The word of God is not a secret code that needs unlocked.

I would never attempt to exegete it, any more than perform the surgery that I know a certain doctor can.
I can only tell you about it.
You need to see the doctor for yourself.
He will show you. For free.

But for now.... Here is one translation that comes close to what is to be understood.


Acts 17:11


Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica,
for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures
every day to see if what Paul said was true.



And... here is something taken from notes from Bible class...



10~~And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea who having arrived went into the synagogue of the Jews.

(Note: As was Paul's custom, he went to the Jews first.)

11~~These {the Bereans} were more open minded than those in Thessalonica,
in that they received and retained the word with an eagerness of mind, and searched
the scriptures daily, if these things had it thus, and they wished it was so.
{4th class condition -they WISH, then after study, they know it to be true.}.

{Note: 'Open minded' was erroneously translated noble in some translations. And, the syntax of the Greek indicates that the Bereans were searching the Old Testament with the purpose of PROVING Paul CORRECT, NOT to prove him wrong as some suggest.}

Different class conditions to be found in the Greek rarely get translated correctly.
Matthew 4:3 is a prime example.

The tempter came to him and said, “If you are the Son of God, tell these stones to become bread.”

You would not know it from how many translations put it.
Satan was not doubting who Jesus was.
He was not pushing Jesus to prove He is the Son of God.
That understanding is to be found in knowing the 1st class condition found in the Greek text.

It should read more like this...


“If you are the Son of God (and you are), tell these stones to become bread.”

That introduces a new and specific question as to why Satan would say that.

Satan knew Jesus as God was able to turn the stones into bread.
So? Why was it a temptation, then?

grace and peace .........

They wished us no where in the text
that’s what I mean. (I looked in the Greek by the way)

Yes! And understanding that God gave a few good teachers comes only from the Holy Spirit.

2 Timothy 4:3 tells us that a vast majority of the teachers we find today will not be sound in God's eyes!




Such it is as we find it today...

If that is the case? Then it should be easy... Matthew 4:3?

Tell me what this passage is conveying to the reader, please.
What was Satan wanting to achieve with Jesus.


What was Satan's objective with such a temptation for Jesus?

Bob... we're just talking about tongues, and what was God's original intended purpose when it was given.
Not talking about "gifts" per se.

It's for they whom I explain things for.

In what manner do you believe the manuscripts are corrupted? For what purpose? To add or remove what specific doctrines?


With EVERY translation there exists a goal of translation that seems to focus heavily on certain aspects of doctrine while depressing other doctrines so that the denominations can promote their particular interests.
The manuscripts of yesteryear are examined carefully by photographing them under various light colors to bring out all old ink to make the characters visible. Also to lighten the background. (Usually they are black on black with the oldest ones)

Alexandrian are the most reliable but not perfect
Syriac tend to be okayish
Coptic is good as well but has problems. The Oldest is the Sainiticus. And it tends to have the largest number of errors.

Masoretic are still faithful to Old Testament but have "fixed" deliberate misspellings with notes in margins.

Then there are manuscripts from Russia, Africa, Egypt, Turkey and just about everywhere.

The Latin Vulgate has at least 4 major variations from which all of their various copies were made. It started with one by Jerome and degenerated from there.

The Oxford/Cambridge University translation was never popular until 200 years after its translation (the one you call KJV) and they used all available manuscripts they could find. However their search for manuscripts started something....and as soon as they finished that translation the searching discovered even more manuscripts....which then led to the immediate start of the earliest RSV Translation.

EVERY English translation has used ALL manuscripts they could obtain to figure out what originally was said....that includes the modern translations.

There's been no corruption. Just a distillation and refining process to make sure what was said was truly said.

The Textus Receptus (received text) is the most accurate and correct.

So - you want to try the same thing with me, do ya?

To update, KJB is still one of the top bestsellers by EPCA as of 2023. Yes KJB is still loved by most readers.
1New International Version
2King James Version
3English Standard Version
4New Living Translation
5Christian Standard Bible
6 New King James Version
7Reina Valera
8New International Reader's Version
9New American Standard Bible
10New Revised Standard Version

https://christianbookexpo.com/bestseller/translations.php?id=BO23

According to what standard? Against what do you measure the TR to draw this conclusion??

The Westcott and Hort text is corrupt. Any bible version translated from it is corrupt. This covers most modern bible versions.

Just because a manuscript [fragment] is older does not necessarily mean it is better, more accurate or correct, etc.

The Textus Receptus (received text) is the most accurate and correct.

The Westcott and Hort text is corrupt. Any bible version translated from it is corrupt. This covers most modern bible versions.

Just because a manuscript [fragment] is older does not necessarily mean it is better, more accurate or correct, etc.

The Textus Receptus (received text) is the most accurate and correct.

… The author of the book says there are "over 6,653 examples of additions, omissions, or changes plus departures from the proper Hebrew and Greek original language texts in the NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION" in the INTRODUCTION of the book.

Your first statement is correct, however the false bibles do not come from the oldest manuscripts. That is a lie that has been debunked. if you wish, I will happily provide the information, but this is just about Westcott and Hort.

Went from informative to a ribbon!!

That would be correct ... "English language has deteriorated."
...... along with denying people have the ability to learn words and their respective meanings in context of the passage so let us just dumb it down.

Despite your claims...
Westcott and Hort NEVER TRANSLATED SCRIPTURES.
They only commented on them. The Westcott commentary on the Book of Hebrews is still followed often by modern preachers and commentators today as it is a handy reference for the Targum, Sifre, Midrash, and Talmud it references.

And they were claimed to be heretics by the Catholic Church because what they preached went against what the Catholics preached. Their preaching was instrumental in the Reformation and a reason why you have a Bible in your hands today.
Eadie and Lightfoot were Westcott's apprentices....their commentaries are also powerful to this day.

Sure, there's a Bible translation attributed to them. But it's not really theirs. Nor is it used. Nobody doing translating work relys upon their work. I wish they did....but they don't.