Oldest and Best, Really??

[Bible Highlighter]

To all:

The Septuagint (the LXX) has the Apocrypha in it.
The Apocrypha teaches…

#1. Praying to the dead.
#2. Purgatory.
#3. An angel of God lying.
#4. Sorcery (Witchcraft).

How can Jesus quote something that contradicts other Scriptures?
The Apocrypha is also used for the Roman Catholic Bible, and the Roman Catholic Vulgate.

There is only one letter (Letter of Aristeas) that suggests that it the LXX existed before Christ.

The article on Wikipedia even talks about the unreliability of this letter.

Letter of Aristeas - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The early church fathers witnesses to the LXX are not reliable witnesses because many of the so called early church fathers are into Catholic practices.

Check out this article here on the early church fathers being tied to Rome (or Roman Catholic practices).

Church Fathers: A Door to Rome

A Survey of Young Fundamentalists - Article by David Cloud

www.wayoflife.org

In fact, it makes sense why Catholics (supposed early church fathers) would support the LXX because it has the Apocrypha in it. Again, the Apocrypha is favored by Catholics and so the LXX is very pro-Catholic. If you are a Catholic, then of course you are going to defend the LXX to your last dying breath. If you have a “hate on” for the King James Bible, King James, and those who follow it as their authority, this may be the case, as well. In either case, the facts of Scripture are there for anyone to see that would refute the existence of an LXX.

Jesus mentioned jots and tittles. This is Hebrew and not Greek.
Jesus did not even want to have anything to do with the Gentiles because He was first sent to the lost house of the tribe of Israel.
It was not until AFTER the resurrection, that the Gentiles were later included.
Jesus said salvation was of the Jews.
Gentiles were generally considered as dogs.
So the whole idea of a Gentile translation of the Old Testament just does not jive or hold water with what we read in the Bible.

So the LXX is a fraud. It’s only promoted by those who are into Textual Criticism (Which is tied to Catholicism and Liberalism).
Granted, there are many Textual Critics who are Protestant and or evangelical who would not agree that Textual Criticism is tied to Catholicism and Liberalism but it’s true. For the facts of history bear this truth out (Whether they see these facts or not).

Textual Criticism Drawn From the Wells of Infidelity

Textual Criticism Drawn From the Wells of Infidelity

www.wayoflife.org

 

[Jim B]

@Jim B

It seems your are extremely antagonist towards King James, the King James Bible and or the KJB Only position. Who taught you to be that aggressive against such things? Was an article? Was it a scholar? Was it a church? Was it a book? Was it something else?

In either case, I think it is best in this case that I not to try and convince you directly about the KJB being the Word of God for today.
But I will seek to present what I believe is the truth on this topic to others instead. But I am not here to convince you. That’s not my job. Only the Lord can show you the truth on this topic if it is something you may be open to hearing someday by His leading.

Peace and blessings be unto you in the LORD.

I am not "extremely antagonist" [sic] towards King James or the King James Bible. It is a very good but outdated translation that is easily misinterpreted. IMHO many translations are better then the KJV.

The KJV only position smacks of religious intolerance, something I oppose.

Who/what taught me to be that aggressive against such things? Nobody and nothing. Who/what taught you to be that aggressive against those who don't worship a single translation? I will seek to present what I believe is the truth on this topic to anyone who is interested.. Only the Lord can show you the truth on this topic if it is something you may be open to hearing someday by His leading.

I cannot ever fathom why anyone thinks that a 412-year old translation, written in an archaic form of English that is difficult to understand when compared to modern English -- the language we all (including you) use to read, write, and speak every day -- is to be preferred to all others. If I had to hazard a guess or two...

The King James translation was the English Bible for most people for many years, so any version that differs from it must be (in their minds) corrupt. They cannot accept that the KJV wasn't dictated by God Himself, but was created by a group of scholars based on a) earlier translations and b) the source material available -- the way that almost every translation is created (the exception being the few translations that have been created by a single person).

Secondly, the King James Bible that people read today is not the same the King James Bible as the original. There have been numerous meaningful changes, i.e., not counting things like spelling changes, made since 1611. So, which one is the actual "God-breathed" version?

We are fortunate to have so much scholarly research done to create the excellent Bibles that we have today. We are doubly fortunate to have Bibles created in our own native language. (Remember, the King James Bible was created using the English that was in common use more than 400 years ago.)

I cannot remember the many, many times that someone has read from the KJV in church, followed by an on-the-fly retranslation such as "now what this means is...". Of course, that has no validity, since the person is rarely qualified and, more importantly, why is the retranslation necessary?

