Forwarded from Apostolic Branch
Today we celebrate the Lord's Day. The day on which our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ rose from the dead. We too, pray to be resurrected, not through works but through grace. Consequently, we pray to God that he will keep our course true, and calm the many storms we face in life, so that we may be seen as pure and undefiled children of God, not wishing to pass through the fire scathed, but rather unscathed. May the grace and love of the Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.
Biblical Translations - 1
Lost in Translation?
If the Bible is God's word, what translation should I use? Wouldn't there be something lost in translation? In order to explore translation, we need a brief history of the Bible and its translation into English.
------------------------------
It's a little known fact that the Bible is made up of three different languages: Hebrew, Koine Greek, and Aramaic.
Hebrew makes up the bulk of the Old Testament with of course Koine Greek making up the New Testament. Aramaic is used in the books of Daniel, Ezra, and a couple words within the Gospels (Matthew Mark Luke and John).
------------------------------
1,400.BCE ~ Moses receives the 10 commandments
400-500.BCE ~ All 39 Old Testament books are completed and collected, as well as multiple apocryphal words
- From the time of Ezra onward, the books would be copied by the Scribes onto new clean animal skin and follow extremely strict rules to ensure the scriptures would never be in danger of being lost to friend or foe.
420.BCE-1st Century AD ~ Known as the "400 Silent Years" of no prophets. These are the years the Deuterocanonical works claim to be written
- A group known today as the Essenes independently recorded and kept the temple library which included many apocryphal and canonized scripture
200.BCE ~ 70 Rabbi scholars come together to translate the 39 books and 14 Apocrypha books into Greek and creating the Greek Septuagint
1st Century AD ~ The New Testament was being penned and collected
315.AD ~ Athenasius, the Bishop of Alexandria, identifies the 27 books of the New Testament which are today recognized as the canon of scripture
382.AD ~ Jerome writes his Latin Vulgate which contains 80 Books: 39 Old Test. 14 Apocrypha and 27 New Test
500-550.AD ~ Scripture has been translated into over 500 languages
600.AD ~ Latin was declared to be the only authorized translation of scripture
700-900.AD ~ Copies of the Gospels, Genesis, and Revelation were translated into Old English, the language of the Anglo-Saxons
- Very few people could read, so the Bible was only made known to the common man through sermons and church leaders. A hermit named Richard Rolle translated many of the Psalms and Gospels to those who could not read Latin.
1384.AD ~ John Wyclif hand-writes the first ever complete English Bible with the 80 books
1526.AD ~ William Tyndale publishes the Tyndale's Bible which consisted of the first ever entire New Testament in English
- Tyndale spent much time with Martin Luther and was familiar with his German translation
1535.AD ~ Miles Coverdale publishes the Coverdale's Bible with all 80 books but was superseded by a version consisting of both Coverdale's and Tyndale's version.
1539.AD ~ Coverdale revises his version and published what was known as 'The Great Bible' due to its large size. This Bible became the first authorized English version
1557.AD ~ William Whittingham produces The ‘Geneva Bible' which quickly became popular, due to its smaller size compared with the Great Bible
- The Geneva Bible was finally banned by Archbishop Laud in 1644
1568.AD ~ The 'Bishops' Bible was created by a committee of bishops led by Archbishop Parker, who was determined that the learned clergy of the Anglican Church should produce an authorized translation more sympathetic to the Catholic position than the Geneva Bible
1582.AD ~ The Vulgate New Testament was translated into English at Reims
1609-10.AD ~ The Vulgate Old Testament was translated into English and combined with the Reims New Testament to form the Douay-Rheims Bible, the first authorized English version in the Catholic Church
1603-1611.AD ~ The Authorized King James Version 1611 was created to be the Bible used by both Catholics and Protestant's, with its translation team using all previous English versions, the Latin Vulgate, and copies of the original Greek and Hebrew manuscripts
------------------------------
So now we know where the KJV came from, but what about Bibles such as the NIV, ESV, NLT, NASB, ect? We will cover this shortly. God Bless
(Ignore the links)
Lost in Translation?
If the Bible is God's word, what translation should I use? Wouldn't there be something lost in translation? In order to explore translation, we need a brief history of the Bible and its translation into English.
------------------------------
It's a little known fact that the Bible is made up of three different languages: Hebrew, Koine Greek, and Aramaic.
Hebrew makes up the bulk of the Old Testament with of course Koine Greek making up the New Testament. Aramaic is used in the books of Daniel, Ezra, and a couple words within the Gospels (Matthew Mark Luke and John).
------------------------------
1,400.BCE ~ Moses receives the 10 commandments
400-500.BCE ~ All 39 Old Testament books are completed and collected, as well as multiple apocryphal words
- From the time of Ezra onward, the books would be copied by the Scribes onto new clean animal skin and follow extremely strict rules to ensure the scriptures would never be in danger of being lost to friend or foe.
420.BCE-1st Century AD ~ Known as the "400 Silent Years" of no prophets. These are the years the Deuterocanonical works claim to be written
- A group known today as the Essenes independently recorded and kept the temple library which included many apocryphal and canonized scripture
200.BCE ~ 70 Rabbi scholars come together to translate the 39 books and 14 Apocrypha books into Greek and creating the Greek Septuagint
1st Century AD ~ The New Testament was being penned and collected
315.AD ~ Athenasius, the Bishop of Alexandria, identifies the 27 books of the New Testament which are today recognized as the canon of scripture
382.AD ~ Jerome writes his Latin Vulgate which contains 80 Books: 39 Old Test. 14 Apocrypha and 27 New Test
500-550.AD ~ Scripture has been translated into over 500 languages
600.AD ~ Latin was declared to be the only authorized translation of scripture
700-900.AD ~ Copies of the Gospels, Genesis, and Revelation were translated into Old English, the language of the Anglo-Saxons
- Very few people could read, so the Bible was only made known to the common man through sermons and church leaders. A hermit named Richard Rolle translated many of the Psalms and Gospels to those who could not read Latin.
1384.AD ~ John Wyclif hand-writes the first ever complete English Bible with the 80 books
1526.AD ~ William Tyndale publishes the Tyndale's Bible which consisted of the first ever entire New Testament in English
- Tyndale spent much time with Martin Luther and was familiar with his German translation
1535.AD ~ Miles Coverdale publishes the Coverdale's Bible with all 80 books but was superseded by a version consisting of both Coverdale's and Tyndale's version.
1539.AD ~ Coverdale revises his version and published what was known as 'The Great Bible' due to its large size. This Bible became the first authorized English version
1557.AD ~ William Whittingham produces The ‘Geneva Bible' which quickly became popular, due to its smaller size compared with the Great Bible
- The Geneva Bible was finally banned by Archbishop Laud in 1644
1568.AD ~ The 'Bishops' Bible was created by a committee of bishops led by Archbishop Parker, who was determined that the learned clergy of the Anglican Church should produce an authorized translation more sympathetic to the Catholic position than the Geneva Bible
1582.AD ~ The Vulgate New Testament was translated into English at Reims
1609-10.AD ~ The Vulgate Old Testament was translated into English and combined with the Reims New Testament to form the Douay-Rheims Bible, the first authorized English version in the Catholic Church
1603-1611.AD ~ The Authorized King James Version 1611 was created to be the Bible used by both Catholics and Protestant's, with its translation team using all previous English versions, the Latin Vulgate, and copies of the original Greek and Hebrew manuscripts
------------------------------
So now we know where the KJV came from, but what about Bibles such as the NIV, ESV, NLT, NASB, ect? We will cover this shortly. God Bless
(Ignore the links)
👍1
Biblical Translations - 2a
Line of Manuscripts
Let it be known that all Bibles got their material from somewhere, that's a given, but where exactly? To figure out which Bible to use, we must uncover where the source material came from.
------------------------------
Three New Testament Textual Theories
Here's a quick rundown...
1. The Critical Text Theory
- This theory can be summarized into 8 rules which are applied to manuscripts, laid out by Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort to find the original Greek text, that landed them at the Alexandrian Text Type. Coming from Alexandria Egypt, this text is used for nearly all modern translations of the Bible, excluding the KJV and NKJV. These rules will be laid out.
2. Majority Text Theory
- This theory takes all known ancient manuscripts and compares them all, finding which textual variant has support among the majority of manuscripts, and that is given that reading priority. This is based on the assumption that scribes chose to copy good manuscripts over bad ones, and thus better readings will be in the majority over time. The text produced from this method is known as the Byzantine Majority Text.
3. The “Confessional” Position, or “Textus Receptus Only”
- This position takes its name from where it starts: a “confession of faith”. The Confessional view holds that God must have preserved the scriptures completely without error. The Textus Receptus, meaning "Received Text", contains the translation base for the first Greek translation of the New Testament into English by William Tyndale and is the textual base for the Bishops Bible, the Geneva Bible and the King James Bible.
------------------------------
Critical Text Rules:
1. Older readings, manuscripts, or manuscript groups should be preferred
2. Readings are approved or rejected by reason of the quality, and not the number, of their supporting witnesses
3. A reading combining two simple, alternative readings is later than the two readings comprising the combination. Manuscripts that rarely or never combine readings are of “special value”.
4. The reading that best conforms to the grammar and context of the sentence should be preferred
5. The reading that best conforms to the style and content of the author should be preferred
6. The reading that explains the existence of other readings should be preferred.
7. The more difficult reading should be preferred
8. Prefer readings in manuscripts that habitually contain better readings, which is more certain if it’s also an older manuscript and if it doesn’t contain combinations of other variations (as in rule #3). This also applies to manuscript families.
------------------------------
One error not accounted for by Westcott and Hort when choosing the Alexandrian Texts is its authors and the doctrines within the text itself. The writers of the text were non-trinitarian Gnostics. The Gnostics were notorious for changing and manipulating texts, and even creating writings to force Christianity to fit into Gnostic mentality. Very few Gnostic texts and ideas fit with Biblical Christianity. As a result of this manipulation, the Alexandrian Texts removes verses and changes very key verses to fit their non-trinitarian doctrines.
------------------------------
Unfortunately, the Majority Text and the Alexandrian Text agrees on certain verses that directly attack the trinity. One such verse is 1 John 5:7-8 “For there are three that testify: the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement,” (NASB). Where in the KJV says “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one,”
There are too many omissions to list here. If you'd like to see more, let me know.
------------------------------
The "Confessional" Position is backed by scripture:
Line of Manuscripts
Let it be known that all Bibles got their material from somewhere, that's a given, but where exactly? To figure out which Bible to use, we must uncover where the source material came from.
------------------------------
Three New Testament Textual Theories
Here's a quick rundown...
1. The Critical Text Theory
- This theory can be summarized into 8 rules which are applied to manuscripts, laid out by Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort to find the original Greek text, that landed them at the Alexandrian Text Type. Coming from Alexandria Egypt, this text is used for nearly all modern translations of the Bible, excluding the KJV and NKJV. These rules will be laid out.
2. Majority Text Theory
- This theory takes all known ancient manuscripts and compares them all, finding which textual variant has support among the majority of manuscripts, and that is given that reading priority. This is based on the assumption that scribes chose to copy good manuscripts over bad ones, and thus better readings will be in the majority over time. The text produced from this method is known as the Byzantine Majority Text.
3. The “Confessional” Position, or “Textus Receptus Only”
- This position takes its name from where it starts: a “confession of faith”. The Confessional view holds that God must have preserved the scriptures completely without error. The Textus Receptus, meaning "Received Text", contains the translation base for the first Greek translation of the New Testament into English by William Tyndale and is the textual base for the Bishops Bible, the Geneva Bible and the King James Bible.
------------------------------
Critical Text Rules:
1. Older readings, manuscripts, or manuscript groups should be preferred
2. Readings are approved or rejected by reason of the quality, and not the number, of their supporting witnesses
3. A reading combining two simple, alternative readings is later than the two readings comprising the combination. Manuscripts that rarely or never combine readings are of “special value”.
4. The reading that best conforms to the grammar and context of the sentence should be preferred
5. The reading that best conforms to the style and content of the author should be preferred
6. The reading that explains the existence of other readings should be preferred.
7. The more difficult reading should be preferred
8. Prefer readings in manuscripts that habitually contain better readings, which is more certain if it’s also an older manuscript and if it doesn’t contain combinations of other variations (as in rule #3). This also applies to manuscript families.
------------------------------
One error not accounted for by Westcott and Hort when choosing the Alexandrian Texts is its authors and the doctrines within the text itself. The writers of the text were non-trinitarian Gnostics. The Gnostics were notorious for changing and manipulating texts, and even creating writings to force Christianity to fit into Gnostic mentality. Very few Gnostic texts and ideas fit with Biblical Christianity. As a result of this manipulation, the Alexandrian Texts removes verses and changes very key verses to fit their non-trinitarian doctrines.
------------------------------
Unfortunately, the Majority Text and the Alexandrian Text agrees on certain verses that directly attack the trinity. One such verse is 1 John 5:7-8 “For there are three that testify: the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement,” (NASB). Where in the KJV says “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one,”
There are too many omissions to list here. If you'd like to see more, let me know.
------------------------------
The "Confessional" Position is backed by scripture:
Biblical Translations - 2b
Psalm 12:6-7
The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.
Psalm 111:7-8
The words of his hands are verity and judgment; all his commandments are sure. They stand fast and for ever and ever, and are done in truth and uprightness.
Psalm 117:2
For his merciful kindness is great toward us: and the truth of the LORD endureth for ever. Praise ye the LORD.
Psalm 119:152
Concerning they testimonies, I have known of old that thou hast founded them for ever.
Psalm 119:160
Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of they righteous judgements edureth for ever.
Isaiah 40:8
The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever.
Matthew 24:35
Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away
1 Peter 1:23
Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.
------------------------------
Conclusion: The Textus Receptus position is not only Biblically sound but the other positions lack in necessary doctrine.
Now we are left with 2 versions, the KJV and the NKJV, but they are both the same right? Wrong. I will explain in a later post.
God Bless
Psalm 12:6-7
The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.
Psalm 111:7-8
The words of his hands are verity and judgment; all his commandments are sure. They stand fast and for ever and ever, and are done in truth and uprightness.
Psalm 117:2
For his merciful kindness is great toward us: and the truth of the LORD endureth for ever. Praise ye the LORD.
Psalm 119:152
Concerning they testimonies, I have known of old that thou hast founded them for ever.
Psalm 119:160
Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of they righteous judgements edureth for ever.
Isaiah 40:8
The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever.
Matthew 24:35
Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away
1 Peter 1:23
Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.
------------------------------
Conclusion: The Textus Receptus position is not only Biblically sound but the other positions lack in necessary doctrine.
Now we are left with 2 versions, the KJV and the NKJV, but they are both the same right? Wrong. I will explain in a later post.
God Bless
Truth In Yeshua
Biblical Translations - 2b Psalm 12:6-7 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever. Psalm 111:7-8 The words of his…
TL;DR
All modern Bibles, excluding the KJV and NKJV, are based off a heretical text.
The "Confessional" Position of Textus Receptus is backed by scripture, giving solid validity to KJV and NKJV
All modern Bibles, excluding the KJV and NKJV, are based off a heretical text.
The "Confessional" Position of Textus Receptus is backed by scripture, giving solid validity to KJV and NKJV
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Here is a video with a very basic rundown of what's above
Biblical Translations - 3a
The KJV vs NKJV
We have now covered the errors of Biblical translations and have narrowed God's word on a single line of translations, the Textus Receptus, but there are two Bibles that come from it. Which should we use? Lets examine what both Bibles have to say
------------------------------
One of the biggest reasons someone would use the NKJV is because of its easy-to-understand language. Does this affect doctrine? Is there a limit to what should be taken out and changed?
The NKJV omits...
"Lord" 66 times
"God" 51 times
"heaven" 50 times
"repent" 44 times
"blood" 23 times
"hell" 22 times
"JEHOVAH" entirely
"new testament" entirely
"damnation" entirely
"devils" entirely
In fact, the NKJV ignores the Textus Receptus in over 1,200 times and has replaced the KJV Hebrew ben Chayyim Old Testament with the corrupted Stuttgart edition ben Asher Old Testament.
------------------------------
One of the most startling things the NKJV has done is demote Christ in the sake of easy-to-understand language.
Luke 13:8 NKJV used "Sir" instead of "Lord"
Mat 18:26 NKJV says "before him saying, Master" instead of "and worshipped him saying, Lord"
Mat 26:64 NKJV says "right hand of the Power" instead of "right hand of Power"
Gen 22:8 says "God will provide for himself a lamb" instead of "God will provide himself a lamb"
John 8:35 says "a son" instead of "the Son"
Col 2:2 says "the mystery of God, both of the Father and of Christ" instead of "the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ" (trinity)
Mat 8:19 et al. "Teacher" instead of "Master"
Mat 19:16 "Good Teacher" instead of "Good Master"
Mat 22:16 "Teacher" instead of "Master"
Mat 23:8 "One is your Teacher, the Christ" instead of "one is your Master, even Christ"
Mat 23:10 "And do not be called teachers, for One is your Teacher, the Christ" instead of "Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ"
In these verses, the NKJV actually copies the incredibly corrupted JEHOVAH WITNESS VERSION and DEMOTES Christ, THE TRINITY, and the PLAN OF SALVATION
Acts 3:13 the NKJV says "His Servant Jesus" instead of the KJV "his Son Jesus"
Acts 3:26 the NKJV says "His Servant Jesus" instead of the KJV "his Son Jesus" again
Acts 4:27 & 30 say "holy Servant Jesus" instead of "holy child Jesus"
Col 1:15 says "the firstborn over all creation" instead of "firstborn of every creature"
Mark 2:15 the NKJV actually OMITTED Jesus
Heb 4:8 and Acts 7:45 the NKJV says Joshua instead of Jesus
2 Thes 3:5 says "patience of Christ" instead of "patient waiting for Christ"
Acts 17:29 the NKJV says "Divine Nature" instead of "Godhead"
Phil 4:20 says "our God and Father" instead of "God and our Father"
Rev 1:6 says "his God and Father" instead of "God and his Father"
Col 3:17 says "God the Father through Him" instead of the KJV "God and the Father by him"
John 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7 the NKJV says "Helper" instead the KJV "Comforter"
1 Cor 11:1 says in NKJV "Imitate Christ" instead of "followers... of Christ"
Rom 3:3 says "faithfulness" instead of "faith"
Rom 11:30 says "disobedient" instead of "not saved"
Rom 11:32 also says "disobedient" instead of "not believed"
1 Cor 1:16 & 2 Cor 2:15 says "are being saved" instead of simply "are saved"
------------------------------
Why would the NKJV copy the Jehovah Witness cult?
