New world order Bible Versions (NIV ESV NKJV etc)

[J7]

I think Bibles fall into two categories. Those translated by Christians whose intent was to be faithful to God's meaning. Those translated by Satanists with the intent to corrupt and destroy the Church.

God's thoughts are inevitably beyond the translators, not to mention the obvious impossibility of a perfect fit translation anyhow.

If God intended a totally perfect Bible in English, then he would simply narrate it verbatim to an amanuensis. No translation (which inevitably requires interpretation) skills would be necessary.

 

[trofimus]

I think Bibles fall into two categories. Those translated by Christians whose intent was to be faithful to God's meaning. Those translated by Satanists with the intent to corrupt and destroy the Church.

God's thoughts are inevitably beyond the translators, not to mention the obvious impossibility of a perfect fit translation anyhow.

If God intended a totally perfect Bible in English, then he would simply narrate it verbatim to an amanuensis. No translation (which inevitably requires interpretation) skills would be necessary.

I do not understand the first part of your posts, but its so true that if God wanted to inspire the English Scriptures, there would be no need to compile Greek manuscripts by a Roman Catholic guy, to publish them, to fix them several times and to gather the KJV translators team with education etc.

All this implies very well that the inspiration did not happen. It was a godly, but still human effort.

 

[Dai3234]

Trying to post a page but it just goes to main web page. Nestle aland Greek text 27th edition is catholic and gas writing inside to show it. 28th edition is UBS, united Bible societies, which the Organisation is supported by the Vatican. Because it's basically the same as the 27th without the Catholic writing inside. It looks more trustworthy, but it's just as bad. Most Bibles were created using earlier nestle-aland-texts. Now the Vatican supports an organisation that prints bibles similar to theirs.

The NIV research was mostly done in an Italian catholic university, apparently.

Now if you have a UBS aland, you'll have to check the link between the Catholic church and UBS. But printed proof of corruption of text will only be in the 27th etc not later.

 

[trofimus]

Trying to post a page but it just goes to main web page. Nestle aland Greek text 27th edition is catholic and gas writing inside to show it. 28th edition is UBS, united Bible societies, which the Organisation is supported by the Vatican. Because it's basically the same as the 27th without the Catholic writing inside. It looks more trustworthy, but it's just as bad. Most Bibles were created using earlier nestle-aland-texts. Now the Vatican supports an organisation that prints bibles similar to theirs.

The NIV research was mostly done in an Italian catholic university, apparently.

Now if you have a UBS aland, you'll have to check the link between the Catholic church and UBS. But printed proof of corruption of text will only be in the 27th etc not later.

Show me specifically in the Nestlé Aland what is so catholic about it. In the text or some proof that it is made in Vatican or whatever.

IN THE NESTLÉ ALAND. NOT IN ANY OF YOUR KVJ ONLY WEB PAGES

Its made by German Bible Society, in Münster institute, Institute for New Testament Textual Research.

The RCC recognized this research lately and begun to use the text for their translations, too. But this does not make the text to be catholic, made in Vatican, gnostic, corrupted, satanic etc!!!!!!!!!

 

[J7]

Well I think bad translations are not accidents. Its not because the translators were amateurs, but rather they had bad intent.

ultimately, if a translation had to be perfect, no-one would undertake the task.

There are excellent but imperfect translations, and imperfect, evil translations.

I do not understand the first part of your posts, but its so true that if God wanted to inspire the English Scriptures, there would be no need to compile Greek manuscripts by a Roman Catholic guy, to publish them, to fix them several times and to gather the KJV translators team with education etc.

All this implies very well that the inspiration did not happen. It was a godly, but still human effort.

 

[trofimus]

Well I think bad translations are not accidents. Its not because the translators were amateurs, but rather they had bad intent.

ultimately, if a translation had to be perfect, no-one would undertake the task.

There are excellent but imperfect translations, and imperfect, evil translations.

How many translations on biblehub.com would you define as "evil" ones?

 

[J7]

No idea. I used to go to a Cathoic Church and some of their bibles were extremely odd.

 

[John146]

What bible before the KJV was the perfect word of God?

Was there a perfect word of God prior to the 1611 KJV?

The overwhelming majority of Bible manuscripts in existence throughout history have been the text found in Antioch. They have always been available in some form, either in copies of the original Greek, or the old Latin of 150 AD, (NOT to be confused with Jerome's corrupt "Vulgate") or the Syrian Peshetto of 157 AD.

Give the Lord all credit for bringing about His word to the common man at a time in history where He foresaw a great missionary movement on the horizon using His holy word, not to mention, the invention of moveable type and the explosion of the English language.


The question is like asking, "Why didn't Jesus come at an earlier date in history? Why did He wait so long after the fall?" The answer always lies in God's fullness of time. It was the perfect time in history. God's word was always being preserved, but did not come together in one language for the common man until 1611.

 

[Dino246]

The overwhelming majority of Bible manuscripts in existence throughout history have been the text found in Antioch. They have always been available in some form, either in copies of the original Greek, or the old Latin of 150 AD, (NOT to be confused with Jerome's corrupt "Vulgate") or the Syrian Peshetto of 157 AD.

You're still carefully ignoring the massive impact of the spread of Islam.

... The question is like asking, "Why didn't Jesus come at an earlier date in history? Why did He wait so long after the fall?" The answer always lies in God's fullness of time. It was the perfect time in history. God's word was always being preserved, but did not come together in one language for the common man until 1611.

Once again, you dodge the question at hand and throw up a red herring.

 

[Dai3234]

Show me specifically in the Nestlé Aland what is so catholic about it. In the text or some proof that it is made in Vatican or whatever.

IN THE NESTLÉ ALAND. NOT IN ANY OF YOUR KVJ ONLY WEB PAGES

Its made by German Bible Society, in Münster institute, Institute for New Testament Textual Research.

The RCC recognized this research lately and begun to use the text for their translations, too. But this does not make the text to be catholic, made in Vatican, gnostic, corrupted, satanic etc!!!!!!!!!

Page 45, nestle greek text 27th edition, the VATICAN and UBS agreement.

Also, Cardinal "Carlo m martini" nearly Pope, just lost, is a Jesuit, and Metzger created the NRSV and gave it directly to an earlier Pope also.

And the NIV research university is the Catholic, Salamanca.

Ok. Enough? Or watch "the real Bible version issue EXPOSED!". Old but shows all the history like a documentary of a KJV researcher.

Though you probably won't believe it even if the pope said so.

 

[trofimus]

Page 45, nestle greek text 27th edition, the VATICAN and UBS agreement.

There is a table of Canones on the page 45 in my Nestlé aland 27, so you must be more specific.

Also, Cardinal "Carlo m martini" nearly Pope, just lost, is a Jesuit, and Metzger created the NRSV and gave it directly to an earlier Pope also.

And the NIV research university is the Catholic, Salamanca.

Irrelevant.

Or watch "the real Bible version issue EXPOSED!". Old but shows all the history like a documentary of a KJV researcher.

I already said I do not care about fanatic, uninformed and biased sources.

 

[Dai3234]

There is a table of Canones on the page 45 in my Nestlé aland 27, so you must be more specific.


Irrelevant.



I already said I do not care about fanatic, uninformed and biased sources.

whatever............a film with visual books and texts.....but I'll write it for you.


"The text shared by these two editions was adopted internationally by Bible Societies, and following an agreement between THE VATICAN and united Bible societies it has served as the BASIS FOR NEW TRANSLATIONS, and for REVISIONS MADE UNDER THEIR SUPERVISION. This makes a significant step with regard to INTERCONFESSIONAL relationships. It should naturally be understood that this text is a working text (in the sense of THE CENTURY LONG -NESTLE-TRADITION) ...............the present edition has NOT been deemed appropriate for textual changes.


You got the writing. If you can't find it on page 45, your either reading a different version like I said, are blind, lying, or catholic. It's not hard to see this much text.
On one page....45. I don't mean to be insulting but your just arguing against a point that's been mentioned for years and shown.
(No change from old to new textual changes)
Basically a Douay Rheims etc.

 

[trofimus]

whatever............a film with visual books and texts.....but I'll write it for you.


"The text shared by these two editions was adopted internationally by Bible Societies, and following an agreement between THE VATICAN and united Bible societies it has served as the BASIS FOR NEW TRANSLATIONS, and for REVISIONS MADE UNDER THEIR SUPERVISION. This makes a significant step with regard to INTERCONFESSIONAL relationships. It should naturally be understood that this text is a working text (in the sense of THE CENTURY LONG -NESTLE-TRADITION) ...............the present edition has NOT been deemed appropriate for textual changes.


You got the writing. If you can't find it on page 45, your either reading a different version like I said, are blind, lying, or catholic. It's not hard to see this much text.
On one page....45. I don't mean to be insulting but your just arguing against a point that's been mentioned for years and shown.
(No change from old to new textual changes)
Basically a Douay Rheims etc.

You are from the UK and do not know the difference between "adopted text" and "created text"? The fact that the RCC adopts something does not mean it created it.

The research of the German Institute is so deep and good that there is no better alternative of the Greek texts. Thats why the RCC also uses it for their revisions and translations. Its easier for them than to fund their own research. Got it?

 

[Dai3234]

You are from the UK and do not know the difference between "adopted text" and "created text"? The fact that the RCC adopts something does not mean it created it.

The research of the German Institute is so deep and good that there is no better alternative of the Greek texts. Thats why the RCC also uses it for their revisions and translations. Its easier for them than to fund their own research. Got it?

No, the RCC had the texts already, where do you think they were found? There's talk of more been found behind a wall, next to the rubbish bin. Said Dr, James White.

Even the people such as westcott and Hort were found to be pretty useless and haters of the textus receptus, as one of their sons released their letters after death, proving one hardly knew greek.

And yes, it was not CREATED by the RCC, I did not say it was. I said new versions are all from the NESTLE. But the nestle has massive variation flaws compared to ITSELF.

And im not going to list every one. The KJV texts, don't vary anywhere near as much. Why, because their from Antioch where the first Christians came from (about 97 to 99% of texts).

Alexandria, Egypt text (minority under 3%). Which vary largely in this small number of texts. Why choose something that varies so much? A fake, is a fake.

I think it's written somewhere that the Antioch Christians had an opposite view to the philosophical Alexandrians. Paul stayed in Antioch for over a year. If followed doctrine rigidly, philosophical interpretation is irrelevant, today and then.

But I've had enough, youve worn me down, catholic

 

[Bogadile]

Can someone back this claim that the manuscripts were found in the rubbish bin? I keep hearing about it but have never actually seen any proof of it.

 

[trofimus]

No, the RCC had the texts already, where do you think they were found? There's talk of more been found behind a wall, next to the rubbish bin. Said Dr, James White.

Even the people such as westcott and Hort were found to be pretty useless and haters of the textus receptus, as one of their sons released their letters after death, proving one hardly knew greek.

And yes, it was not CREATED by the RCC, I did not say it was. I said new versions are all from the NESTLE. But the nestle has massive variation flaws compared to ITSELF.

And im not going to list every one. The KJV texts, don't vary anywhere near as much. Why, because their from Antioch where the first Christians came from (about 97 to 99% of texts).

Alexandria, Egypt text (minority under 3%). Which vary largely in this small number of texts. Why choose something that varies so much? A fake, is a fake.

I think it's written somewhere that the Antioch Christians had an opposite view to the philosophical Alexandrians. Paul stayed in Antioch for over a year. If followed doctrine rigidly, philosophical interpretation is irrelevant, today and then.

But I've had enough, youve worn me down, catholic

Do you even know that the Textus receptus IS created by the RCC church? So what the heck are you trying to hunt? The KJV is based on the RCC text.

And you ignore that and try to attack Nestlé aland just because of some shadowy connections.

 

[Dai3234]

Can someone back this claim that the manuscripts were found in the rubbish bin? I keep hearing about it but have never actually seen any proof of it.

It's written by tischendorf in a book somewhere?? They were going to be burned at some point, but he had a look and kept them etc.

 

[trofimus]

Can someone back this claim that the manuscripts were found in the rubbish bin? I keep hearing about it but have never actually seen any proof of it.

Few pages.

The rest was in the library and monks did not want to give them. Russian tsar had to go to the monastery and get them for Tischendorf.

 

[Dai3234]

Do you even know that the Textus receptus IS created by the RCC church? So what the heck are you trying to hunt? The KJV is based on the RCC text.

And you ignore that and try to attack Nestlé aland just because of some shadowy connections.

Not really.

It's based on all texts, but the KJV translators rejected the "minority text" , probably because it's so messed up. But even if it was, the Catholic church has changed its Bible over time. The KJV has not.

The KJV keeps the verses that the early church fathers have quoted, early popes.

But the RCC removes them, so do all new versions. Because it is damaging to catholic teachings. And don't think I haven't noticed that you didn't deny being a catholic

 

[trofimus]

Not really.

It's based on all texts, but the KJV translators rejected the "minority text" , probably because it's so messed up. But even if it was, the Catholic church has changed its Bible over time. The KJV has not.

The KJV keeps the verses that the early church fathers have quoted, early popes.

But the RCC removes them, so do all new versions. Because it is damaging to catholic teachings. And don't think I haven't noticed that you didn't deny being a catholic

ACtually, you are totally wrong.

Textus receptus is based on 7 manuscripts.

There are 5000 of manuscripts so The TR is not even close to "all".

And guess what. Even though 3 oldest complete codexes are the most authoritative for Nestlé aland, its text is based on many others, try to read the preface. Every nuance is carefully examined and at least recorded in notes.

And now, the Editio Critica Maior will be the most comprehensive work in this field. TR is really absolutely lower league.