Correct Doctrine 3


1.3. The entire Bible, and all of its words are inspired, infallible and inerrant, not suffering loss in transmission, supernaturally preserved from the time of the Apostles to today through the Masoretic Text Old Testament and the Textus Receptus Greek New Testament (Psalm 12:6-7, 2 Tim. 3:16).

1.4. The King James Bible, as the only Bible translated from these texts (The Masoretic (Ben Chayim בן חיים) Text in Hebrew and Textus Receptus/Stephanus 4th Edition in Greek), is the pure, preserved Word of God for English Speaking people, without any error, without any need for correction or re-translation.

1.5. Any translation based in whole or in part upon any other texts (Such as Wescott/Hort, Vaticanus & Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, Nestle/Alland and so forth) are to be rejected (including the NIV, NRSV, NKJV, RSV, TNLB, the ESV and The Message, among others).

6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. 7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever. Psalm 12:6-7 (KJV)

These verses, memorized by many Baptists, is one of the great promises of the Lord to keep, safeguard, and preserve the Bible.

It also directly refutes the theory (invented by two unregenerate Modernist Anglicans, who denied the Divinity of Christ, the inspiration of the Bible, and denied many cardinal doctrines of Christianity), that the Word of God was corrupted and lost from AD 400 or so and not recovered until partway through the 19th century – when it was found accidentally in a trash heap in a monastery (which also had rooms full of the bones of dead monks) on the Sinai Peninsula.

So, the theory of these two lost men is that only the enemies of the word of God possessed and safeguarded the words of God, while the Christians dedicated to the study, teachings and reverence of the Bible – corrupted it???

The theory makes no sense logically or Scripturally. The Lord has promised to preserve His words.

17 And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail. Luke 16:17 (KJV)

18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Matthew 5:18 (KJV)

16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 2 Timothy 3:16 (KJV)

How were we supposed to obey the Lord and study to shew ourselves approved – if He did not keep His words in the hands of the Christians who revere His Bible?

The Wescott-Hort texts are blasphemous, and deliberately distort and remove evidence for doctrines key to the Christian faith. I’m sure that Wescott and Hort regret it now. We won’t be seeing them at the Believer’s Judgment – but we’ll see them at the Great White Throne Judgment.

Codex Sinaiticus is full of errors and editing, by the admissions of their very discoverer. And we can only take the Vatican’s word for it that the text they provided for the use of Wescott and Hort is a true and valid copy. Which again brings up the question, why are we taking the word of unSaved Men on which manuscripts are the Bible or not??? is not the very fact they belonged to an unholy organization, a false religious system, and known for their very opposition to the word of God, make their manuscripts suspect? Let’s not forget that BOTH Vaticanus and Sinaiticus come from Catholic origins – Vaticanus from the Vatican, and Sinaiticus from the Greek Orthodox Church.

The very doctrine of preservation argues for a manuscript being in the hands of believing Christians. Much as the Calvinists hate to admit it, the only manuscript that had been in Christian hands (including the hands of the very reformers they revere) was the Syrian texts, the Textus Receptus. And today, only the King James Bible is translated from the Textus Receptus.

Advertisements