Apostates and Heretics behind the texts underlying modern translations

[Jordan Kurecki]

Most of your modern translations such as the NASB, NIV and others are based on the United Bible Societies Greek text or the Nestle Aland text, I dont trust the editors of these texts such as Bruce Metzger, Kurt and Barbara Aland, or Eberhard Nestle to decide what the accurate and best readings are of the New Testament considering that they are heretics and apostates. For example Metzger questions that Peter even wrote the epistles that bear his Name

“KURT ALAND denied the verbal inspiration of the Bible and wanted to see all denominations united into one “body” by the acceptance of a new ecumenical canon of Scripture which would take into account the Catholic apocryphal books (The Problem of the New Testament Canon, pp. 6,7,30-33). “

Kurt Aland also doubted the canonicity of several New Testament Books.

Not the kind of guy I want editing the Greek text behind my bible translation.

See page 5 and following of this link http://www.bibelgriechisch.info/Aland.pdf
Eberhard Nestle (1851-1913)

“Nestle, of the popular Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament (nearly 30 different editions now), rejected the infallibility of the Bible, and believed it was no more than a normal piece of literature. He claimed that authors of the New Testament never expected their writings to be read by others let alone be taken as the authoritative word of God.”

Kurt and Barbara Aland

“Partner with Eberhard Nestle (above), he and his wife are also contributors the UBS. Aland does not believe in verbal inspiration of the Bible, and that the Old Testament and the gospels are full of myths that were not inspired by God but merely a naturalistic process. Kurt Aland does not believe that the canon of Scripture is complete or settled.”

The Heretics Behind Modern Bible Versions Supported By James White


The people behind modern textual criticism are largely apostate heretics and the evangelicals involved are piggy backing off of unbelieving scholarship.

Textual Criticism Drawn From the Wells of Infidelity

 

[Yeshua1]

Most of your modern translations such as the NASB, NIV and others are based on the United Bible Societies Greek text or the Nestle Aland text, I dont trust the editors of these texts such as Bruce Metzger, Kurt and Barbara Aland, or Eberhard Nestle to decide what the accurate and best readings are of the New Testament considering that they are heretics and apostates. For example Metzger questions that Peter even wrote the epistles that bear his Name

“KURT ALAND denied the verbal inspiration of the Bible and wanted to see all denominations united into one “body” by the acceptance of a new ecumenical canon of Scripture which would take into account the Catholic apocryphal books (The Problem of the New Testament Canon, pp. 6,7,30-33). “

Kurt Aland also doubted the canonicity of several New Testament Books.

Not the kind of guy I want editing the Greek text behind my bible translation.

See page 5 and following of this link http://www.bibelgriechisch.info/Aland.pdf
Eberhard Nestle (1851-1913)

“Nestle, of the popular Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament (nearly 30 different editions now), rejected the infallibility of the Bible, and believed it was no more than a normal piece of literature. He claimed that authors of the New Testament never expected their writings to be read by others let alone be taken as the authoritative word of God.”

Kurt and Barbara Aland

“Partner with Eberhard Nestle (above), he and his wife are also contributors the UBS. Aland does not believe in verbal inspiration of the Bible, and that the Old Testament and the gospels are full of myths that were not inspired by God but merely a naturalistic process. Kurt Aland does not believe that the canon of Scripture is complete or settled.”

The Heretics Behind Modern Bible Versions Supported By James White


The people behind modern textual criticism are largely apostate heretics and the evangelicals involved are piggy backing off of unbelieving scholarship.

Textual Criticism Drawn From the Wells of Infidelity

And how are you able to determine of the Critical Greek text is an accurate representation of the originals or not? The end result, how much different is it really from the Majority/TR/Bzt Greek texts? Does it have any errors of doctrines within it?

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

And how are you able to determine of the Critical Greek text is an accurate representation of the originals or not? The end result, how much different is it really from the Majority/TR/Bzt Greek texts? Does it have any errors of doctrines within it?

What percentage of the word of God is important? Is the differences even if they are 5% not important? Are you trying to tell me that 5% or the word of God is not important?

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

Are there important differences between the Textus Receptus and the Nestle Aland/United Bible Society text? - King James Version Today

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

Psa 33:11 The counsel of the LORD standeth for ever, the thoughts of his heart to all generations.

So then Yeshua, you would contend that only most of the thoughts of God to us will stand for all generations and your position is that we can be content to believe God has not preserved a small percentage of his words?

 

[Yeshua1]

What percentage of the word of God is important? Is the differences even if they are 5% not important? Are you trying to tell me that 5% or the word of God is not important?

I am saying that all of the primary Greek source texts are close enough to the originals to be accurate, as NONE of them would be 100 % a perfect copy of the originals!

 

[agedman]

I am reminded of a person who was incensed that in the Christian School the first graders were not learning "Christian phonics."

The teacher responded, "How is the "T" pronounced differently as a Christian than that of a non-christian?"

Ultimately, a translation may certainly be marginalized when documentation of biased translation is produced.

Personally, I don't use the NIV except in rare occasions. It drifts (imo) too far away from the original intention. But that is purely subjective and I really would rather use the NASB or the ESV for serious study and then compare the work with the KJV. I have never had a conflicting presentation of the truth when using those three either in combination or as stand alone.

If one wants the most serious study, they will use multiple sources (translations) and especially those which retain a formal translation over someone attempting to style the translation work into some presentation that is perhaps agenda driven.

But frankly, it is all of very little consequence.

The typical "christian" doesn't even open their Bible in typical week weakly worship much less daily feast at the table set before them by the Word.

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

I am reminded of a person who was incensed that in the Christian School the first graders were not learning "Christian phonics."

The teacher responded, "How is the "T" pronounced differently as a Christian than that of a non-christian?"

Ultimately, a translation may certainly be marginalized when documentation of biased translation is produced.

Personally, I don't use the NIV except in rare occasions. It drifts (imo) too far away from the original intention. But that is purely subjective and I really would rather use the NASB or the ESV for serious study and then compare the work with the KJV. I have never had a conflicting presentation of the truth when using those three either in combination or as stand alone.

If one wants the most serious study, they will use multiple sources (translations) and especially those which retain a formal translation over someone attempting to style the translation work into some presentation that is perhaps agenda driven.

But frankly, it is all of very little consequence.

The typical "christian" doesn't even open their Bible in typical week weakly worship much less daily feast at the table set before them by the Word.

I’m sorry but I fail to see the relevance of your post to the OP?

 

[Rob_BW]

The darker side of the chief King James Bible translator, Lancelot Andrewes

 

[utilyan]

Sounds like we must depend on the AUTHORITY of particular people to be assured what we read is genuine and what they translate is genuine.

How do we know their sources are Legit or what they translate is fake or distorted by preconceived indoctrination?

 

[Rippon]

JK : Give us examples where the modern versions have led us astray with false doctrines.

 

[Deacon]

Most of your modern translations such as the NASB, NIV and others are based on the United Bible Societies Greek text or the Nestle Aland text, I dont trust the editors of these texts such as Bruce Metzger, Kurt and Barbara Aland, or Eberhard Nestle to decide what the accurate and best readings are of the New Testament considering that they are heretics and apostates.

Fortunately you don’t have to trust these people. They have been quite transparent in the development of the Critical Greek Text. Sources have been footnoted, evidence has been compiled, ancient texts have been published and even digitalized, theories have been expounded.

You can choose to believe it or not... the choice is yours.

But to denigrate men of God (who have spent their whole lives studying ancient languages so that we might taste just a bit of what others in the distant past have written and lived by, the Word of God), to demean them is un-Christ-like.

Disagree all you like, but stop spreading slander about men you have never met or studied.

Rob

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

Fortunately you don’t have to trust these people. They have been quite transparent in the development of the Critical Greek Text. Sources have been footnoted, evidence has been compiled, ancient texts have been published and even digitalized, theories have been expounded.

You can choose to believe it or not... the choice is yours.

But to denigrate men of God (who have spent their whole lives studying ancient languages so that we might taste just a bit of what others in the distant past have written and lived by, the Word of God), to demean them is un-Christ-like.

Disagree all you like, but stop spreading slander about men you have never met or studied.

Rob

Please show examples of how I have slandered any of the men above.

Which one did I slander and what did I say about them that is slander?

 

[Deacon]

Please show examples of how I have slandered any of the men above.

Which one did I slander and what did I say about them that is slander?

Well let’s start with the title of the thread...

Rob

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

Well let’s start with the title of the thread...

Rob

Slander: to make false and damaging statements about (someone).

What statement did I make that is false?
Do you not consider it to be apostasy and heresy to do things like questioning the canon of scripture, believing that genesis is not literal, questioning that peter wrote the epistles that bear his name, or claiming that the Old Testament is full of myth?

 

[Rippon]

JK: David Cloud is not a biblical scholar. And as I have pointed out, he's a false teacher.

You had better come up with people who have better reputations and true scholarship.

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

David Cloud is most certainly more of a bigger scholar than you Rippon.

David Cloud has written a encyclopedia for Christianity, a Bible dictionary, has written commentaries on several books of the Bible, has written hundreds upon hundreds of weekly and daily articles on different issues relating to Christianity, has written and published several books on several different issues relating to Christianity, in his book “for love of the Bible”, Cloud makes mention in the preface that he had hundreds of books of the history of the Bible and textual criticism that he consulted when writing that book.

For you to say he’s not a bible scholar is folly and is a blatant slander. He is one of the most studied men alive in Christianity today, as for your charge he is a heretic, I don’t agree with everything David Cloud says, but I would consider him far more sound in the faith than most people on the BB here.

 

[Rob_BW]

Were they part of a church/state hegemony that sentenced believers to imprisonment and death?

Did they abandon their urban congregations when the plague came to town, retiring to the countryside to wait it out in ease?

Did they visit fellow Christians on death row, not to comfort them, but to heap scorn and blatantly mock them?

Of course, ol Lancelot was just one man amongst the companies, but to use your own language, everyone else is guilty by default by "piggy backing off of" his scholarship.

The difference is, I can acknowledge the scholarship of the man who committed these heinous acts.

 

[Jordan Kurecki]

Were they part of a church/state hegemony that sentenced believers to imprisonment and death?

Did they abandon their urban congregations when the plague came to town, retiring to the countryside to wait it out in ease?

Did they visit fellow Christians on death row, not to comfort them, but to heap scorn and blatantly mock them?

Of course, ol Lancelot was just one man amongst the companies, but to use your own language, everyone else is guilty by default by "piggy backing off of" his scholarship.

The difference is, I can acknowledge the scholarship of the man who committed these heinous acts.

Apples and oranges in my opinion.

Your talking about moral failures vs blatant heresies and apostasy in regard to bibliology

That would be like trusting Richard Dawkins on the existence of God.

 

[Yeshua1]

JK: David Cloud is not a biblical scholar. And as I have pointed out, he's a false teacher.

You had better come up with people who have better reputations and true scholarship.

Bzt/Majority texts folks do have some legit scholarship behind their views, but the KJVO do not!