Lord Jesus is still alive and He states that no man would take His life but that He would lay it down of Himself. "No man TAKETH it from me", (present tense - aipei) is found in all texts including Sinaiticus, except two, one of which is Vaticanus. "No man taketh it from me" is the reading of the RV, ASV, NIV, ESV, RSV, and ISV. The Vaticanus reading is absurd but that didn't stop the previous Nestle-Aland scholars from following Vaticanus in their text. ONLY the NASB has adopted the Vaticanus reading which puts this verb in the past tense (eeren) and says: "No one HAS TAKEN IT AWAY from me, but I lay it down..." Duh, wouldn't it be obvious that no man had taken His life is He were still alive and speaking to them? The NASB 95 still reads this way, but the Nestle text has once again changed their scholarly opinions and gone back to the KJB reading.

Will K

 

Acts of the Apostles - Part 1

Acts 3:6 "Then Peter said, Silver and gold have I none; but such as I have give I thee: In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, RISE UP AND walk."

Here the words "rise up and" (eyeire kai) are found in the Majority of all texts, including A, C, the Syriac Peshitta, Old Latin, Coptic, and Armenian ancient versions. Sinaiticus and Vaticanus omit these words and so do the RSV, NASB, NIV, and the ISV. The Nestle-Aland text originally omitted these words too, but then later added them back to the text again. The words "rise up and" are now included in the NRSV, ESV, and even in the upcoming Holman Christian Standard. Are you beginning to get the picture of how our scientific scholars constantly disagree among themselves?

Acts 7:46 "Who found favor before God, and desired to find a tabernacle for the GOD of Jacob."

Here the reading "GOD of Jacob" is found in the majority of all texts, including Sinaiticus correction, A, C and many ancient versions like the Old Latin, Syriac Peshitta, Coptic Boharic, Sahidic, Ethiopian, Georgian and Armenian. The "GOD of Jacob" is the reading of the RV, ASV, NIV, NASB, and ESV. But again Vaticanus reads differently and says: "to find a tabernacle for the HOUSE of Jacob." The NASB, even though it reads "God of Jacob", has a footnote: "the earliest mss. read 'house' and not 'God'". Well, if they think this is the closest to the original reading, why not put it in their version? Ah, but wait, the NRSV and the upcoming ISV have done just that and now read "the HOUSE of Jacob."

Acts 19:16

In Acts 19 we are told of SEVEN sons of Sceva, who were vagabond Jews, exorcists, which "took upon them to call over them which had evil spirits the name of the Lord Jesus, saying, WE adjure you by Jesus whom Paul preacheth". There are two blunders found here in the "oldest and best" texts of both Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, against the majority of all others. The Majority of all texts, as well as the Syriac Peshitta, read as does the KJB with these seven sons saying "WE adjure you by Jesus". The word "we" is obviously plural, and the evil spirt answers in verse 15 "Jesus I know, and Paul I know, but who are YE?". Now, the word "ye" is plural in all texts answering to the plural "we" of "We adjure thee".

However Sinaiticus and Vaticanus both have only one individual saying: "I" adjure you by Jesus, and so read the NASB, NIV, and ESV. Nevertheless, the evil spirit still answers addressing a plural number of persons rather than one individual even in the corrupted Sinaiticus and Vaticanus manuscripts.

The more striking blunder is found in Acts 19:16. There we read: "And the man in whom the evil spirit was leaped on them, and overcame THEM, (autoon) and prevailed against them, so that they fled out of that house naked and wounded." There were seven sons and the spirit leaped on THEM.

This is the reading of the majority of all texts. However both Sinaiticus and Vaticanus tell us that the evil spirit "overcame BOTH OF THEM, (amphoteros autwn) and prevailed against them." The word for "both" is amphoteros, and always means "both". Yet the word "both" can only refer to the number two, not the SEVEN sons of Sceva. In fact, the NASBs from 1960 through 1972 read "and overcame BOTH OF THEM", and so also do the RV and ASV. Finally, after several years and numerous editions, it apparently occured to the NASB scholars that there was a clear blunder in their "oldest and most reliable texts", so in 1977 and again in 1995 the NASB changed their versions to read that the evil spirit overcame "ALL OF THEM" instead of "both of them". The NIV and RSV, also say "all of them". Actually, the word "all" is not found in any text whatsoever, but the NIV, NASB, RSV put the extra word in anyway.