Another point is that Jesus was a rural tradesman who spoke Aramaic, a Northwest Semitic language that originated among the Arameans in the ancient region of Syria, and was the common dialect of the people. Can you seriously imagine Jesus saying "Blessed are ye, when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you from their company, and shall reproach you, and cast out your name as evil, for the Son of man's sake. Rejoice ye in that day, and leap for for, behold, your reward is great in heaven: for in the like manner did their fathers unto the prophets." Anyone present at the time would have wondered why a rural carpenter would use such arcane, stilted language! It is far more probable that He said something like "What blessings await you when people hate you and exclude you and mock you and curse you as evil because you follow the Son of Man. When that happens, be happy! Yes, leap for joy! For a great reward awaits you in heaven. And remember, their ancestors treated the ancient prophets that same way." (NLT) or perhaps more literally (but probably not the way He spoke) “Blessed are you when people hate you and when they exclude you, revile you, and defame you on account of the Son of Man. Rejoice on that day and leap for joy, for surely your reward is great in heaven, for that is how their ancestors treated the prophets." NRSVue

If people want to use the KJV, fine -- no problem if that's what they prefer. But to claim that a) it is the word of God, b) that other translations are not the word of God, or more bizarrely, that c) Westcott and Hort were influenced by satan or d) that modern translators are not as intelligent or gifted as their 1611 counterparts, or e) that differences in certain wording, e.g., Romans 8:1, are errors, etc. are all clearly false.

So, that's my take on the King James translation. If you or anyone wants to use it as your preferred translation, fine. Go ahead. But stop the sanctimonious nonsense of claiming that it is the only valid English translation. It isn't!

 

[Veronakxm]

Есть кто из модераторов?
Не могу написать в топик.
С уважением.

 

[Jim B]

To all:

The Septuagint (the LXX) has the Apocrypha in it.
The Apocrypha teaches…

#1. Praying to the dead.
#2. Purgatory.
#3. An angel of God lying.
#4. Sorcery (Witchcraft).

How can Jesus quote something that contradicts other Scriptures?
The Apocrypha is also used for the Roman Catholic Bible, and the Roman Catholic Vulgate.

There is only one letter (Letter of Aristeas) that suggests that it the LXX existed before Christ.

The article on Wikipedia even talks about the unreliability of this letter.

Letter of Aristeas - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The early church fathers witnesses to the LXX are not reliable witnesses because many of the so called early church fathers are into Catholic practices.

Check out this article here on the early church fathers being tied to Rome (or Roman Catholic practices).

Church Fathers: A Door to Rome

A Survey of Young Fundamentalists - Article by David Cloud

www.wayoflife.org

In fact, it makes sense why Catholics (supposed early church fathers) would support the LXX because it has the Apocrypha in it. Again, the Apocrypha is favored by Catholics and so the LXX is very pro-Catholic. If you are a Catholic, then of course you are going to defend the LXX to your last dying breath. If you have a “hate on” for the King James Bible, King James, and those who follow it as their authority, this may be the case, as well. In either case, the facts of Scripture are there for anyone to see that would refute the existence of an LXX.

Jesus mentioned jots and tittles. This is Hebrew and not Greek.
Jesus did not even want to have anything to do with the Gentiles because He was first sent to the lost house of the tribe of Israel.
It was not until AFTER the resurrection, that the Gentiles were later included.
Jesus said salvation was of the Jews.
Gentiles were generally considered as dogs.
So the whole idea of a Gentile translation of the Old Testament just does not jive or hold water with what we read in the Bible.

So the LXX is a fraud. It’s only promoted by those who are into Textual Criticism (Which is tied to Catholicism and Liberalism).
Granted, there are many Textual Critics who are Protestant and or evangelical who would not agree that Textual Criticism is tied to Catholicism and Liberalism but it’s true. For the facts of history bear this truth out (Whether they see these facts or not).

Textual Criticism Drawn From the Wells of Infidelity

Textual Criticism Drawn From the Wells of Infidelity

www.wayoflife.org

You must be right -- NOT -- since the Bible, including the King James translation, uses quotes from the Septuagint in the New Testament.

The Septuagint is quoted in the New Testament In about 90 instances, The Septuagint is quoted literally. In around 80 further instances the quote is altered in some way. For example, at Mark 7:6-8,

6 He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.

7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

8 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.

(in your preferred KJV)

But Isaiah 29:13 says "Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men

Did Jesus not know the Hebrew Bible, or was He quoting from the Septuagint??

If you look at Luke 4:18, Jesus said (quoting Isaiah 61:1 and 58:6) "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,"

But in the Hebrew Bible it says "The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound" and "to set at liberty those that are oppressed (or bruised). Hebrew – to let the oppressed go free."

How about John 10:22? "And it was at Jerusalem the feast of the dedication, and it was winter." But... there is no feast of dedication in the Hebrew Bible; it didn't exist! But it is mentioned in the Septuagint (which you claim doesn't exist!)

or John 12:40, "lest they should see with eyes…turn for me to heal them." But the Hebrew Bible says – "shut their eyes…and be healed." Isaiah 6:10

Again, did Jesus not know the Hebrew Bible, or was He quoting from the Septuagint?? The answer here and numerous other places is obvious!!! Jesus Christ, Lord and Savior, quoted numerous places from the Septuagint, not the Hebrew Bible!!!

There are many more examples in the NT of quotes by Jesus from the Septuagint -- which you claim doesn't exist!!!

Clearly, you are totally wrong.

I rest my case.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

To all:

If there was no perfect Bible, I would most likely not be a believer in Jesus Christ today.
For when I ran into what appeared to be an error in the KJB (Which was pointed out by Textual Critics) early on in my faith, it almost destroyed my faith. This supposed contradiction made me believe for a fraction of a second that God’s Word was not true or trustworthy. But I knew I was changed by the LORD and so I knew His Word was true. I talked with God and said I did not have an answer for what appeared to be a contradiction in His Word, but that I knew that He would reveal the answer to me in His timing (if it was His will). Many years later, I did get an answer to that supposed contradiction in the KJB (See #1 here in this write up). It was not a contradiction or error as the Textual Critics said it was. So supposed errors or contradictions only exist in the mind of the person who is looking to see them. I believe God placed such challenges in His Word to test our faith in His Word. I mean, stop and think about when Abraham was given the word to sacrifice his son Isaac. Think if you were in Abraham’s place. Would you try and maybe rationalized God’s word away in that moment and say that God would never have you do something like that?

Also, if God cannot give us His words perfectly, then how can I determine what is true and or false in His Word. I would then become the authority and not God (by His Holy Word).

Some will say that believing the KJB as being the perfect Word of God is about religious intolerance:

I disagree. As I said before, I am not willing to divide on the KJB issue. As I previous stated, I have a Christian brother who is not of the KJV Only position or Core KJB viewpoint and yet we are still good Christian friends. There are always going to be those who are extremists on certain things involving God’s Word (that ignores loving one another). So yes, you will run into KJV Only Christians who will say it is a salvation issue, or who do not want to fellowship with other Non-KJV Only believers, and who will say that Modern Translations are so bad that they cannot even save anyone. This to me is wrong of course. But there are some things in the Christian faith we do divide over, though. Jesus said, “Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.” (Matthew 10:34).

Some have a problem that it took so long for God’s perfect Word to be available to mankind. Others also have a problem as to which KJB edition is the actual words of God (Seeing not all KJB editions say the same thing).

To answer these claims: We have to first recognize that there is a symbiotic relationship between Jesus (the Living Word), and the Communicated Word (like Scripture).

Check out this thread here for 41 verses on this beautiful truth.

The Living Word & the Communicated Word.

The Symbiotic Relationship Between The Living Word, & the Communicated Word: Christ is good (John 10:11, John 10:14), and the word is good (1 Kings 2:42). Christ is the truth (John 14:6), and the word is the truth (John 17:17). Christ is called Faithful and True (Revelation 19:11), and...

www.christianforums.com

Anyways, I believe the KJB Cambridge Edition (circa 1900) is the final purified settled version of the King James Bible.

http://www.bibleprotector.com/LUL04.pdf

https://www.bibleprotector.com/GUIDE_TO_PCE.pdf

It took 2,000 years for the Word to be made flesh on Earth. So then why could it not take a long time for the perfect Word of God (i.e. A perfect Bible) to arrive?

Jesus was perfected by his obedience.

Hebrews 5:8-9
8 ”Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
9 And being made perfect,…”

I believe the KJB was perfected over time. The Apocrypha needed to be removed, among the updating of a standardization in spelling and the printing process.

William Tyndale was martyred (killed) by the Catholic Church for translating a good portion of the Textus Receptus (TR) into English.
The TR was one major source (not the only one) used in the translating of the King James Bible.
The translating of the King James Bible was almost stopped by Catholics with a super bomb.
The King James Bible was the first English Bible to have a lasting wide spread influence upon the speaking world and went out to the common man. Many of the churches over the years had regarded the KJB as the pure words of God even from the 1600’s to the 1900’s and to this very day.

You check that out the statement of faiths by churches over the years who professed that the KJB is inerrant and or perfect here:

Build a Free Website | VistaPrint

Design and create a professional website with the Wix website builder. Choose from customizable templates and design, then select the features that your business needs.

brandplucked.webs.com

So the KJB has a unique history stained in the blood of the saints and came under Catholic opposition.

Biblical numerics confirms the KJB as being divine in origin, as well.

Note: Biblical numerics is not numerology whereby you seek to live your life by numbers. In my view: The main purpose of Biblical numerics to primarily glorify how God’s Word as being divine in origin.

27 Miracles in the KJV - By Chance... or by God? - Truth is Christ

Contents The Volume of the Book The First and Last Verses Holy Jerusalem First Mentions of LORD The House of Jeshua The 777 Godhead Mentions of Jesus + Christ The

truthischrist.com

+.............Luke 4:4
+........Matthew 4:4
+ Deuteronomy 8:3
________________
= ..................16:11

1 column (green) added up together in a straight line down = 16.

One column (red) added up together in a straight line down = 11.

This is a total of 16:11 or 1611.

The year 1611 (Which is a major change in human history) with the bringing in of the King James Bible.

Luke 4:4 says,
"And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God."

Matthew 4:4 says,
"But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God."

Deuteronomy 8:3 says,
"And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live."


Side Note:

Also, if you are attempting to attack my faith in a perfect Bible, please know that it could destroy my faith entirely in the Bible altogether as being trustworthy. Most really don’t seem to care about this and they will just keep pushing the recent agenda of Textual Criticism that makes men to doubt God’s Word.

