Oldest and Best, Really??

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

GerhardEbersoehn

Well-Known Member
Jan 14, 2014
6,140
558
113
Johannesburg
www.biblestudents.co.za
Faith
Christian
Country
South Africa
the Modern Translations (Which was based on the Nestle and Aland supervised by Rome).
No <Modern Translation> BEFORE 2018
was <based on the Nestle and Aland>; and
since 2018 I do not know of any <new translations> or <revision>;
and whether there has been or not,
they are WORTHLESSLY CORRUPTED and MUST be
like you, say, <have been corrupted by Rome> :
AS during the Nida-dispensation
throughout the previous era of Bible QUASI-translation
which STILL LASTS UNTIL THIS VERY DAY Sunday 2023/01/15.
 
Last edited:

Davy

Well-Known Member
Feb 11, 2018
11,466
2,500
113
Southeastern U.S.
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
No <Modern Translation> BEFORE 2018
was <based on the Nestle and Aland>; and
since 2018 I do not know of any <new translations> or <revision>;
and whether there has been or not,
they are WORTHLESSLY CORRUPTED and MUST be
like you, say, <have been corrupted by Rome> :
AS during the Nida-dispensation
throughout the previous era of Bible QUASI-translation
which STILL LASTS UNTIL THIS VERY DAY Sunday 2023/01/15.

THE ABOVE IS FALSE BRETHREN.

The NEWER MODERN NT Bible versions started in the 1880s when 19th century British scholars Wescott and Hort pushed their new Greek New Testament translation on the revision committee in 1881. And since then, ALL... LATER BIBLE VERSIONS HAVE BEEN BASED ON THEIR CORRUPT GREEK TEXT REVISION, INCLUDING THE NESTLE-ALAND, AND THE UNITED BIBLE SOCIETIES' TRANSLATIONS.

The Nestle-Aland Greek text has been 'revised' 28 times so far in its own history. It's revisionists CLAIM they continually keep finding more ancient Greek manuscript fragments! If you don't find that suspicious, then you simply have your head in the sand. Did God need to do 28 revisions of His Own Word?
 

Bible Highlighter

Well-Known Member
Feb 17, 2022
4,767
989
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
To all:

Now, some may criticize the King James Bible because not everyone on the planet speaks in English.

However, the King James is available in other languages:

Textus Receptus in Spanish (RVG 2010):
https://www.amazon.com/Santa-Biblia-Rústica-Valera-Spanish/dp/0758907567/

King James Francais in French:
Bible King James Française | King James Française

Koning Jacobus Vertaling in Dutch:
http://www.koningjacobusvertaling.org/info_english.php

Bibelen Guds Ord in Norwegian:
http://www.hermon.no/netbibelen/

Thai King James Bible Version:
The Bible (พระคัมภีร์ไทย)

Korean King James Version:
Korean - English HOly Bible KKJB - KJV / Korean King James Bible (KKJB) / Black Leather Bound with Golden Edges with Thumb Index: Amazon.com: Books

Brazillian Portuguese (the BKJ):
Bíblia King James Fiel 1611

Also, keep in mind that the Scriptures once existed in Hebrew and Greek and not thousands of languages.
Was it wrong for God to preserved His words in the Scriptures during that time period? Surely not.
 
Last edited:

Bible Highlighter

Well-Known Member
Feb 17, 2022
4,767
989
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You can be right; in fact, spot-on! Now I have not argued against your conclusions - about Roman Catholicism - I SHOWED HOW CORRECT YOU ARE, even more that you realize yourself. I have shown you the cunning of Antichrist HEREIN:
You are talking of NA Edition 27, or rather <this guy> who <is a Textual Critic> is talking of NA Edition 27 and that means he is in the Antichrist camp which you, FAIL TO SEE. Remember Westcott and Hort were Oxford guys? Roman Catholic OXFORD the 19th century Counter Reformation hub vis a vis Cambridge on the Protestant side? This guy does not compare Nestle's work during his lifetime or his son's lifetime, BUT HE COMPARES THE CATHOLICS' WORK OF 1881 WITH CATHOLICS' WORK OF 2018! Of course their works would be <barely different> so that he and they caught YOU like they catch every poor trusting Protestant! Meanwhile ALL they have been doing was STEALING AND CORRUPTING the authentic work and fruits of Nestle's labours FOR THE PROPAGATION OF THEIR LIES AND FRAUD AGAINST GOD'S WORD IN SCRIPTURE.
Your not making any sense. He is comparing the Westcott and Hort 1881 with the Nestle and Aland. Both are influenced by Catholicism. If you are Catholic, or you don’t mind Catholics subtly altering your Bible, there is no need to have any further discussion. But if you are against Catholicism, then you should reject both the Westcott and Hort text, and the Nestle and Aland as your textual base. Anyways, I am still working on my 101 Reasons for the King James Bible. Hopefully my explanations there will help you.

Peace, and blessings be unto you in the LORD.
 

GerhardEbersoehn

Well-Known Member
Jan 14, 2014
6,140
558
113
Johannesburg
www.biblestudents.co.za
Faith
Christian
Country
South Africa
The Nestle-Aland Greek text has been 'revised' 28 times so far in its own history. It's revisionists CLAIM they continually keep finding more ancient Greek manuscript fragments! If you don't find that suspicious, then you simply have your head in the sand. Did God need to do 28 revisions of His Own Word?
When GE says something, it's <FALSE>; when Davy says plus minus the exact same thing, it's <suspicious, then you simply have your head in the sand.>

So, yes, the <NEWER MODERN NT Bible versions started in the 1880s>, e.g., Darby's. So, yes, <when 19th century British scholars Wescott and Hort pushed their new Greek New Testament translation on the revision committee in 1881>, it more or less was exactly when <Darby published a translation of the New Testament in 1867>, FOURTEEN YEARS BEFORE 1881, and Eberhardt Nestle 1851 THIRTY YEARS BEFORE 1881 And since then, MORE OR LESS EXACTLY ALL... LATER BIBLE VERSIONS HAVE BEEN BASED ON THEIR (Westcott and Hort’s) CORRUPT GREEK TEXT REVISION, <INCLUDING> THE <NESTLE-ALAND> : <LATER BIBLE VERSION>--WHICH one of the <LATER 28 times 'revised'>?

And so more or less exactly we ended up with <ALL…THE UNITED BIBLE SOCIETIES' TRANSLATIONS>, indeed – <TRANSLATIONS> more or less exactly <revisions of His (God’s) Own Word> as per the <Nestle-Aland Greek text>…?? HAVEN’T YOU JUST EMPHASIZED IT’S AS PER THE WESTCOTT AND HORT?

Sorry, I forgot it’s ALL more or less exactly.

Fact of the matter remains more solidly than ever, THE LIE of the Roman Catholics and Bible societies, THAT NESTLE 1851 TO 1904 IS <THE BASES> OF ALL 20TH CENTURY TRANSLATIONS CLAIMED TO BE.

JOIN THE CHOIR OF ALL LIARS – IT’S ON YOUR CONSCIENCE. But ALL SUCH ‘versions’ / ‘editions’ whatever have been <BASED> ON NOTHING BUT ROMAN CATHOLIC indoctrination, coercion, pressure, dominance, black-mailing – every human subtlety and arrogance, ULTIMATELY AIMED AT ACCEPTANCE OF Roman Catholic CHURCH TRADITION ABOVE THE BIBLE.
 
Last edited:

GerhardEbersoehn

Well-Known Member
Jan 14, 2014
6,140
558
113
Johannesburg
www.biblestudents.co.za
Faith
Christian
Country
South Africa
Your not making any sense. He is comparing the Westcott and Hort 1881 with the Nestle and Aland. Both are influenced by Catholicism. If you are Catholic, or you don’t mind Catholics subtly altering your Bible, there is no need to have any further discussion. But if you are against Catholicism, then you should reject both the Westcott and Hort text, and the Nestle and Aland as your textual base. Anyways, I am still working on my 101 Reasons for the King James Bible. Hopefully my explanations there will help you.

Peace, and blessings be unto you in the LORD.

<He is comparing the Westcott and Hort 1881 with the Nestle and Aland.>
Epp does NOT compare <the Westcott and Hort 1881 with the Nestle and Aland.> He compares the Westcott and Hort 1881 - his way - with the Nestle : and Aland edition 29. 1904 AD was not 2018 AD, nor was the Nestle 1904 e.g., anything like the Nestle : and Aland edition 29.
Not that that matters at all because the culprits do not actually use or consult or in any way are faithful to NA, BUT in English SPIN THEIR OWN COOCON AFTER THE MOTH HAS BROKEN ITS ESCAPE TUNNEL THROUGH.

It's fiction that Nestle or Nestle Aland are <influenced by Catholicism> which would mean that the manuscripts are or had been <influenced by Catholicism> -- silly!


And who says I <don’t mind Catholics subtly altering your Bible>? It only shows you are a know-nothing. Has anything you consider of sacred importance been <rejected>, or believe to be Truth been <subtly altered> by Catholics - Roman and Protestant - alike? Thanks for the help you offer, unfortunately halve a century after the crisis/ crises.
 

Bible Highlighter

Well-Known Member
Feb 17, 2022
4,767
989
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
When GE says something, it's <FALSE>; when Davy says plus minus the exact same thing, it's <suspicious, then you simply have your head in the sand.>

So, yes, the <NEWER MODERN NT Bible versions started in the 1880s>, e.g., Darby's. So, yes, <when 19th century British scholars Wescott and Hort pushed their new Greek New Testament translation on the revision committee in 1881>, it more or less was exactly when <Darby published a translation of the New Testament in 1867>, FOURTEEN YEARS BEFORE 1881, and Eberhardt Nestle 1851 THIRTY YEARS BEFORE 1881 And since then, MORE OR LESS EXACTLY ALL... LATER BIBLE VERSIONS HAVE BEEN BASED ON THEIR (Westcott and Hort’s) CORRUPT GREEK TEXT REVISION, <INCLUDING> THE <NESTLE-ALAND> : <LATER BIBLE VERSION>--WHICH one of the <LATER 28 times 'revised'>?

And so more or less exactly we ended up with <ALL…THE UNITED BIBLE SOCIETIES' TRANSLATIONS>, indeed – <TRANSLATIONS> more or less exactly <revisions of His (God’s) Own Word> as per the <Nestle-Aland Greek text>…?? HAVEN’T YOU JUST EMPHASIZED IT’S AS PER THE WESTCOTT AND HORT?

Sorry, I forgot it’s ALL more or less exactly.

Fact of the matter remains more solidly than ever, THE LIE of the Roman Catholics and Bible societies, THAT NESTLE 1851 TO 1904 IS <THE BASES> OF ALL 20TH CENTURY TRANSLATIONS CLAIMED TO BE.

JOIN THE CHOIR OF ALL LIARS – IT’S ON YOUR CONSCIENCE. But ALL SUCH ‘versions’ / ‘editions’ whatever have been <BASED> ON NOTHING BUT ROMAN CATHOLIC indoctrination, coercion, pressure, dominance, black-mailing – every human subtlety and arrogance, ULTIMATELY AIMED AT ACCEPTANCE OF Roman Catholic CHURCH TRADITION ABOVE THE BIBLE.
There is no lying needed. I have already demonstrated that the Westcott and Hort 1881 text and the Nestle and Aland 27th edition text (1993) are both influenced by the Catholic Church. You don’t have to be a private detective to figure it out.
 