Again, Sinaiticus and Vaticanus are clearly wrong. The NKJV correctly footnotes that the Nestle and UBS text says "both of them" instead of "overcame them".

Acts 20:21 "Testifying both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus CHRIST."

The word "Christ" is found in the Traditional Greek text, and also in Sinaiticus, A, C, Lamsa's Syriac Peshitta, NKJV, Tyndale, Geneva, and in the modern versions of the RV, ASV, NASB, RSV, and ESV of 2001.

However Vaticanus omits the word "Christ" from the full title of our Lord, and so do the NIV, NRSV, ISV, and the Holman Christian Standard. See how consistent this scientific method is in determining what God wrote?

Will Kinney

 

Scott, you keep asking about the facts for the number of changes between the two texts. I rounded it off to 5000, but actually over 9,000 words are affected. Would you feel better if I said only 3,000?

Here are the statistics.


[email protected]
Number of word differences between the Textus Receptus of the King James Bible vs. the UBS text.
 

  http://www.picknowl.com.au/homepages/rlister/bible/kjv4.htm

THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN
THE GREEK TEXTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
by David Blunt


THE PRINCIPAL TYPE of alteration in the modern Greek Text is omission of material found in the Received Text or "Textus Receptus" {T.R.). There is a lesser number of substitutions, where words in the modern Text differ from those appearing at the same place in the T.R., and an even smaller number of additions of words not in the T.R. There is also a number of transpositions, in which words or phrases have been moved from the place they occupy in the T.R. to another place nearby, and of punctuation differences which affect meaning. Data on these alterations have been collated by Fowler, from which the following is largely derived:

A Summary of the Differences in the Greek between the Received Text of the New Testament (Trinitarian Bible Society, 1976) and the United Bible Societies Text {Third Edition, 1976). (The NIV was largely based on this latter text, although in over 650 instances fails to follow it - Fowler, p. 22).

SUMMARY OF ALL WORD DIFFERENCES


Greek words in T.R. omitted from U.B.S. Text 3,602
Greek words in T.R. subsituted in U.B.S. Text 3,146
Greek words not in T.R. added to U.B.S. Text 976
Greek words in T.R. spelled differently in U.B.S. Text (but not different words) 950
Total Word Differences between Texts 8,674
( = 6.2% of words in T.R., 1 word in 16).


(1) in Waite, page 42.
(2) in Wright.
(3) The reason why this figure is less than the total for Greek words omitted (3,602) minus Greek words added (976) {=2,626) is that some differences classed as substitutions involve the substitution of a longer phrase in the U .B.S. Text than the one being replaced in the Received Text, thereby increasing the total word count of the U.B.S. Text.


SUMMARY OF DIFFERENCES WHICH AFFECT TRANSLATION

Places where Greek words in T R. omitted from U.B.S. Text 1,309
1. omissions of one or more whole verses 17
2. omissions of significant portions of verses 185
3. other omissions 1,107
4. Number of Greek words involved 2,632

Places where Greek words in T.R. substituted in U.B.S. Text 587
5. substitutions of words of dissimilar spelling 288
6. substitutions of words of similar spelling 283
7. substitutions of several words 16

Number of Greek words involved 603 (1)
8. Places where Greek words in T R. added to in U.B.S. Text 161
Number of Greek words involved 317
9. Places where Greek words in T.R. transposed in U.B.S. Text 9
10. Places where Greek words in T.R. punctuated differently in U.B.S. Text so as to affect translation 11


Total Differences Affecting Translation 2,077

Total Number of Greek Words Involved 3,572 (1)

(1) With 3,572 out of 8,674 total word differences between the texts involved, over 40% of the textual changes are seen to affect translation.