The KJV vs NKJV
We have now covered the errors of Biblical translations and have narrowed God's word on a single line of translations, the Textus Receptus, but there are two Bibles that come from it. Which should we use? Lets examine what both Bibles have to say
------------------------------
One of the biggest reasons someone would use the NKJV is because of its easy-to-understand language. Does this affect doctrine? Is there a limit to what should be taken out and changed?
The NKJV omits...
"Lord" 66 times
"God" 51 times
"heaven" 50 times
"repent" 44 times
"blood" 23 times
"hell" 22 times
"JEHOVAH" entirely
"new testament" entirely
"damnation" entirely
"devils" entirely
In fact, the NKJV ignores the Textus Receptus in over 1,200 times and has replaced the KJV Hebrew ben Chayyim Old Testament with the corrupted Stuttgart edition ben Asher Old Testament.
------------------------------
One of the most startling things the NKJV has done is demote Christ in the sake of easy-to-understand language.
Luke 13:8 NKJV used "Sir" instead of "Lord"
Mat 18:26 NKJV says "before him saying, Master" instead of "and worshipped him saying, Lord"
Mat 26:64 NKJV says "right hand of the Power" instead of "right hand of Power"
Gen 22:8 says "God will provide for himself a lamb" instead of "God will provide himself a lamb"
John 8:35 says "a son" instead of "the Son"
Col 2:2 says "the mystery of God, both of the Father and of Christ" instead of "the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ" (trinity)
Mat 8:19 et al. "Teacher" instead of "Master"
Mat 19:16 "Good Teacher" instead of "Good Master"
Mat 22:16 "Teacher" instead of "Master"
Mat 23:8 "One is your Teacher, the Christ" instead of "one is your Master, even Christ"
Mat 23:10 "And do not be called teachers, for One is your Teacher, the Christ" instead of "Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ"
In these verses, the NKJV actually copies the incredibly corrupted JEHOVAH WITNESS VERSION and DEMOTES Christ, THE TRINITY, and the PLAN OF SALVATION
Acts 3:13 the NKJV says "His Servant Jesus" instead of the KJV "his Son Jesus"
Acts 3:26 the NKJV says "His Servant Jesus" instead of the KJV "his Son Jesus" again
Acts 4:27 & 30 say "holy Servant Jesus" instead of "holy child Jesus"
Col 1:15 says "the firstborn over all creation" instead of "firstborn of every creature"
Mark 2:15 the NKJV actually OMITTED Jesus
Heb 4:8 and Acts 7:45 the NKJV says Joshua instead of Jesus
2 Thes 3:5 says "patience of Christ" instead of "patient waiting for Christ"
Acts 17:29 the NKJV says "Divine Nature" instead of "Godhead"
Phil 4:20 says "our God and Father" instead of "God and our Father"
Rev 1:6 says "his God and Father" instead of "God and his Father"
Col 3:17 says "God the Father through Him" instead of the KJV "God and the Father by him"
John 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7 the NKJV says "Helper" instead the KJV "Comforter"
1 Cor 11:1 says in NKJV "Imitate Christ" instead of "followers... of Christ"
Rom 3:3 says "faithfulness" instead of "faith"
Rom 11:30 says "disobedient" instead of "not saved"
Rom 11:32 also says "disobedient" instead of "not believed"
1 Cor 1:16 & 2 Cor 2:15 says "are being saved" instead of simply "are saved"
------------------------------
Why would the NKJV copy the Jehovah Witness cult?
Biblical Translations - 3b
The KJV vs NKJV
As we've seen, in the name of easy-to-read language, the NKJV has demoted Christ, attacked the trinity, and downplayed the plan of salvation. The NKJV also supports new age ideas that are incompatible with Christianity.
------------------------------
The NKJV supports Works Salvation:
Mat 7:14 NKJV states "difficult is the way" instead the KJV "narrow is the way"
Gal 5:22 NKJV says "faithfulness" instead of the KJV "faith"
1 John 5:13 NKJV says "may continue to believe" instead of "may believe"
Eccl 5:20 "God keeps him busy" instead of the KJV "God answereth him"
The NKJV supports "progressive ages" AKA Hyper-Dispensationalism:
Mat 12:32 NKJV "age to come" instead of the KJV "world to come"
Mat 13:39 NKJV "end of the age" instead of "end of the world"
Acts 15:18 NKJV "from eternity" instead of "from the beginning of the world"
1 Cor 15:45 "Adam being a living being" instead of "Adam was mad a living soul"
The NKJV alludes to pantheism, androgeny, and gender equality:
Luke 7:19-20 & Mat 11:3 the NKJV says "the Coming One" instead of the KJV "he that should come"
John 7:18 et al. NKJV "the One" instead of the KJV "he" or "his"
John 4:24 NKJV "God is spirit" instead of KJV "God is a spirit"
2 Cor 2:10 "presence" instead of "person"
Gen 2:18 NKJV says "helper comparable to him" instead of "help meet for him"
The NKJV supports a "the devil made me do it" mentality:
Phil 3:21 NKJV "lowly bodies" instead the KJV "vile bodies"
1 John 5:19 "whole world lies under the sway of the wicked one" instead of the KJV "whole world lieth in wickedness"
Mat 5:37 NKJV "the evil one" instead of KJV "of evil"
Luke 11:4 NKJV "deliver us from the wicked one" instead the KJV "deliver us from evil"
2 Cor 1:12 NKJV "boast" instead of KJV "rejoicing"
The NKJV supports religious tolerance and a one world religion:
Acts 24:14 NKJV "sect" instead of KJV "heresy"
Acts 17:22 "very religious" instead of KJV "too superstitious"
The word "heathen" was replaced with "nation(s)" 148 times
Acts 8:9 "astonished" instead of the KJV "bewitched"
Acts 25:19 "religion" instead the KJV "superstition"
2 Cor 10:5 "casting down arguments" instead of the KJV "casting down imaginations"
Titus 3:10 "Reject a divisive man" instead of the KJV "an heretic...reject"
The NKJV has subjective standards:
Mat 5:32 et al. NKJV "sexual immortality" instead the KJV "fornication"
1 Cor 6:9 "homosexual" (calamities only) instead the KJV "effeminate"
The KJV word "sodomite" is changed to "perverted persons" completely
2 Tim 3:17 "complete" instead of the KJV "perfect"
The NKJV uses new age terms:
Mat 23:10 et al. "the Christ" instead of the KJV "Christ"
Ps 106:6 NKJV omits the word Satan
Rom 6:24 NKJV "slave" instead the KJV "servant"
The NKJV changes "hell" into "hades" 22 times
The NKJV changes "devil(s)" into "demon(s)" 81 times
The NKJV messes with the mark of the beast:
Rev 13:16 et al. "a mark on their hand" instead of the KJV "a mark in their hand" this subtle difference could go a long way.
