Holy Bible in Its Original Order - A Faithful Version

No, they're just later Jewish folk writings. They were authored by Jews, not God.
>The Church actively sought out, refuted and destroyed copies the Talmud, until certain (((reformers))) started spreading heresies about (((religious emancipation))) and the kosher version of the OT.
Believe whatever you want about the history then, I have provided concrete sources. And even more relevant, I don't see my church cozying up to Talmudists like the catholic church now is. So unless you have something more specific to complain about than what you've already said, I think we're done here. I did a much more thorough debunking of the OP's translation than you did.

...

Yes and the deuterocanonicals were all written a century before Christ and were in the Greek Septuagint which was used by Paul and the other authors of the New Testament as the authoritative source, so whats the problem?

Matthew 11:13, as I said. The were written by non-prophets and are not known in the original language sources. I think I said this already.

Do you think the expurgated Talmud and Hesronot ha shas didn't really exist? Do you think the toleration of Jews and use of Italian renaissance printing presses to print expurgated Talmuds did not occur? You can continue to think that if you want, but I will keep on doing what I've been doing.

They were in Origen's rescension of the septuagint, which was written after the New Testament. There are no surviving sources of the pre-NT version or any way to prove what the vast majority of it said and where it may have differed from Origen's Hexapla.

But it postdates their authorship. We're not talking about the Gospel of Peter, here. Christ Himself even quotes them, several times in the Gospel.

Yeah, and the Church had for a long time endorsed the translation of the Qur'an, the intention being to use it to undermine it. What is your point?
As for toleration, we're not talking "Our greatest allies"-tier toleration, we're talking not executing them. They lived in ghettoes in many Catholic areas even well into the 19th century, and were only allowed to leave with civil and ecclesiastical permission, for a short time, and had to wear a big yellow hat and a badge so people would avoid them.

The fact that they aided the Jews by producing an "approved" version which could later be used to dupe the goyim into believing the Talmud said nothing negative about Christ, which in turn led to greater toleration and misunderstanding about what the Talmud actually says to this very day.

By simply leaving an offending passage blank, a Jew equipped with the Hesronot ha-shas was able to fill in the blank to acquire the complete Talmud for himself, printed with fine quality on pages with the blessing of the Catholic printers of the age, the same exact people in the same time who were prohibiting and burning Tyndale's and other translations of the Old and New Testament. And furthermore they were also printing the Zohar and all kinds of "Christian cabbalistic" commentaries that cited rabbinical commentaries as authoritative via the publications of Reuchlin, Pico de Mirandola, Cornelius Agrippa, and others who were in favor with many Catholic potentates including some popes at the time. That's more or less the point there.

We can come up with example after example of how Jews were sometimes treated as dregs of society and sometimes treated far too well, but the fact remains that all of the above still happened. The sort of neo-platonic philosophies of kabbalism infiltrated the state church in the Vatican and abroad, leading to the de-facto promotion of rabbinic thought through the use of rabbinic commentaries as authority and through the willing propagation of their sacred Talmud and Zohar texts. And at the same time, the spread of the received word of God from the original languages uncorrupted was being stifled through mass persecution. Even today, corruptions are being spread and hawked by greedy publishers and theological revisionists, Catholics included who would like nothing more than to replace the received word of God with their own imitations. They can try, but will never actually succeed in doing so.

Why are you even talking about some middle ages conspiracy theory? The Greek Orthodox and the Copts and the Syrians and the Assyrians basically have the same canon as Rome, got any theories about how the Jews infiltrated the Coptic church or whatever?

I'm answering the question. Going back to Matthew 11:13, it's clear that until John came that they were taught (prophesied) from the Law and Prophets.

Well they don't call it the Alexandrian text for no reason

Attached: 1460771582497.jpg (672x512 67.28 KB, 124.08K)

Approved by Pope Leo X. Not an amazing pope, by the way, especially when most of his ancestors and descendents publicly condemned the Jews and their Talmud. It also wasn't helped that under his awful papacy, the heresy of Luther (another Judaizer) took root.

Three men who were put before the Inquisition on at least one occasion each and made to answer for their heresy. Then again, compared with later protestant sympathies, I think their naivete pales a bit.

Yeah, cabbalistic, pro-rabbinic thinking like there are only 39 books in the OT, for example.
For real though, this statement is too nebulous. If you are referring to the likes of Masonry and enlightened politics and the rise of religious tolerance/pluralism, I think the Reformation has more to do with that.

I do agree with this. I think James White is right about this too.

Sure there is. The same way we know what the New Testament says despite not having originals. The Septuagint is the definitive version of the Old Testament for Christians, sorry if that ruffles your neckbeard but it's a fact.

You're 2 for 2 in terms of trusting the Jews over Christians, you might as well just put on a yarmulke and be done with it

Attached: lxx_vs_mt3.jpg (769x993, 265.81K)

This graphic is a great tool for dismantling your own thought process. So you think the "Complete Jewish Bible" is accurate and reference it troughout as if it was.

I've got to go now, so after you write your next post now consider this.

Psalm 148:2
Praise ye him, all his angels: praise ye him, all his hosts.

Isaiah 29:18
And in that day shall the deaf hear the words of the book, and the eyes of the blind shall see out of obscurity, and out of darkness.

Psalm 22:16
For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet.

Zephaniah 3:11-12
In that day shalt thou not be ashamed for all thy doings, wherein thou hast transgressed against me: for then I will take away out of the midst of thee them that rejoice in thy pride, and thou shalt no more be haughty because of my holy mountain.
I will also leave in the midst of thee an afflicted and poor people, and they shall trust in the name of the LORD.

Luther, let some other demon use the computer. You can't hack it any longer.

Genius.

Attached: 16454ca62d872681bbc5407dfa25e964.png (1280x720, 707.72K)

First things first it’s Armstrongite, as in binitarian (only God the Father and God the Son are persons, the Holy Spirit is just their shared “force”) and Judaizing (Old Testament law being followed, they don’t believe in the spirit as anything more then “the breath of life” and thus you don’t go to heaven when you die). They’re also gnostic in their belief that God will include all true believers as persons of the Godhead at some point and that during the millennium some people who died that were not Christians will be resurrected and given a second chance to convert to their particular brand of Christianity. Basically a mish mash between Mormonism, Jehovah’s Witnesses and Seventh Day Adventists.

Just read the KJV or please don’t kill me for this ESV if you want a Bible. Don’t buy into a bunch of gimmicks, since usually the (usually single person) translators will put their own doctrinal biases into the text or footnotes.

Attached: 1715D6AC-34A6-4CD8-91F4-DC629065BC64.jpeg (400x596, 70.02K)

Nice digits

ESV is actually pretty legit.

Thanks for the QRD. What bible would you recommend? My family was/is atheist but i went to a Jesuit university. I consider myself a follower of Christ. I am not catholic but i am drawn to Lutheranism.

The ancient fathers sure quoted them a lot rlly makes u think

kek