The TR and our Holy Bible

 

A few reasons why I know the Textus Receptus readings and the Textus Receptus based Bibles (viz. Geneva [1560], Bishop’s [1568], and King James [1611]) are correct:

 

  1. The TR readings promote piety in the Christian life and promote the Divinity of Christ. (see John 5:39)  Satan would not want you to have a Bible that is theologically superior!  For example, words such as “repentance” (Matt. 9:13; Mark 2:17) and “fasting” (Matt. 17:21; Mark 9:29) are included in the AV 1611 holy text, yet excised in the catholic and ecumenical bibles.
  2. Suppose the TR is a conflated text: that means God’s true people (born-again evangelical believers) added to the word of God, which is forbidden. (see Deut. 4:2; Prov. 30:6; Rev. 22:18)  That’s impossible.  The ones who really added to the word of God are the Jesuits who canonized the Apocryphal books at the council of Trent.
  3. The TR readings pre-date the Alexandrian manuscripts by almost two centuries.  The Alexandrian manuscripts date to the 4th century; but there are Majority (Byzantine) versions that date to the 2nd century—versions like the Latin (Itala) [157 A.D.], the Gallic [177 A.D.], and the Syrian Peshitta [150 A.D.].
  4. Since Satan and his antichrist spirit have been resisting and attacking the word of God since Genesis 3:1 (cf. 2 Cor. 11:3), doesn’t it make sense that the reason the TR readings have been curtailed is because of satanic involvement?  Satan hates Jesus, of course he would try to cover up with glory and doctrine in his ‘bibles’.  See what Jesus Christ says Satan does in Mark 4:15.
  5. The Majority text is a Syrian text, where the believers were first called Christians (see Acts 11:26).  On the other hand, the Minority text is an Egyptian text, and Egypt has probably the worst connotation in scripture; it’s even called “the iron furnace” (see Deut. 4:20; 1 Kings 8:51; Jer. 11:4).  Not trying to complicate things, but doesn’t even a casual glance at these two locations show that the Holy Spirit would have chosen Antioch as a much more favorable place to preserve His words than Egypt?  Plus, since the Roman Catholic church has always adopted the worldly, philosophic, Arian, Gnostic, Egyptian mss: it makes Pharaoh a type of the pope (see Ezek. 28–32).
  6. Satan (or “Lucifer” [v. 12]) didn’t like what God prophesied about him in Isaiah 14.  So what did he do?  The devil changed the Bible (in the modern Alexandrian versions) so he wouldn’t be sentenced to hell, but Christ (the “morning star” [Rev. 22:16]) would be—that’s satanic blasphemy to the utmost!  “Star” (Strong’s #3556 Kokab) appears nowhere in Isaiah 14:12 in the Masoretic Text.
  7. The Alexandrian bibles remove “Satan” from Psalm 109:6.  (See Strong’s #7854.)  The King James, Bishop’s, and Geneva Bibles all have “Satan” in them in this verse.
  8. The AV 1611 so powerfully exalts the Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ that it is a threat to the honor the Roman catholics give the pope (see John 5:43-44).  Therefore, get rid of that Christological Bible of the Bible-believers and Protestant reformers!
  9. The modern bibles’ perversion of Micah 5:2 is an utter blasphemy straight from the pit of hell!  Christ is NOT a created being because He has no ‘origin’ (NAB, NIV, etc.).  His “goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting” (KJV) [the Geneva and Bishop’s have similar readings], not just ‘ancient’ (NAB, NIV, etc.).  Now you tell me whose reading is more in line with Colossians 1:18... The papists and ecumenists or the Bible-believers and Protestant reformers?  I’ll go with the ones whose blood was shed “for the word of God” (Rev. 1:9, 6:9, 20:4)—after all, as Bro. Nic Kizziah said, ‘It’s a blood sprinkled Book.’
  10. Also, a few more major satanic corruptions (see 2 Cor. 2:11, 17) found in modern perversions (see Jer. 23:36) include... (1) A denial of the Holy Incarnation in 1 Timothy 3:16.  (2) A denial of the blood atonement of Jesus Christ in Colossians 1:14. (3) A denial of Jesus Christ’s role in creation in Ephesians 3:9.  ¶ Apostle Peter predicted you’d do this stuff in 2 Pet. 2:1. (See also Jude 4.)  ¶ Wow, you modern, backslidden, apostate, Laodicean Christians are really “valiant for the truth” (Jer. 9:3) and really know how to “contend for the faith” (Jude 3)!  You’ve compromised on the Christian birthright to the English-speaking church for a mess of pottage—so you could get along with the ‘holy father’ and his pack of ravening wolves filled with more devils than the demoniac from Gadarenes.
  11. The Alexandrian manuscripts have the apocrypha attached to their canon.  Jews and Bible-believers have always separated these books from the canonical Scriptures.

 

 

 

P.S. As a side note, because I’m not a ‘TR-man’ but a King James Bible-believer, I make this comment... I have a Greek New Testament from Trinitarian Bible Society—it does not say “Holy” anywhere on the cover or title page in Greek or English.  But I have several King James Bibles that say “HOLY BIBLE” on the cover.  Seems to me the Holy Spirit has put more emphasis on the English rather than the Greek, but that’s just too obvious for the intellectuals.