Nestle-Aland a working text

I am aware that in the preface of the 27th edition of Nestle-Aland (NA27), the editors described the text in that edition to be a working text, in other words, not a fixed text. This very clearly show the doubts the editors who are mostly unbelievers and liberals have towards their scholarship.

We must understand that the Nestle-Aland will never be a fixed text because this is in the financial interests of the scholars. If the Nestle-Aland text becomes fixed, whole university departments would close and those scholars would have to look for another job. Also, those unbelieving scholars probably do not have the knowledge and skills to excel in jobs outside of left-wing academia. Therefore, the scholars would make sure that the Nestle-Aland text is ever changing.

Given that almost all modern versions are translated from the Nestle-Aland editions, how is it possible for modern version (such as ESV, NIV, NASB, and CSB) readers have any confidence that the version they are reading is truly the Bible?

We are also absolutely certain that the Nestle-Aland editions represent a false and rejected text (Alexandrian text). 

Therefore, I would suggest that the church reader must not proclaim 'this is the Word of God' after reading from the ESV, NIV, NASB, CSB, and other versions translated from the Nestle-Aland or other forms of the Alexandrian text.

The Modern Critical Text (Alexandrian Text) cannot be trusted

Academia is extremely left wing and this is in full display after President Donald Trump's historic victory in the 2024 U.S. presidential election on 5 November 2024.

Elite universities such as Harvard and Georgetown are either giving students a day off or some kind of help to support their distress and depression due to Trump's victory. Academics and students in these elite universities are refusing to accept reality and the will of the American people. How left wing and liberal are these people! Can you trust anything that comes out of academia in the modern day?

The reason I wrote about this is we must remember the false Modern Critical Text based on the false Alexandrian text is a product of unbelieving and liberal scholars of academia (universities). If you would not allow the same unbelieving and liberal scholars to preach in your church on a Sunday, why are you allowing them to tell you what is and what is not in the Bible?

Tyndale Memorial

William Tyndale was a great English reformer who translated the New Testament from the Greek Textus Receptus and parts of the Old Testament from the Hebrew Masoretic Text into English. The first edition of his English translation of the New Testament was published in 1526.

At that time, both the Pope and King Henry VIII of England forbade the translation of the Bible into English. Therefore, Tyndale's translation had to be smuggled back to England from continental Europe where Tyndale was then living.

Tyndale was fluent in seven languages including Hebrew and Greek such that when he spoke any of those languages, he was thought to be a native speaker of that language. He was also quoted to have said to a Roman Catholic official that he hoped to make the ploughboy know the Scriptures more than the Pope.

Many opponents of the Authorised Version (KJV) quoted Tyndale's ploughboy quote to justify their support of modern English versions. However, the same opponents of the KJV are very mistaken to use the ploughboy quote because the English of Tyndale's translations are Biblical English and NOT the English spoken by the ploughboy and the common Englishman of the 16th century. Tyndale and the KJV revolutionised the English language, transforming mediaeval English into modern English. How would Tyndale revolutionise English if his translation is the same English spoken by the ploughboy?

William Tyndale was martyred in Brussels, Belgium on 6 October 1536. Tyndale's last words were his prayer: 'Lord, open the eyes of the King of England.' Having said thus, the rope around Tyndale's neck was tightened and the flames soon consumed his earthly body.

Tyndale's prayer was answered. Two years following his martyrdom, King Henry VIII himself who had by then broke away from the Roman Catholic Church, commanded the translation of the Bible into English. Tyndale's translation then formed the foundation of the KJV and it can be rightly said that the KJV translators completed the work started by Tyndale. When we read the KJV, we are also reading Tyndale's work.

As we remember Tyndale on the anniversary of his martyrdom, may we treasure our Bibles (I am referring to the KJV and other versions translated from the true Traditional Text and NOT the modern false bibles such as the NIV, ESV, NASB, and CSB that are translated from the false Modern Critical Text) and remember that men like Tyndale had paid the greatest price to give us the liberty to read the Word of God in our language. 

Rosh Hashanah (ראש השנה) 2024

At sunset today (2 October 2024) would be 1 Tishrei 5785 in the Jewish calendar. This day is the first day of the seventh Jewish month and is the Feast of Trumpets (Leviticus 23:24, Numbers 29:1).

The Jews also celebrate this day as their New Year's Day (ראש השנה / Rosh Hashanah - Head of the year). 

Therefore, to my Jewish friends, שנה טובה (Shanah Tovah - literally means 'Good year').

The truth about the English Standard Version (ESV)

The ESV published in 2001 is now very widely used by people who claim themselves to be conservative Christians. However, do these people actually know about the ESV that they so strongly support?

The ESV is a conservative revision of the liberal Revised Standard Version (RSV) published in 1952, updating the unacceptable RSV to a more acceptable version. In other words, the ESV is a conservative version of RSV. If RSV and the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) - another liberal revision of the RSV published in 1989 - are rejected by conservatives, why should not the ESV be rejected also?

Remember, the ESV is RSV! The base text of the ESV is the RSV. 

Now the question is, why are conservatives so against us returning to the Word of God in English - the Authorised Version (KJV)?  

The Fellowship of Independent Evangelical Churches (FIEC) is now heretical

The Fellowship of Independent Evangelical Churches (FIEC) is a fellowship of Calvinist (mainly Baptist and Congregationalist) churches in Great Britain established in 1922. Today, FIEC has over 600 member churches across the country.

The FIEC is historically traditional and conservative. However, today they are increasingly liberal. In my survey of some of their member churches, I have discovered female deacons in some of them including the Westminster Chapel where Martyn Lloyd-Jones once preached. I have yet to find any FIEC member church (again including Westminster Chapel) where the Authorised Version (KJV) is read and preached from. Lloyd-Jones was a supporter of the KJV and yet it appears that even the Westminster Chapel has abandoned the KJV.

FIEC appears to be at war with the KJV. The leadership of FIEC member churches appears to be extremely hostile to the KJV. Any version is acceptable other than the KJV. Not only do they ban the reading and preaching from the KJV in their services, they effectively forbid godly men who read and trust only the KJV from serving in church leadership. 

The FIEC churches sing modernised versions of traditional hymns (no more 'thou', 'thee', and other KJV English) from the Praise! hymn book, all kinds of modern songs, and even songs from heretics (like Hillsong and Bethel Music) and charismatics but no song with KJV English is allowed.

Does FIEC know what they are doing? Opposing the KJV is opposing the Word of God. Opposing the Word of God is opposing the Almighty God Himself. 

By promoting and reading false bibles such as the ESV and NIV (the most common false bibles read in FIEC churches), the FIEC is now heretical. By banning the KJV and claiming KJV supporters as divisive, the FIEC is determined to remain heretical.

Without the KJV - the Word of God in English - in their hands, the FIEC has NO right to claim that they believe in Sola Scriptura (Scriptures alone).   

It is little wonder why Evangelicals in England are increasingly liberal. 

Piper and MacArthur doubt the Bible

John Piper taught in his sermon on 6 March 2011 that Pericope Adultarae (John 7:53-8:11) is not the Word of God.  Meanwhile, in his sermon on 26 June 2011, John MacArthur taught that the traditional conclusion of St. Mark's Gospel (Mark 16:9-20) is not part of Holy Scriptures.

Both Piper and MacArthur have put their trust in the Modern Critical Text and the unbelieving scholars. It is a tragedy that these men have become supporters of unbelievers and false bibles.

I would now question if Piper, MacArthur, and all Evangelical pastors who read and preach from false bibles such as NIV, ESV, NASB, and CSB, have any right to teach us to have faith in the Bible when they themselves doubt the Bible.

Is it any wonder why Evangelicals are getting increasingly liberal?