Herman Otten Promoted the "Plastic Text" of the Bible - His Attack on Kloha. Will We Get Another Hale-Storm?The Beck Bible Is No Different, Undermining the Gospel of Mark

Pastor Herman Otten made a special case out of Kloha and the professor's fondness for the "plastic text" of the Bible. 

 Jeffrey Kloha was at the Concordia Seminary when Voelz published his1300 page, two-volume CPH mega-commentary on the Gospel of Mark. Voelz wrote that his outsized commentary was based on the dubious Codex Vaticanus.

Voelz - "The elephant gave birth and brought forth a mouse." Professor humor.

I remember Otten making a point about William F. Beck being such a scholar - Beck read the scholarly journals that no one else on the faculty opened (uncut pages - dead giveaway).

As I am pointing out in - 

The King James Version: 

Apostolic Texts, Precise Translation versus 

Fraudulent Texts and Heretical Translations - 

neither Codex Sinaiticus (Aleph) nor Vaticanus (B) are reliable sources - and are most likely late forgeries. Sinaiticus and Vaticanus are not the "World's Oldest Bibles" as Tischendorf bragged. They are the World's Newest Fakes.

How is Beck in the category of advocating a plastic, flexible Bible text?

He footnoted the true ending of Mark with this - 

“The two oldest manuscripts [Vaticanus, Sinaiticus] lack Mark 16:9-20…but end at verse 8.” [GJ - quite the betrayal of the text]

Like the wily and dishonest plastic text scholars, Beck established doubts about the Empty Tomb with his pernicious footnote. Mark 16:9-20 is not really part of the Bible, they think, following the Westcott-Hort example.

 Tis always funny to see how KJV opponents fall for Pietism and Calvinism, while promoting Justification without Faith.