SUMMARY OF THE NATURE OF THE DIFFERENCES AFFECTING TRANSLATION

Differences which affect the meaning 1,658
Differences that substantially affect the meaning 481
1. Differences presenting problems in translation 288
2. Differences affecting quotations from the O.T 49
3. Differences which involve doctrine 44
4. Names of Deity omitted:


Jesus 75
Christ 44
Lord 35
God 32
Other names 26
Total 212

5. Pronouns that refer to Deity omitted 157
6. Other differences that downgrade Deity 41
7. Names of Deity added 29

Words enclosed in single brackets ("words, or portion of words, whose presence or position in text is regarded as disputed") 642
Words enclosed in double brackets ("passages which are regarded as later additions to the text, but which are of evident antiquity and importance") 427


References:

Fowler, Everett W., Evaluating Versions of the New Testament, Maranatha Baptist Press, Maranatha Baptist Bible College, 745 West Main Street, Wisconsin, U.S.A., 1981.

Waite, D. A.. Defending the King James Bible, The Bible for Today Press, 900 Park Avenue, Collingswood, New Jersey, U.S.A., 1992.

Wright, Geoff, Personal Communication, 16 Bedford Road, Letchworth, Herts., SG6 4DJ.


In his book, Defending the King James Bible, Dr. Donald Waite writes on pages 41-42: "In 1881, Westcott and Hort published their Greek text that rejected the Textus Receptus in 5,604 places BY MY ACTUAL COUNT (caps mine). This included 9,970 Greek words that were either added, substracted, or changed from the Textus Receptus. This involves, on the average, 15.4 words per page of the Greek New Testament, or a total of 45.9 pages in all. It is 7% of the total of 140,521 words in the Textus Receptus Greek New Testament."


The Westcott and Hort text changes the TR in over 5,600 places. My OWN PERSONAL COUNT (caps mine), as of August 2, 1984, using Scrivener's Greek N.T, was 5,604 changes that Westcott and Hort made to the TR in their Greek N.T. text. Of these 5,604 alterations, I found 1,952 to be omissions, 467 to be additions, and 3,185 to be changes. In these 5,604 places that were involved in these alterations, there were 4,366 more words included, making a total of 9,970 Greek words that were involved.

The W/H text changes 5,604 places in the N.T.
Changes include 9,970 Greek words.
Changes 7% of the Greek words

Rev. Jack A. Moorman, in December 1988, wrote a book titled: Missing in Modern Bibles--Is the Full Story Being Told? Rev. Moorman counted every word of the Received Greek Text and also every word of the Nestle/Alandd Greek text and came up with the Nestle-Aland text being shorter than the Received Text by 2,886 words. This is 934 words more than were omitted from the Westcott and Hort text. (1,952 vs.2,886) The omitting of 2,886 Greek words is equivalent, in number of English words involved, of dropping out the entire books of 1 Peter and 2 Peter!.

 

Praise the Lord! Brother Will, God is enabling you to speak the truth clearly, boldly and with His grace.
Keep on keepin' on!

Thank you Lil sister. I appreciate the encouragement and the fact that God has given you eyes to see and faith to believe His words.

We have an inspired, inerrant Bible and the General Message Onlyists do not. They don't want us to have one either, it seems. They rant about minor printing errors as though they had proved to the world there is no such thing as an inspired Bible.

I may post something regarding the spelling changes and the printing errors in a future post.

He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.

God bless you saint,

Will K

 

Hi brother Adams, you mentioned: " posted November 20, 2003 07:35 PM                       
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some will be arguing translation until Jesus returns...
The people of the land, in which both testaments of the Holy Bible were written, speak in pictures where as we here in the West rely more heavily on words.
If your Bible clearly shows you your sin, paints a picture of a Savior on the cross and an empty tomb- you have more than got your moneys worth!
Oh, that we would devote ourselves to what the Bible says that is so obvious!
"Love one another"
"Follow me"
"Sin not"
"If you see a brother in need"
"Thou shall not 1 - 10"
"Give thanks"
"Pray without ceasing"
...on and on...and on!

Bro. Adams, I understand your point. Modern Christianity is not much concerned with truth, doctrine or the authority of God's inerrant words. They have adopted a Rodney King type mentality "Can't we all just get along?"

I agree, we should love one another, but we cannot sit by and let the very foundation of our Christian faith be undermined by the position that no Bible is the complete, inspired, inerrant words of God. "If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?" Psalm 11:3

How do you know anything is true if it is all based on a Book that has totally different texts and meanings in hundreds of places?

I would rather be divided by truth than united by error.

Will K

 

Acts 20:28

"Feed the church of GOD, which he hath purchased with HIS OWN BLOOD."

This verse is under attack by many modern versions because it clearly shows that the Lord Jesus Christ is GOD, and that GOD shed His blood to purchase the church. Those who oppose the full Godhead of the Lord Jesus Christ will alter this verse in several ways to either change, hide, or obscure the truth that it was GOD'S blood that purchased the church.

The Traditional Byzantine Text that underlies the King James Bible says: poimainein thn ekklhsian tou qeou hn periepoihsato dia tou idiou aimatoV - feed the church of God which He purchased with His own blood."

The Westcott-Hort text has a slight variation which says:dia tou aimatoV tou idiou- by the blood of His own", which opens the door to several of the renderings we will see in some modern versions based on the Westcott-Hort text.

There are a wide variety of readings found in this verse. Many texts say "the church of THE LORD AND GOD", and this is actually the reading of the Hebrew Names Version, and the World English Version. Many other texts have "the church of THE LORD OF GOD", while Alexandrinus, C original, D and P74 read "the church OF THE LORD which he purchased with his own blood." This last reading would say it was only the Lord (not God) who shed his blood, and thus not clearly teach the deity of Christ.

In fact, this is exactly the reading found in the American Standard Version of 1901 based on the Westcott-Hort texts, the Revised Standard Version of 1952, the Worldwide English New Testament, and the New English Bible of 1970. They say: "Feed the church OF THE LORD which he obtained by his own blood." The new ISV (International Standard Version) shows both readings with this: "to be shepherds of God's (Other mss. read the Lord's) church, which he purchased with his own blood."

Other versions deny the full deity of Christ by keeping the word "God" in the phrase "the church of God", but they add an extra word to the sentence, not found in any Greek text, and thus again deny the Godhead of Christ. Among these are the modern versions like the Jehovah Witness New World Translation (based on the Westcott-Hort texts), the New Revised Standard of 1989, the New Jerusalem Bible, the 21st Century New Testament, The Contemporary English Version 1991 by the American Bible Society, Today's English Version 1992 put out by the American Bible Society and the United Bible Society, which also publish the Westcott-Hort Greek text that underlies most modern versions like the NASB, NIV, ESV.

The NRSV, NWT, Today's English Version, the Good News Translation, the New Jerusalem Bible, and the Contemporary English Version all say: "Feed the church of God which he obtained by the blood OF HIS SON". This fabricated reading denies that it was the blood of GOD which purchased the church, but affirms only the blood of His Son. The word "Son" does not occur in any manuscript at all.

The Bible versions that correctly read "Feed the church OF GOD which he purchased with HIS OWN BLOOD", are the King James Bible, NKJV, Revised Version, NASB, NIV, the Modern Greek N.T. used by the Greek Orthodox church today, Green's Modern KJV, Webster's translation, the KJV 21, Third Millenium Bible, and the ESV. This is the reading of the Tradtional Byzantine texts that underlies the King James Bible. It is also the reading found in Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, the Old Latin, Syriac Harclean, Vulgate, some Coptic versions, the Italian Diodati, the Spanish Antigua Versión of 1569, and Luther's German Bible.

Notice that the RSV, NRSV and ESV, all of which are revisions of each other, each gives a different rendering of this same verse, and the ASV differs from the NASB. Isn't modern scholarship exciting to watch! Hey, all bible versions have the same "message", and no doctrines are changed, right?

Acts 28:29 "AND WHEN HE HAD SAID THESE WORDS, THE JEWS DEPARTED, AND HAD GREAT REASONING AMONG THEMSELVES."

This entire verse is found in the Majority of all texts, as well as the Old Latin, and the Syriac Peshitta, both of which predate Sinaiticus and Vaticanus which omit this whole verse. What is of interest here is that while the NIV, RSV, ESV omit the verse, the NASB put it back in the text in 1977 and again in 1995, whereas from 1960 to 1972 they had omitted it. Now the new Holman Christian Standard version is coming out and it includes the verse while the ISV does not! If you get ten scholars in a room, you will come out with 12 different opinions

The following partial list of various Bible versions around the world shows which ones include Acts 28:29 in the New Testament.

In English we have Wycliffe, Tyndale, the Geneva Bible, NKJV, KJB, Young's, NASB 95 Update, Holman CSV, and the World English Bible. Foreign language Bibles that contain Acts 28:29 are the Albanian, Bulgarian, Czech, Chinese, Danish, Finnish, French, German, Modern Greek, Haitian, the Hebrew New Testament, Hungarian, Italian, Norsk, Portuguese, Romanian, Russian, Slavic, Spanish, Swahili, Tagalog, Turkish, Ukranian, and Vietnamese Bible versions. Yet in this country the RSV, NIV, ESV and ISV omit the verse entirely. Go figure.

Will Kinney

 

Hi Brian,

Originally posted by Will J. Kinney:
We have an inspired, inerrant Bible and the General Message Onlyists do not.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, we do, we have the same one that existed in 1605. I have no idea why you keep attacking it, and wanting to replace it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
And what is your 1605 inspired, inerrant Bible called, Brian? Can I get a copy?

Can you hold it in your hands, read it and believe every word of it? Or is it the mystical bible version that exists only in your own mind? Shall I hazard a guess?

As for Larry getting upset about my addressing a post to him that should have been meant for Bob, I apologize. Because all you General Message, Probably Close Enuf Version guys all sound alike, I sometimes get you confused

Will K

 

Book of Romans


Romans 5:1-2 "...we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ: By whom also we have access BY FAITH into this grace wherein we stand..."

"By faith" is found in the Majority of all texts as well as Sinaiticus, and also in the NASB, NIV, and ESV. However Vaticanus omits "by faith" and so do the RSV and the NRSV.

Romans 8:2 "For the law of the Spirit of live hath made ME free from the law of sin and death." "made ME free" is the reading in the Majority of texts, as well as A, C, D. "made ME free" is found in the NKJV, NIV, RV, ASV, and the RSV. But Vaticanus and Sinaiticus say "has made YOU free" and this is the reading of the NASB, NRSV and ESV.

Romans 15:19 "Through mighty signs and wonders, by the power of the SPIRIT OF GOD...I have fully preached the gospel of Christ."

Textually speaking, this is a very interesting verse in that it reveals a great deal about the mindset of the men behind the multitude of conflicting modern versions. The reading of "the Spirit OF GOD" is that of the Majority of all texts, including Sinaiticus and P46, which is about 200 years older than Vaticanus. "Spirit of GOD" (pneumatos theou) is found in Tyndale, Geneva, KJB, NKJV, and Lamsa's translation of the Syriac Peshitta. The modern versions of the NRSV, ESV, ISV, and the upcoming Holman Christian Standard all read "Spirit of GOD", just as the King James Bible.

When Westcott and Hort first came out with their totally revised Greek text in the 1881 Revised Version, their text read: "power of the HOLY SPIRIT" (pneumatos hagiou) and so read the Revised Version, ASV, and the RSV of 1952.

I have in my possession three different Nestle-Aland Greek texts, which is basically the Westcott-Hort text that underlies most modern versions since 1881. All three of these are different here in Romans 15:19. The one from 1934 (4th edition) says: HOLY Spirit. The one dated 1962 changed this to simply "the SPIRIT", thus omitting "Holy" and "God". This reading comes from only one manuscript and that is Vaticanus. The NASB and the NIV both follow only one Greek manuscript here and read: "through the power of the SPIRIT".

Then sometime between the 1962 edition and the 1993 edition, the Nestle-Aland text changed for the third time and now reads: "the Spirit OF GOD", as has the King James Bible for almost 400 years now. We can clearly see here the constantly changing opinions of the noted scholars behind the modern versions.

Here is a brief chart showing the conflicting readings of just this one phrase.

"power of the SPIRIT OF GOD" - KJB, NKJV, NRSV, ESV, ISV, Holman

"power of the HOLY SPIRIT" - RV, ASV, RSV

"power of the SPIRIT" - NASB, NIV

Romans 16:24 "THE GRACE OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST BE WITH YOU ALL. AMEN."

This entire verse is found in the Majority of all texts, as well as the Old Latin, the Syriac, and all English Bibles from Wycliffe to Tyndale and the Geneva Bible. Vaticanus and Sinaiticus omit this entire verse and so do the RV, RSV, NIV, and ESV. However though the NASB omitted the verse from 1960 to 1972, in 1977 and again in 1995 the NASB now includes the verse in its text and so does the 2003 Holman Christian Standard Version, but the ISV does not. So I guess we can all confidently rest in the findings of our present day noted scholars, huh?


Will Kinney

 

First Corinthians


1 Corinthians 4:17 "...Timotheus...shall bring you into remembrance of my ways which be in CHRIST, as I teach every where in every church."

Here the word "Christ" stands alone in the Majority and Vaticanus. So read the NKJV, NASB, RSV, and ESV. However Sinaiticus add the word 'Jesus' and so the NIV, NRSV, ISV and Holman say: "my ways which are in CHRIST JESUS."

We will see a whole lot more of this type of thing in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ because Sinaiticus and Vaticanus both differ from each other numerous times. In fact, already in 1 Corinthians Vaticanus omits "Christ" in 1:7 and 10, while Sinaiticus includes it. In 2:16 Vaticanus reads "the mind of THE LORD", while Sinaiticus has "the mind of CHRIST." In 5:4 "In the name of our Lord Jesus CHRIST", Vaticanus omits "Christ" and so do most modern versions, but "Christ" is found in the Majority, Sinaiticus and the oldest one we have which is P46.

1 Corinthians 5:5 "that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord JESUS." Here the word "Jesus" again is in the Majority and Sinaiticus, and so read the KJB, NASB, RV and ASV. However Vaticanus omits the word "Jesus" and so do the NIV, NRSV, ESV and the ISV.

1 Corinthians 10:9 "Neither let us tempt CHRIST, as some of them also tempted, and were destroyed of serpents."

This verse is typical of the tossed to and fro by every wave methods of modern scholarship. CHRIST is the reading of the Majority of texts, as well as P46 which predates Sin/Vat by 150 years. The RV, ASV, NASB, NIV follow Sinaiticus and Vaticanus here and say: "Neither let us tempt THE LORD" (RV). The Nestle-Aland text originally read "the Lord" but more recent editions have gone back to reading "Christ". In fact, the NRSV, ESV and Holman now read as the KJB with "neither let us tempt CHRIST", but the ISV still reads " the Lord".

1 Corinthians 13:3 This is another head slapper. "And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body TO BE BURNED, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing."

The reading of "give my body TO BE BURNED" is in the Majority text, C, D, Syriac Peshitta, Old Latin, Armenian, and Ethiopic ancient versions. The Nestle-Aland text originally read "to be burned" and so also read the RV, ASV, RSV, NASB, NIV, Holman and ESV. However Sinaiticus and Vaticanus read: "though I give my body THAT I MAY BOAST,...it profits me nothing." The latest Nestle-Aland Greek texts have changed once again and now have "that I may boast" and so read the NRSV and the ISV.

If you think the Vaticanus manuscript is the best to follow here, you should take note of the fact that in 13:5, just two verses later, instead of reading "charity...seeketh not her own", Vaticanus reads: "charity does not seek that which is NOT her own". As for Sinaiticus, among many other blunders, in 1 Cor. 15:51 instead of saying: "We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed" Sinaiticus actually says: "we shall sleep but we shall not all be changed." These are the "oldest and most reliable manuscripts" the modern sholars are so fond of.

Will Kinney