"O L-RD, Who are my power and my strength and my refuge in the day of trouble, to You nations will come from the ends of the earth and say, 'Only lies have our fathers handed down to us, emptiness in which there is nothing of any avail! Can a man make gods for himself, and they are no gods? 'Therefore, behold I let them know; at this time I will let them know My power and My might, and they shall know that My Name is the L-RD".
Jeremiah 16:19-21

Q1) Do you KNOW who ‘canonized’ the “New Testament” books?

Q2) How do you KNOW they are authentic?

Q3) Were they forged?

There were some writings of antiquity that were claimed as forgeries or of completely unknown origin but were later admitted to the canon.

How do you KNOW that whomever ‘canonized’ them did not have their own political or religious agenda?

Have you, the reader, honestly done an in-depth study, or even a casual one, looking at all sides, to see where different versions of the “Bible” come from?

Do you simply base your decision on which Bible to use flippantly by how `easy to read’ it is, rather then educate yourself as to WHERE it came from.  WHY you should trust it’s accuracy, and then, if needed, try to read at a higher level?

Just because “church” leaders since about the 3rd or 4th Century (stemming mostly from the Roman Catholic Church, Nicene creed/council; Council of Trent; Constantine; etc…) have promoted the “New Testament” as incontrovertible, infallible ‘fact’ or Scripture, does that mean it is?

WHY?  Did those that lived around the times of the “New Testament” manuscripts were written, regardless of their convictions, view these writings as ‘inspired’ or did they even go so far as to consider these writings to be infallible Scripture, on the same level as the Books of the Torah or Tanakh?  Or did they just think they were simply letters, good for edification but not overriding the existing Scripture (Torah /Tanakh)? 

The “New Testament,” depending on the version of the “Bible” used, is based upon copies that were, for the most part, written/copied in the Greek various times over.  Some versions use the Alexandrian (or Minority) texts, which are older texts, that were fairly recently found.

These are questionable at best and trash at worst.  There is the Textus Receptus that the KJV and few others use as their basis for the “New Testament.”  The “New Testament Textus Receptus is basically a collation document of approximately 5,400+ Greek documents (Papyrus, Unicles, Cursives, Manuscripts, Fragments, etc…).  None of these documents agree in whole, so, where there was a majority of agreement or grammatical/textual indications and considerations showed otherwise, the Textus Receptus was reputedly created to reflect this agreement of the majority.

As an actual manuscript, the Textus Receptus does not exist as a relic, but as a relatively contemporary creation based on what some thought the original would look like given all the disagreements there are in the “New Testament” manuscripts.

These disagreements, some minor grammatical errors while others are of quite significant theological importance, vary depending on the scholarship but are agreeably, by all sides, in the range of 200,000 to 300,000 variances (more than the number of words in the “New Testament”).

Note that just because a majority of anything agrees upon anything does not make them right, accurate, or correct.  Nor are the minority texts (e.g. Alexandrian, Vaticanus, Sinaiticus, etc…) correct just because of their antiquity.

These minority texts seem to have survived due to lack of use.  Most likely because those that had them available knew they were flawed/slanted in favor of the authors/promoters, mostly early Gnostic “Christians” (Origin and Clement).

One of the Alexandrian texts was found being used as kindling, kind of odd for something that, if it were accurate, should have been revered, even by the ignorant.  Even those who call themselves atheists aren’t often seen going around burning ‘bibles.’  Motivation in all its forms needs to be examined especially when dealing with man-made religiosity.

I will not bore you all with the common, arguments on the mistranslations of Hebrew wordings and meaning, with an obvious choice, such as the word ‘alma’ meaning ‘young woman’ wrongly translated in Christian writings as ‘virgin. The church must hold this position because Matthew 1:22-23 translates ‘alma in Isaiah 7:14 as “virgin.”

The first Gospel quotes this well-known verse to provide the only “Old Testament” proof text for the supposed virgin birth of Jesus.  The stakes are high for Christendom, because if the Hebrew word ‘alma does not mean virgin, Matthew is misquoting the prophet Isaiah, and both a key tenet of Christianity and the credibility of the first Gospel collapses. (taken from Rabbi Tovia Singer)

I will use not so common references to make you aware of the tragedies of the “New Testament”.

In Acts of the Apostles, Chapter 17, we can clearly see, even from the pages of the “New Testament” that any dogma, doctrine or spiritual beliefs/convictions of those that were actually around the time of Jesus were based upon what Acts 17:2 calls “Scripture.”

If Shaul (“Paul”, another Jewish man with a Jewish name) reasoned with them (Jews) in the Synagogues on the Sabbath from “Scripture,” what Scripture was he reasoning from?

His doctrine was, out of necessity in dealing with the audience at hand, solely based upon the Scriptures available to him, a Jew.  These Scriptures are the “Torah and the Tanakh” (Tanakh includes prophets, psalms etc) you may refer to as the “Old Testament” writings.

Acts 17 goes on to say that the Bereans were more noble than the Thessalonians in that they searched “Scripture” daily to see if what Shaul (Paul) said was true.  Again the Scripture they were searching was the Torah/Tanakh.  Not the copies of writings canonized in the “New Testament” 300-500A.D.

If ‘Paul’ was able to argue his dogma/doctrine from the “Torah and the Tanakh”, then any argument or any reasoning or any doctrine made by you as christians should it then not  fall in line with “those Scriptures” also.

Modern ‘Christianity’ is loosely based on the guidelines of the G-d of the Hebrew/Jewish culture.

History shows that the culture/people the Creator of the chose to share His ‘Laws & Commandments’ for a healthy, happy life was through the Hebrews, the Jewish people NOT the christians or NOT a Greek philosophy.

An example of this preservation is the Masoretic Text.

To show that the New Testament has made basic ‘errors’/mistranslations’ I will give you just 1 example:

(Though the real question is were these errors intentional or unintentional)

Look at Hebrews 4:8 and Acts 7:45.  Get a Strong’s concordance and compare these verses with any of the other times the name “JESUS” is translated in the “New Testament.”  It is the same word Iousus (Ἰησοῦς) in the Greek, Strong’s #2424.  Check it out.

There is no “J” in the Hebrew or Greek alphabet.

Both of these verses are referring to Joshua the contemporary of Moses (משה –  Moshe)

Now Acts 7:45.  In these verses ‘Joshua’ (contemporary of Moses) is completely mistranslated as “Jesus” in KJV but is correctly transliterated as ‘Joshua’ (contemporary to Moses) in the NASB.

All agree that these two verses (Acts 7:45 and Hebrews 4:8) are referring to Moshe’s  (Moses) cotemporary Joshua (second person to lead the Jewish people in their early history).

In Numbers 13:16 ‘Joshua’ gets his name (which is יְהוֹשֻׁעַ Yehoshua in the Hebrew).

Now if Jesus’  name and ‘Joshua’s’ name are the same in the Greek, and transliterated from the same word and in Hebrew it seems as though they had the same name, thus, establishing just two of many errors with the English translations of Greek manuscripts.

When modern ‘Bible’ publishers discovered this error, why didn’t they correct it ‘New Testament’ wide?  Why not restore Jesus’ name correctly and as was indicated even in the Greek?

They continue in their Greek mythology…….. So christianity continues to Idol worship a Greek entity…….whom they continue to disregard as a Hebrew/Aramaic speaking Jew.

‘Christos’ is a Greek word meaning ‘anointed’.  So your so called ‘anointed’, whom you as a christian worship and give the highest reverence too choose to worship him as yet again a Greek……why continue calling him something Greek!!!!! (as well as why are you all continuing to worship him anyway)

Basically I just want to point out just  a few of between 200,000 – 300,000 issues/mistakes/mistransulations to you as I KNOW TO WHOM I GIVE REVERANCE TO ALWAYS …


Sh’ma Yis’ra’eil Adonai Eloheinu Adonai echad.

Hear, Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is One

Christianity has been misled in so many ways to the point of sadness…. They are the only religion on earth that stubbornly refuses to acknowledge the name of whom they worship (not forgetting that he shouldn’t be worshipped anyway) , convinced by the names they hear from their pastors and read in their establishment Bibles.

It would reason that basing any religious doctrine; dogma or conviction on any manuscripts/doctrines that have even the slightest error or that are even arguably error ridden is a grave mistake.  PLEASE seriously consider these facts.

So, on one hand we have Greek manuscripts, copies of copies, and a Hebrew manuscript, of GREATER antiquity than the oldest Greek.  The Hebrew Torah has anomalies a computer could not have done and still made the text understandable.

Why, when presented with information of this gravity, would someone base any doctrine, dogma or conviction on a text or translation that has, at best, many unintentional errors or, at worst, has been a tool used by “ALL Christian’s” of the 3rd and 4th Centuries till now to their own ends?

Wisdom would look at all information available and fit beliefs to the facts, not manipulate or disregard facts to fit beliefs, as is commonly done.

Bottom line is basing doctrine or beliefs on a book, manuscript or treatise based on what any and all will have to agree is flawed at best and downright deceptive at worst is just plain foolish, to praise, give reverence to, to depend on healing, or the taking away of sin, to call out & depend on any other name other than G-d ALONE is IDOLATRY!!

That is why ONE G-d and he alone should be worshipped, anything or anyone other than G-d ALONE will cause you total confusion as can be clearly seen.

Isaiah Chapter 45 יְשַׁעְיָהוּ

5 I am the LORD, and there is none else, beside Me there is no God; I have girded thee, though thou hast not known Me; 6 That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside Me; I am the LORD; and there is none else; 7 I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil; I am the LORD, that doeth all these things.





Want to share or print this? Choose how below:
  • Print
  • email
  • Add to favorites
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: