Ape Mountain 3.0

The Masoretic Text is our source for the Hebrew Old Testament, which God preserved ONLY in Hebrew. (This isn’t to say versions were not attempted in Greek, which is explained in the above study)

The New Testament, however, WAS preserved in Greek through the Textus Receptus in a Greek-speaking world.

Both of which were used in Spain in the 1569 Casiodora de Reina and in England in 1611 in the KJV. The Lord chose English as the new language for the complete Word of God to be preserved in, and the elite set about changing the very language over the next several centuries, which largely has destroyed the ability of us supposed English speakers to even read and interpret our own language.

The lack of attention, ability or desire to study and read God’s Word as it was intended in English (with the precise language of “thee”, “thou” etc.) is NOT the fault of God, but a failure of those who claim to be leaders among Christians, and the very supposed body of Christ themselves.

“Updating language” or making the Bible “easier to read” is no different than translating Hebrew to Greek and changing verses to sound better or more agreeable. The desire for an “easier to understand” text is a desire for a corrupted text with no true meaning.

Every single word preserved in the Bible has meaning, and is essential to the narrative from Genesis to Revelation. If you think a “jot or tittle” doesn’t matter, then I refer you to God’s Word directly:

Matthew 8:18 KJV “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.”

@ApeMtn37

One argument I hear that is unique to /ourguys/ is against the Masoretic Text, which is not evidence FOR the LXX at all.

The claim is that the Masoretic Text is “jewish”, and came much later than earlier texts, and is assumed to have been edited profusely in order to create a palatable religious text that jews could control.

The Leningrad and Aleppo Codexes (MT sources) pre date the Khazarian-Edomite merging in the Caucasus and have been shown to have extraordinary agreement between the two, as opposed to the manuscripts claimed to be the basis for the LXX, which disagree in THOUSANDS of places. The MT in Hebrew matches with other ancient sources of the same language, giving us as complete a picture as we can get at the present time. (The Aleppo Codex appears to have been mysteriously lost in Israel in 1947. Interesting timing to get rid of such an important document, but hey at least ALLLL of these other Greek manuscripts exist, right? Right?)

All this to say, I do not believe the MT to be some “jewish” deception document meant to deceive and draw people from the Word of God, but I do believe that is how the Septuagint has come to be used, especially when you look into the translators and supporters, men such as Wescott and Hort, famous Oxford Darwinists who were on the Catholic payroll and were admitted enemies of God.

@ApeMtn37

To be clear, if you’re not going to read both parts in good faith and examine the evidence (or lack thereof) then don't bother.

The glaring issues of the “LXX” are apparent, and the only evidence being dubious letters and a Pharisee known as Josephus (none of which agree with each other). This is a major problem for any supposed church that take these texts as Scripture over the Hebrew, which was the only language ordained by God at the time for the Old Testament to be recorded in.

@ApeMtn37