1 Corinthians 11: 24

Assembly Testimony error

A Summers, writing in Assembly Testimony No.363, Jan/Feb2013, states,

….[M]ost translations (e.g. R.V., J.N.D., E.S.V.)drop the word “broken” in 1 Cor. 11.24 because of a lack of reliable manuscript evidence. They read “this is my body which is for you”.

It is a palpable lie that there is a lack of reliable manuscript evidence for the word “broken”. It may be that A Summers followed the perverted line of textual criticism without examining the evidence for himself. The evidence for inclusion is very strong.

I include my notes on this verse, taken from AV Verses Vindicated. 

The word 'broken' is omitted in the RV etc, but has the support of the majority of the Byzantine mss. and lectionary copies. It is also in the Peshitto and Harcleian Syriac and is quoted in the writings of some of the early fathers. The Codex Siniaticus is one of the few manuscripts omitting the word, but even this has been altered by a corrector to include it.

The  RV was the work of Westcott and Hort based on their own version of the Greek Text. But we note that even they did not remove klao (I break) from their new text. JND would have seen this. It was eventually the Nestle/Aland Greek Text that abandoned klao.  

In this there is,

" no contradiction and no departure from the Passover symbolism. The bones of the Passover Lamb were not to be broken. The bones of the Lord Jesus Christ were not broken. The body of the Passover Lamb was certainly broken, when its blood was shed, and when it was skinned before roasting. It is equally true to say of the Lord that, while no bone was broken, His body was broken when the crown of thorns broke the flesh of His brow, when the scourging broke the flesh of His body, when the nails broke the flesh of His hands and His feet, and when the spear broke the flesh of His side. There was thus a literal fulfilment of the Passover symbolism in that His bones were not broken; and a fulfilment of Isaiah 53 - He was wounded for our transgressions."

Last paragraph quoted from TBS. Leaflet No.65.

The Day of Christ

In the same issue of Precious Seed as that quoted below we read a comment by John Stubbs. John has been a friend of mine for many decades and we have entertained him in our home on several occasions.

We must, however, take him to task, again,   for his comment,  “The Day of the Lord (‘Day of Christ’ KJV in verse 2 [2 Thess 2] should read ‘the Day of the Lord’ RV)

When Mr Stubbs made this statement while preaching at our hall in New Bradwell in 2008, he was instantly and publicly rebuked. It is a false statement, carrying no authority. It mocks my Bible and Christ. Its reappearance in the wretched Precious Seed magazine is therefore a matter of arrogance added to ignorance.

The change from the Received Text was made by the Westcott/Hort duo who were both perverted clerics. It is deeply regretted that men who purport to be our present Bible teachers should promote depraved parodies of Scripture.

I include, yet again, my notes on 2 Thess.2: 2

2 Thes.2:2.

….the day of Christ is at hand.   AV

“….asserting that the Day of the Lord has already come”.    NIV

. Modern versions change this to "the day of the Lord" being come. This appears more suitable in relation to what the rest of scripture teaches concerning the Day of the Lord, but the manuscript evidence for the change is very poor. The vast majority of all manuscripts support "day of Christ". Some Alexandrian manuscripts (i.e. found in Egypt where early corruptions of the Scriptures are known to have taken place) support "day of the Lord" ^*. So let us believe what the Bible says and admit that maybe we do not fully understand the doctrine of the day of Christ. The Thessalonians had no such problems and they most certainly read "day of Christ".

The Day of the Lord had been expounded in the first epistle to the Thessalonians. They knew it would come as a thief in the night, unexpectedly, and that it would not affect them (ch.5v.4) They knew that the Day of Christ would affect them (2Thes.2v.5 and compare Phil.1v.10 & 2v.16) and that it would be preceded by the great apostasy. If the Day of Christ had come ("at hand" means that), then for a start they had missed the Rapture. What troubled them was the false teaching they were getting on the subject including apparently a letter from Paul himself saying the Day had come. Note that! Falsified Scripture. (N.B. 2Cor.2v.17) Thus we are warned in Scripture that men would from the beginning seek to corrupt the Word of God. Note that the N.I.V. mutilates even this verse to read "....we do not peddle the word of God for profit." But that is what every modern version is about.

*The Hodges/Farstad MajorityText footnote for this verse shows the consensus of Alexandrian manuscripts to have Kyrios, against the majority of manuscripts which have Xristos.

For the Bible believer, this speaks for itself. It is the battle of apostasy against faith.

United We Stand – Divided We Fall

A review of the article appearing in Precious Seed, No.? by J Gibson.

Is Gibson writing concerning the problems within his church (Curzon Street Gospel Hall, Derby) or problems affecting a broader circle? The first sentence seems to clarify this;

Unity is at the heart of Christianity.

“Christianity” is not a Bible word. It stands for the conglomerate mass of Christendom, which includes Romanism, Protestantism, every denomination and every Christianised cult. Its unity is easy to define. It is being screamed out continually. It is Ecumenism.

It is this anti- truth mess that Gibson and Precious Seed is promoting. His war cry is John 13: 35 By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye love one another.

The Lord taught that a hall-mark of the true believer is that  as a disciple of Christ he will love other disciples. A disciple is one who follows Christ and continues therefore in Apostolic teaching.

Gibson then goes on to write that,

Our capacity to fully comprehend divine truth is impaired, even though the indwelling Holy Spirit has been sent to ‘guide [us ] into all truth’, John 16: 13  

[my italics-R.S.]                

                              

We are to believe that not even the Holy Spirit can do what He has been sent to do, i.e. to produce a one mindedness among His people concerning Scripture truth.  There is no such thing as absolute truth?

If we remember controversies have raged for centuries  ̶

We will be more gracious when confronting the opposing camp.

I confess I do not understand this statement.  How do I show my graciousness to men in the opposing camp? Where is this opposing camp? When some bring to us their doctrines of devils, as Paul warned they would, we refuse them. We are to refuse profane and old wives fables. How much more these outright satanic dogmas that men are thrusting on us. We believe some of these, held by and mentioned by Gibson include Calvinism, A-millennialism, etc.

I can be gracious but this will not include a handshake. Much less do wish to sit down and  break bread with them.  My responsibility is to show love to Christ and withdraw from such. Their “opposing camp” will not be found in our fellowship.

Gibson believes that “most disruptions in local churches boil down to nasty feelings and personality clashes”. This may be largely true because  doctrinal error is tolerated throughout Brethrenism.

The local church is the pillar and ground of the truth (1 Tim. 3: 15). John wrote, I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth. (1 John 2: 21)

We shall continue to withdraw from such who oppose truth,

Beware of the agnosticism and error of J Gibson and Precious Seed.

Gibson, with all P S contributors, holds the Authorized Version in contempt. Precious Seed Magazine must be treated with much suspicion.                                                                                                 

Two new AV Verses

 The following commentaries will be add to my AV Verses files.

Genesis 10: 11

Out of that land went therefore Asshur, and builded Nineveh…..

“From that land he went to Assyria. There he built Nineveh.”       NIV

Almost all versions agree with the NIV, which links “he” with Nimrod in v.8.  Nimrod’s father was Cush. Nimrod did not build Nineveh. He built Babylon.

Asshur was the second son of Shem.(V.22) Asshur built Nineveh.  He left the land of Shinar where was Babylon in order to build Nineveh.

There is no dispute in the Hebrew text and the Authorized Bible is plain in its translation, yet almost all scholars, historians, archeologists, etc  reject the AV reading. They have no authority for so doing.
The translators relegated the possibility of "he" to the margin, being satisfied that Asshur was the true reading.

This blind and stubborn rejection of inspired Scripture may have to do with the Hamitic background of Nimrod and the Semitic background of Asshur. No territory is to be acceded to the sons of Shem. God has other plans.

Ephesians 4: 19

Who being past feeling have given themselves over unto lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness.

“They have become callous, and have given themselves up to sensuality, greedy to practice every kind of impurity.”   ESV

Seeing that the word callous existed in the 14^th century, we ask why the AV translators did not use it. The reason is they knew it did not properly translate apalgeo. (found here only in GNT) Paul was teaching that the unconverted Gentiles were unable to feel the pain of their actions upon themselves.

Callousness is a hardened attitude to the needs of others. Thus the ESV is a false translation.

Sensuality is far too bland a word to use here. Lasciviousness involves sexual impurity, lechery, lewdness.

The School Visitor

A FTW wrote recently, “when I go on a school visit, I don’t go in both guns blazing”.

Paul wrote,  For I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God, Acts 20: 27

Our FTW implies that he is holding back somewhat, One cannot tell an audience of mixed religions, We preach Christ crucified, and, neither is there salvation in any other.  (The very heart of the gospel!)

Our school visitors are required to preach another gospel, for which says the apostle, let him be accursed, Gal. 1: 8

The evidence of a false gospel preached is when the praise of ungodly men is given. Our FTW boasts how much he is appreciated by head teachers and staff.

Woe unto you, when all men shall speak well of you! For so did their fathers to the false prophets. Luke 6: 26

Our FTW cares not that his “message” does not differ from that of the R.C., Methodist, Anglican, visitors.

A little bible story with a hint of a moral application does not keep a soul out of hell.

I also note that this FTW has a bible which does not agree with mine.