Bible Highlighter

Well-Known Member
Feb 17, 2022
4,767
989
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
<He is comparing the Westcott and Hort 1881 with the Nestle and Aland.>
Epp does NOT compare <the Westcott and Hort 1881 with the Nestle and Aland.> He compares the Westcott and Hort 1881 - his way - with the Nestle : and Aland edition 29. 1904 AD was not 2018 AD, nor was the Nestle 1904 e.g., anything like the Nestle : and Aland edition 29.
Not that that matters at all because the culprits do not actually use or consult or in any way are faithful to NA, BUT in English SPIN THEIR OWN COOCON AFTER THE MOTH HAS BROKEN ITS ESCAPE TUNNEL THROUGH.

It's fiction that Nestle or Nestle Aland are <influenced by Catholicism> which would mean that the manuscripts are or had been <influenced by Catholicism> -- silly!


And who says I <don’t mind Catholics subtly altering your Bible>? It only shows you are a know-nothing. Has anything you consider of sacred importance been <rejected>, or believe to be Truth been <subtly altered> by Catholics - Roman and Protestant - alike? Thanks for the help you offer, unfortunately halve a century after the crisis/ crises.
Please read the following:

full


full
 

GerhardEbersoehn

Well-Known Member
Jan 14, 2014
6,140
558
113
Johannesburg
www.biblestudents.co.za
Faith
Christian
Country
South Africa
There is no lying needed. I have already demonstrated that the Westcott and Hort 1881 text and the Nestle and Aland 27th edition text (1993) are both influenced by the Catholic Church. You don’t have to be a private detective to figure it out.
If Nestle or Westcott or Hort were Catholics - I do not know whether they were or not but - if they were SURELY they were <both influenced by the Catholic Church>. Now I am telling you that both in any case - regardless their Church-connection and regardless their science in Bible manuscripts - were both influenced by the Catholic Church. Even the greatest independent mind CANNOT ESCAPE THE WORLD WHEREIN HE LIVES. <You don’t have to be a private detective to figure it out.>
Even so you don’t have to be a private detective to figure it out THAT MANUSCRIPTS CANNOT be influenced by the Catholic Church.
 

Davy

Well-Known Member
Feb 11, 2018
11,466
2,500
113
Southeastern U.S.
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
If Nestle or Westcott or Hort were Catholics - I do not know whether they were or not but - if they were SURELY they were <both influenced by the Catholic Church>. Now I am telling you that both in any case - regardless their Church-connection and regardless their science in Bible manuscripts - were both influenced by the Catholic Church. Even the greatest independent mind CANNOT ESCAPE THE WORLD WHEREIN HE LIVES. <You don’t have to be a private detective to figure it out.>
Even so you don’t have to be a private detective to figure it out THAT MANUSCRIPTS CANNOT be influenced by the Catholic Church.
What an amazing SWITCHEROO that is above in red!

Out of one side of his mouth he says Wescott and Hort were influenced by the Catholic Church.

And then out of the OTHER SIDE OF HIS MOUTH, he SUGGESTS that the Catholic Church had no INFLUENCE regarding the manuscripts (i.e., the SUPPOSED authentic Greek manuscripts FOUND IN THE VATICAN ONLY IN 1475 (Codex Vaticanus), & the Greek manuscript (Codex Siniaticus) supposedly found in the garbage can in a Greek monastery only in 1850 (by Tischendorf who CLAIMED its antiquity).

The facts today still are, CODEX VATICANUS and CODEX SINAITICUS do NOT have historical proof of how old they are. These are the main Greek New Testament manuscripts which Hort and Wescott used for THEIR NEW GREEK TRANSLATION of 1881, and is used by ALL MODERN New Testament translations, even the NKJV! They are CORRUPT MANUSCRIPTS, sneaked in! Even Codex Sinaiticus has been noticed by scholars to be the color of WHITE! What does that mean, since ALL old Greek New Testament texts (like the Traditional text) are BRONZE in color, showing their age! But the Codex Sinaiticus manuscript is STILL WHITE COLORED! One can see pictures of it online.
 
Last edited: