Sunday, April 10, 2022

Deception is at an all time high - Ukraine, Qanon, Trump cult

 Donald Trump spoke in Michigan a week ago.  I viewed the livestream presentation last Sunday afternoon.  It was hard to stomach.  He spoke again last night in Selma, North Carolina and his groupies such as Mike Lindell, the woman running for governor of Arizona on a Trump ticket were present.  At the Michigan event in Washington, Michigan on March 2nd, he announced his "RINO" (translated:  anybody who raises an eyebrow at Donald Trump) hitlist.  Two Michigan Congressmen Peter Meijer and Fred Upton were included.  The next day Upon announced his retirement and Trump has been  boasting about his success in chasing them from the political scene.  Brave Liz Cheney is on his list.  He already chased Adam Kinzinger away, but don't count Kinzinger out.  He has formed a brave Country First PAC (Political Action Committee.

I've written before about the LOVE JOY TRUMP book that clearly includes unashamedly blatant New Age themes and proclamations such as Trump is ushering in the Age of Aquarius, the Millennial Reign of Christ, and Gaia worship.  This should be shocking to anybody knowing specifics about the New Age Movement and their Bible.  I'm bothered by how little it is disturbing Evangelicals and some Catholics who once professed to know better.

I believe Trump is consciously operating out of the old Nazi/Hitler   playbook.  He has declared that if he is re=elected President in 2024 he will pardon those charged and convicted with the Capitol invasion on January 6, 2021.  He is running efforts to take control of the election machinery from the bottom up - precinct workers, clerks, public officials, judges and putting those in power who will reaffirm his big lie that he was elected by a landslide in 2020 but the "Bit Steal" intervened.  He is holding frequent large scale rallies that in some ways remind me of Munich spectacles.  

Brannon Howse has made probably an excellent living parroting the information I pioneered on the New Age Movement and its ramifications for Christians.  For that, I have no complaint, although I think it strange that he never attempted to make contact with me.  As those of you who hav e, you know that I  pick up my phone and am willing to generously share information and sources.

Now,  Brannon Howse and Mike Lindell have worked together in recent history.  Brannon Howse certainly knows enough about the New Age Movement to have set Mike Lindell straight.  Even a cursory glance at LOVE JOY TRUMP that Lindell forwarded and probably paid for the publication would have clearly shown Mr. Howse that Mike Lindell and the cohorts writing that book were either New Age activists and/or had followed into its trap. Why did he obviously not set Lindell straight?  I bluntly have to assume that Mike Lindell's money was more important to Brannon Howse than Mike Lindell's soul!

What about Qanon?

Qanon is obviously alive and well on Planet Earth.  A Trump enrosed Secretary of State candidate for michigan Kristine Karamo spoke to a recent Michigan Republic Club  meeting on the second Wednesday of March, 2022.  I was present, seated near the font and given the mike to question her.  I expressed my fears and concerns to her about Qanon and itss possible spread to the Michigan Trump circles.  She told the entire room she knew little or nothing about Qanon.  I wa shocked even before I learned the full truth because she claims to have a master's degree in Apologetics.  It is impossible in my opinion to be in that field and not be aware of Qanon.

Yesterday, another candidate for the same office, a Michigan State Representative from the Upper Peninsula introduced himself to me at a small political meeting.  I was there to help notarize precinct delegate applications.  I decided to tell h im my concerns about Ms. Karamo's statements to me and the large audience of which I was a part this past week  -- our local GoGop meeting.  He was shocked at her reported lack of knowledge.  "Kristine Karamo spoke at a national Qanon Convention in Las Vegas, Nevada on October 23, 2021 and he promptly handed me the evidence.   You can find it yourself easily on a Google / Duck Dck Go /  Bing or other internet engine search.

Bluntly, she lied.  

It is also looking to me sadly as though Archbishop Vigano is also falling into the Qanon and beyond traps including the theory that Putin is a hero trying to block the World Economic Forum and New World Order.

So much confusion -- hard to know where to start to fight it.  I am also fearful that some of you might be taken in by the Qanon cult.  We must be praying daily, "lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil."

Constance





1,072 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   601 – 800 of 1072   Newer›   Newest»
Anonymous said...

At 2:02 PM

LOL
Oh the manipulative smarm...
J is, indeed, a good balance and several here are right there with her. Not all but certainly several are.
I find much to agree with her about..much...both politically and spiritually too. She is able to discern many things. You, well, not so much---like almost nothing. Your biases run too deep, too bitter (you can't manage to help it).
There's hardly a thing to agree with you though, X.

You throw her, and a number of us under the bus, then come slithering back to J when you've stepped in it......because she is gracious.

You are so easy to read.


Anonymous said...

They are trying to take down John MacArthur again with another salacious story of child sex-abuse by a Pastor that, via inuendo, they are claiming John MacArthur covered up.

I believe the victim was abused but I also believe John MacArthur handled things the best he could at that time. I think it would likely go differently today but that's do to more awareness today and a lot of hard lessons learned by many churches. It should have been a police matter.

Julie Roys is on a witch hunt.

But something I would like you all to notice while reading this article...which goes straight to my discussioon regarding hiring and retaining unrepentant adulterers. John MacArthur years later supposedly "lamented hiring a divorced pastor". This accused pastor did much more than simply get divorced. The accused pastor was an unrepentant adulterer, who cheated with a teenager in a youth group at some random church, got his teenage affair partner pregnant, "divorced" his legimate wife in Vegas, abandoned her and his child, Wendy, and married to his teenage affair partner. 2 years later, he "legally" divorced his ex-wife in California while married to this other woman. He technically was a bigamist. These facts were likely available to the Church or just look at the ages of the parties and dates and it's suspicious enough. Like I said, adulterers usually reveal themselves without even knowing it. But it was all a long time before being hired by Grace Christian Church. MacArthur should have went with hit gut and never hired the man. The "bitter ex-wife" was a victim in this too. Her teenage daughter leaves her to seek better days living with her dad and stepmom (a conspirator in the destruction of her family), where she's then sexual molested by her dad. When the damaged daughter returns to mom's care, nobody will believe her/them. Sad story.

The accused Pastor is now dead. He was a pathological liar and unrepentant adulterer who was able to fool a lot of people nearly his entire life, John MacArthur included. Don't hire these people. They are toxic to your workplace AND reputation.


EXCLUSIVE: John MacArthur Covered Up Pastor’s Sexual Abuse, Witnesses Say

https://julieroys.com/john-macarthur-covered-up-pastor-sexual-abuse-witnesses-say/

x

J said...

Nice move changing the subject.

RayB said...


American Airlines Pilot Suffers Severe Cardiac Arrest 6 Minutes After Landing Plane, Blames COVID Vaccine

"An American Airlines pilot recently suffered a severe cardiac arrest six minutes after landing a plane at Dallas-Fort Worth, narrowly avoiding a catastrophe for everyone onboard. Captain Robert Snow was reportedly still in the cockpit of Airbus 321 carrying 200 people on April 9, when his heart stopped."

"From his hospital room in Dallas, Snow bitterly complained that he’s a victim of the airline’s COVID vaccine mandate, and will probably never be able to fly again."

https://amgreatness.com/2022/04/20/american-airlines-pilot-suffers-severe-cardiac-arrest-6-minutes-after-landing-plane-blames-covid-vaccine/

Anonymous said...

at cRayQ -

This is why you don't get your news from former Rappers willing to say anything for attention

Captain Robert Snow is simply an older pilot, nearing retirement age who had a heart attack. Why would mainstream news cover it? He wasn't flying the plane any longer, they weren't in the air and there was a co-pilot on board.

He was vaccinated on November 7th, 2021 so there's no indication whatsoever the covid vaccine had anything to do with it.

If it's covid related at all, it is much more likely a result of a more recent mild omicron variant break-through infection. Had he not been vaccinated, that might have killed him and/or killed someone else he loved. Very fortunate to be vaccinated.

x

Craig said...

X,

You really are an ass, braying in most all your comments. How in the world can you just categorically assert Captain Robert Snow’s claims are false? You cannot possibly know for a fact that this event is not the direct result of his vaxx. He thinks it is. Snow says he had been a very healthy pilot until he got the Johnson and Johnson vaccine, at which point his health went into decline, and culminated in the cardiac arrest.

The lapse in time between his vaxx and his cardiac arrest does not negate the possibility that the vaxx is the proximate cause of this event.

Yoder [of US Freedom Flyers] said Snow doesn’t remember anything from the time he pulled into the gate at Dallas-Fort Worth to 24 hours later when he woke up in the ICU. Upon waking up, according to Yoder, Snow called the US Freedom Flyers for help.

So Snow reached out to US Freedom Flyers after regaining consciousness. Then he proceeds to let her know:

From his hospital room in Dallas, Snow bitterly complained that he’s a victim of the airline’s COVID vaccine mandate, and will probably never be able to fly again.

“This is unacceptable, and I am one of the victims,” he [Snow] lamented. “You can see that this is the actual result of the vaccine for some of us. Mandatory, no questions asked. Get the shot or you’re fired.”

While it is certainly possible the cardiac arrest is not the result of the vaxx, again, you cannot possibly know one way or the other.

This is one of many examples of why you lack any credibility here.

Anonymous said...

So Craig...does your rebuke apply equally to cRay, Capt Snow and alt-right rapper, Stew Peters?

It's truly 'braying' to suggest these stories imply anything.

Neither Capt Robert Snow nor Ray nor Stew Peters could possibly KNOW one way or the other that this heart attack had anything to do with the Covid Vaccine.

I indicated "He was vaccinated on November 7th, 2021 so there's no indication whatsoever the covid vaccine had anything to do with it"....Which leaves open the possibility it was and that I don't know any more than that.

If Capt. Snow's health had truly "deteriorated" than what was he doing endangering the lives of passengers in such an old, fragile and unhealthy state?


Pilot heart attacks are rare but they do happen. Here's the story of a 57 year old American Airline pilot that had a heart attack and died mid-flight back in 2015. A heart attack here and there now is not hardly proof or a signal of some anomoly in the covid time warp.

https://www.nbcnews.com/business/travel/american-airlines-captain-who-died-flight-idd-57-year-old-n439066


In 2013, United Airlines pilot has a heart attack mid-flight.

United Airlines' Pilot Has Heart Attack: Prompts Emergency Landing in Idaho

https://youtu.be/cEDSr3rs_sY

x

Anonymous said...

craig said: "The lapse in time between his vaxx and his cardiac arrest does not negate the possibility that the vaxx is the proximate cause of this event."

By that logic, the lapse of time between Capt Snow doing a, b, c, d and his cariac arrest does not negate the possilibity that a, b, c, d is the proximate cause of this event.

a. Voting for Trump in Nov 2020;
b. Maybe 5G cell tower waves did it;
c. Maybe stress due to anger, bitterness and braying too much over mandatory vaccination in his workplace last fall;
d. Maybe his thanksgiving dinner just didn't sit right in his gut

There is nothing indicating as of yet that there has been much, if any, long lasting heart problems causes by any of the covid vaccines. Further, Captain Snow is obviously older than the young men, ages 12 to 39, who were in the age group that is/was most likely to develop myocarditis or pericarditis after getting the COVID-19 vaccine and those side effects have only occurred in people who received the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine or Moderna vaccine. They also manifested such adverse event shortly thereafter...not 5 months later. Finally, Capt Snow received the Johnson and Johnson vaccine which is, generally or fully, not associated with those side effects.

x

Anonymous said...

The one common denominator in all of the drama here is that narcissist X is the focus and center of attention. Like a train wreck, it's often hard to look away.

Marko said...

Constance / Rich / whomever else might have some measure of control over this blog:

Because of "imposter" posting (people posting as a certain person when they are in fact someone else, just to make that person look bad), and for a variety of other reasons, I would like to re-iterate an occasional request I've made in the past:

Please consider moving to a discussion board / forum of some kind, with moderators. This has the advantage of:

1. Being able to ban/moderate users who violate whatever rules are established at the setup. The rules can be as lenient or as strict as you want. I'd lean toward very lenient, like it already is here.

2. No "anonymous" users. Everyone will have some screen name tied to them. You can still be anonymous, and call yourself whatever you want. But your posts will always have that screen name tied to them, so people can keep straight who's talking about what. This would eliminate some measure of confusion. And if you think in this blog, you are truly anonymous, maybe you are up to a point. But if Google or the authorities or the "powers that be" or whatever bad guy you're afraid of really wanted to find out who you were, they could.

3. This is probably the biggest advantage - on a discussion board everything is discussed in threads by topic. No more mishmash of everything all in one long meandering thread. That way, you can skip what topics you find of no interest, and just read through the ones that interest you.

4. Certain threads / topics can be pinned to the top, for high visibility.

5. It may attract more people into this community, so more learning and sharing of what's going on can take place.

There are probably disadvantages too. More effort will be needed to maintain a site like that, but probably not as much as you'd think. Also, some people might not like that format, and leave. Well, how many have left because of the negatives of using the current format? I'd guess quite a few.

Perhaps there are some advantages / disadvantages others might want to share. Please do.

Thanks and have a good rest of the week all!

Anonymous said...

Well, I think it's safe to say that this is my blog now.
Every comment is either by me or about me.

x

P.S.
Resistance is futile.

Craig said...

X @ 7:03 PM,

My comment is solely directed at you for your persistent braying like an ass here.

In your own ‘defense’, you wrote: I indicated "He was vaccinated on November 7th, 2021 so there's no indication whatsoever the covid vaccine had anything to do with it"....Which leaves open the possibility it was and that I don't know any more than that.

Nice try. Unlike you, I look at the larger context so that I don’t quote someone out of context. Following that near-assertion (“no indication whatsoever”), in the first sentence of your very next paragraph in your 5:03 PM comment, is this (bold added):

If it's covid related at all, it is much more likely a result of a more recent mild omicron variant break-through infection…

So, your claim is definitively that it WAS NOT as a result of the vaxx. Like I stated @ 6:21 PM: “You cannot possibly know for a fact that this event is not the direct result of his vaxx.” You ain’t omniscient.

You then post this red herring in your attempt to deflect from your earlier comment: If Capt. Snow's health had truly "deteriorated" than what was he doing endangering the lives of passengers in such an old, fragile and unhealthy state?

Like you stated @ 5:03 PM as your initially tried to ‘debunk’ this claim, using unnecessary hyperbole in your straw-manning of the situation, there was a co-pilot on board.

There’s ALWAYS a co-pilot on commercial airliners here in the US. In fact, this is why the red herring incident you cite in the following didn’t result in a crash:

Pilot heart attacks are rare but they do happen. Here's the story of a 57 year old American Airline pilot that had a heart attack and died mid-flight back in 2015. A heart attack here and there now is not hardly proof or a signal of some anomoly in the covid time warp.

The fact that there have been cardiac events pre-covid is immaterial to the details of Capt. Snow.

And your 7:21 PM is not worth responding to, except to say that your logic is flawed. But we knew that already.

Anonymous said...

Craig,

This is silly but you placed the emphasis all wrong...


My saying...

IF it's covid related at all, it is much more likely a result of a more recent mild omicron variant break-through infection…

IS conditional and even alluding to the possibility when I say "more likely" covid than the covid vaccine. That is a "weighing of odds" based upon what experience and the studies I recall reading suggest (where the odds of injury are seemingly much higher due to actually acquiring covid naturally than the covid vaccine).


Further, my 7:21 pm logic was purposely flawed. Sure there's a possibility the covid vaccine injured this guy but such "possibility" appears in the same ballpark as the possibility it was 5G or some other hypothetical neither you or I could eliminate entirely.

My 7:21 pm post also pointed out Capt Snow was J&J vaccinated which means his cardiac issues are much less likely covid vaccine related.

x


Anonymous said...

Craig said: "Like you stated @ 5:03 PM as your initially tried to ‘debunk’ this claim, using unnecessary hyperbole in your straw-manning of the situation, there was a co-pilot on board."

This is simply countering the hyperbole of the story cRay posted trying to indicate if the pilot's heart attack had happened just a few minutes earlier....200 passengers might have been kiiled or under threat.

It also addresses the hyperbole that mainstream media is trying to suppress it or not report on it like it's so obvious its got to be the vaccne and the plane really was in danger. The co-pilot was right there, I presume. Sure it's a risk but they train for such predicaments.

The articles I posted of other pilots having heart attacks were pilots who died in flight. A pilot or anyone dying from a heart attack IN an airport may or may not be a newsworthy story depending on the local news. There doesn't appear to be any reason or evidence this story was/is being supressed.

x

Craig said...

X,

You can keep trying to dance around this, but you prefaced your initial statement with He was vaccinated on November 7th, 2021..., meaning a correlation to that date. The implication then was that that date was too long ago to have any relevance.

Then the "if" conditional should be understood such that it's covid as opposed to the vaxx for covid, and the "much more likely" would be your claim that it was omicron over against some other earlier covid variant.

If that isn't what you initially intended, then why the strong language "no indication whatsover" with no other qualifiers or disclaimers at that time?

That's not to mention the over-the-top hyperbole and finger-pointing via the genetic fallacy in your first paragraph.

Man, you're a big time-waster. And, all for what?

Anonymous said...

x's same ole baffle 'em with B^11$#!T ploy.
Pathetic.

He must be needy as hell...he has to turn to a blog for company..

Every businessman I've ever met had no time to blog like this hog.





Anonymous said...

craig said: "The fact that there have been cardiac events pre-covid is immaterial to the details of Capt. Snow."

The fact there have been captains having heart attacks in the air in the past to any degree may be immaterial to the details of Capt Snow; however, cRayQ wasn't sharing a human interest story about Capt Snow asking for prayers for his friend. Rather, he shared it as a supposed warning about the covid vaccine and suggesting, by implication, that this is HIGHLY unusual. That pilots are perfectly healthy and regular tested so it MUST BE the covid vaccine. After all...Capt Snow thinks it's related which isn't evidence whatsoever.

I read a few stories in a few places as Capt Snow's story was making its way around the alt-right disinformation circuit and, inevitably, this event is combined with statements combining this event with "all the athletes dropping dead around the world" as if these events are out of the ordinary and piling up. They aren't. Athletes and pilots and everyone else have heart attacks. It is irresponsible to report singular events like they, alone, point to some kind of hidden trend. There may be a bump in cardiac deaths related due to actual covid or as a result of lookdowns, depression, weight-gain and lack of preventative care. Looking at countries like Australia and New Zealand where there was little infection might reveal whether it's related to covid or, POSSIBLY, the vaccine. Neither of those countries endured much excess deaths at all despite much higher percentages of vacccinated populations than the US.

It all just appears to me to be a big steaming pile of mage qanon political conspiracy.

x

p.s. - Like hospital workers, Pilots and flight crew SHOULD be fully vaccinated by mandate. I bet the list of required vaccinations for the job is pretty long. A sick crew member could distribute contagions to a lot of people, who may themselves be vaccinated or not. In such a closed space they could conceivably spread disease throughout the country/world pretty fast. It is my opinion that Florida and Texas were the main culprits of the rise of the delta variant throughout the US as they protected their travel industries and naive maga voters travelled to florida and texas with abandon bringing covid via airplanes back to their home red states and red counties. After the country wide lockdowns, Florida then led the waves in 2020 and then Florida and Texas in 2021.


Craig said...

X,

Get over yourself. We already know the premises incorporated into your belief system re: CV19 and how you straw man most anything.




Well, all us working taxpayers can feel good that we're supporting X via his government-sponsored, tax-payer supported reduced ACA health coverage. All while he bloviates here on this blog.

RayB said...


1 in 10 Surveyed Doctors Believe COVID Shots Aren’t Safe — BUT IS THE NUMBER EVEN HIGHER?

One in 10 primary care physicians don’t agree COVID-19 vaccines are safe, and 9.3% don’t believe the vaccines are effective, according to a survey conducted between May 14 and May 25, 2021.

The findings were published in the April 2022 issue of Vaccine.

Researchers at the Texas A&M School of Public Health asked 625 primary care physicians whether they strongly agreed, somewhat agreed, neither agreed nor disagreed, somewhat disagreed or strongly disagreed with the following three statements:

The COVID vaccines are safe.
The COVID vaccines are effective.
The COVID vaccines are important.
Here is a summary of their findings:

10.1% did not agree the vaccines were safe.
9.3% did not agree the vaccines were effective.
8.3% did not agree the vaccines were important.
5.2% were unvaccinated at the end of the survey in May 2021.

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/1-in-10-surveyed-doctors-covid-shots-arent-safe/?utm_source=salsa&eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=d4aa2f1a-ba21-4c5f-b2b6-abd41b57b6e7

NOTE: Keep in mind that many health care professionals fear serious repercussions by the establishment for voicing any professional concern regarding the safety of these EXPERIMENTAL 'vaccines.' Therefore, these sentiments are no doubt held by many more than that which is indicated by these survey statistics.

Anonymous said...

craig said: "Then the "if" conditional should be understood such that it's covid as opposed to the vaxx for covid, and the "much more likely" would be your claim that it was omicron over against some other earlier covid variant."

Why would I say that...more likely omicron than some other variant??? Capt Snow had the heart attack April 9th, 2022. The Omicron variant is and has been the overwhelmingly dominant variant for several months...especially the kind of presumably mild variant he wasn't aware of having endured (I assume he thinks he's not recently been sick with covid cause that would seemingly be the most obvious "go to" for him versus the vaccine last november). Also he was vaccinated and more resistant to other older strains of the virus. Point is, other strains was not on my radar...I didn't really even need to say omicron. If covid was a factor...it was more likely cathcing covid than anything to do with the covid vaccine he got last november.

I also included this because a bunch of anti-covid vaccine quacks are pounching on Capt Snow and will be attempting to prove his heart is damaged and somehow the covid vaccine did it as though, perhaps, Capt Snow was never infected. Hopefully they can differ and honestly share the results showing a difference between an infection and vaccine injury. We'll see what they come up with ...if anything


Craig asked: "Then why the strong language "no indication whatsover" with no other qualifiers or disclaimers at that time?

Is there really "any indication" it was the covid vaccine outside of Capt Snow simply claiming it? It's not that "strong" a statement as it is a fact at the current time. You can't believe or imply covid vaccine harmed this man based solely off Capt Snow's claim, right?

If he was a week out from vaccination, sure. Maybe even a month or 6 weeks out of getting vaccinated MIGHT be a slight indication of covid vaccine being a factor..but..5 months...come on. For now, there remains 'no indication whatsoever" this was anything more than a common-place run of the mill heart attack suffered by millions throughout the world for eons and it's irresponsible and dishonest to publicly claim or even imply otherwise.

But it is possible....evidence please.

x

RayB said...


No surprise here ... the United Methodists (Duke University) has been in full swing apostasy for decades. Now they have sunken to a new level of evil;
flat out BLASPHEMY !

Christian Divinity School Recites Prayer to the 'Great Queer One,' Who's a 'Drag Queen and Trans Man'

https://redstate.com/alexparker/2022/04/20/christian-divinity-school-recites-prayer-to-the-great-queer-one-whos-a-drag-queen-and-trans-man-n553395

Craig said...

X,

Among your most recent red herrings is the following: If he was a week out from vaccination, sure. Maybe even a month or 6 weeks out of getting vaccinated MIGHT be a slight indication of covid vaccine being a factor..but..5 months...come on. For now, there remains 'no indication whatsoever" this was anything more than a common-place run of the mill heart attack suffered by millions throughout the world for eons and it's irresponsible and dishonest to publicly claim or even imply otherwise.

And that's pretty much what you implied in your initial statement, so why the earlier follow up that your comment leaves open the possibility it was [vaxx-related] and that I don't know any more than that.

Cake and eat it, too, eh?

Craig said...

X,

Why not just swallow your gigantic pride and admit you overstated the case in your initial comment in this vein?

RayB said...


What a dilemma.

Who are we going to trust on this one?

Omniscient Dr. X or the airline pilot Captain Snow? ROFL !!!

PS: If I were in a hot desert and dying of thirst and X showed up with what he claimed was a cool glass of water, I wouldn't drink it!

RayB said...


In the mean time, as Biden continues to supply war weapons to one of the most corrupt nations on earth ...

Russia Tests Nuclear-Capable ICBM As Putin Warns Enemies It's "Food For Thought"

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/russia-tests-new-intercontinental-ballistic-missile-putin-warns-enemies-its-food

Meanwhile, China is also sending our Death Cult Woke Dear Leader a message ...

This Is Our Best Look Yet At China’s Air-Launched ‘Carrier Killer’ Missile

China’s mysterious air-launched anti-ship ballistic missile just made its latest appearance.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/this-is-our-best-look-yet-at-chinas-air-launched-carrier-killer-missile

Anonymous said...

Craig,

How could you possibly KNOW exactly what I meant? Are you omniscient? Am I responsible for you getting upset by inferring things? Isn't it possible I simply shared my opinion? Did I say I KNOW, without doubt in every instance, it's not the covid vaccine. I have no credentials or first hand knowledge to make that conceivably impossible claim (not even medical doctor could make that claim over the internet without examing Capt Snow).

No...I said (paraphrased)...

"there is no indication whatsoever right now it was the covid vaccine related at all BUT if it was, in fact, related somehow to covid in the future, in my opinion, it's more likely that not due to a covid infection rather than the covid vaccine.

No need to apologize for overstating your overconfident rebuke.

x




RayB said...


7 Different Patented Poisons in CV19 Injections – Karen Kingston

Karen is a Christian and a warrior for truth. She also is one very brave lady ...

Karen Kingston is a biotech analyst and a former Pfizer employee who has researched and written about many aspects of the so-called CV19 vaccines.

“We are being lied to at such a level it is difficult for people to comprehend. The American people and global citizens were told the injections were vaccines. In fact, when you look at the patents, they call them bioweapons. They call them ‘toxins,’ they call them ‘agents of chemical biowarfare’. . . . Specifically, there is a 2017 patent related to what they are calling a ‘vaccine.’ The patent is titled ‘Vaccine Nanotechnology.’ . . .It is owned by the NIH, and when you read this nanotechnology patent in section 9, it clearly states in some embodiments, the small molecule is a toxin, a toxin from a chemical weapon, an agent of biowarfare. What they call a ‘vaccine’ in the patent, they say we are going to inject people with bioweapons.”

See the entire interview here on Greg Hunter's USA Watchdog site:

https://usawatchdog.com/7-different-patented-poisons-in-cv19-injections-karen-kingston/

Craig said...

X,

You wrote: No...I said (paraphrased)...

Um, no you didn't. And no amount of semantic dancing will convince otherwise. But I feel sure you'll persist nonetheless.

RayB said...


Project Veritas Drops Recording Of AstraZeneca CEO Saying How ‘Millions Of People’ Should Avoid COVID Shots [VIDEO]

"So-called conspiracy theorists were right again..."

https://www.redvoicemedia.com/2022/04/project-veritas-drops-recording-of-astrazeneca-ceo-saying-how-millions-of-people-should-avoid-covid-shots-video/

Anonymous said...

Craig,

But it's possible, right? You don't can't KNOW exactly what I meant when I said "If" and "much more likely", right?

It's ok...you read an implication I didn't make.

Speaking of which, why aren't you lecturing cRay's re: his much more overt implication? He surely can't KNOW why Capt Snow had a heart attack. Is cRay omniscent?

Talk about red herrings.

x

Anonymous said...

Another Project Veritas deliberate misrepresentation...

The ceo never said "millions of people should AVOID covid shots" he merely indicated what was speculated in December 2020 that the covid vaccines won't really work for the immunocompromised.

In order to stimulate an immunoreaction and develop sufficient antibodies to covid, you best not be immuno-suppressed. It's not that they can't handle the shot or need to avoid it because it would be dangerous for them, it's just less likely to be effective or incapable at providing them the typical resulting antibodies they need depending on their level of immuno-suppression.

In other words, this video appears to be a big nothing burger.

x

p.s. - Kingston is not a doctor or vaccine expert in anyway. I've watched videos of her lying (like when she was onstage with the attorney Renz guy trying to manipulate pfizer numbers to say the covid shots made you more like to catch covid or when she claimed graphene oxide was in the vaccines). Christians don't travel around the world presenting lies to audiences of people in person and on the interent that surely included some that died thereafter due to her misinformation.

Craig said...

X @ 12:15 AM,

Since you closed your initial comment on this subject with Very fortunate to be vaccinated, we can be sure of your intention. That is, in your comment the vaxx was not the cause of his cardiac arrest; if it was covid-related at all it was omicron, and it's--continuing with your view considering your penultimate sentence--good that he was vaccinated because that might have killed him and/or killed someone else he loved.

J said...

Craig,

Returning to the word "peitho" and its meaning, I'll start here. It took me a little while to find this particular article in the leadership series on this web site I had linked to before.

Here it is. Below is a copy and paste from this article. https://www.scripturerevealed.com/the-church/the-hebrews-1317-dilemma/

There are thirteen potential English equivalents for the Greek word “Peitho”. Many translators chose to translate “Peitho” simply as “obey”. This list was taken from both Vines’ and Strong’s concordances:

• Be convinced
• Give assent [agreement]
• To rely on (by inward certainty)
• Agree with
• Believe
• Have confidence in
• Become content with
• Make friends with
• Obey
• Be persuaded by
• Trust
• Yield to
• Be assured by

Now look at all the possibilities on this list. Yet the translators chose to translate “Peitho” into English as just “obey”. In doing so, the central theme and nuances of the true meaning in the Greek are totally lost. The essence of this important Greek word cannot possibly be conveyed in English by the single word “obey”.

Craig said...

J,

A word only takes on meaning in its context. So, no one single context will convey what you call the "essence". Context is king.

Craig said...

J,

Maybe an illustration from English will help. Off the top of my head I thought of "vague":

1 not clearly or explicitly stated or expressed:
vague promises.

2 indefinite or indistinct in nature or character, as ideas or feelings:
a vague premonition of disaster.

3 not clear or distinct to the sight or any other sense; perceptible or recognizable only in an indefinite way:
vague shapes in the dark;
vague murmurs behind a door.

4 not definitely established, determined, confirmed, or known; uncertain:
a vague rumor;
The date of his birth is vague.

5 (of persons) not clear or definite in thought, understanding, or expression:
vague about his motives;
a vague person.

6 (of the eyes, expression, etc.) showing lack of clear perception or understanding: a vague stare.



I'm sure you (or someone else) can think of other, better examples.

Anonymous said...

This day begins with a good ole belly laugh!

x burying himself deeper and deeper in his own steaming pile!

This is not new to the blog, by any means, but he's dug in really deep this time.
The attention whore is at it again.

Proof that for certain donkeys even a "bad love" is better than no love at all!! LOL

J said...

Craig,

Thank you. To be clear, the author wasn't proposing a different English translation, and he also wrote about context. Specifically, he wrote, "Look at the context of each passage keeping in mind that no Scripture conflicts with any other Scripture."

This is the whole paragraph, and it is his concluding paragraph:

Let me also say that for your edification, you might want to do your own word study of Hebrews 13:17. Use a good Greek concordance such as Vine’s or Strong’s and specifically study the words “obey”, “rule”, “submit” and “authority”. Study the scriptures with a mind that is open to God’s truth. Look at the context of each passage keeping in mind that no Scripture conflicts with any other Scripture. Then you will undoubtedly be in for an eye-opening revelation. In this manner will allow the scriptures to be revealed to you.

Anonymous said...

"I'm sure you (or someone else) can think of other, better examples.


8:47 AM"

X is not vague about the particular kind of bloviating self-aggrandizing idiot he has chosen to be.

J said...

Very interesting and topical article.

How Christians Discovered Resistance to Wicked Governments: Very Gradually, Then Suddenly

https://stream.org/how-christians-discovered-resistance-to-wicked-governments-very-gradually-then-suddenly/

Anonymous said...

Every morning X's wife packs his lunch so he can go to work. X takes his lunch, and off he goes to sit at the computer until bed time.

Anonymous said...

Wash rinse repeat

Anonymous said...

thegatewaypundit.com/2022/04/white-house-spokesperson-jen-psaki-teachers-talk-kindergarteners-boy-girl/

Anonymous said...

Florida votes to strip Disney of privileged tax and self governing status: Ron DeSantis strikes first blood in culture war win as panicked media giant considers 'bringing back Bob Iger' to steady rocky ship

The Repulican let Senate voted to end the Reedy Creek Improvement District
It means the firm will no longer be able operate as a self-contained government

It rips up the 55-year-old deal that allowed Disney to effectively self-govern itself

But it may see two Florida counties saddled with $1billion of debt owed by Disney

It is the latest escalation in the ongoing battle between Ron DeSantis and Disney

It started when its bosses opposed the 'Don't Say Gay' bill and enraged governor

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10735801/Florida-counties-end-footing-Disneys-1B-bond-debt-DeSantis-rips-special-status.html

Anonymous said...

10:22 AM

I would be surprised if X even has a wife (let alone is 'boss' of employees at 'his' company).

Somehow, I imagine him living in someone's basement, typing away 24/7, with a Pepsi and Cheeto crumbs falling from his chin.

J said...

A good read about Easter, written by an atheist who disagrees with the poor Christian history scholarship of most other atheists. The way that the word "Easter" is compared to "Ishtar" reminds me of the way that the word "Russia" is compared to "Rosh." This is a blog I've bookmarked to return to often.

Is Easter Pagan?

https://historyforatheists.com/2022/04/easter-pagan/

J said...

New-onset autoimmune phenomena post-COVID-19 vaccination

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34957554/

The abstract says:

Recently, new-onset autoimmune phenomena after COVID-19 vaccination have been reported increasingly [bullet points mine]

* (e.g. immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia, [a blood coagulation disorder caused by low platelets]

* autoimmune liver diseases,

* Guillain-Barré syndrome, [demyelinating disease similar to MS]

* IgA nephropathy, [kidney disease]

* rheumatoid arthritis and

* systemic lupus erythematosus). [a complicated systemic auto-immune disease that increases risk of heart disease and lowers life expectancy]

Anonymous said...

Former President Donald J Trump, God's gift to the Left that keeps on giving.

ttps://www.wnd.com/2022/04/kavanaugh-barrett-

Anonymous said...

They love this guy!

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-ad-praising-covid-19-vaccines-convinced-thousands-2022-4

Anonymous said...

America is RUNNING OUT of military munitions in Ukraine and can’t replace them FOR YEARS due to industrial decline and supply chain collapse

Just as Russia has now completed the test firing of its global ICBM “Sarmat” missile system — which can reach any target anywhere in the world with a dizzying array of re-entry (nuclear) vehicles — alarm bells are being sounded over America’s rapid depletion of munitions due to the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

The US Pentagon has shipped thousands of Javelin anti-tank weapons to Ukraine, along with millions of rounds of ammunition, artillery shells, rockets, drones and troop transport vehicles, leading to a sudden drop in the available stockpiles of such equipment should US forces need to defend the homeland.

Pentagon officials say that Kyiv is blowing through a week’s worth of deliveries of antitank munitions every day. It is also running short of usable aircraft as Russian airstrikes and combat losses take their toll. Ammunition has become scarce in Mariupol and other areas. This is presenting Western countries with a stark choice between pouring more supplies into Ukraine or husbanding finite capabilities they may need for their own defense.

https://www.naturalnews.com/2022-04-20-america-is-running-out-of-military-munitions-and-cant-replace-them-for-years.html

RayB said...


I'm sure it's just another one of those coincidences (there sure seems to be a LOT of these strange coincidences, don't you think?)

7,500% Increase in Recorded Cases of Cancer Following COVID-19 Vaccines

"Dr. Ryan Cole was recently interviewed by Maria Zeee where he stated that he is getting reports all across the world from doctors observing that cancer rates are “taking off like wild fire” following COVID-19 vaccinations."

https://healthimpactnews.com/2022/7500-increase-in-recorded-cases-of-cancer-following-covid-19-vaccines/




Anonymous said...

cRayQ,

That's got to be one of the worst maga qanon lying articles you have ever shared.

First, Dr. Ryan Cole is a murdering pathologist from rural Idaho...how would he be plugged into the world and be receiving calls from real medical doctors sharing the private trials and tribulations of their cancer patients with a well-known quack?

Second, as you've known for over a year now (evidence you are a unabashed liar) using any VAERS reports as proof of any vaccine injury is NOT a correct or honest way to utilize such information.

Third, it's laughable to compare some contrived monthly cancer rate using cancer case reporting to the VAERS system after covid vaccines versus other vaccines over 30 years when MOST of the those vaccines were administered to infants and children versus the covid vaccine administered to the entire population including most of the 1.6 millon persons that statistically would be expected to be diagnosed with cancer each and every year.

Fourth, cancer generally takes more than a year to develope so any supposed current increase in cancer wouldn't be covid vaccine related. A quick google and it appears for most breast and bowel cancers, the tumours begin to grow around ten years before they're detected. And for prostate cancer, tumours can be many decades old.

x

Anonymous said...

J @2:45

That study really doesn't say all that much that by now was already well established. I guessing it may have caught the eye of some disinformation websites simply because it said "recently" and "NEW onset autoimmune phenomena" like it's fresh 2022 information of sickness and autoimmune disease spreading today when it's really just discussing some of the most common, yet highly infrequent, known adverse reactions from January through October 2021 when people were getting the shots and looking into how they come about. A more detailed look into what was happening biologically in those very rare circumstances. When reading it, be sure to know there's important differences between autoimmune phenomena, reactions, disorders and autoimmune disease.

Like an anaphylaxis reaction which has been a known mild rare reaction since the beginning. It was why they made you sit there for 10 or 15 minutes after they admiistered the shot. Anaphylaxis IS an example of an autoimmune reaction/response. The person having the reaction may or may not already be autoimmune disordered when they got the shot. Simply having a autoimmune reaction does not, necessarily, consititute a disorder/disesase and the shot doesn't cause it but, rather, that individuals body's reaction to the shot that did.

It was noteworthy to me to read that study today because throughout the study ALL the adverse reactions they were looking into were from immediate to 14 days or so after the covid vaccine injection. This was validating considering yesterdays argument I had with Craig about how outlandish a covid vaccine reaction would be 5 months later. It was nice to read some medical literature on the subject confirming my reasoning.

Thanks,

X

Anonymous said...

"The way that the word "Easter" is compared to "Ishtar" reminds me of the way that the word "Russia" is compared to "Rosh."

Another Biblical illiteracy and/or lie advanced by J.

https://www.oxfordbiblechurch.co.uk/index.php/books/the-imminent-invasion-of-israel/541-appendix-5-where-is-rosh

Anonymous said...

Schumer Compares Ketanji Brown Jackson's Confirmation to Jesus Christ's Resurrection: 'The Stone Has Been Rolled Away From The Tomb'

thegatewaypundit.com/2022/04/schumer-compares-ketanji-brow-jacksons-confirmation-supreme-court-jesus-christs-resurrection-stone-rolled-away-tomb...

Anonymous said...

19-Year-Old White Woman Brutally Beaten by Pack of Black Teens Over "Black Hairstyle"

thegatewaypundit.com/2022/04/19-year-old-white-woman-brutally-beaten-pack-black-teens-black-hairstyle-video/

Anonymous said...

18 Food processing plants burned down in the last 6 months. Totally normal, nothing to see here...

iO.wp.com/www.dailycrow.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/43c1622bef5aae58.webp?ssl=1

Anonymous said...

The Megadeath Intellectuals of the Great Reset

banned.video/watch?id=6260115cd905881a861e14a1

Anonymous said...

Libs of TikTok Doxing Uncovers Secret Hacker-Government Mercenary Alliance Behind Regime's War on MAGA Americans

revolver.news/2022/04/libsoftiktok/dox-uncovers-secret-hacker-government-alliance-attacking-americans/

Anonymous said...

ELON MUSK AGAIN SOUNDS ALARM OVER DEPOPULATION

blacklistednews.com/article/82402/video-elon-musk-again-sounds-alarm-over.html

Anonymous said...

DARK DAY FOR PRESS FREEDOM AS BRITISH COURT ORDERS ASSANGE EXTRADITION

blacklistednews.com/article/82395/dark-day-for-press-freedom-as-british-court-orders-assange.html

RayB said...


From the history vault (2020) ...

BLM Leader Calls For Abolition Of United States

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=higWEdNC0R0

NOTE: IMO, X is doing the 'signing' for the hearing impaired in this video. Being that X is an enthusiastic supporter of BLM & ANTIFA, it only stands to reason that X would offer his services. At any rate, even if this isn't in fact X, this is how I picture him. Let me know what you think ...

Anonymous said...

Former U.S. President, and likely our current shadow president, Barack Obama delivered a speech reeking of hypocrisy on Thursday when he addressed a Stanford University crowd.

Speaking about digital disinformation, Obama compared Putin to Hitler, claimed President Trump “incited a violent insurrection” on January 6th, and shared several other inaccurate claims.

Arrogantly disregarding the irony, Obama spoke alongside several known disinformation peddlers such as his former aide Ben Rhodes, president of the civil rights group Color of Change Rashad Robinson and Stanford researcher Renee DiResta.

Barack criticized Trump and other GOP politicians who have continued to question the blatantly faulty 2020 presidential election as people who are trying to “overturn the will of the people.”

In reality, those individuals are trying to address a Democrat election theft operation that already undermined the will of the American people, and Obama is knee-deep in the scheme.

Obama insinuated former Trump advisor Steve Bannon is engaging in Putin-style propaganda by pushing so many “conspiracies” that citizens don’t know what to believe.

“Once they lose trust in their leaders, in mainstream media, in political institutions, in each other, in the possibility of truth, the game’s won,” he told the audience.

Continuing to spew every trigger word he could, the former president criticized a free and open internet where a person could find “lies, conspiracy theories, junk science, quackery, white supremacists, racists tracks, misogynist screeds.”

In a world where people have access to these dangerous ideas, Obama is worried the average person isn’t smart enough to “distinguish between fact, opinion, and wholesale fiction,” before suggesting some people, “just stopped caring.”

At one point, Barack subtly admitted the Covid “vaccine” rollout was itself a sort of clinical test since the jabs were given emergency approval with little testing beforehand.

“Despite the fact that we have now essentially clinically tested the vaccine on billions of people worldwide,” he said. “Around 1 in 5 Americans is still going to put themselves at risk… rather than get vaccinated.”

The 44th president claimed “people are dying” because one in five Americans have refused to take an experimental Covid jab.

Perhaps the funniest part of Barack’s speech came when he referred to himself as “a free speech absolutist” amid a keynote address focused on destroying the First Amendment as we know it and consolidating the power into the hands of his globalist cohorts.

https://www.infowars.com/posts/obama-pushes-hardcore-disinformation-in-speech-condemning-disinformation/

Anonymous said...

Re: “Despite the fact that we have now essentially clinically TESTED the vaccine on billions of people worldwide,” he said. “Around 1 in 5 Americans is still going to put themselves at risk… rather than get vaccinated.”

____________________________________________________________________________________________


Yep! I am one of those '1 in 5 Americans' who chooses to put myself in the hands of my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, rather than in the hands of my government and the CDC.

Anonymous said...

cRayQ,

Your 12:19 pm entry is so fitting of exactly who you are. What kind of Christian man mocks the deaf?

Shame on you.

As for Lilith Sinclair, she appears to be a young, mentally ill, disillusioned young anarchist who spends her time as an local activist in Portland. It's kind of a reach to call her a black lives matters "leader" just because she's wearing a BLM mask., though, it does appear, she was given a microphone at this event the summer of 2020.

She's young, stupid and powerless. I don't defend her other than to say she's not expousing views that differ all that much from the ultra-right wing lunatics you defend, such as the insurrectionists and other dominionists (including ecumenical roman catholic partners). That's the point of your white nationalist dominionism, isn't it?

J posted an article and video the other day featuring a guy named Derrick Broze. He's a new age, lefty libertarian and anarchist agorist that wants to topple the US too. Does that make J an "enthusiatic supporter of agorist anarachists"?

You point to these kids to promote fear of some underclass liberal uprising while knowing they are absolutley powerless to actually do anything, they will eventually grow up and that YOU are the real mage qanon gospel agent of the true hateful ignorant new age uprising.

x

Anonymous said...

He's mocking you, moron @ 12:19 PM.

You keep stepping in it...up to your deaf ears.

Your bias would make you dangerous if you had any power.
You are a loudmouth liberal flea, a mere annoyance.
I guess you gotta be what you're good at.

All you've got here is an audience that won't hear. We can, but choose not to.
The truth sounds good to us, but your posts are the like the sound of crickets, clanging, and amount to crap to scrape off the bottom of our shoes.

You are so dadgum needy. How does your wife stand it?

Anonymous said...

'Christ, they're going after Mickey Mouse': Biden criticizes 'ugly' Republicans for going to war with Disney, says the 'far right has taken over the party' and insists Democrats can GAIN two seats in the Senate in November

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10743273/Biden-criticizes-ugly-Republicans-targeting-Disney.html


__________________________________________________________________________________________



(Of course, that's much tamer than the DemoRATS taking the United States of America DOWN THE TOILET WITH A BIG FLUSH!!!)

Anonymous said...

Are ARSON TEAMS burning down America's food production infrastructure?

Video posted on April 22, 2022...
https://www.brighteon.com/e5ba1f81-8c62-4f38-b92c-6f953c11c024

Anonymous said...


CAUGHT ON TAPE: Kevin McCarthy Said Trump Should Resign After Jan 6, BUSTED Lying

https://youtu.be/977SU_R9BKs?t=136

RayB said...


X @ 1:16 PM ...

It appears that you are now renouncing your radical support for the anarchist, LGBTQ++, Marxist, murdering, looting, burning, raping Black Lives Matter & ANTIFA. Allow me to be the first to congratulate you! I think that's GREAT !!!

Let this be a lesson to all of us; if X can turn his back on BLM & ANTIFA, (obviously due to our collective efforts on this blog), there is reason to have a degree of hope for everyone.

Now, if only X would announce that he is no longer a member in proud standing of Dear Leader's Death Cult ... well ... we can only hope. Perhaps that's asking for too much ? There I go being pessimistic again.

Anonymous said...

Biden says: "Christ, they're going after Mickey Mouse"

___________________________________________________________________________________________


No, Christ (via Florida's Governor) is 'going after' the pedophiles at Disney World!!!




Anonymous said...

ahhh...the ease with which cRayQ lies is not surprising.

What is surprising is his inability to ever admit he's wrong or apologize for making fun of the physically handicapped.

Do you often make fun of the deaf?

x

RayB said...


I noticed that X did not deny that he has 'turned his back on BLM & ANTIFA,' which is a sign that gives one hope, but, with dismay, I have also noticed that X has not renounced his faithful membership in Dear Leader's Death Cult.

With equal dismay, I must state the obvious; X does what he does best; he lies, as evidenced by the fact that in no way did I make "fun of the deaf." Also, as usual, X uses the evil, and deceptive tactics of Saul Alinsky (12 Rules for Radicals). X refers to himself as a "christian," but has no problem using the tactics of Alinsky, who, incidentally, dedicated his infamous work to none other than Lucifer!

Rules for Radicals also happened to be one of Hillary Clinton's 'favorite books.' She was disciple of Saul Alinsky ... apparently so is X. NOTE: Hillary Clinton is also a member of the Death Cult.

RayB said...


This is what happens when you have a RIGHTEOUS man in charge ...

Ron DeSantis Signs Bill Dismantling Disney’s Special Tax Jurisdiction into Law

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/04/22/ron-desantis-signs-bill-dismantling-disneys-special-tax-jurisdiction-into-law/

NOTE: Keep in mind what this was all about. Disney was SUPPORTING the REPEAL of legislation that PROTECTED SCHOOL CHILDREN, grades 1 thru 3 (it should be 1-12), from being INDOCTRINATED into the evil LGBTQ+ lifestyle! Disney became outspoken for their radical support. DeSantis took action and left wing radicals like X are going nuts!

Anonymous said...

cRayQ linked a video of an apparent physically disable deaf man somewhat eccentrically providing American sign language interpretation at a public event and made the observation...

"RayQ: "NOTE: IMO, X is doing the 'signing' for the hearing impaired in this video. Being that X is an enthusiastic supporter of BLM & ANTIFA, it only stands to reason that X would offer his services. At any rate, even if this isn't in fact X, this is how I picture him . Let me know what you think. " (emphasis mine)

This was a derogatory comparison using an actual phsycally disabled deaf person as your prop. It IS making fun of this man.

So again...if you are even capable of apologizing, apologize for it or your actions define you...again.

x

p.s. - Please don't cry and post another goodbye cruel world post. I know it's frustrating getting outed by me as a liar over and over and over again and you're just trying to change tactics; but, just once be a man, admit you were wrong and apologize.

Anonymous said...

Deathsantic isn't "protecting children". There are approximately 1000 private schools in Flordia and 850 of them or so are completely LGBTQ inclusive and the other 150 are roman catholic schools where same-sex attracted priests and nuns groom young men and women for abuse as potential alter children for the older pedo priests.

If Ron really cared about children he'd be chastizing his former wingman and accused pedophile, Matt Gaetz.


As a person in the middle and libertarian, I really don't like politicians punishing private companies for not agreeing with their extreme political views. I didn't support leftist politicians boycotting and forbidding Chik-fil-A restraurants around the country and this is no different. It set sa dangerous precedent that hatred of those with differing opinions is socially and politically acceptable.

There are certainly way more pedophile republicans than pedophile employees at disney and "grooming" of k-3rd graders is a made up "crisis" to divert attention from all the dead bodies Desantis killed in Florida as well as the maga-qanon Jan6th insurrection.

x

Craig said...

So, Biden the "Catholic" stoops to taking the Lord's name in vain--breaking the 3rd commandment--as he defends pagan Disney? Pathetic.

Of course, I've not forgotten how he struggled to read the words on the teleprompter, 'misreading' "Psalmist" as palmist.

Anonymous said...

Yeah Craig, I agree.

It's really too bad we didn't have a Christian running for President.

It bothered me immensely when Trump did it too...

GRAPHIC WARNING: Trump angers some Christians for "taking the Lord’s name in vain" in NC speech: July 18, 2019

https://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/national-politics/article232866932.html

I like how Ray Comfort asks people on the street if they'd ever take their mother's name in vain. It's just respectful even if you are not a Christian like Trump, Biden and/or DeathSantis.

x

RayB said...


X states: "This was a derogatory comparison using an actual phsycally (sic) disabled deaf person as your prop. It IS making fun of this man."

I'm shocked. There is NOTHING in this video that indicates that this man is "physically disabled" or that he is "deaf." NOTHING. Yet, Dr. X 'knows' that he is.

What I was referring to was the obvious ENTHUSIASM that the 'signer' was displaying as he interpreted the Black Lives Matter message. THAT is what I pictured X to be ... an enthusiastic radical supporter for BLM.

Sounds to me that X is again being VERY judgmental. What else is new?

Craig said...

X,

I don't disagree. It was shameful of Trump. The sad thing is, the media--Christian and non-Christian--reported Trump's shameful breaking of the 3rd commandment; but, I've not heard anything just yet about Biden's. But, then I've not read or listened to much media lately.

Oh, and for the record, I was REALLY put off when Russell Brand did both GD and JC in a somewhat recent vlog. The difference, though, is he doesn't claim to be Christian.

Anonymous said...

cRayQ,

He can't be deaf ...as he can obviously hear the speaker that he's interpreting; but, his "enthusiasm" you were making fun of was simply signing in a manner appearing to be physically, if not mentally handicapped. There's nothng to indicate he "enthusiastically" supported/supports "radical blm" or not and acting NOW like his enthusism for BLM reminded you of me is such a huge lie. Not surprising though.

You probably excused Trump physically mocking and making fun of the handicapped too.

x

Anonymous said...

Craig,

Thank you.

x

Craig said...

Hmmmm. What we are not told.

Kim Iversen: Former NATO Analyst & Top UN Official Says THIS Is The REAL Reason For War In Ukraine

The Hill

Kim Iversen reviews the role of autonomists in the war in Ukraine.



Anonymous said...

Mocking and ridiculing others is a big part of the DJT personality cult. Don't expect an apology from RayB anytime soon.

RayB said...


X stated (in part) @ 5:45 PM ...

"cRayQ linked a video of an apparent physically disable deaf man ..."

NOTE: X has reached a level of depravity that even I didn't think was possible.

FROM A SHORT VIDEO CLIP that I linked to entitled; BLM Leader Calls For Abolition Of United States https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=higWEdNC0R0, with absolutely no evidence to back up his bogus claim, X has JUDGED this BLM supporter to be "physically disabled" and a "deaf man." Side bar: how exactly is a DEAF MAN able to HEAR what the speaker is saying and then be able to sign it to the hearing impaired? Yet, that doesn't stop X from wrongfully labeling this poor man as being DEAF and PHYSICALLY IMPAIRED !

Just imagine the hurt that this BLM signer would feel if he were to stumble in here and read X's description of him?! Let's just hope he doesn't.

Talk about judging a man based ENTIRELY upon APPEARANCE. X, have you no decency sir? Is your conscience so seared that you cannot even see your grievous error?

Shameful X, absolutely SHAMEFUL.

Anonymous said...

So the left is so virtuous and impeccable they can't be accused of same 7:18 PM?

Politics has become poisonous basically all across the board.
What's wrong that you can't seem to call things fairly?

J said...

7:32 AM,

https://www.oxfordbiblechurch.co.uk/index.php/books/the-imminent-invasion-of-israel/541-appendix-5-where-is-rosh

I have read this whole article. The first issue I see with it is the issue of which Bible translation to rely on and why. The author of this web page simply notes that in Ezekiel 38:2 the name "Rosh" is not in KJV but is in ASV.

He passes quickly and superficially over this very significant issue without a closer look at the original Hebrew text.

Then the rest of his article consists of his head count of various scholars he's chosen to support his opinion.

I could possibly be convinced, but this article did not convince me. I am more convinced by Gary DeMar.

He has written quite a bit about the claim that "Rosh" means "Russia." This is just one of his articles on this subject.

The Prophetic Mess that 'Rosh' is Russia

https://americanvision.org/posts/the-prophetic-mess-that-rosh-is-russia/

Read it or don't. Insult me or don't. I'll continue to argue in this way unless or until I am presented with better arguments.

Craig said...

J,

I read the info at the link you provided re: peithō, and while the conclusions are good, the following raised my eyebrows:

Concordances, commentaries and translations other than the King James Version (KJV) are never consulted or studied. Whether done out of ignorance or malice, the word of God is never rightly divided.

What? That’s a ridiculous statement! He’s an apparent KJV-onlyist, and seems to be wrongly using the KJV as the standard by which all others are ‘judged’. I’d like to see some specific ‘proof’ of his assertion here.

I’ve even noted on occasion here recently where the KJV has curious translations in spots, with some apparently following the old (RCC) Douay-Rheims, which comes from the Latin rather than directly from the Greek. Odd.

In any case, I generally recommend comparing a number of Bible versions to get a decent grasp of a given passage—if one has no facility of the Greek. Had the author here known a bit of Koine Greek, he could have made some comment on the middle voice in Hebrews 13:17.

RayB said...

J,

Keep in mind that much of what appears in the modern translations are not translations at all, but rather, interpretations of what the 'translators' WANTED the text to read. Wescott & Hort were famous for this and allowed their own, pre-determined prejudices to guide them in their INTERPRETATIVE works on manuscripts. Both held to numerous heresies which no doubt influenced their work.

Also, I do recall reading that Scofield's reference bible notes (wrongly) declared that "ALL are in agreement that Rosh is Russia," which provided the basis as to why virtually all Dispensationalists make such a big deal about Russia playing such a key role in end times prophecy.

Craig said...

J,

I stand corrected--correcting myself regarding the above. The author DOES mention the middle voice (though he doesn't define this), and he does claim (though not stating why) "be persuaded" is what is meant here. (And, the KJV simply translates as "obey" here, so why his weird never rightly divided assertion when this is what most other translations read, as well--'agreeing' with the KJV?)

Craig said...

...and now we have RayB making his ridiculous--and erroneous--claim that modern translations are not translations at all, but rather, interpretations of what the 'translators' WANTED the text to read. Then he digs back up his dubious claims re: Westcott & Hort, AND implies all modern translations are merely W&H clones, using the same exact methodology, which is untrue.

J said...

X 11:59 PM,

Anaphylactic shock is an immediate allergic reaction. It's thought to be a reaction to polyethylene glyclol (peg). It has nothing at all to do with the development of autoimmune disease.

Let's revisit another paper. I shared this paper here before, some time back.

Molecular mimicry between SARS-CoV-2 spike glycoprotein and mammalian proteomes: implications for the vaccine

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32946016/

The spike protein resembles proteins found in humans and mice. This is called molecular mimicry. It is one way for susceptible individuals to develop an autoimmune disease.

No, I did not find the "New-onset autoimmune phenomena post-COVID-19 vaccination" paper linked on a conservative news site.

The last time I looked at vaccine related headlines on a conservative news site, I saw the talking point of the day had changed to snake venom. I opted not to share it, and I suspect a possible effort to redirect attention to something dumb in order to distract attention from the spike protein and autoimmune disease and in order to discredit vaccine skeptics.

No, the paper does not prove at all that autoimmune diseases can't develop after 14 days post vaccine. That's ridiculous. That has nothing to do with the medical study of auto-immune disease. There is no medical reason whatsoever to arbitrarily cap it at 14 days.

J said...

Craig 9:05 PM,

The way I read this author, I took him to highly suggest consulting some concordances and commentaries.

The questions you raise would be questions for him - and not unreasonable questions.

Craig said...

J @ 9:32 PM,

Yes, but he only wants you to consult concordances and commentaries NOT based on or from ANY modern translation. Vine's and Strong's (and Cruden's concordance) will only get one so far (and I have all three). For this reason, I'd only recommend the source with appropriate caution.

RayB said...

Craig,

We all have our opinions/convictions on this matter. You have yours and I have mine.

After doing a verse by verse comparison with the KJV vs the modern translations, I have reached the conclusion that the modern translations are vastly inferior. I already know where you stand on this issue. Please don't demean me for having my sincere conviction on this issue.

Craig said...

RayB @ 10:13 PM,

That's because you are applying a wrong methodology. You don't start with the KJV, as if it's THE standard; you start with the Greek and see how faithful a given translation is to the Greek.

I'm demeaning your methodology, not your person (not ad hominem).

RayB said...

Craig,

The KJV is the culmination of extensive work that was done by true scholars with a check and balance system that ensured the correct translation from the Greek "Received Text," (Textus Receptus), to English, so in a real sense, it is the standard by which others should be judged. Furthermore, Tyndale used the Received Text, as did the translators of the Great Bible, the Geneva Bible, precursors of the KJV.

The Greek Text of Westcott & Hort most certainly influenced the translators of modern bibles long after they passed from this earth.

"Westcott and Hort were the original textual critics of their day. Though they no longer live, their legacy lives on in the form of a corrupted Greek text. The influence of their methods blackens and corrupts every modern translation of the Bible available (NIV, NASB, NKJV, NRSV, NAB, REB, RSV, CEV, TEV, GNB, LIVING, PHILLIPS, NEW JERUSALEM, NEW CENTURY, and the New Word Translation). Readers of these new Bibles are quite unaware that they are reading the translation of a corrupt text. Without thinking or looking deeper into the matter, they blindly assume that every Bible is the same. They assume some are just more easy to read than others. But we must remember that Bibles are translated by men, and thus corruption is possible. Westcott and Hort did what was unthinkable…..they picked through five Greek texts which did not agree with each other, and came up with a new revised Greek version of the Bible. All modern Bibles of the day have therefore not been translated from the 5000+ Majority text, but from the 5 disagreeing witnesses. Which Bible do you think is more reliable? Isn’t it better to trust that God preserved His Word in the 5000+ witnesses rather than the five witnesses who do not agree with each other? The KJV is a straight translation from the Majority text. The NIV (and others) is taken from the five Minority texts, which do not agree. We don’t even know what part of which text they used and where! The consensus however is they favored the Aleph and B text more than the others."

-- taken from Modern Bible Versions, and Westcott and Hort (see more here):

https://www.apostolic.edu/modern-bible-versions-and-westcott-and-hort-27-5/

RayB said...


The Majority Texts (Received Texts) vs the Minority Texts:

Now we have said that 99.9% of those 5000+ manuscripts agree with each other almost perfectly, but what about the other .1%??? These are commonly called the MINORITY TEXTS, but they are also known to many as the corrupted manuscripts. For much unlike the 5000+, these five manuscripts are radically different. They do not even agree with each other. Their names are as follows:

Codex Vatican (B)
Codex Sinaiticus (Aleph)
Codex Alexandrian (A)
Codex Ephraemi (C)
Codex Bezae (D)

If we are to understand the foundation of the NIV, it is critical to understand that the NIV is translated from these five manuscripts above which do not agree with one another.

- taken from the same site: https://www.apostolic.edu/modern-bible-versions-and-westcott-and-hort-27-5/

Craig said...

RayB,

Anyone sourcing Gail Riplinger, as your source does, discredits itself. James White illustrates her numerous fallacious arguments, which demonstrate her lack of understanding both Greek and textual criticism in his book The King James Only Controversy.

And, for the record, the "Majority Text" is not the same as the "Received Text" (Textus Receptus). The majority text does not include the Johannine Comma, e.g., while the Textus Receptus does:

Erasmus omitted the text of the Johannine Comma from his first and second editions of the Greek-Latin New Testament (the Novum Instrumentum omne) because it was not in his Greek manuscripts....

Just this statement is absolutely false on its face: If we are to understand the foundation of the NIV, it is critical to understand that the NIV is translated from these five manuscripts above which do not agree with one another.

If you are going to try to discredit any position, you need to first understand that position.

Craig said...

RayB,

Your source asserts: Furthermore, Tyndale used the Received Text... No, it does not.

Note that the Johannine Comma, the whole of verse 7 and part of 8, is in parenthesis: https://tyndalebible.com/1-john-chapter-5/

Anonymous said...

People who leave cults tend to trade them for a different one. You should consider that J as you fill this blog with bogus theological arguments such as you can take a physical mark but don't bow and you'll be ok. Your mistake was taking advice from RayB who obviously gravitates towards Qanon.

Marko said...

Interesting video with Cliff Kincaid interviewing Sylvia McKelvey about how New Agers are infiltrating some parts of conservatism. I'm a conservative myself, so please don't take this as me supporting Leftism of any kind.

In the video, there is much mention of the book "Love, Joy, Trump", which provides ample evidence of New Agers on the right, "from the horses mouth".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Il246Uc0fzU

Another video I recommend watching (although it's kinda long, and might be hard to sit through because of all the rabbit-hole conspiracy stuff mixed with a New Age worldview), demonstrates a pretty strong New Age influence over Mike Adams of Natural News and Health Ranger Report. In this video, he has blatant New Ager David Wilcock on, and they are like best pals, with Mike agreeing with everything David says. It's a great example of how well-intentioned people can get sucked in by the coming New Age deception.

https://www.brighteon.com/a472b7c0-673a-4f27-92e5-01a5ce216d07

It's all about saving or defending "Humanity", and the "Alliance" vs. the Globalists/cabal/NWO/Illuminati/etc. The Alliance are posing as the good guys, but it's a FALSE LIGHT movement that will deceive many, I believe.

There are several recent anonymous posts here from Health Ranger Report / Natural News. Please, if you watch or read material from either one, watch the above video and see where they are headed. They are a tainted source!

Anonymous said...

To RayB @ 10:59 PM

Re: "The KJV is the culmination of extensive work that was done by true scholars with a check and balance system that ensured the correct translation from the Greek "Received Text," (Textus Receptus), to English, so in a real sense, it is the standard by which others should be judged."

_________________________________________________________________________________________


Yes, I absolutely agree with you. Why bother with more 'modern' (or 'updated') verions of THE WORD? I have never understood that, as there is the temptaton for newer versions to become corrupted.

J said...

Modern Bible Versions, and Westcott and Hort

https://www.apostolic.edu/modern-bible-versions-and-westcott-and-hort-27-5/

Tobin Pederson

When it comes to the various Bible versions of our modern day, most readers assume that all Bibles are created equal, with perhaps differing degrees of readability. By the same token, most have rid themselves of the “ancient” King James Version and upgraded for a newer model, such as the NIV, or NASB, etc. “When the modern Bible reader is asked if they are familiar with the two Textual Bible Critics, Westcott and Hort, most have never heard of them. They are not aware nor concerned that almost all the modern Bible versions of our day are built upon the Greek Text of Westcott and Hort, commonly called the Westcott-Hort text. In my own NIV Student Bible (Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids Michigan, Copyright 1986, 1992), there is no mention of Westcott and Hort, but a mere reference to “textual criticism.”

“Where existing manuscripts differ, the translators made their choice of readings according to accepted principles of New Testament textual criticism.”

Though these quotations say nothing of Westcott and Hort, they are hidden behind the words “accepted principles of textual criticism“.
Textual Criticism

To understand Westcott and Hort, you must first understand textual criticism. This requires us to reach back in history to the days of the apostles, when the New Testament was written in the original Greek language – sometime between 33-100 AD. Since the original books of the Bible do not exist anymore, it becomes necessary to translate the Bible from copies of the original. The word MANUSCRIPTS is used to describe these copies or parchments which still exist. There are over 5366 manuscripts of the Greek New Testament. Not one of these manuscripts is exactly the same in Greek content. However the majority of these manuscripts agree with each other almost perfectly.

Translators of the Bible over the years have used these agreeing manuscripts to make what is called the MAJORITY TEXT. Other names for the Majority Text are Traditional Text, Syrian Text, Byzantine Text, and the Common Text. This Majority Text was made from more than five thousand (5000+) manuscripts. It is sometimes called the Textus Receptus. Since 99.9% of these manuscripts agree, we can be comforted knowing that God has preserved His Word among us. You could say that “Over five thousand witnesses agree, this New Testament is God’s holy Word”. Not only do we have 5000+ manuscripts which are nearly identical, but the Lord Himself promises us through His Word to preserve His Scriptures for the sake of mankind. In Matthew 24:35 Jesus said, “Heaven and earth shall pass away but My words shall not pass away.” Isaiah 40:8 says, “The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the Word of our God shall stand forever.” See also Is. 30:8, 59:21, I Pet 1:23. The point here is simple. God has promised to preserve His Word among us, and God always keeps His promises! Likewise we dare never put confidence in man. “It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man.” Ps. 118:8 Putting our confidence in God and not man, it seems apparent our Lord has kept His promise and that His Word is faithfully preserved in over 5000 witnesses!

J said...

Now we have said that 99.9% of those 5000+ manuscripts agree with each other almost perfectly, but what about the other .1%??? These are commonly called the MINORITY TEXTS, but they are also known to many as the corrupted manuscripts. For much unlike the 5000+, these five manuscripts are radically different. They do not even agree with each other. Their names are as follows:
Codex Vatican (B)
Codex Sinaiticus (Aleph)
Codex Alexandrian (A)
Codex Ephraemi (C)
Codex Bezae (D)

If we are to understand the foundation of the NIV, it is critical to understand that the NIV is translated from these five manuscripts above which do not agree with one another.

But what does this mean and is it important? Take, for example, five men who are eye witnesses to a crime. In the court room they tell it to the judge as it is, yet when the judge hears each of their stories, the witnesses do not agree. The judge then listens to the other side which holds over 5000 witnesses. These 5000 agree perfectly as to what happened.

So here is the dilemma when it comes to the “witness” of the Greek manuscripts. Do we listen to the 5000+ witnesses, or do we listen to the 5? Which group do you think would be more trustworthy? At this point we have entered the realm of “textual criticism”. A textual critic is one who picks and chooses what part of whose story they will believe to be true. They make themselves the judge. For example, the witness “Codex Vatican B” (one of the five), a Greek manuscript of the New Testament, testifies that the last 12 verses of Mark do not exist. In other words, the manuscript “Codex Vatican B” does not contain Mark 16:9-20. Now take your Bibles and look at Mark 16:9-20. If you have a King James Bible you see it is about the resurrected Christ,….quite an important part of Scripture. The King James men used the Majority text (5000+) and simply translated it as is. But if you have a NIV Bible, between verses 8 and 9 there is a line and a large space along with this caption in brackets:

[The earliest manuscripts and some other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20]

After this bracket in the NIV they then list verses 9-20 (Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids Michigan, Copyright 1986, 1992, pg 1104).

For the reader of the NIV this note in brackets must at least cause doubt to enter one’s mind as to the authenticity of these verses. They might argue, “My Bible says the “earliest” manuscripts do not have this verse!” But does this reader know of the thousands of other manuscripts which do contain this verse? The one who writes “the earliest manuscripts…..” is the man we call a textual critic. He picks and chooses what belongs in the Bible and what doesn’t, based upon his education, beliefs, and ideals. His method of picking and choosing which verses belong and which verses don’t, is called the eclectic method. The Westcott-Hort text is an eclectic text. They are the judges as to what belongs in the Bible and what does not.

J said...

There is more to the article, but I wanted to consider this part in its context. Obviously I'm not an ancient languages scholar, so I need to study this further, myself. But I hoped this part would be addressed from the article:

Now we have said that 99.9% of those 5000+ manuscripts agree with each other almost perfectly, but what about the other .1%??? These are commonly called the MINORITY TEXTS, but they are also known to many as the corrupted manuscripts. For much unlike the 5000+, these five manuscripts are radically different. They do not even agree with each other. Their names are as follows:
Codex Vatican (B)
Codex Sinaiticus (Aleph)
Codex Alexandrian (A)
Codex Ephraemi (C)
Codex Bezae (D)

Craig said...

Anon 7:06 AM and RayB,

Let’s test your “correct translation” assertion. Romans 15:16 has the same underlying Greek text in the “Received Text” (aka Textus Receptus, which = Majority Text here) as the new UBS5/NA28 “Critical Text”. That is, there is no variation in the Greek underlying any translation (see middle column at hyperlink). So, let’s see how faithful the KJV is to the Greek text:

KJV: That I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost.

