How can it be anything other than spiritual blindness that many cannot see the gross corruptions and perversions in every new version of the Bible? NKJV - in whom we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins. (Colossians 1:14) NASB - in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins. (Colossians 1:14) The phrase through His blood states that we are redeemed - our sins are forgiven - through the blood of Christ, meaning His atoning death on the cross. Take out the blood, i.e., take out the cross, and this verse loses not only its precision but becomes deceptive since without Christs death on the cross, there is no redemption or forgiveness of sins. This begs the question, why did B.F. Westcott and F.J. Hort, the two Cambridge scholars who brought the SV to the world as the Westcott & Hort Greek Text, use Codex Sinaiticus, found in the garbage pile of a Catholic convent at the base of Mount Sinai, and Codex Vaticanus, which the editors of TR had deemed worthless because it was filled with errors and corrections on itself, omitted 46 chapters of Genesis, 32 chapters of Psalms, entire books of Pauls Epistles, etc, and instead contained the Catholic Apocrypha, which even the Catholic church today admits isnt part of the Bible? Why did they ignore the 95-99% of the Majority Text and choose to believe the handful of those with the shady reputation? Heres a hint from Hort himself: I had no idea till the last few weeks of the importance of texts, having read so little Greek Testament, and dragged on with the villainous Textus Receptus...Think of that vile Textus Receptus leaning entirely on late manuscripts; it is a blessing there are such early ones. (Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, New York, 1896, Vol. 1, p. 211) Horts assertion that TR leans on late manuscripts is false and undermined by his own admission that he has read so little Greek Testament. What makes this quote significant is that it was written in 1851 when he was only 23 years old. Why would he call TR villainous and vile without having studied them? The answer has to do with the fact that Westcott & Hort didnt end up with SV after setting out to get as close as possible to the original version of the Word of God. They ended up with SV because they set out to zero in on SV and use it to attack the villainous and vile TR. Why would they do that? Here are a few more of Mr. Horts own words: I have been persuaded for many years that Mary-worship and Jesus-worship have very much in common... (Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, New York, 1896, Vol. 2, p. 50) The Romish (Roman Catholic) view seems to me nearer, and more likely to lead to the truth than the evangelical. (Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, New York, 1896, Vol. 1, p. 76) Evangelicals seem to me perverted rather than untrue. (Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, New York, 1896, Vol. 1, p. 400) The popular doctrine of substitution (Jesus substitutionary death on the cross) is an immoral and material counterfeit. (Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, New York, 1896, Vol. 1, p. 430) But the book that has most engaged me is Darwin...my feeling is strong that the theory is unanswerable. (Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, New York, 1896, Vol. 1, p. 416) Hort sounds like a Darwinian Catholic, but was in fact more than that: Hort and Westcott were not simply the members, but from their college years the founders of four occult organizations - Cambridge Ghost Society, Hermes Club (named after the Egyptian-Greek God who brings messages from Hades), Eranus, and Company of Apostles - that communicated with the dead via seances, mediums, ghosts, psychics and other occult activities. In Horts own words, Westcott, Gorham, C.B. Scott, Benson, Bradshaw, Laurd etc. and I have started a society for the investigation of ghosts and all supernatural appearances and effects, being all disposed to believe that such things rally exist... Westcott is drawing up a schedule of question. (Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, New York, 1896, Vol. 1, p. 211) Westcotts son wrote in the biography about his father that, [Westcott] had a lifelong faith in what for lack of a better name, one must call Spiritualism. And in Westcotts own words, declared as a professor during one of his lectures: Recent historical and textual criticism had shown beyond doubt that most of the evidence for the New Testament miracles, not to mention the Old Testament, can not be unfairly described as remote and hearsay… It is quite certainly far weaker than the evidence for, let us say, the miraculous events associated with modern Spiritualism.
Posted on: Sat, 05 Apr 2014 04:44:34 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015