1 Sam 13:21 "the charge...was a prim" (alluding to a microchip) instead of the KJV "they had a file...for the coulters"
------------------------------
It's very apparent the KJV and the NKJV are not the same. Now we can see that the difference in language can downplay or manipulate crucial doctrine
The KJV vs NKJV
As we've seen, in the name of easy-to-read language, the NKJV has demoted Christ, attacked the trinity, and downplayed the plan of salvation. The NKJV also supports new age ideas that are incompatible with Christianity.
------------------------------
The NKJV supports Works Salvation:
Mat 7:14 NKJV states "difficult is the way" instead the KJV "narrow is the way"
Gal 5:22 NKJV says "faithfulness" instead of the KJV "faith"
1 John 5:13 NKJV says "may continue to believe" instead of "may believe"
Eccl 5:20 "God keeps him busy" instead of the KJV "God answereth him"
The NKJV supports "progressive ages" AKA Hyper-Dispensationalism:
Mat 12:32 NKJV "age to come" instead of the KJV "world to come"
Mat 13:39 NKJV "end of the age" instead of "end of the world"
Acts 15:18 NKJV "from eternity" instead of "from the beginning of the world"
1 Cor 15:45 "Adam being a living being" instead of "Adam was mad a living soul"
The NKJV alludes to pantheism, androgeny, and gender equality:
Luke 7:19-20 & Mat 11:3 the NKJV says "the Coming One" instead of the KJV "he that should come"
John 7:18 et al. NKJV "the One" instead of the KJV "he" or "his"
John 4:24 NKJV "God is spirit" instead of KJV "God is a spirit"
2 Cor 2:10 "presence" instead of "person"
Gen 2:18 NKJV says "helper comparable to him" instead of "help meet for him"
The NKJV supports a "the devil made me do it" mentality:
Phil 3:21 NKJV "lowly bodies" instead the KJV "vile bodies"
1 John 5:19 "whole world lies under the sway of the wicked one" instead of the KJV "whole world lieth in wickedness"
Mat 5:37 NKJV "the evil one" instead of KJV "of evil"
Luke 11:4 NKJV "deliver us from the wicked one" instead the KJV "deliver us from evil"
2 Cor 1:12 NKJV "boast" instead of KJV "rejoicing"
The NKJV supports religious tolerance and a one world religion:
Acts 24:14 NKJV "sect" instead of KJV "heresy"
Acts 17:22 "very religious" instead of KJV "too superstitious"
The word "heathen" was replaced with "nation(s)" 148 times
Acts 8:9 "astonished" instead of the KJV "bewitched"
Acts 25:19 "religion" instead the KJV "superstition"
2 Cor 10:5 "casting down arguments" instead of the KJV "casting down imaginations"
Titus 3:10 "Reject a divisive man" instead of the KJV "an heretic...reject"
The NKJV has subjective standards:
Mat 5:32 et al. NKJV "sexual immortality" instead the KJV "fornication"
1 Cor 6:9 "homosexual" (calamities only) instead the KJV "effeminate"
The KJV word "sodomite" is changed to "perverted persons" completely
2 Tim 3:17 "complete" instead of the KJV "perfect"
The NKJV uses new age terms:
Mat 23:10 et al. "the Christ" instead of the KJV "Christ"
Ps 106:6 NKJV omits the word Satan
Rom 6:24 NKJV "slave" instead the KJV "servant"
The NKJV changes "hell" into "hades" 22 times
The NKJV changes "devil(s)" into "demon(s)" 81 times
The NKJV messes with the mark of the beast:
Rev 13:16 et al. "a mark on their hand" instead of the KJV "a mark in their hand" this subtle difference could go a long way.
1 Sam 13:21 "the charge...was a prim" (alluding to a microchip) instead of the KJV "they had a file...for the coulters"
------------------------------
It's very apparent the KJV and the NKJV are not the same. Now we can see that the difference in language can downplay or manipulate crucial doctrine
Forwarded from Sub to @ApeMtn37 ⬅️ New Channel! (Reinhardt von Krieger)
Babylon Mystery Religion, Ralph Woodrow.pdf
6.6 MB
Babylon Mystery Religion - Ralph Woodrow PDF
——————
Recently sent to me by a friend, this book details several origins of corruption in Christianity that stem from Babylonian magic and ritual practice.
Icons such as the Virgin Mary, Saints, obelisks, festivals and more have their roots in very ancient mystery religions and have made their way into the Christian faith, subverting its practices and ensnaring its people into the complacent, unrecognizable Judaized Christianity of today.