ESV: to be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles in the priestly service of the gospel of God, so that the offering of the Gentiles may be acceptable, sanctified by the Holy Spirit.

NASB: to be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles, ministering as a priest the gospel of God, so that my offering of the Gentiles may become acceptable, sanctified by the Holy Spirit.

D-R: That I should be the minister of Christ Jesus among the Gentiles; sanctifying the gospel of God, that the oblation of the Gentiles may be made acceptable and sanctified in the Holy Ghost.

The word for “minister” is leitourgos, from which we get “liturgy”. (Though there is no article [~”the”] in the Greek, there’s no need to quibble there.) Yet the word the KJV translates “ministering” is a completely different root word, here as the participle hierourgeō, which is from the adjective hieros, meaning “sacred” or “holy” thing. (The word for Temple is hieron.) If I had to come up with a one-word translation, I’d say something like ‘sacred-ing’ or ‘holy-ing’.

But the KJV translators wanted to steer away from any notion of the Catholic ideology pertaining to its priests, so they went with “ministering”. Of course, all Christians are priests, a priesthood, as Peter states in 1 Peter 2:5, 9 (the word hierateuma).

The Douay-Rheims “sanctifying” might be a good translation, except the confusion it creates when compared to the last clause in the verse. That word is agiazō, taken from agios, meaning “holy”, as in “Holy Spirit” (pneuma agios). And this leads to the last problem: the Holy GHOST? I’ve no idea why “Spirit” was not the preferred translation in both the D-R (the Latin Vulgate is Spiritu) and the KJV. And this leads to the weird English ascribed to Jesus on the Cross in the KJV of Matthew 27:50: Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost

Craig said...

^^forgot hyperlink: Romans 15:16

Craig said...

J @ 8:27, 28, 32,

Why in the world would you merely repeat what RayB has already posted?

In a nutshell, this is mis- and/or dis-information, and one (I) shouldn't have to spend a lot of time trying to refute something that contains such a multitude of errors in its wild assertions.

You might find it more profitable to study the discipline of textual criticism for yourself.

RayB said...

Craig said @ 11:18 PM (in part):

"RayB,

Anyone sourcing Gail Riplinger, as your source does, discredits itself. James White illustrates her numerous fallacious arguments, which demonstrate her lack of understanding both Greek and textual criticism in his book The King James Only Controversy."

Craig,

James White is an ADVOCATE of modern translations, so it should come as no surprise at all that he "illustrates her numerous fallacious arguments." I've kept an open mind on Riplinger's "New Age Versions." Having read it myself, I found many of her arguments to be anything but "fallacious."

Have you read Riplinger's book yourself in its entirety, or, are you just taking the word of her detractors?

J said...

From here, a pdf and other formats can be downloaded free.

New Age Bible Versions

https://archive.org/details/NewAgeBibleVersionsRiplinger

J said...

Craig 9:20 AM,

Any recommended sources to study textual criticism?

J said...

I found this very interesting and very disturbing. This is a quotation from Dr. Frank Logsdon on the inside cover of New Age Bible Versions. (But I intend to study it from both sides so I can understand the other side as Craig recommends and I agree.)

I must under God renounce every attachment to the New American Standard.

…I am afraid I’m in trouble with the Lord…We laid the groundwork; I wrote the format; I helped interiew some of the translators; I sat with the translator; I wrote the preface.

I’m in trouble; I can’t refute these arguments; it’s wrong, terribly wrong; it’s frighteningly wrong; and what am I going to do about it? I can no longer ignore these criticisms I am hearing and can’t refute them.

When questions began to reach me at first I was quite offended. However, in attempting to answer, I began to sense that something was not right about the NASV. Upon investigation, I wrote my very dear friend, Mr. Lockman, explaining that I was forced to renounce all attachment to the NASV. The product is grievous to my heart and helps to complicate matters in these already troublous times. The deletions are absolutely frightening…there are so many…Are we so naive that we do not suspect Satanic deception in all of this?

I don’t want anything to do with it…

[T]he finest leaders that we have today…haven’t gone into it [the new version’s use of a corrupted Greek text], just as I hadn’t gone into it. that’s how easily one can be deceived. I’m going to talk to him [Dr. George Sweeting, then president of Moody Bile Institute] about these things.

[Y]ou can say the Authorized Version (KJV) is absolutely correct. How correct? 100% correct.

If you must stand against everyone else, stand.

Dr. Frank Logsdon

Anonymous said...

Marko @ 7:40 AM

Marko:

With all due respect, I believe that you are sincere, and that you don't mean to insult the intelligence of the bloggers here... but you do.

I don't know any blogger here who believes that Donald Trump is 'divine' (we never have, and we never will).

An over the top dressed up (like Halloween) 'shaman' on January 6th did NOT represent the average Trump supporter that day. (Although the Globalist-controlled mainstream news media keeps showing HIM over and over again... and the indoctrinated Trump haters fall for it every time.)

There was a small group of evil forces at work on January 6th (who HATED Trump) who deliberately INFILTRATED his supporters for one purpose only... to bring Trump DOWN and it worked, didn't it?

Those of us who voted for Trump twice did so to AVOID what we have now in the White House... O'Biden (since Globalist Barack Obama is obviously pulling the strings to a cognitively-impaired puppet president).

November 3-4, 2020 was the real COUP... not January 6, 2021.

Our God-given LOGIC, common sense, and basic math REVEALS that there is no way that Trump could have LOST* to Biden in November, 2020 (UNLESS the election was stolen).

*Basis Math Lesson101...
1) Trump consistently attracted standing room only crowds ALL over the United States in big cities and small towns throughout the year 2020.
2) Biden came out of his basement once in awhile to speak to 'crowds' that were so small that his handlers wanted to make sure that the TV cameras did not 'pan around' to reveal the embarrasing 'trickle' of people that that actually showed up to see and hear him speak.

Results: 2 plus 2 = 4.
(There is NO WAY those numbers could have ever translated into a 'landslide victory' for Biden in November, 2020. (And if you believe that, I have a 'couple of bridges' to sell you.)

______________________________________________________________________________________


Further...

I believe that the Globalists (with their plan for a New World Order, One World Government, abolishing cash, depopulation agenda, etc.) would be much more likely to introduce a future 'Savior' to the masses.

I would rather take a bullet to the head than be vaccinated... just in case it is the mark of the beast (or the precursor).

I believe that so-called 'aliens' are more likely to be demons from the spirit world... NOT from outer space.

We already KNOW what the New Age Movement is all about... and none of us here believes that 'we are God' (there is only ONE God... our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, who died for the sins of all mankind).

So, again... please stop insulting our intelligence.

Thank you.

Craig said...

RayB,

Though I’ve not read her ENTIRE book, I’ve read through enough (see J’s link) myself and I’ve read portions of it as White refutes it in his book (which I own) The King James Only Controversy. By analogy, neither you nor I need to read the entire JW New World Translation to know that it contains serious errors.

But we have a Riplinger-White radio debate to compare (skip to about 5 minutes, to forego a preface):

Gail Riplinger vs. James White, 1993, KRDS Radio Part I

I had the opportunity of exposing Gail Riplinger for the false accuser and troublemaker she was then, and continues to be today, in late 1993 on KRDS radio in Phoenix. Here is part I of our encounter.

---

Gail Riplinger vs. James White, 1993, KRDS Radio Part II

More of my radio "debate" with Gail Riplinger, starting off with...Acrostic Algebra!

She correctly uses NASB to indicate the New American Standard Bible, yet, curiously, she uses "NASV" for her 'Acrostic Algebra'.

---

Gail Riplinger vs. James White, 1993, KRDS Radio Part III

Continuation of the series, this one featuring Gail's melt down on Edwin Palmer and clear evidence she has little understanding of context, or the Trinity.

She conflates the Incarnation with the Trinity, as she tries to demonize one writer. And along the way she illustrates she has poor facility with the Greek.

---

Gail Riplinger vs. James White, 1993, KRDS Radio Part IV

---


Gail Riplinger vs. James White, 1993, KRDS Radio Part V

The conclusion of the 1993 radio program with Gail Riplinger.

Anonymous said...

Fred Butler's Book

Royal Deceptions: Exposing the KING JAMES ONLY Conspiracies Against God's Word

https://www.amazon.com/Royal-Deceptions-Exposing-Conspiracies-Against/dp/0578801965



Fred Butler's Blog

Answering the Claims of KJV-Onlyism

https://hipandthigh.wordpress.com/2010/06/01/answering-the-claims-of-kjv-onlyism/



About Fred Butler (from his "about" page on blog above):

"My name is Fred Butler. I’m a graduate of Arkansas State University and The Master’s Seminary. I currently live in the LA area and work at Grace to You, the radio ministry of John MacArthur, where I have the honor of coordinating and directing the volunteer ministries. My wife and I have five kids and we are all actively involved at Grace Community Church.

I began this blog in 2005 to have an outlet for my opinions both theological and secular. I don’t have any particular emphasis with my blog except for promoting a high view of God, the authority of Scripture, and a biblically grounded worldview."

RayB said...

Craig,

Quite frankly, I'm rather surprised, being that Constance's site specializes in the New Age Movement, that you would criticize Riplinger's "New Age Translations" without actually taking the time to read her book in its entirety. Granted, it is rather lengthy, about 650 pages, but, nevertheless, it is well worth the read if you are going to be educated as to what her research uncovered.

By the way, you wrote "... neither you nor I need to read the entire JW New World Translation to know that it contains serious errors." Are you aware that the JW New World translators used the Minority Texts, and not the Majority Texts, i.e. the Textus Receptus as the basis for their 'translation?' They also used Westcott & Hort's method of forcing their INTERPRETATIONS into the text as they compiled their Greek Text in 1881 ... a common practice employed by 'translators' of modern bibles.

Craig said...

J @ 9:48 AM,

This first one might be overly simplistic (and is really a 'booklet' at less than 80 pages with medium type):

David Alan Black New Testament Textual Criticism: A Concise Guide


Better:

J. Harold Greenlee Introduction to New Testament Criticism (Revised Edition)


And while Metzger's Textual Commentary is essential for the textual critic relative to modern versions, it is very technical, requiring decent Greek facility. However, there's an option: Roger Omanson's A Textual Guide to the Greek New Testament. To get an idea of what this is all about, see my book review from ten years ago: Book Review: Roger Omanson’s ‘A Textual Guide to the Greek New Testament’

Anonymous said...

Thank You 10:12 AM

The gnat strainers are just as psychotic, and dangerous, as the New Agers.

Craig said...

RayB @ 10:56 AM,

That's because I REJECT Riplinger's premise that the newer translations are "New Age", just by reading a few of her assertions. I don't need to read it in its entirety to see her fallacious argumentation in this regard and her unwarranted--and unchristian--ad hominem attacks on others. James White takes her to task on the latter in the radio 'debate'.

Why do you keep perpetuating the fallacious Textus Receptus = Majority Text, when I've already illustrated this is not true?

And your claim that the NWT uses the "minority texts"--whatever those are exactly--implying that this is exactly the same as modern versions is a red herring. We can just take John 1:1, which is the same in the TR, the MT, the "Critical Text" underlying all modern Bible versions, and yes the NWT. The NWT translates the last clause "a god", while all the others do not. So what is your point exactly?

Anonymous said...

7:40 AM

Understood Marko.

This has been stated here again and again.
Chew the meat and keep on spitting out the bones is necessary, even more so now.
What troubles me is many people are more apt to read books and books with half-truths and big deceptions but won't pick up the Bible and spend actual useful time in it.
Working at the bank you are taught to get very used to the look and feel of actual dollar bills and repeatedly examine them by sight and touch so you can spot when the counterfeits come through. That is a tried and true method for catching the fraudulent.
People are being distracted away from the Bible. I read a copy of Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow from our Church library years ago and it was a good rule of thumb for spotting New Age material even more. But reading my Bible cover to cover for decades did me a lot more good than reading more and more books about New Age.

This isn't that hard if people are keeping Scripture at forefront in their thinking.
Hence the problem, since so many lean on their own understanding instead. I think that is where so much bias can be introduced.
The world is inundated with material. I will not be going through the flood of the latest books to learn more about deception.
Knowing Satan's deceptions are rampant, being further ramped up, should make us wary and distrustful of basically everything but the Bible.
The Holy Spirit is the seal and promise of God, that He is the truth to guide us to all truth. He has not changed. But we need healthy skepticism about all else.
I am skeptical of things even by Constance and what is posted here by others. My prayers to the Lord for His discernment and wisdom have helped me and I need it, more not less. So people really do choose what they really want to believe and gravitate toward those things no matter how much warning goes out.
Any person of some type of celebrity (good boy/bad boy (even trusted blog owners) can have a cultish following.
Crazy times we are in..perhaps going faster toward the craziest now..but crazy in this world has always been.
I urge people to simply read the Bible more and other (even fairly good) materials less. The devil likes things complicated--that's where the deceptions hide the best.
Stay above the fray is the best way...

Craig said...

J @ 10:09 AM,

Logsdon is not a textual critic, as White notes in one of those clips; but, I cannot speak for him regarding his change of mind. And I don't know if Riplinger misquotes him--though I'd wager she did--but note his quote has "NASV". The New American Standard Bible is never called "New American Standard Version. I suspect Riplinger did this, as she does this sort of thing--misquoting sources--to further her own agenda, in this case likely in service of her 'Acrostic Algebra' (see part II of her debate with White), which 'the Lord gave to her' (see part II of her debate with White @ 2:41). Yeah, sure...

RayB said...


Bibles of Two Parallel Streams

True Path – Believers in Antioch, Syria collected the Holy Scriptures, which formed the New Testament. Antioch is where followers of Christ were first called Christians. They made many copies of the scriptures and shared them with other churches, and many believed in Jesus through their witness. Source: End Times Deceptions https://christianitybeliefs.org/end-times-deceptions/bible-manuscript-paths/

Antioch, Syria:

Tyndale's N.T. 1522 A.D., Coverdale Bible 1535 A.D., Matthews Bible 1537 A.D., the Great Bible (English) 1539 A.D., Stephens Greek N. T. 1550 A.D., Geneva Bible 1560 A.D., Bishops Bible 1568 A.D. (English), Bezas Greek N.T. 1598 A.D., King James Bible 1611 A.D.

Corrupt Path – Satan countered by having philosophers in Alexandria, Egypt change the Syrian texts to fit their beliefs. Unbelieving philosophers in Alexandria Egypt, such as a man named Origen, who did not accept the Bible as the Word of God or Jesus as the Son of God; amended, added to and deleted many portions of the true text and then palmed off their work as the Word of God.

As a result, their Greek manuscripts either changed words, deleted words, or deleted entire verses, where a text validated the deity of Jesus. Source: End Times Deceptions https://christianitybeliefs.org/end-times-deceptions/bible-manuscript-paths/

Alexandria, Egypt:

Douay-Rheims Bible 1582 A.D., Westcott-Hort Greek N.T. 1881 A.D., Revised Version 1881 A.D., the stream of Modern Bibles: ASV, CEV, ESV, ISV, NASB, NIV, NRSV-CE, RSV, RV, NKJV, New World Translation, etc., etc. There are now over 100 English modern translations of the 'bible.'

Anonymous said...

J said: "No, the paper does not prove at all that autoimmune diseases can't develop after 14 days post vaccine. That's ridiculous. That has nothing to do with the medical study of auto-immune disease. There is no medical reason whatsoever to arbitrarily cap it at 14 days."

There are over 3 new scientific journals/papers/articles published every minute. Rarely do any of them "prove" anything. You plucked that journal abstract from that river of science literature and when I read it, I see it, suggesting by inference, that the biggest and best/worst examples of individuals who had some kind of autoimmune response to the covid vaccines seemed to all have happened within 14 days of receipt of the vaccine with 14 days being pretty much the outlier. I didn't read it that closely but this observation aligns with my observations and reading of other scientific literature....that the whole vaccination process of providing an individual with some level of immunity to the novel covid virus involves the delivery of a vaccine, in a level sufficient enough to generate a safe and short-lived immuno-response, and this process, by design and intention generally takes 10-14 days to complete in its entirety.

That doesn't mean its a fact. Many viruses are notoriously involved in the pathogenesis of autoimmune events, reactions & diseases. It is reasonable to conclude that such "mimicry" might lead to the development of immune disorders in long covid patients or that a similar scenario might take place following covid vaccination. I just have YET to see it established as having happened to anyone more than about 2 weeks out.

Considering the numbers of persons vaccinated...if this "danger" were significant at all, it would be apparent.

x

RayB said...

Craig @ 11:09 AM ...

"That's because I REJECT Riplinger's premise that the newer translations are "New Age", just by reading a few of her assertions."

You've rejected the entirety of a work of research that resulted almost 650 pages, all based upon "just reading a few of her assertions?" You can do much better than that Craig.

Aside from Riplinger, I have personally compared verses of modern translations with the KJV and have seen for myself evidence that indicates a New Age influence.

Anonymous said...

I am sticking with my KJV, NKJV, and ESV. And handle with prayer all the while.
Period.

Craig said...

RayB @ 11:26 AM,

You REALLY should study this yourself instead of relying on others providing faulty information. So, the Alexandrian texts are "corrupt" and they do "not accept the Bible as the Word of God or Jesus as the Son of God"? Are you sure about that?

Check out John 1:18 in which the TR and MT have "Son", while the Alexandrian (as reflected in the modern versions here) have "God" for Jesus.

Also, what about John 3:16? Do they deny Jesus is the Son of God?

Craig said...

RayB @ 11:33 PM,

You've yet to counter a single challenge I've made to Riplinger's book; so, why would I waste time just appease you?

You're using some of the fallacious argumentation you've used in many of your other postings here.

Now I'll challenge you: Point out one JUST ONE assertion of Riplinger's that 'proves' modern versions are "New Age". You are the one supporting the work, so it's incumbent on you to support your position.

Anonymous said...

A one hour interview of Fred Butler by Justin Peters Ministries

Fred, a former KJV only brother, discusses Riplinger's book at around the 8:52 mark. He double-checked her footnotes and found it all very lacking and disingenuous.


Royal Deceptions: Exposing the King James Only Conspiracies

https://youtu.be/Lyu_MPe2ZvM

Anonymous said...

"x

11:31 AM"

Ok!
Die on your Covid/Vaxx/Globalist hill, then.

Craig said...

Anon 11:41 AM,

Thanks for providing that vlog. Butler does a great job!

RayB said...

J @ 10:09 AM ...

Although I own a copy of Riplinger's "New Age Versions," it's been years since I read it, so therefore, I didn't recall Dr. Frank Logsdon's written statement that was contained on the inside cover.

From a personal perspective; very early on, I used the NASB exclusively and was an enthusiastic proponent of it. In my NASB, I read the Lockman Foundation's introductory assertion, claiming that their work was based upon the "most reliable and earliest manuscripts." I completely believed that their statement was true. I came to saving faith in Christ by reading the NASB. Having said that, one day, I, and my then future wife, were challenged to do a verse by verse comparison of the NASB & the KJV, which we eventually did. What we found out was nothing short of SHOCKING. The very next day, we both purchased KJV bibles and have been using the KJV exclusively ever since.

I encourage others to do the same. A verse by verse comparison quickly reveals a watering down of the truth, at times entire passages are missing, hundreds of words are missing, including the name of Jesus Christ, the blood, etc.

J said...

RayB 11:53 AM,

I think that's reasonable to urge people to do their own comparison, as you have done yours.

Nobody needs to declare publicly in a debate what they conclude, unless they so choose.

I'll study it and compare it as you urge but won't debate further.

Pride should have no role in it, one way or the other.

It's not about who's right and who's wrong. It's about one's good faith attempt to rightly divide God's Word to the best of one's knowledge.

We all stand warned, and we are all capable of making up our own minds by the method you described.

Anonymous said...

I just read this at American Thinker site, RayB. It's spot on.
And sad..

RayB said...


J @ 1:51 PM (along with your other posts):

I agree J.

None of us have, nor will we ever, reach the point where we 'know it all.' I'm always learning something that I didn't know before, or, I'm coming to a deeper understanding, etc. that I didn't have prior. I guess that won't stop until we take our last breath on this earth ... after that ... we're REALLY going to learn about everything as the veil is taken away from our eyes.

Just keep doing what you're doing J. God is obviously doing a work in you!

Craig said...

J @ 1:51 PM,

You replied to RayB: I think that's reasonable to urge people to do their own comparison, as you have done yours.

Nobody needs to declare publicly in a debate what they conclude, unless they so choose.


So, do you think it's "reasonable" that RayB (@ 9:05 PM) made this unprovoked assertion to you?

Keep in mind that much of what appears in the modern translations are not translations at all, but rather, interpretations of what the 'translators' WANTED the text to read. Wescott & Hort were famous for this and allowed their own, pre-determined prejudices to guide them in their INTERPRETATIVE works on manuscripts. Both held to numerous heresies which no doubt influenced their work.

No need to answer; you can take my question as rhetorical.

---

As for me, I'm interested in the truth. I don't at all care for assertions not rooted in evidence or fact.

Anonymous said...

RayB's last paragraph at 11:53 AM should be a 'red flag' and warning to everyone:

"From a personal perspective; very early on, I used the NASB exclusively and was an enthusiastic proponent of it. In my NASB, I read the Lockman Foundation's introductory assertion, claiming that their work was based upon the "most reliable and earliest manuscripts." I completely believed that their statement was true. I came to saving faith in Christ by reading the NASB. Having said that, one day, I, and my then future wife, were challenged to do a verse by verse comparison of the NASB & the KJV, which we eventually did. What we found out was nothing short of SHOCKING. The very next day, we both purchased KJV bibles and have been using the KJV exclusively ever since."

"A verse by verse comparison quickly reveals a watering down of the truth, at times entire passages are missing, hundreds of words are missing, including the name of Jesus Christ, the blood, etc."

Craig said...

RayB (and for J’s benefit, and now Anon 3:18 PM as well),

You wrote @ 11:53 AM: A verse by verse comparison quickly reveals a watering down of the truth, at times entire passages are missing, hundreds of words are missing, including the name of Jesus Christ, the blood, etc.

What if your entire premise is incorrect? What if the TR/KJV ADDED texts and verses not in the original manuscripts? We don’t have any original manuscripts, so we make assessments based on what we do have. And we have an abundance of manuscript riches! Much more than any other literature.

Let’s take yet another example, this time “the blood” in Colossians 1:14. The KJV has “through his blood”, while the modern versions ‘omit’ this phrase. But take a look at RP Byzantine Majority Text 2005 in the middle column at the hyperlink. It also lacks the Greek of this phrase (δια του αιματος αυτου). Scroll further down to Byzantine/Majority Text (2000) w/o Diacritics and you’ll find this phrase in brackets, which means it’s doubtfully original. That is, the majority of Byzantine texts lack this clause.

Now, let’s assess the textual evidence, in brief. There are a grand total of four Greek manuscripts with this phrase (614, 630, 1505, 2464), the earliest of which is from the 8th century. Now, there is also a Syriac translation—translations are always considered after Greek texts—from 616AD. And there’s a Catholic Latin Clementine edition from 1592, which means the earlier Latin texts lacked this clause. Taken together, all this means the Byzantine texts—which make up the TR—largely lack this phrase, and there’s not a lot of evidence otherwise. (To put concisely, the TR is made up of Byzantine texts, but not all the TR reflects the Majority Text of the Byzantine.)

The Alexandrian manuscripts ALL contain this verse (Aleph, A, B, C, D—plus F, G, Ψ, 075, 33, 1739), yet they ALL lack this specific phrase.

Putting aside the evidence from the Byzantine/Majority Text manuscripts, let’s assume for the moment that the Alexandrian texts omitted the phrase—that it was there originally, and someone took it out. Let’s even also assume that nefarious motives may have been involved. Then why would the Alexandrian texts ’leave in’ “through His blood” in Ephesians 1:7?

Let’s employ Occam’s razor here, as Metzger and Omanson (cited below) have done:

The Textus Receptus, following several secondary [ED: later and less reliable] witnesses [manuscripts], inserts the words “through his blood” from Eph. 1.7. If the phrase had been present originally, there would have been no reason for copyists to omit it.

This is not an common thing in the Byzantine/Majority Text tradition. Parallel passages are considered, and copyists apparently insert verbiage if the given passage does not conform exactly to its parallel. It is assumed an earlier copyist omitted it by accident. But this may or may not be.

Anonymous said...

Question: How can 'the WORD' have credibility, if some of those 'words' have been watered down or changed with more 'modern' versions of the Bible?

Craig said...

Anon 3:21 PM,

What if your premise is incorrect? See my 3:21 PM.

Anonymous said...

It's like when someone appears in court, and that person (on cross examination) keeps changing his or her story.

There is no such thing as 'versions' of the truth. There is only one TRUTH.

Craig said...

Anon 3:25 PM,

Or how about when four witnesses all say exactly the same thing, with exactly the same verbiage? Four separate witnesses are better believed as a group when they are not exactly duplicating the others. The truth is still conveyed, because we can be more assured they did not collude beforehand, in order to tell the account in the exact same manner with the exact same words.

Anonymous said...

However, New Agers want to 'muddy the waters' and give you various options (versions) of the 'truth' to choose from... which is very dangerous spiritually to Christians!!!

Satan is the master of confusion and deception.

Anonymous said...

Craig:

Here is what RayB said at 11:53 AM:
"From a personal perspective; very early on, I used the NASB exclusively and was an enthusiastic proponent of it. In my NASB, I read the Lockman Foundation's introductory assertion, claiming that their work was based upon the "most reliable and earliest manuscripts." I completely believed that their statement was true. I came to saving faith in Christ by reading the NASB. Having said that, one day, I, and my then future wife, were challenged to do a verse by verse comparison of the NASB & the KJV, which we eventually did. What we found out was nothing short of SHOCKING. The very next day, we both purchased KJV bibles and have been using the KJV exclusively ever since."


Craig said...

Anon 3:36 PM,

Yes, I read that. But, again, what if their methodology was faulty? What if their premise is wrong and the truth is actually 180 degrees the other way? That is, what if the KJV adds and changes verbiage as compared to original texts?

Anonymous said...

Will Disney's loss of special tax district in Florida mean taxpayers are stuck with the bill?

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/disney-stripped-special-status-florida-local-taxpayers

Anonymous said...

Craig:

Why would you ever imagine that the King James Version would add or change verbiage?

Based on what?

Craig said...

This from Wikipedia balances the discussion (bold to indicate section, italics for emphasis):

Textus Receptus

The first printed edition of the Greek New Testament was completed by Erasmus and published by Johann Froben of Basel on March 1, 1516 (Novum Instrumentum omne).[5]: 143  Due to the pressure of his publisher to bring their edition to market before the competing Complutensian Polyglot, Erasmus based his work on around a half-dozen manuscripts, all of which dated from the twelfth century or later; and all but one were of the Byzantine text-type.[5]: 143–146  Six verses that were not witnessed in any of these sources, he back-translated from the Latin Vulgate, and Erasmus also introduced many readings from the Vulgate and Church Fathers.[5]: 143–146  This text came to be known as the Textus Receptus or received text after being thus termed by Bonaventura Elzevir, an enterprising publisher from the Netherlands, in his 1633 edition of Erasmus' text.[5]: 152  The New Testament of the King James Version of the Bible was translated from editions of what was to become the Textus Receptus.[5]: 152  The different Byzantine "Majority Text" of Hodges & Farstad as well as Robinson & Pierpont is called "Majority" because it is considered to be the Greek text established on the basis of the reading found in the vast majority of the Greek manuscripts. The Textus Receptus differs from the Majority Text in 1,838 Greek readings, of which 1,005 represent "translatable" differences.[13]

Modern critical texts

Karl Lachmann was the first New Testament textual critic to produce an edition that broke with the Textus Receptus, ignoring previous printings and basing his text on ancient sources, therefore discounting the mass of late Byzantine manuscripts and the Textus Receptus.[14]: 21  The critical Greek New Testament texts of today (represented by UBS/NA Greek New Testaments) are predominantly Alexandrian in nature,[15] but there are some critics such as Robinson and Hodges who still favor the Byzantine Text, and have produced Byzantine-Majority critical editions of the Greek New Testament.[16] Around 6,500 readings differ between the Majority text and the modern critical text (represented by UBS/NA Greek New Testaments), although the two still agree 98% of the time.[17]

Craig said...

Anon 4:03 PM,

See my 4:03 PM and my earlier example of Colossians 1:14.

I can understand if you might experience a little cognitive dissonance at first. This is natural when belief systems are challenged. All I ask is that you step back and slowly consider what I've written.

I started studying this about 15 years ago, when I started to study Greek in general. I was initially quite taken aback with the entire subject of textual criticism! It took a while, but I wanted to know why others had their particular views. I was eventually persuaded that there's no larger hidden agendas, either with the KJV or with the modern versions. Simply, we have unearthed LOADS more manuscripts in the intervening years between Erasmus' first edition. Moreover, with airplane travel and the digitization of manuscripts, the evidence is being compiled and is easier to see than ever.

RayB said...

Just a FEW verse by verse comparisons. Is there any difference?

Matthew 5:44

KJV - "Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you."

NIV - "Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you."

NASB - "Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you."

Matthew 9:13

KJV - "for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance."

NIV - "For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners."

NASB - "For I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners."

Matthew 18:11

KJV - "For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost."

NIV - OMITTED

NASB - footnote casts doubt

Matthew 25:13

KJV - "Ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh."

NIV - "You do not know the day or the hour."

NASB - "You do not know the day nor the hour."

Matthew 27:35

KJV - "And they crucified him, and parted his garments, casting lots: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, "They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots."

NIV - "When they had crucified him, they divided up his clothes by casting lots"

NASB - "And when they had crucified Him, they divided up His garments among themselves by casting lots"

Mark 10:24

KJV - "how hard it is for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God!"

NIV - "how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God!"

NASB - "how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God!"

RayB said...

(more)

Luke 2:33

KJV - "And Joseph and his mother..."

NIV - "The child's father and mother..."

NASB - "His father and mother...." NOTE: GOD is the Father, not Joseph.

Luke 4:4

KJV - "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God."

NIV - "Man does not live on bread alone."

NASB - "Man shall not live on bread alone."

Luke 4:8 (Jesus speaking to Peter. Rome claims Peter is their first Pope)

KJV - "Get thee behind me, Satan."

NIV - OMITTED

NASB - OMITTED

Luke 11:2

KJV - "And he said unto them, When ye pray, say, Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth."

NIV - "He said to them, When you pray, say: "Father, hallowed be your name, your kingdom come..."

NASB - "And He said to them, When you pray, say: "Father, hallowed be Your name. Your kingdom come...


John 6:47

KJV - "He that believeth on me hath everlasting life."

NIV - "He who believes has everlasting life."

NASB - "He who believes has eternal life."

Craig said...

RayB @ 5:22 PM,

Welp, yep, there are differences. But the million dollar question is: What accounts for these differences?

Which readings are original? Would the original text be found in an English text based upon a Greek text--the Textus Receptus--which is based on 6 to 12 LATE (ca. 12th century) manuscripts? Or might the original text be found in earlier manuscripts, even other Byzantine (non-Alexandrian) texts?

Have you even looked at the evidence posted regarding Colossians 1:14 @ 3:21 PM? Care to comment on that?

RayB said...

(more)

John 10:30

KJV - "I and my Father are one"

NIV - "I and the Father are one."

NASB - "I and the Father are one."

John 16:16

KJV - "A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again, a little while, and ye shall see me, because I go to the Father."

NIV - "In a little while you will see me no more, and then after a little while you will see me."

NASB - "A little while, and you will no longer see Me; and again a little while, and you will see Me."

Acts 2:30

KJV - "that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;"

NIV - "he would place one of his descendants on his throne."

NASB - "to seat one of his descendants upon his throne."

Acts 8:37

KJV - "If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."

NIV - OMITTED

NASB - footnote casts doubt (some NASB editions just omit it)

Acts 23:9

KJV - "Let us not fight against God."

NIV - OMITTED

NASB - OMITTED

Rom 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus
Rom 13:9

Thou shalt not bear false witness.

OMITTED

OMITTED

I Cor 15:47


KJV - "The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven."

NIV - "The first man was of the dust of the earth, the second man from heaven."

NASB - "The first man is from the earth, earthy; the second man is from heaven."

Colossians 1:14

KJV - "In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins."

NIV - "In whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins."

NASB - "In whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins."

1 Timothy 3:16

KJV - "God was manifest in the flesh."

NIV - "He appeared in a body."

NASB - "He who was revealed in the flesh."

Craig said...

RayB,

It's clear that your mind is already made up and that no evidence will suffice to get you reassess your position to see if it is indeed on solid ground or not.

I already addressed Colossians 1:14 @ 3:21 PM above. Why didn't the other texts 'omit' "through his blood" in Ephesians 1:7?

RayB said...

(more)

1 Peter 1:22

KJV - "Ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit."

NIV - "you have purified yourselves by obeying the truth."

NASB - "Since you have in obedience to the truth purified your souls."

1 John 4:3

KJV - "And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God."

NIV - "But every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God."

NASB - "And every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God."

I John 5:7

KJV - "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."

NIV - "For there are three that testify:

NASB - "For there are three that testify:"

Revelation 1:11

KJV - "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book...

NIV - "which said: "Write on a scroll..."

NASB - "saying, "Write in a book..."

Revelation 5:14

KJV - "Four and twenty elders fell down and worshipped him that liveth for ever and ever."

NIV - "the elders fell down and worshipped."

NASB - "the elders fell down and worshipped."

Revelation 20:9

KJV - "Fire came down from God out of heaven."

NIV - "Fire came down from heaven."

NASB - "Fire came down from heaven."

Revelation 21:24

KJV - "And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it."

NIV - "The nations will walk by its light."

NASB - "And the nations shall walk by its light."

Revelation 22:14

KJV - "Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life ..."

NIV - "Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life ..."

NASB - "Blessed are those who wash their robes, so that they may have the right to the tree of life..."

Marko said...

I don't know if anyone in the Bible translations thread might find this helpful:

https://drmsh.com/tag/textual-criticism/

I like some of Dr. Heiser's work. He tends to focus on ancient Biblical texts from an apologetics angle, arguing the case for the authenticity of the Bible in front of skeptics and others who would question it, or using original manuscripts to argue against those who try to make the Bible support ludicrous ideas, like "The human race was planted here by a highly advanced race, and Adam and Eve were the couple that was left here to populate the earth by 'ancient astronauts'".

RayB said...


One correction:

Romans 8:1

KJV - "There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit."

NIV - "Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus"

NASB - "Therefore there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus"

NOTE: This is EXTREMELY important. Read Galatians 5:16-26 for the Scriptural definition of what constitutes the "flesh" vs the "Spirit."

Anonymous said...

https://emeralddb3.substack.com/p/goodbye-to-cnn?s=r

HAHA! Love this!

Craig said...

RayB @ 6:07 PM,

Right you are about living by the "flesh" vs. living by the "Spirit". That's why Paul is sure to indicate this in the larger context, in Romans 8:3-4, 7, and 8. It's a shame that the TR and the KJV appear to have added to God's Word here. That's just wrong.

The manuscript evidence, though not a slam-dunk, is clear enough. If we are to think the NIV and NASB (and the underlying Greek) were trying to hide something they would also have 'omitted' 8:3-4, 7, and 8. Moreover, they should have scratched out Galatians 5:16-26 for good measure.

Craig said...

Though definitely not a Greek TR issue, it's quite curious what the KJV translators did in Acts 12:4:

And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.

Easter?! While there is not a consensus on just when the holiday of Easter was instituted, it certainly did not begin during the Acts of the Apostles. The underlying Greek word is pascha, which means Passover. Even more curiouser, the KJV renders all other occurrences of pascha "Passover", so why the difference here?

How do we reconcile this with RayB's earlier assertion?: The KJV is the culmination of extensive work that was done by true scholars with a check and balance system that ensured the correct translation from the Greek "Received Text," (Textus Receptus), to English, so in a real sense, it is the standard by which others should be judged.

In any event, "Easter" here is a clear anachronism.

Craig said...

RayB,

Here’s one you left out—Revelation 14:1:

KJV: And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads.

NIV: Then I looked, and there before me was the Lamb, standing on Mount Zion, and with him 144,000 who had his name and his Father's name written on their foreheads.

NASB: Then I looked, and behold, the Lamb was standing on Mount Zion, and with Him one hundred and forty-four thousand, having His name and the name of His Father written on their foreheads.

Wait, what? The KJV omitted “His [the Lamb’s] name and” from this verse? This is clearly a watering down, a diluting of the Lamb of God! Unbelievable!

Hyperbole aside, there are only six manuscripts that lack the Greek for “His name and”, the earliest of which is from the 9th century. The others are much later. This variant is so obviously not original that none of the textual commentaries include it, and neither the NA28 nor the UBS5 Greek texts make note of it in their apparatuses (“footnotes”). I found the info in White’s book (pp 65–66, 108).

And, in a footnote (p 124, note 29) White quotes Riplinger, who gets it exactly backwards:

All new versions, based on a tiny percentage of corrupt Greek manuscripts, make the fatefully frightening addition of three words in Revelation 14:1: “Then I looked, and there before me was the Lamb, standing on Mount Zion, and with him 144,000 who had his name and his Father's name written on their foreheads.” Will the unwary, reading Revelation 14:1 in a recent version, be persuaded that the bible sanctions and encourages the taking of “his name” on their forehead before they receive the Father’s name? [pp 99–100].

The “tiny percentage of corrupt Greek manuscripts” are those lacking “His name and”! Maybe more important, what in the world is she trying to say here?! Is she implying one cannot receive both names at the same time? Why not?

Craig said...

Anon 6:26 PM,

That's great!


Rich Peterson - Medford said...

I talked with Constance last night and she said she has been running a low grade fever for the past ten days. She has requested our prayers.

Anonymous said...

Praying for a speedy end to the low grade fever and the root cause.

Anonymous said...

Craig, Easter was celebrated for centuries before Christ as goddess worship in the spring. The Acts of the Apostles took place after passover and the resurrection of Christ. Regarding Acts 12:4, Herod the Edomite, would not have wanted to wait until after passover, anyway. He wanted to wait until after the celebration of his pagan holiday, Easter.

Because "Easter" appears in the KJV Bible, many Christians mistakenly think the early Christians celebrated Easter. I was one of them until the Lord showed me otherwise. I'm not a fanatic about it. I'm ok if churches want to use the word "Easter ', but as for my family, we don't celebrate "passover", we don't celebrate "Easter", we celebrate Resurrection Day.

Anonymous said...

Everyone should read the article linked @ 6:26 PM

I have been praying against propaganda media for a quite while now! Thank You Lord!

RayB said...


Another correction:

Romans 13:9

KJV - "Thou shalt not bear false witness."

NIV - OMITTED

NASB - OMITTED

It's possible that the 'translators' of the NIV & NASB felt guilty about "bearing false witness" and just decided to eliminate this verse entirely. They may have felt, "this kinda describes what we've been doing ... let's get rid of it." LOL

Or maybe, the heretics Westcott & Hort decided to eliminate it from their Greek Text in 1881 (which just so happens to be the "Text" that is heavily relied upon by the modern translators)? Whatever, there must be some explanation. If only we knew a Greek 'scholar', we could ask him, because you can't understand ANYTHING unless you know some Greek.

Anonymous said...

RayB, Your research in comparing scripture translations is impressive. I don't use any of the modern Bible translations for many of the same reasons you stated. Bibles not mentioned, if one can call them that, are The Message promoted by Pat Robertson, The amplified bible promoted by the Copelands, and the passion bible promoted by Bethel, Reading, CA, all Dominionist/New Apostolic Reformation versions. Add to that the Hebrew Roots/Messianics who don't believe the book of Hebrews should be in the Bible and the Book of Galatians is just wrong. It wouldn't be surprising if they were to publish their own bible in the future. Just naming a few, there's probably more that I'm not aware of.

The word of God is under attack. It can be confusing when a pastor prepares a sermon based on one translation that enforces his message one week and uses a different translation the next. Church attendees often use different translations or they don't own a Bible and they take whatever is preached that day as the gospel truth. That's one way the New Age has infiltrated the church.

Craig said...

Anon 9:52 AM,

With respect, you’re conflating quite a bit of things in your comment. The non-Christian Jews (NCJ) and even the Christian Jews (CJ) celebrated Passover (which was week-long), during the recording of the Acts of the Apostles. Though there is Scriptural evidence of Christians celebrating Sunday generally as “The Lord’s Day”, this is not the verbiage used here. And, Luke was writing Acts from a Christian perspective within the milieu of then-contemporaneous traditions.

Both Herod and the NCJs were against the CJs. When Herod had James, brother of John killed by the sword (12:2), and he observed how this pleased the NCJs (12:3), he seized Peter during the “days of Unleavened Bread”—which is a reference to Passover week. The reason Herod waited until after pascha, Passover (Passover week) to put Peter on trial was so that NCJs would be able to attend, because the Passover Festival would be over.

If your position that Herod wished to wait until after a pagan “Easter” celebration was finished were to be correct, surely Luke would have used a different word in Acts—NOT pascha. Luke would have made it clear that he was referring to a pagan festival so as not to confuse it with the pascha.

The bottom line is that the KJV is a bad translation here in Acts 12:4, for it should be “Passover”. The KJV rendering of “Easter” is a Christian anachronism, not a reference to a pagan holiday.

Craig said...

Anon 11:29 AM,

I don't believe anyone here supports The Message paraphrase (which is certainly New Age influenced) or the incredibly faulty and heretical Passion translation supported by the NAR. But these have absolutely NOTHING in common with other modern translations, such as NASB, NIV, ISV, NET, etc.

Craig said...

RayB,

You not only illustrate a bias against Biblical scholarship (textual criticism, e.g.), you keep dishonestly perpetuating errors you had previously been corrected on. And, though you are quick to note differences between English Bible versions, you ignore evidence that counters your position that the TR is without error and the KJV translators are without error. And you made no comment on the evidence that Riplinger misrepresented evidence regarding Revelation 14:1 apparently to further her agenda. This is obviously quite purposeful and serves to negatively reflect on your character.

To reiterate sections from the Wikipedia article cited above:

The different Byzantine "Majority Text" of Hodges & Farstad as well as Robinson & Pierpont is called "Majority" because it is considered to be the Greek text established on the basis of the reading found in the vast majority of the Greek manuscripts. The Textus Receptus differs from the Majority Text in 1,838 Greek readings, of which 1,005 represent "translatable" differences.[13]

The critical Greek New Testament texts of today (represented by UBS/NA Greek New Testaments) are predominantly Alexandrian in nature,[15] but there are some critics such as Robinson and Hodges who still favor the Byzantine Text, and have produced Byzantine-Majority critical editions of the Greek New Testament.[16] Around 6,500 readings differ between the Majority text and the modern critical text (represented by UBS/NA Greek New Testaments), although the two still agree 98% of the time.[17]

Thus, the Textus Receptus is NOT the Majority Text (MT), as you fallaciously asserted above (quoting someone else without doing your own due diligence). Moreover, NONE of the modern editions are based on the Westcott-Hort text (W-H had called the Alexandrian text “the neutral text”, a stance that ALL modern textual critics REJECT). However, many modern versions do favor Alexandrian texts, because they are deemed to be earlier texts. This is especially true after some important papyri were unearthed, namely P45, P46, P66 and P75.

As for your example of Romans 8:11, once again the TR is in the minority. Both the Majority Text and Alexandrian texts lack “bear false witness” here. These words were apparently ADDED by some scribes in a few later manuscripts, and Erasmus apparently had one or more of these in front of him when he collated the TR.

Craig said...

^I meant Romans 13:9 above @ 12:10PM.

RayB said...

Anonymous @ 9:52 AM ...

Of course you are correct on this ... I can't understand why anyone would question your analogy. I also think you have the proper attitude, which I share. For example, on "easter" weekend (Saturday), I received a phone call from a long time friend that had become a believer within the last few years. He called to wish my wife & I a happy "easter," with the remarks "it's all about the Resurrection. Without it, we have no hope." I of course agreed with him, while not mentioning anything about the pagan origins of "easter."

One other thought about Christ's Resurrection. Every "easter" season, the message is that this is a "time for renewal, and hope." For the BELIEVER, the Resurrection of Christ is evident every single day of our lives. He is Risen, and He LIVES now, making intercession on our behalf. We don't need the world to tell us when we should acknowledge the Resurrection.

Another thought ... on the flip side, the Resurrection is very bad news for those that reject Christ, because it guarantees a future in which they will face the coming judgment, without Christ ... "It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God."

RayB said...

Anon @ 11:29 AM ...

You bring up some very interesting points. It is confusing. There are currently over 100 modern translations into the English language, and all differ from each other! All of this confusion is very damaging to the cause of Christ.

For example: When conversing with Roman Catholics, I have often heard the statement (paraphrase):

"You tell me that the Bible is the only true authority, yet, you so-called Bible believers can't even agree on which Bible is the right one."

Then, to confuse matters even more, we have self-appointed 'scholars' that tell people that they can't properly understand the meaning of God's Word without knowing the original Greek!

Craig said...

RayB @ 12:47,

You apparently missed J's reference to this video explaining the NON-pagan roots of the Christian Easter holiday:

Is Easter Pagan?

Here I've timestamped his discussion of how Easter is NOT pagan in origin:

Is Easter Pagan?

---

RayB @ 12:59PM,

You wrote: Then, to confuse matters even more, we have self-appointed 'scholars' that tell people that they can't properly understand the meaning of God's Word without knowing the original Greek!

Who made such a claim?

J said...

RayB touched on this in a comment above, but I didn't want it to go unnoticed, so I'm highlighting it again.

Comparing the Lord's Prayer in the KJV and the NIV and NASB Bibles.

Changes:

* "Our Father which art in heaven" is changed to "Father." "...which art in heaven" was completely removed from NIV and NASB. "Our" was completely removed from NIV and NASB.

* "Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth," was completely removed from NIV and NASB.

* "but deliver us from evil" was completely removed from NIV and NASB.

KJV Luke 11:2-4

2 And he said unto them, When ye pray, say, Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth.

3 Give us day by day our daily bread.

4 And forgive us our sins; for we also forgive every one that is indebted to us. And lead us not into temptation; but deliver us from evil.


NIV Luke 11:2-4

2 He said to them, “When you pray, say:

“‘Father,[a]
hallowed be your name,
your kingdom come.[b]
3
Give us each day our daily bread.
4
Forgive us our sins,
for we also forgive everyone who sins against us.[c]
And lead us not into temptation.[d]’”


NASB Luke 11:2-4

2 And He said to them, “When you pray, say:

‘[a]Father, [b]hallowed be Your name.
[c]Your kingdom come.
3
Give us each day our [d]daily bread.
4
And forgive us our sins,
For we ourselves also forgive everyone who is indebted to us.
And do not lead us into temptation.’”

Craig said...

J,

And how does Matthew record the 'Lord's Prayer'?

Craig said...

Spoiler alert for those who didn't view the link J initially referenced and I reference at 1:04PM: the source of all the confusion is one Alexander Hislop. He and Gail A. Riplinger are two peas in a pod: pseudo-scholars, pushing forth their own agendas.

Anonymous said...

11:42 PM

Craig said I don't believe anyone here supports The Message paraphrase (which is certainly New Age influenced) or the incredibly faulty and heretical Passion translation supported by the NAR. But these have absolutely NOTHING in common with other modern translations, such as NASB, NIV, ISV, NET, etc.

Of course they don't have anything to do with modern translationss. I mention them because they are very popular among Christians, regardless of denomination. How is it possible for you to know what book anyone here supports unless they have specifically stated so?

Craig said...

Anon 1:25 PM,

You wrote: How is it possible for you to know what book anyone here supports unless they have specifically stated so?

I said, "I don't believe anyone here supports..." I didn't say, "I know..." No one here has specifically referenced any of those works you mention @ 11:29PM. Had someone done so, we would know.

RayB said...


Here is an incredibly important verse that very much reveals the 'spirit' that is behind this controversy:

I John 5:7

KJV - "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."

NIV - "For there are three that testify:

NASB - "For there are three that testify:"

NOTE: I John 5:7 is the CLEAREST verse in the entire Bible that declares, IN ONE VERSE, the Triune God. Notice what the NIV & NASB did to this verse ! This isn't just a 'mistake,' it is an EVIL deception that brings into question the Triune God.

As a side bar ... Westcott & Hort compiled and published the enormously influential "Westcott & Hort Greek Text, 1881." Both Westcott & Hort QUESTIONED the validity of the Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ, claiming that John 1 does NOT refer to Jesus as the Word, and that, Jesus himself never claimed to be God ! They also held to many other heresies, were followers of Charles Darwin, doubted the validity of the miracles in the Bible, were members of a cult in which they attempted to 'contact the dead,' etc. THESE are the men that provided the foundational work that is used by the modern translators.

Craig said...

RayB,

Like Riplinger, you take Westcott & Hort out of context. Perhaps you should find their original quotes so you can set things aright. I'd already explained a few years ago when you first brought this up that Riplinger had misattributed a quote to Hort--one that was of a completely different person.

So, did Westcott and Hort “QUESTION the validity of the Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ, claiming that John 1 does NOT refer to Jesus as the Word”, as you claim? Are you absolutely positive about that? Have you done research on this to make such an assertion as if established fact? Once again, no you did not. You relied on someone else, for here is Westcott’s commentary on John 1:18. He and Hort favored “God” in place of “Son” here in view of the manuscript evidence. Yeah, it’s technical, but the point for posting here is that BOTH affirm the Deity of Christ:

18. the only begotten Son Two readings of equal antiquity, as far as our present authorities go, though unequally supported, are found in this passage. Of these the first, followed by A. V., the only begotten Son (ὁ μονογενὴς υἱός), is found in [list of manuscripts]…

The second, one who is God, only begotten (μονογενὴς θεός), is found in [list of manuscripts, including ℵ*B C*L]…

On the whole, therefore, the reading God only-begotten must be accepted, because (1) It is the best attested by ancient authority; (2) It is the more intrinsically probable from its uniqueness; (3) It makes the origin of the alternative reading more intelligible.

An examination of the whole structure of the Prologue leads to the same conclusion. The phrase, which has grown foreign to our ears though it was familiar to early Christian writers, gathers up the two thoughts of sonship and deity, which have been separately affirmed of the Word (John 1:14, 1).

The reading has been discussed in detail by Dr E. Abbot (‘Bibliotheca Sacra,’ Oct. 1861; ‘Unitarian Review,’ June, 1875); and by Dr Hort (‘Two Dissertations...,’ Camb. 1875). The conclusion of Dr Hort in favour of μονογενὴς θεός [God, only-begotten], after a full examination…has been “established beyond contradiction.”

Anonymous said...

It's always been hard for me to believe that the original scripture was written in Greek by unlearned men. And it takes a Greek scholar to interpret.

I remember the first time I heard from a guy that I went to school with, preaching from the pulpit that the Bible was in error. He didn't know any more Greek than I did. I think the notion was popularized by Christian television. Then the new "more accurate" translations came out targeted at lower reading levels they said. All were excuses for watering down or omitting the truth. Churches with bookstores on site were more than happy to add the new translation to their inventory. We've now evolved to the point where it's vogue for churches (cults) to publish their own rendition, having nothing at all to do with authentic scripture, but sold by Christian publishing houses and bookstores.

RayB said...


A few more verse by verse comparisons:

Matthew 17:21

KJV - "Howbeit this kind goeth out but by prayer and fasting."

NIV - omits

NASB - most publications ... omits

Matthew 20:16

KJV - "many shall be called, but few chosen."

NIV - omits

NASB - omits

Matthew 20:22 & 23

KJV - "and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with."

NIV - omits

NASB - omits

Matthew 23:14

KJV - "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretense make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation."

NIV - omits

NASB - omits

Matthew 27:35

KJV - "that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots."

NIV - omits

NASB - omits

Mark 6:11b

KJV - "Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city."

NIV - omits

NASB - omits

Mark 7:16

KJV - "If any man have ears to hear, let him hear."

NIV - omits

NASB - (If any man has ears to hear, let him hear) Footnote questions the validity of this verse.

Mark 13:6

KJV - "For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many."

NIV - "Many will come in my name, claiming, ‘I am he,’ and will deceive many."

NASB - "Many will come in My name, saying, ‘I am He!’ and they will mislead many."

Mark 15:3

KJV - "And the chief priests accused him of many things: but he answered nothing."

NIV - "The chief priests accused him of many things."

NASB - "And the chief priests started accusing Him [a]of many things."

Mark 15:28

KJV - "And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors."

NIV - omits

NASB - ("And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, "And He was numbered with transgressors") Footnote casts doubt as to the validity of this verse.

Luke 2:33 (Casting aspersions that God is not Jesus's FATHER, but Joseph is, which brings his Deity into question)

KJV - "And Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him."

NIV - "The child’s father and mother marveled at what was said about him."

NASB - "And His father and mother were amazed at the things which were being said about Him."

Craig said...

RayB,

For the sake of completeness, clarity, and conciseness, I’ll add this from Westcott’s commentary, regarding 1:14: The mode of the Lord’s existence on earth was truly human, and subject to all the conditions of human existence, but He never ceased to be God. It doesn’t get more Christian orthodox than that.

Now, on to 1 John 5:7, the Johannine Comma, which no one but rabid KJV/TR priorists/onlyists would claim as original, for it is intellectually dishonest to do so. It is absent in the Majority Text and the Alexandrian texts. Erasmus himself—the compiler of the TR—didn’t even include this verbiage in his first two editions, because it wasn’t in any of his manuscripts. According to Wikipedia (and see here) , He added the text to his Novum Testamentum omne in 1522 after being accused of reviving Arianism and after he was informed of a Greek manuscript that contained the verse. ONE MANUSCRIPT.

In any case, W-H were not the first to question the inclusion of this extra verbiage in 1 John 5:7. See "Tischendorf 8th Edition" in middle column at hyperlink—no, you don't have to read Greek to see that his verbiage doesn't include the TR words. Tischendorf is from 1871, predating W-H’s 1881. And there are other textual critics before Tischendorf who questioned this text.

RayB exclaimed: Notice what the NIV & NASB did to this verse ! This isn't just a 'mistake,' it is an EVIL deception that brings into question the Triune God.

In view of the evidence posted just above, let me fix this for you: Notice what the KJV did to this verse! This isn’t just a ‘mistake’, this is a purposeful inclusion into the Word of God, based on merely ONE MANUSCRIPT!

Certainly, it’s not difficult to support the Triune God using legitimate Scripture, is it?

Craig said...

Anon 2:57 PM,

You wrote: It's always been hard for me to believe that the original scripture was written in Greek by unlearned men. And it takes a Greek scholar to interpret.

Koine Greek is the language of the first century. It's not the language of the 21st century.

Craig said...

Since the first two links @ 3:07 did not go through, I'll post them here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannine_Comma

https://books.google.com/books?id=n583DwAAQBAJ&pg=PA64#v=onepage&q&f=false

Craig said...

J,

You wrote @ 1:51 PM yesterday: I'll study it and compare it as you urge but won't debate further.

Yet you made the comment @ 1:08PM today regarding Luke 11:2-4, implying your position of KJV priority with your claim that the NIV and NASB ‘changed’ the text here.

Let’s look at this from a different angle. What if the TR used Greek manuscripts which conformed Luke 11:2-4 to Matthew 6:9-13? In other words, what if later copyists assumed the earlier copy he was looking at had accidentally omitted the verbiage in Matthew 6? Such a copyist might add this text to his copy in order to ‘correct’ it. But what if Luke recorded this originally as the Greek texts underlying the NIV and NASB have it?

Is that not possible?

RayB said...

Craig states @2:11 PM (in part):

"RayB,

Like Riplinger, you take Westcott & Hort out of context. Perhaps you should find their original quotes so you can set things aright."

How's this Craig? In their own words ...​

On the validity of the Scriptures:

"I reject the word infallibility of Holy Scriptures overwhelmingly." (Westcott, The Life and Letters of Brook Foss Westcott, Vol. I, p.207).

"Our Bible as well as our Faith is a mere compromise." (Westcott, On the Canon of the New Testament, p. vii).

"Evangelicals seem to me perverted. . .There are, I fear, still more serious differences between us on the subject of authority, especially the authority of the Bible." (Hort, The Life and Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, Vol. I, p.400)

On the Deity of Christ:

"He (Jesus) never speaks of Himself directly as God, but the aim of His revelation was to lead men to see God in Him." (Westcott, The Gospel According to St. John, p. 297).

"(John) does not expressly affirm the identification of the Word with Jesus Christ." (Westcott, Ibid., p. 16).

"(Rev. 3:15) might no doubt bear the Arian meaning, the first thing created." (Hort, Revelation, p.36).

On Salvation:

"The thought (of John 10:29) is here traced back to its most absolute form as resting on the essential power of God in His relation of Universal Fatherhood." (Westcott, St. John, p. 159).

"I confess I have no repugnance to the primitive doctrine of a ransom paid to Satan. I can see no other possible form in which the doctrine of a ransom is at all tenable; anything is better than the doctrine of a ransom to the father." (Hort, The First Epistle of St. Peter 1:1-2:17, p. 77).

The Doctrine of Hell:

"(Hell is) not the place of punishment of the guilty, (it is) the common abode of departed spirits." (Westcott, Historic Faith, pp.77-78).

"We have no sure knowledge of future punishment, and the word eternal has a far higher meaning." (Hort, Life and Letters, Vol. I, p.149).

The Doctrine of Creation:

"No one now, I suppose, holds that the first three chapters of Genesis, for example, give a literal history. I could never understand how anyone reading them with open eyes could think they did." (Westcott, cited from Which Bible?, p. 191).

"But the book which has most engaged me is DARWIN. Whatever may be thought of it, it is a book that one is proud to be contemporary with..... My feeling is strong that the theory is unanswerable." (Hort, cited from Which Bible?, p. 189)

Romanism:

"I wish I could see to what forgotten truth Mariolatry (the worship of the Virgin Mary) bears witness." (Westcott, Ibid. )

"The pure Romanish view seems to be nearer, and more likely to lead to the truth than the Evangelical." (Hort, Life and Letters, Vol. I, p. 77)

Craig said...

RayB,

Perhaps you can supply more context so that we can more adequately assess them. Oh, you don't actually have those works, as you pulled these from some online source?

I see...

Anonymous said...

Is Easter Pagan? denies that Easter is a pagan holiday on a History for Atheists website. The fool has said in his heart there is no God. Does anyone here actually believe a fool who doesn't believe in Jesus Christ would tell the truth about anything spiritual, especially pagan roots?

Craig said...

RayB,

And two of these quotes you used a few years ago when we went through this. At the time I pointed out how the second one was not even correct, even in its condensed form. But here we go again:

The first one: "He (Jesus) never speaks of Himself directly as God, but the aim of His revelation was to lead men to see God in Him." (Westcott, The Gospel According to St. John, p. 297).

More complete context reveals that Westcott absolutely affirms the Deity of Jesus Christ:

Thomas...My Lord and my God The words are beyond question addressed to Christ (saith unto him), and cannot but be understood as a confession of belief as to His Person (comp. ‘Syn. OEc.’ v. Can. 12, De tribus capitulis) expressed in the form of an impassioned address. The discipline of self-questioning, followed by the revelation of tender compassion and divine knowledge, enabled St Thomas to rise to the loftiest view of the Lord given in the Gospels. His sublime, instantaneous confession, won from doubt, closes historically the progress of faith which St John traces. At first (John 1:1) the Evangelist declared his own faith: at the end he shews that this faith was gained in the actual intercourse of the disciples with Christ. The record of this confession therefore forms the appropriate close to his narrative; and the words which follow shew that the Lord accepted the declaration of His Divinity as the true expression of faith. He never speaks of Himself directly as God (comp. 5:18), but the aim of His revelation was to lead men to see God in Him.”

The second one is not even correct: "(John) does not expressly affirm the identification of the Word with Jesus Christ." (Westcott, Ibid., p. 16). The source you stole from didn’t include “but assumes”, two VERY IMPORTANT words in this context. Your source must good ol’ Gail A. Riplinger, who had a penchant for changing quotes to suit her agenda. In any case, here is fuller context:

“There is no effort on the part of the writer [John’s Gospel] to establish, or to enforce, or to explain. He sets forth what is matter of experience to him with complete conviction and knowledge. Nothing can be farther from the appearance of introducing any new teaching. The Evangelist takes for granted that his readers understand perfectly what he means by “the Word,” “the Father.” He does not expressly affirm but assumes the identification of the Word with Jesus Christ (vs. 17).”

The honest inquirer here can see that your source(s) are misquoting W and H to mischaracterize them. That’s quite unchristian.

Let’s focus strictly on their methodology.

RayB said...

(more)

Hort's view on the Textus Receptus:

“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 leaning entirely on late MSS.; it is a blessing there are such early ones.” (Life, Vol. I, p. 211).

Hort's view on the Garden of Eden:

"I am inclined to think that no such state as Eden (I mean the popular notion) ever existed, and that Adams fall in no degree differed from the fall of each of his descendants, as Coleridge justly argues." Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York, 1896), Volume I, p. 78.

Hort was also an adherent to the teaching of Samuel Taylor Coleridge. His son writes:

"In undergraduate days, if not before, he came under the spell of Coleridge."

"Coleridge was the college drop-out whose drug addiction is an historical fact. The opium habit, begun earlier to deaden the pain of rheumatism, grew stronger. After vainly trying in Malta and Italy to break away from opium, Coleridge came back to England in 1806."

"One of Coleridge's famous works is Aids to Reflection. Its chief aim is to harmonize formal Christianity with Coleridge's variety of transcendental philosophy. He also did much to introduce Immanual Kant and other German philosophers to English readers." Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York, 1896), Volume I, p. 449.

Hort's views on Purgatory:

"The idea of purgation, of cleansing as by fire, seems to me inseparable from what the Bible teaches us of the Divine chastisements; and, though little is directly said respecting the future state, it seems to me incredible that the Divine chastisements should in this respect change their character when this visible life is ended."

"I do not hold it contradictory to the Article to think that the condemned doctrine has not been wholly injurious, inasmuch as it has kept alive some sort of belief in a great and important truth." Volume II, pp. 336,337 Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York, 1896)

Hort's Atonement for sins:

Hort's Atonement

There was also his rejection of Christ's atoning death for the sins of all mankind.

"The fact is, I do not see how Gods justice can be satisfied without every man's suffering in his own person the full penalty for his sins." 103

In fact, Hort considered the teachings of Christs atonement as heresy!

"Certainly nothing can be more unscriptural than the modern limiting of Christs bearing our sins and sufferings to His death; but indeed that is only one aspect of an almost universal heresy."

"I confess I have no repugnance to the primitive doctrine of a ransom paid to Satan, though neither am I prepared to give full assent to it. But I can see no other possible form in which the doctrine of a ransom is at all tenable; anything is better than the notion of a ransom paid to the Father." Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York, 1896), Volume II, p. 428

Hort on Baptismal Regeneration:

"...at the same time in language stating that we maintain Baptismal Regeneration as the most important of doctrines ... the pure Romish 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), Volume II, p. 81

Hort also states that, Baptism assures us that we are children of God, members of Christ and His body, and heirs of the heavenly kingdom.




Anonymous said...

Bottom line: The truth has no versions!!!

Which begs the question: WHY isn't there just ONE Bible?

Why would it be necessary to 'mess with' the Bible?

Why would it be necessary to 'modernize' (e.g. take out all of those 'thees' & 'thous' since that IS the way they actually SPOKE back then)?

Who do these 'changes' benefit, especially when later 'watered down' versions end up actually CHANGING the very MEANING of these scriptural passages?

And to even imagine that there would be something 'new' (undiscovered)... that Jesus didn't tell us about 2,000 years ago is the height of arrogance and an insult to Jesus. Jesus didn't give us a 'rough draft' 2,000 years ago. He told us ALL he wants us to KNOW before he was crucified and died for our sins.




Anonymous said...

Craig 1:29 PM I haven't seen any rule that states we're to discuss only things that have been mentioned here previously. If so, that would disqualify a lot of your statements.
It's been my impression that this blog is for sharing thoughts and ideas concerning the new age and learning from others. I don't see any reason for your superior attitude.

Craig said...

Anon 5:11PM,

I may have misunderstood your initial comment, which is causing you to misunderstand my response.

My comment was merely noting that no one on here was referencing, and by that I meant supporting, those particular 'Bibles'. I wasn't implying that we cannot bring up new subjects.

I thought you were comparing modern Bible versions with The Message and Passion. Sorry I apparently misunderstood you.

Craig said...

Anon 4:52 PM (and for all),

Scripture was written in Greek (with tidbits of Aramaic and Hebrew) in the 1st century. This is because Greek was the common language. Taking just one example, Paul wrote Ephesians as a circular letter, meaning it was intended not just for the assemblies in Ephesus (in Asia Minor). So, Paul wrote a letter, sent it to Ephesus. Copies were made to retain, and then it was forwarded on. Then copies of those were made for individual ‘house churches’. Then copies were eventually sent out further to other areas, such as northern Africa (Egypt. e.g.), the Middle East, etc. Since humans are imperfect, mistakes were made. This is especially so, because Greek was written with no spacing between words and absolutely no punctuation. And we don’t have Paul’s original letter.

So copies of copies were made, and mistakes were repeated and more mistakes were made. Some scribes would attempt to correct—whether this was indeed an actual correction or not. Then copies were translated into other languages (Latin, Coptic, Syriac, etc.). And scribes were much more likely to add (to correct) than subtract text. If a text looked questionable, a mark would be placed next to it, and a note would be written in the margins of the document.

English was not even a language until about mid-fifth century.

Because Christianity was largely not accepted in the first few centuries, copies were written sometimes haphazardly and by not well-trained scribes. It wasn’t until Constantine that the Scriptures became more ‘standardized’. This is because Christianity was officially sanctioned. So, scribes were better trained (and more relaxed!), and we have historical evidence pointing to a tendency to harmonize Scripture. If one passage wasn’t exactly like another passage—especially in the Gospels—then the scribe would make a change in his new copy. Then future copies would be more likely to conform. And this is why the Byzantine text—the majority of our extant copies—is typically more consistent. But we also have a lot of imperfect copies. In fact, not one copy is without some sort of error. And no copy agrees entirely with another.

So, copies got lost, destroyed by enemies, worn out, etc. Because of this, we do not have any original letters of Paul or any of the NT writers.

Because of northern Africa’s dry air, hidden copies (in caves, e.g.) were better preserved. Thus, copies were found in the past 150 years or so, and these appear to be closer to the first century than other copies in other areas. These are the Alexandrian texts. Of course, we are also finding texts in other areas. To date there are about 6000 manuscript copies, though many are mere fragments.

These are continuously compared with one another by trained textual critics to help us determine what is most likely the ‘original autographs’—the original Bible. This is why modern versions differ from older ones, which were based on fewer manuscripts. That is, we now have more manuscript evidence from which to make a determination of ‘original’ texts.

This is not to say God’s Word has been lost. God’s Word is within those 6000 manuscripts. Though we may not know exactly what was written originally by Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, etc., we have a REALLY good idea. And the variations among the current (legitimate) Bible versions we have—whether in English, Spanish, Mandarin Chinese, Swahili, etc.—are not such that any important doctrine is compromised.

J said...

I'm still studying this topic. For those interested in it, this entire article is well worth reading, if you want to get all the evidence for and against the Johannine Comma having been added or removed.

Spoiler alert: 'So while 5000 is an impressive number, the actual number of “early” manuscripts that contain 1 John 5:7-8 is only 12. And no, none of those contain the Comma. That is fairly strong evidence, however it’s not the only evidence. There is equally compelling evidence to include the Comma. (which we’ll get to in a bit.)'

The Johannine Comma of 1 John 5:7-8: Added or Removed?

https://www.bereanpatriot.com/the-johannine-comma-of-1-john-57-8-added-or-removed/

J said...

Still studying. Westcott and Hort did not use Byzantine texts. They used Alexandrian texts. One reason was they thought older = better. It is true Alexandrian texts are older.

But another reason was that they assumed Byzantine texts combined Alexandrian with Western texts. That assumption was proven wrong by more recent manuscript findings.

There is much more to the article. It is very long.

Majority Text vs. Critical Text vs. Textus Receptus – Textual Criticism 101

https://www.bereanpatriot.com/majority-text-vs-critical-text-vs-textus-receptus-textual-criticism-101/

Craig said...

J,

You wrote: Westcott and Hort did not use Byzantine texts...

Not correct. W-H preferred the Alexandrian over the Byzantine, etc. They didn't "use" the Alexandrian to the exclusion of other texts. They considered all texts, but thought the Alexandrian the "neutral text". Modern textual critics reject this position.

Craig said...

In the “Textual Criticism 101” the author misinterprets Daniel Wallace:

“Codex Alexandrius is a very interesting manuscript in that in the Gospels, it’s a Byzantine text largely, which means it agrees with the majority of manuscripts most of the time. While as, in the rest of the New Testament, it is largely Alexandrian. These are the two most competing textual forms, textual families, text types if you want to call them that, that we have for our New Testament manuscripts. So when you get outside the Gospels, Alexandrius becomes [a] very important manuscript.” – Dan Wallace

The author interprets this thusly: Please notice the casual dismissal of the Byzantine text type by one of the most respected textual critics of our age. I’m honestly not sure why it’s dismissed so easily.

Wallace didn’t ‘dismiss’ the Byzantine. He noted that the Byzantine “agrees with the majority of [Byzantine] manuscripts most of the time”. So, since this manuscript has the Byzantine text for the Gospels, Wallace states, “So when you get outside the Gospels, Alexandrius becomes [a] very important manuscript.” His point is that it’s the Alexandrian portion is the important part, for the other (Byzantine) is found elsewhere.

If this exemplifies his ‘logic’, then I cannot recommend.

«Oldest ‹Older   601 – 800 of 1072   Newer› Newest»