@NephilimHour
@TheParanormiesPresent
@AltSkullMirror
——————
Recently sent to me by a friend, this book details several origins of corruption in Christianity that stem from Babylonian magic and ritual practice.
Icons such as the Virgin Mary, Saints, obelisks, festivals and more have their roots in very ancient mystery religions and have made their way into the Christian faith, subverting its practices and ensnaring its people into the complacent, unrecognizable Judaized Christianity of today.
@NephilimHour
@TheParanormiesPresent
@AltSkullMirror
photo_2022-02-04_11-17-21.jpg
145.8 KB
Biblical Translations - 4
KJV vs the world
From what we have explored, the new age Bible versions are corrupted while the KJV stands alone. Even the NKJV, which claims to be from the KJV, is simplified to the point of corrupting essential doctrine and demotes Christ. The KJV is it right? There is one more trick up satans sleeve... C. I. Scofield
------------------------------
The Scofield KJV Bible is a perverted and twisted interpretation of the word of Lord YHWH.
Futurism and Hyper-Dispensationalism have no place in the church of Christ.
The claims that Christ was not the messiah or that Christ only came to save the Jews is blasphemous to the core.
The idea of Dispensationalism promotes the idea that Jews are special, are "God's chosen people" and are somehow free from the sin brought on by the Talmud.
------------------------------
How can somebody claim to be Christian and say Christ isn't the Messiah?
The fruit of dispensationalism is rotten, and we will cover this shortly.
https://t.me/TruthInYeshua83
KJV vs the world
From what we have explored, the new age Bible versions are corrupted while the KJV stands alone. Even the NKJV, which claims to be from the KJV, is simplified to the point of corrupting essential doctrine and demotes Christ. The KJV is it right? There is one more trick up satans sleeve... C. I. Scofield
------------------------------
The Scofield KJV Bible is a perverted and twisted interpretation of the word of Lord YHWH.
Futurism and Hyper-Dispensationalism have no place in the church of Christ.
The claims that Christ was not the messiah or that Christ only came to save the Jews is blasphemous to the core.
The idea of Dispensationalism promotes the idea that Jews are special, are "God's chosen people" and are somehow free from the sin brought on by the Talmud.
------------------------------
How can somebody claim to be Christian and say Christ isn't the Messiah?
The fruit of dispensationalism is rotten, and we will cover this shortly.
https://t.me/TruthInYeshua83
False Doctrine
Dispensationalism
What exactly is dispensationalism? I've claimed it to be a false doctrine without truly explaining what is is, or how it is wrong. The video above does a fine job, but I need to explain a little deeper.
------------------------------
The Scofield Bible divides the history of the world into periods of time, known as "dispensations :" (I) Innocence, (2) Conscience, (3) Human Government, (4) Promise, (5) Law, (6) Grace, (7) Kingdom.
Within each "dispensation" or age, the Lord supposedly "deals with man upon a plan different from the plan of the other dispensations."
For example, the period from Sinai to Calvary was "the dispensation of Law;" from the cross to the second coming, "the dispensation of grace;" and from the second coming to the close of the millennium, "the dispensation of the kingdom."
There is no "mingling" of methods of salvation during these periods, according to the Scofield scheme. There was "no grace" in the dispensation from Moses to the cross; "no law" in our present period of "grace." Moreover, our era is the era of the church, and has nothing to do with the kingdom. The age to come ushers in the kingdom. This "kingdom" belongs to the Jewish nation, which will be restored and its people converted during the millennium.
------------------------------
These ideas have zero scriptural support. The idea that grace did not exist before Christ is insane... The idea that "plans" don't matter to other "ages" is complete heresy. This promotes the idea that the Old Testament doesn't matter to those who follow Christ. When in reality ALL scripture is profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction, and instruction in righteousness (1Tim 3:16).
Faith and Grace have always existed, for our God YHWH does not change (Mal 3:6).
In fact, nobody has been saved on account of following the Law (Rom 3:20). If somebody breaks a single law, he has violated the entire law! (James 2:10)
The men in the Old Testament were not justified by the Law, but by their Faith (Heb 11)
The Law was the schoolmaster to bring people to Christ (Gal 3:24-25)
Those in the Old Testament who lived by Faith were those who lived by the Law (Gal 3:12)
There is no Law that brings salvation (Gal 3:21) and if salvation and righteousness did come from the Law, Christ is dead in vain (Gal 2:21)
I could go on and on exposing each "dispensation" one by one with multiple examples within scripture.
------------------------------
Dispensationalism is a blasphemous doctrine, that downplays and manipulates the Lord YHWH's plan of Salvation through Christ our King.
There are plenty more errors in the Scofield Bible such as a "secret rapture" a "second chance" for those who've died in sin, and even a "postponement" of the Kingdom of God. The book is full of error.
Stay away from Dispensationalism and its false teachers. The Scofield Bible is a blasphemy and perversion of the word of God YHWH.
------------------------------
Some popular proponents of Dispensation that I know of are:
- Dr. Gene Kim from the Youtube channel "Real Bible Believers"
- Robert Breaker from the Youtube channel with his name, "Robert Breaker"
- John Hagee from the Youtube channel "Hagee Ministries"
- Dr. Sam Gipp from the Youtube channel with his name, "Sam Gipp"
------------------------------
But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring themselves swift destruction.
-2 Peter 2:1
Dispensationalism
What exactly is dispensationalism? I've claimed it to be a false doctrine without truly explaining what is is, or how it is wrong. The video above does a fine job, but I need to explain a little deeper.
------------------------------
The Scofield Bible divides the history of the world into periods of time, known as "dispensations :" (I) Innocence, (2) Conscience, (3) Human Government, (4) Promise, (5) Law, (6) Grace, (7) Kingdom.
Within each "dispensation" or age, the Lord supposedly "deals with man upon a plan different from the plan of the other dispensations."
For example, the period from Sinai to Calvary was "the dispensation of Law;" from the cross to the second coming, "the dispensation of grace;" and from the second coming to the close of the millennium, "the dispensation of the kingdom."
There is no "mingling" of methods of salvation during these periods, according to the Scofield scheme. There was "no grace" in the dispensation from Moses to the cross; "no law" in our present period of "grace." Moreover, our era is the era of the church, and has nothing to do with the kingdom. The age to come ushers in the kingdom. This "kingdom" belongs to the Jewish nation, which will be restored and its people converted during the millennium.
------------------------------
These ideas have zero scriptural support. The idea that grace did not exist before Christ is insane... The idea that "plans" don't matter to other "ages" is complete heresy. This promotes the idea that the Old Testament doesn't matter to those who follow Christ. When in reality ALL scripture is profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction, and instruction in righteousness (1Tim 3:16).
Faith and Grace have always existed, for our God YHWH does not change (Mal 3:6).
In fact, nobody has been saved on account of following the Law (Rom 3:20). If somebody breaks a single law, he has violated the entire law! (James 2:10)
The men in the Old Testament were not justified by the Law, but by their Faith (Heb 11)
The Law was the schoolmaster to bring people to Christ (Gal 3:24-25)
Those in the Old Testament who lived by Faith were those who lived by the Law (Gal 3:12)
There is no Law that brings salvation (Gal 3:21) and if salvation and righteousness did come from the Law, Christ is dead in vain (Gal 2:21)
I could go on and on exposing each "dispensation" one by one with multiple examples within scripture.
------------------------------
Dispensationalism is a blasphemous doctrine, that downplays and manipulates the Lord YHWH's plan of Salvation through Christ our King.
There are plenty more errors in the Scofield Bible such as a "secret rapture" a "second chance" for those who've died in sin, and even a "postponement" of the Kingdom of God. The book is full of error.
Stay away from Dispensationalism and its false teachers. The Scofield Bible is a blasphemy and perversion of the word of God YHWH.
------------------------------
Some popular proponents of Dispensation that I know of are:
- Dr. Gene Kim from the Youtube channel "Real Bible Believers"
- Robert Breaker from the Youtube channel with his name, "Robert Breaker"
- John Hagee from the Youtube channel "Hagee Ministries"
- Dr. Sam Gipp from the Youtube channel with his name, "Sam Gipp"
------------------------------
But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring themselves swift destruction.
-2 Peter 2:1
Note: The KJV video explaining with the coffees was done by Dr. Sam Gipp, the dispensationalist. This comes to show that some dispensationalists can be correct on certain things, but they are by no means in the right doctrine as a whole and by no means should all their teachings be looked into. As you watch videos or read their commentaries, remember what the Lord says in Matthew 10:16 "...be ye therefor wise as serpents, and harmless as doves."
The Jew
The Jew, the Canaanite?
They take the self-proclaimed title of "God's chosen" and claim to be a holy people, closest to God. To Dispensationalists, the nation Israel and its state religion has a right to be preserved no matter the cost. Where did they come from?
------------------------------
The first thing to note is what "Jew" actually means Biblically.
Strong's H3064: a Judahite, or descendant of Jehudah
Strong's G2453: Judæan, i.e. belonging to Jehudah
The word Jew should not be read with the modern day interpretation. In the Old Testament, Jew should be read as Judahite AKA a descendant of Judah. In the New Testament however, the definition of Jew has expanded to those who are from the province of Judæa or have ancestry to the tribe of Judah.
------------------------------
According to a study published in May 2020, while researching the genetic makeup of ancient Canaanites, the researchers "found that most Arab and Jewish groups in the region owe more than half of their DNA to Canaanites and other peoples who inhabited the ancient Near East—an area encompassing much of the modern Levant, Caucasus, and Iran."
-Article written on the subject: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/article/dna-from-biblical-canaanites-lives-modern-arabs-jews
-Research paper: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2020.04.024
------------------------------
As seen in the Bible, the Israelites were not allowed to mix with the Canaanites or any other peoples. They were instructed to keep marriage and other things within their tribe, such as having children, appointing leadership positions, ect.
(Num 35 & 36; Deu 7:1-5; 17:15; 23:2-8; Neh 10:30; 13:22-30; et al.)
------------------------------
From a genetic standpoint, the modern day Jew and the ancient Israelite are not very similar. They can't be. Being at least half Canaanite, there is no doubt the ancestors of the modern Jews within Israel did not follow the rules laid out by the Lord YHWH to the Israelites. Despite this, Jews of today still claim to be either from the tribe of Juda specifically or they claim to have ancestry from all 12 tribes.
According to the study linked above, the Canaanite, being a localized group, did not share much DNA with other tribes in the surrounding areas, making them genetically different than others in the area. This means they themselves did not generally mix with other tribes. Canaan, having rich soil for farming, makes sense as to why the Canaanites did not move around much and mingle.
------------------------------
If these Jews are lying about their ancestry, or are at least ignorant concerning their genetics, where did they come from? Can they trace at least some of their ancestry to the ancient Israelites? What about the Ashkenazi, who are they? If Jews today are not the 12 tribes of Israel, where did they go?
All will be covered in the future. God Bless
The Jew, the Canaanite?
They take the self-proclaimed title of "God's chosen" and claim to be a holy people, closest to God. To Dispensationalists, the nation Israel and its state religion has a right to be preserved no matter the cost. Where did they come from?
------------------------------
The first thing to note is what "Jew" actually means Biblically.
Strong's H3064: a Judahite, or descendant of Jehudah
Strong's G2453: Judæan, i.e. belonging to Jehudah
The word Jew should not be read with the modern day interpretation. In the Old Testament, Jew should be read as Judahite AKA a descendant of Judah. In the New Testament however, the definition of Jew has expanded to those who are from the province of Judæa or have ancestry to the tribe of Judah.
------------------------------
According to a study published in May 2020, while researching the genetic makeup of ancient Canaanites, the researchers "found that most Arab and Jewish groups in the region owe more than half of their DNA to Canaanites and other peoples who inhabited the ancient Near East—an area encompassing much of the modern Levant, Caucasus, and Iran."
-Article written on the subject: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/history/article/dna-from-biblical-canaanites-lives-modern-arabs-jews
-Research paper: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2020.04.024
------------------------------
As seen in the Bible, the Israelites were not allowed to mix with the Canaanites or any other peoples. They were instructed to keep marriage and other things within their tribe, such as having children, appointing leadership positions, ect.
(Num 35 & 36; Deu 7:1-5; 17:15; 23:2-8; Neh 10:30; 13:22-30; et al.)
------------------------------
From a genetic standpoint, the modern day Jew and the ancient Israelite are not very similar. They can't be. Being at least half Canaanite, there is no doubt the ancestors of the modern Jews within Israel did not follow the rules laid out by the Lord YHWH to the Israelites. Despite this, Jews of today still claim to be either from the tribe of Juda specifically or they claim to have ancestry from all 12 tribes.
According to the study linked above, the Canaanite, being a localized group, did not share much DNA with other tribes in the surrounding areas, making them genetically different than others in the area. This means they themselves did not generally mix with other tribes. Canaan, having rich soil for farming, makes sense as to why the Canaanites did not move around much and mingle.
------------------------------
If these Jews are lying about their ancestry, or are at least ignorant concerning their genetics, where did they come from? Can they trace at least some of their ancestry to the ancient Israelites? What about the Ashkenazi, who are they? If Jews today are not the 12 tribes of Israel, where did they go?
All will be covered in the future. God Bless
Premium
DNA from the Bible's Canaanites lives on in modern Arabs and Jews
A study of ancient DNA traces the surprising heritage of these mysterious Bronze Age people.
👍1
Biblical Translations - 4
KJV 1611
Since we have narrowed down on the KJV, I think the next step is to talk about the books included, namely the Apocrypha.
------------------------------
Everybody knows about the standard 66 canonical books within the Bible, Genesis to Revelation, but not many people know about the Apocrypha, or that the KJV 1611 actually incorporated it into the translation. Why did they do this? What's the purpose? First, some history.
------------------------------
Queen Mary I, also known as Bloody Mary, reigned from 1553 to 1558. She got the name Bloody Mary because of her persecution of Protestants and her attempts of reinstalling Roman Catholicism.
Queen Elizabeth I (reigning from 1558-1603), the half sister of Bloody Mary, imposed a high degree of uniformity within the Church of England. During her reign Protestantism was reinstated as the official religion of England.
In the times leading up to King James religious tension I'm England was at an all time high.
In 1604 a conference was held that requested a new English Bible because existing translations "were corrupt and not answerable to the truth of the original."
------------------------------
The Catholics at the time used the Reims New Testament while the Protestants mostly used the Geneva Bible or the Bishops Bible.
The Catholics used the Apocryphal writings and incorporated them in their Bibles. The Protestants did not.
King James wanted his translation to be the universal Bible used by both Catholics and Protestants.
------------------------------
In 1592, Pope Clement VIII removed 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras and the Prayer of Manasseh from the Vulgate.
By June 1604, King James had approved 54 revisers, but only 47 actually participated. When the group came together there was an agreement to add the apocrypha between the New and Old Testament. The Protestants wouldnt agree unless they also include 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras and the Prayer of Menasseh.
The list of Apocryphal books included in the KJV 1611 are as follows:
• 1 Esdras (AKA 3 Esdras)
• 2 Esdras (AKA 4 Esdras)
• Tobit
• Judith
• an addition to Esther
• Wisdom
• Ecclesiasticus (AKA Sirach)
• Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremy
• Song of the Three Children (addition to Daniel)
• The Idol Bel and the Dragon (addition to Daniel)
• Prayer of Menasseh (addition to 2nd Chronicles)
• 1 Maccabees
• 2 Maccabees
------------------------------
Why are these books debated on? Is there any validity to these books? We will explore this later on. In the meantime, proceed with caution. God Bless
KJV 1611
Since we have narrowed down on the KJV, I think the next step is to talk about the books included, namely the Apocrypha.
------------------------------
Everybody knows about the standard 66 canonical books within the Bible, Genesis to Revelation, but not many people know about the Apocrypha, or that the KJV 1611 actually incorporated it into the translation. Why did they do this? What's the purpose? First, some history.
------------------------------
Queen Mary I, also known as Bloody Mary, reigned from 1553 to 1558. She got the name Bloody Mary because of her persecution of Protestants and her attempts of reinstalling Roman Catholicism.
Queen Elizabeth I (reigning from 1558-1603), the half sister of Bloody Mary, imposed a high degree of uniformity within the Church of England. During her reign Protestantism was reinstated as the official religion of England.
In the times leading up to King James religious tension I'm England was at an all time high.
In 1604 a conference was held that requested a new English Bible because existing translations "were corrupt and not answerable to the truth of the original."
------------------------------
The Catholics at the time used the Reims New Testament while the Protestants mostly used the Geneva Bible or the Bishops Bible.
The Catholics used the Apocryphal writings and incorporated them in their Bibles. The Protestants did not.
King James wanted his translation to be the universal Bible used by both Catholics and Protestants.
------------------------------
In 1592, Pope Clement VIII removed 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras and the Prayer of Manasseh from the Vulgate.
By June 1604, King James had approved 54 revisers, but only 47 actually participated. When the group came together there was an agreement to add the apocrypha between the New and Old Testament. The Protestants wouldnt agree unless they also include 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras and the Prayer of Menasseh.
The list of Apocryphal books included in the KJV 1611 are as follows:
• 1 Esdras (AKA 3 Esdras)
• 2 Esdras (AKA 4 Esdras)
• Tobit
• Judith
• an addition to Esther
• Wisdom
• Ecclesiasticus (AKA Sirach)
• Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremy
• Song of the Three Children (addition to Daniel)
• The Idol Bel and the Dragon (addition to Daniel)
• Prayer of Menasseh (addition to 2nd Chronicles)
• 1 Maccabees
• 2 Maccabees
------------------------------
Why are these books debated on? Is there any validity to these books? We will explore this later on. In the meantime, proceed with caution. God Bless
The earth's shape is...
Anonymous Poll
16%
Round
4%
Round but hollow
60%
Flat
8%
Other
12%
Don't care/doesn't matter/idk