 

[RLT63]

To all:

If there was no perfect Bible, I would most likely not be a believer in Jesus Christ today.
For when I ran into what appeared to be an error in the KJB (Which was pointed out by Textual Critics) early on in my faith, it almost destroyed my faith. This supposed contradiction made me believe for a fraction of a second that God’s Word was not true or trustworthy. But I knew I was changed by the LORD and so I knew His Word was true. I talked with God and said I did not have an answer for what appeared to be a contradiction in His Word, but that I knew that He would reveal the answer to me in His timing (if it was His will). Many years later, I did get an answer to that supposed contradiction in the KJB. It was not a contradiction or error as the Textual Critics said it was. So supposed errors or contradictions only exist in the mind of the person who is looking to see them. I believe God placed such challenges in His Word to test our faith in His Word. I mean, stop and think about when Abraham was given the word to sacrifice his son Isaac. Think if you were in Abraham’s place. Would you try and maybe rationalized God’s word away in that moment and say that God would never have you do something like that?

Also, if God cannot give us His words perfectly, then how can I determine what is true and or false in His Word. I would then become the authority and not God (by His Holy Word).

Some will say that believing the KJB as being the perfect Word of God is about religious intolerance:

I disagree. As I said before, I am not willing to divide on the KJB issue. As I previous stated, I have a Christian brother who is not of the KJV Only position or Core KJB viewpoint and yet we are still good Christian friends. There are always going to be those who are extremists on certain things involving God’s Word (that ignores loving one another). So yes, you will run into KJV Only Christians who will say it is a salvation issue, or who do not want to fellowship with other Non-KJV Only believers, and who will say that Modern Translations are so bad that they cannot even save anyone. This to me is wrong of course. But there are some things in the Christian faith we do divide over, though. Jesus said, “Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.” (Matthew 10:34).

Some have a problem that it took so long for God’s perfect Word to be available to mankind. Others also have a problem as to which KJB edition is the actual words of God (Seeing not all KJB editions say the same thing).

There is no doubt there is a symbiotic relationship between Jesus (the Living Word), and the Communicated Word (like Scripture).

Check out this thread here for 41 verses on this beautiful truth.

The Living Word & the Communicated Word.

The Symbiotic Relationship Between The Living Word, & the Communicated Word: Christ is good (John 10:11, John 10:14), and the word is good (1 Kings 2:42). Christ is the truth (John 14:6), and the word is the truth (John 17:17). Christ is called Faithful and True (Revelation 19:11), and...

www.christianforums.com

Anyways, I believe the KJB Cambridge Edition (circa 1900) is the final purified settled version of the King James Bible.

http://www.bibleprotector.com/LUL04.pdf

https://www.bibleprotector.com/GUIDE_TO_PCE.pdf

It took 2,000 years for the Word to be made flesh on Earth. So then why could it not take a long time for the perfect Word of God (i.e. A perfect Bible) to arrive?

Jesus was perfected by his obedience.

Hebrews 5:8-9
8 ”Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
9 And being made perfect,…”

I believe the KJB was perfected over time. The Apocrypha needed to be removed, among the updating of a standardization in spelling and the printing process.

William Tyndale was martyred (killed) by the Catholic Church for translating a good portion of the Textus Receptus (TR) into English.
The TR was one major source (not the only one) used in the translating of the King James Bible.
The translating of the King James Bible was almost stopped by Catholics with a super bomb.
The King James Bible was the first English Bible to have a lasting wide spread influence upon the speaking world and went out to the common man. Many of the churches over the years had regarded the KJB as the pure words of God even from the 1600’s to the 1900’s and to this very day.

You check that out the statement of faiths by churches over the years who professed that the KJB is inerrant and or perfect here:

Build a Free Website | VistaPrint

Design and create a professional website with the Wix website builder. Choose from customizable templates and design, then select the features that your business needs.

brandplucked.webs.com

So the KJB has a unique history stained in the blood of the saints and came under Catholic opposition.

Biblical numerics confirms the KJB as being divine in origin, as well.

Note: Biblical numerics is not numerology whereby you seek to live your life by numbers. In my view: The main purpose of Biblical numerics to primarily glorify how God’s Word as being divine in origin.

27 Miracles in the KJV - By Chance... or by God? - Truth is Christ

Contents The Volume of the Book The First and Last Verses Holy Jerusalem First Mentions of LORD The House of Jeshua The 777 Godhead Mentions of Jesus + Christ The

truthischrist.com

+.............Luke 4:4
+........Matthew 4:4
+ Deuteronomy 8:3
________________
= ..................16:11

1 column (green) added up together in a straight line down = 16.

One column (red) added up together in a straight line down = 11.

This is a total of 16:11 or 1611.

The year 1611 (Which is a major change in human history) with the bringing in of the King James Bible.

Luke 4:4 says,
"And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God."

Matthew 4:4 says,
"But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God."

Deuteronomy 8:3 says,
"And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live."

There are no contradictions?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

There are no contradictions?

While I will not set out to answer new supposed contradictions in the KJB because that is not my calling at this time, there are plenty of apologetic resources out their explaining supposed KJB contradictions.

This is one thread write up I have provided (that kept getting interrupted) that answers a few of them.

https://www.christianforums.com/threads/a-biblical-defense-against-supposed-contradictions-in-the-kjv.8035969/

Are they all perfect explanations? Only the LORD truly knows. But the point here is contradictions exist in the mind of the person. Atheists see contradictions in the Bible where there are none, either. But again, I am not looking to be your answer man involving supposed KJB contradictions. Only God can reveal the truth to you on this topic. My explanations on new supposed contradictions is not really going to convince you or others if their mind is closed to the truth.

Anyways, do you know what an agnostic is?

According to one dictionary, an agnostic is:

“A person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God.”​

Many Christians today do not know if there is any existing perfect Bible.
So they are a bible agnostic. I know, it does not sound pretty but it is the truth.
In their mind, there is no Bible on the face of the planet that 100% accurately reflects what God said.
So then… YOU or the scholar has to become the authority to PICK and CHOOSE what God really said, and has not said.
Therein lies the problem.
I just believe God’s Word as it is written.
The Bible is my authority and not my own thinking trying to figure out what God really said (Between looking at one translation or another, or looking at a different manuscript or looking at a different array of definitions for one word in a dead language I really don’t know, etc).
Therein lies the difference between us.

God is not the author of confusion giving me mixed messages on what His Word says at times.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

To all:

It’s like a house contract. If you ever bought a home, you would know it is something you don’t want to be inaccurate.
Imagine if your house contract was based upon other contracts out there that could change your agreement (like saying later paying a super crazy high interest rate). Would you want to buy a house if you knew that your contract was like that? Then why do it with something more valuable than a house (Which is a contract involving your very soul)?

 

[Jim B]

To all:

If there was no perfect Bible, I would most likely not be a believer in Jesus Christ today.
For when I ran into what appeared to be an error in the KJB (Which was pointed out by Textual Critics) early on in my faith, it almost destroyed my faith. This supposed contradiction made me believe for a fraction of a second that God’s Word was not true or trustworthy. But I knew I was changed by the LORD and so I knew His Word was true. I talked with God and said I did not have an answer for what appeared to be a contradiction in His Word, but that I knew that He would reveal the answer to me in His timing (if it was His will). Many years later, I did get an answer to that supposed contradiction in the KJB (See #1 here in this write up). It was not a contradiction or error as the Textual Critics said it was. So supposed errors or contradictions only exist in the mind of the person who is looking to see them. I believe God placed such challenges in His Word to test our faith in His Word. I mean, stop and think about when Abraham was given the word to sacrifice his son Isaac. Think if you were in Abraham’s place. Would you try and maybe rationalized God’s word away in that moment and say that God would never have you do something like that?

Also, if God cannot give us His words perfectly, then how can I determine what is true and or false in His Word. I would then become the authority and not God (by His Holy Word).

Some will say that believing the KJB as being the perfect Word of God is about religious intolerance:

I disagree. As I said before, I am not willing to divide on the KJB issue. As I previous stated, I have a Christian brother who is not of the KJV Only position or Core KJB viewpoint and yet we are still good Christian friends. There are always going to be those who are extremists on certain things involving God’s Word (that ignores loving one another). So yes, you will run into KJV Only Christians who will say it is a salvation issue, or who do not want to fellowship with other Non-KJV Only believers, and who will say that Modern Translations are so bad that they cannot even save anyone. This to me is wrong of course. But there are some things in the Christian faith we do divide over, though. Jesus said, “Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.” (Matthew 10:34).

Some have a problem that it took so long for God’s perfect Word to be available to mankind. Others also have a problem as to which KJB edition is the actual words of God (Seeing not all KJB editions say the same thing).

To answer these claims: We have to first recognize that there is a symbiotic relationship between Jesus (the Living Word), and the Communicated Word (like Scripture).

Check out this thread here for 41 verses on this beautiful truth.

The Living Word & the Communicated Word.

The Symbiotic Relationship Between The Living Word, & the Communicated Word: Christ is good (John 10:11, John 10:14), and the word is good (1 Kings 2:42). Christ is the truth (John 14:6), and the word is the truth (John 17:17). Christ is called Faithful and True (Revelation 19:11), and...

www.christianforums.com

Anyways, I believe the KJB Cambridge Edition (circa 1900) is the final purified settled version of the King James Bible.

http://www.bibleprotector.com/LUL04.pdf

https://www.bibleprotector.com/GUIDE_TO_PCE.pdf

It took 2,000 years for the Word to be made flesh on Earth. So then why could it not take a long time for the perfect Word of God (i.e. A perfect Bible) to arrive?

Jesus was perfected by his obedience.

Hebrews 5:8-9
8 ”Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
9 And being made perfect,…”

I believe the KJB was perfected over time. The Apocrypha needed to be removed, among the updating of a standardization in spelling and the printing process.

William Tyndale was martyred (killed) by the Catholic Church for translating a good portion of the Textus Receptus (TR) into English.
The TR was one major source (not the only one) used in the translating of the King James Bible.
The translating of the King James Bible was almost stopped by Catholics with a super bomb.
The King James Bible was the first English Bible to have a lasting wide spread influence upon the speaking world and went out to the common man. Many of the churches over the years had regarded the KJB as the pure words of God even from the 1600’s to the 1900’s and to this very day.

You check that out the statement of faiths by churches over the years who professed that the KJB is inerrant and or perfect here:

Build a Free Website | VistaPrint

Design and create a professional website with the Wix website builder. Choose from customizable templates and design, then select the features that your business needs.

brandplucked.webs.com

So the KJB has a unique history stained in the blood of the saints and came under Catholic opposition.

Biblical numerics confirms the KJB as being divine in origin, as well.

Note: Biblical numerics is not numerology whereby you seek to live your life by numbers. In my view: The main purpose of Biblical numerics to primarily glorify how God’s Word as being divine in origin.

27 Miracles in the KJV - By Chance... or by God? - Truth is Christ

Contents The Volume of the Book The First and Last Verses Holy Jerusalem First Mentions of LORD The House of Jeshua The 777 Godhead Mentions of Jesus + Christ The

truthischrist.com

+.............Luke 4:4
+........Matthew 4:4
+ Deuteronomy 8:3
________________
= ..................16:11

1 column (green) added up together in a straight line down = 16.

One column (red) added up together in a straight line down = 11.

This is a total of 16:11 or 1611.

The year 1611 (Which is a major change in human history) with the bringing in of the King James Bible.

Luke 4:4 says,
"And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God."

Matthew 4:4 says,
"But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God."

Deuteronomy 8:3 says,
"And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live."


Side Note:

Also, if you are attempting to attack my faith in a perfect Bible, please know that it could destroy my faith entirely in the Bible altogether as being trustworthy. Most really don’t seem to care about this and they will just keep pushing the recent agenda of Textual Criticism that makes men to doubt God’s Word.

Oh, please!

I have read you post and, among many disagreements, these struck me...

+.............Luke 4:4
+........Matthew 4:4
+ Deuteronomy 8:3
________________
= ..................16:11

This is beyond silly. Chapters and verses are not part of the Bible. Stephen Langton, in the 12th century, added what we use today as the chapter divisions. He did this into the Latin Vulgate. The tradition is that these divisions were later transferred to the Hebrew Bible. From manuscripts dating back to the fourth century, however, some form of chapter divisions were used. In 1551, Robert Estienne (a.k.a. Stephanus) added verse divisions to his fourth edition of the Greek New Testament, while en route between Paris and Lyons, France. The first translation to employ his versification was the Geneva translation of 1557 (whole Bible, 1560). (from bible.org) There is no relation between these separate chapter and verse numbers and the year 1611. It makes as much sense as saying that because there were three crosses then there must be three valid divisions of the Bible: the Old Testament, the New Testament, and the Apochrypha.

Why do Luke 4:4 and Mathew 4:4 have Jesus saying different things, neither of which are quoting exactly from Deuteronomy 8:3? Did Jesus not know what the Bible said? Was Luke misquoting? Was Matthew misquoting? BTW, Luke 4:4 has 22 words, Matthew 4:4 has 26 words, and Deuteronomy 8:3 has 53 words, totaling 101.
Is 101 a special number? Yes! 101 is the 26th prime number and there are 26 letters in the English alphabet!

Side note: You wrote "if you are attempting to attack my faith in a perfect Bible, please know that it could destroy my faith entirely in the Bible altogether as being trustworthy." Why are you trying to destroy the faith of others in their preferred translation??? You really don’t seem to care about this and you will just keep pushing your personal agenda to make other people to doubt that their copies of God’s Word are valid.

P.S. Clearly you don't understand what textual criticism is. The short definition is "the process of attempting to ascertain the original wording of a text" . You may be interested to know that the people who created the KJV extensively used textual criticism to arrive at their interpretation of the source materials and other Bible translations.

 

[RLT63]

While I will not set out to answer new supposed contradictions in the KJB because that is not my calling at this time, there are plenty of apologetic resources out their explaining supposed KJB contradictions.

This is one thread write up I have provided (that kept getting interrupted) that answers a few of them.

https://www.christianforums.com/threads/a-biblical-defense-against-supposed-contradictions-in-the-kjv.8035969/

Are they all perfect explanations? Only the LORD truly knows. But the point here is contradictions exist in the mind of the person. Atheists see contradictions in the Bible where there are none, either. But again, I am not looking to be your answer man involving supposed KJB contradictions. Only God can reveal the truth to you on this topic. My explanations on new supposed contradictions is not really going to convince you or others if their mind is closed to the truth.

Anyways, do you know what an agnostic is?

According to one dictionary, an agnostic is:

“A person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God or of anything beyond material phenomena; a person who claims neither faith nor disbelief in God.”​

Many Christians today do not know if there is any existing perfect Bible.
So they are a bible agnostic. I know, it does not sound pretty but it is the truth.
In their mind, there is no Bible on the face of the planet that 100% accurately reflects what God said.
So then… YOU or the scholar has to become the authority to PICK and CHOOSE what God really said, and has not said.
Therein lies the problem.
I just believe God’s Word as it is written.
The Bible is my authority and not my own thinking trying to figure out what God really said (Between looking at one translation or another, or looking at a different manuscript or looking at a different array of definitions for one word in a dead language I really don’t know, etc).
Therein lies the difference between us.

God is not the author of confusion giving me mixed messages on what His Word says at times.

I’m not trying to refute the KJV. There are issues like does God change his mind that on the surface appear to be contradictions

 

[Bible Highlighter]

To all:

Some Textual Critic Christians will basically say something along the lines that the KJV Only Christian (or the believer who holds to the KJB as perfect) is wrong for saying that Westcott and Hort were in error or misled spiritually.

While I do not agree with Chuck Missler's view of sin and salvation, there are certain things I do agree with him on.
His study involving Westcott and Hort is one of them.

Here are a few screen captures from one of Chuck's videos on this topic that I agree with:

Here is the video if you are interested in checking it out.

(Screen captures from Chuck's videos on Westcott and Hort will be continued in my next post):

 

[Bible Highlighter]

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Looking at Westcott's Commentary on the Gospel of John:

We see these false theologies being promoted by him.

Westcott says of Jesus Christ,

Wescott says from the gospel of John,

 

[Bible Highlighter]

And so you want me to trust Westcott and Hort who popularized the Modern Textual Criticism movement we have today? Westcott and Hort's work was still used as a significant textual basis (not entirely) for the Nestle and Aland NT Greek text.

Yeah, sorry. You can have them if you like. I will stick with the King James Bible (of which they hated).


Side Note:

All Modern bibles today are based on the New Testament Greek text known as the Nestle and Aland (Which was supervised by the Vatican).

You can read up more on this here.

Novum Testamentum Graece - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

You can see the stats here on how the Westcott and Hort NT Greek text agrees greatly with the Nestle and Aland New Testament Greek text.

Statistical comparison of editions of the Greek New Testament

 

[Bible Highlighter]

To all:

The fact of the matter is that the Critical Text of Westcott-Hort differs from the TR (Textus Receptus), mostly by deletions, in 9,970 words out of 140,521, giving a total of 7% difference. In the 480-page edition of the Trinitarian Bible Society Textus Receptus this would amount to almost 34 pages, the equivalent of the final two books of the New Testament, Jude and Revelation” (Thomas Strouse, Review of “From the Mind of God to the Mind of Man,” November 2000).

Jack Moorman made an extensive study of the differences between the modern critical text and the Received Text and published his conclusions in Early Manuscripts and the Authorized Version--A Closer Look. He found that there are 2,886 words omitted in the Nestle/Aland text. THIS IS EQUIVALENT TO OMITTING THE ENTIRE BOOKS OF 1 AND 2 PETER FROM THE NEW TESTAMENT. Moorman also examines 356 doctrinal passages that are significantly affected by these changes.

THERE ARE 230 ENTIRE OR PARTIAL VERSES (45 ENTIRE AN 185 PARTIAL) OMITTED OR QUESTIONED IN THE UNITED BIBLE SOCIETIES GREEK NEW TESTAMENT (by the count of Everett Fowler, Evaluating Versions of the New Testament, available from Bible for Today, Collingswood, NJ). These omissions alone account 19 for far more significant differences than admitted by Schaff. In the New International Version, for example, there are 17 verses omitted outright--Mt. 17:21; 18:11; 23:14; Mk. 7:16; 9:44; 9:46; 11:26; 15:28; Luke 17:36; 23:17; Jn. 5:4; Acts 8:37; 15:34; 24:7; 28:29; Rom. 16:24; and 1 Jn. 5:7. Further, Mark 16:9-20 is separated from the rest of the chapter with a note that says, “The two most reliable early manuscripts do not have Mk. 16:9-20,” and John 7:53--8:11 is separated from the rest of the text with this footnote: “The earliest and most reliable manuscripts do not have Jn. 7:53--8:11.” Hence, another 24 verses are effectively removed from the Bible. The NIV questions four other verses with footnotes- Matthew 12:47; 21:44; Luke 22:43; 22:44. Therefore, 45 entire verses are either omitted or questioned.

The actual facts above on the differences between the texts is commonly misstated or grossly distorted by Textual Critics and or Original Onlyist Christians.

A Textual Critic said: “Only about 400 affect the sense; and of these. 400 only about 50 are of real significance for one reason or another, and NOT ONE OF THESE 50 AFFECT AN ARTICLE OF FAITH or a precept of duty which is not abundantly sustained by other and undoubted passages, or by the whole tenor of Scripture teaching” (Philip Schaff, Companion to the Greek Testament and English Version).

An Original Onlyist Christian said: “[The variants between the modern texts and the Received Text amount to] less than one page of my entire Testament” [and the believer should have] “no concern” (From the Mind of God to the Mind of Man, 1999, pp. 97, 183).


Source used:
What about the differences in our Bibles?

 

[Jim B]

And so you want me to trust Westcott and Hort who popularized the Modern Textual Criticism movement we have today? Westcott and Hort's work was still used as a significant textual basis (not entirely) for the Nestle and Aland NT Greek text.

Yeah, sorry. You can have them if you like. I will stick with the King James Bible (of which they hated).

Note:

All Modern bibles today are based on the New Testament Greek text known as the Nestle and Aland (Which was supervised by the Vatican).

You can read up more on this here.

Novum Testamentum Graece - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Why do you care so much about Westcott and Hort??? No modern translation group that I know of uses Westcott and Hort; they do their own research and textual criticism. Try reading the introductions to the modern Bibles that you object to and see if you can find that they depended on Westcott and Hort. Personally, I have never found that to be the case, but I would be happy to be proven wrong if you can show me evidence to the contrary.

One of my favorite translations is the NRSVue (New Revised Standard Version updated edition), published in 2022. Here is part of their introduction...

"The New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition reflects discoveries of ancient texts and new insights made in the 30 years since the NRSV was last revised. The newly updated translation offers clearer, more direct, and inclusive language, and increased cultural sensitivity absent of the unintended biases of prior versions. ... The NRSV Updated Edition is the result of rigorous biblical scholarship to give readers access to the most inclusive, informed, and reliable text available. As new manuscripts came to light following the 1989 introduction of the NRSV, an improvement was undertaken to ensure the accuracy, clarity, and modernity of the updated translation ... The NRSV Updated Edition sets out to be the most literal translation of the Bible available to date with its clear use of unambiguous and unbiased language. The new version gives English Bible readers access to the most meticulously researched, rigorously reviewed, and faithfully accurate translation on the market. It is also the most ecumenical Bible with acceptance by Christian churches of Protestant, Anglican, Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, African American, and Evangelical traditions ... As the most widely authorized Bible for use as an ecumenical and interfaith resource, The NRSV Updated Edition is considered the most clear and accurate version because it utilizes the most literal forms of translation. Some Bible translators use a word-for-word approach, others rely heavily on the context to convey the meaning of scripture. Following the tradition of Bruce M. Metzger, reviewers and editors for the NRSV Updated Edition were guided by the maxim “as literal as possible, as free as necessary” to present the most accurate as possible renderings of the biblical text. Therefore, it is important for the reader to understand the provenance of his or her preferred Bible version, its translation methodology, use of ancient text discoveries, translation methods and language conventions when selecting a preferred version."

I see no mention of Wescott and Hort here! Do you???

 

[Bible Highlighter]

To all:

Some have a problem that the chapter and verse numbers were added later as a part of God’s divine hand or providence (Which was clearly a later addition to the originals). But say John 3:16 to another Christian and he knows what you are talking about. God surely knew of their importance of our finding something immediately in His Word because of the chapter and verse references (Of which would be more difficult to do if they were not there). Take for example Exodus chapter 33. How do I know that this is the chapter that God showed His back parts to Moses? Because I also know that we have 33 bones in the back of our spine. Coincidence? Well, if that was the only one (then we would not be saying anything on this topic), but the insanely high number of these coincidental occurrences happening over, and over, and over and over and over and over again in the KJB rules this theory out. But of course those who do not believe any perfect Bible exists will resist these kinds of things and scoff at them (in unbelief).

Just look at…

The Amazing Bible Number 46.

As many of you may be aware of: In the realm of medical science, we know that there are 46 chromosomes in the human body.

We know according to Scripture that under the New Covenant, our bodies are the temples of the Holy Spirit.

"Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?" (1 Corinthians 3:16).

1 Corinthians 6:19 also confirms this truth, as well. What is interesting is that 1 Corinthians is the 46th book of the Protestant Bible.

Behold the scene in John 2:


[Jesus said]

“Destroy this temple,
and in three days I will raise it up.”

The Jews
then said,

“It took forty-six years to build this temple,
and will You raise it up in three days?”

But He was speaking of the temple of His body. So when He was raised from the dead, His disciples remembered that He said this; and they believed the Scripture and the word which Jesus had spoken.

(John 2:19-22).

Not sure if you caught it or not, but the Jews said that it took them 46 YEARS to build the temple. The Jews were confused and they thought Jesus was going to tear down the literal temple of worship, but Jesus was referring to His body. The body that has 46 chromosomes within it.

In 1 Kings 7:15-16, we learn that the two large bronze pillars which stood at the entryway of Solomon's temple. The shaft of the columns (structural) measured 18 cubits in height, with a capital (Structural top piece) measuring 5 cubits in height; this gives us a total height of 23 cubits. This parallels the pairs (two) of 23 chromosomes in each nucleus of the cell of our bodies. We see in a DNA molecule what looks like a twisted ladder. Two sides to that ladder, and 23 rungs or chromosomes. (Note: There was a flower or fruit like piece mentioned to be at the top of this; But this was merely the adorning feature of the structure). There is even a spiral staircase mentioned in Solomon's temple, and this reflects the spiral nature of the DNA ladder.

The word “the body” is found 69 (23 x 3) times in the Bible.

(Important Side Note: While I do use BlueLetterBible for quick keyword searches, it does not always give you the final accurate count number; Check out King James Pure Bible Search, which is available as a software (PC/MAC/Linux), a mobile app, and or as an online search).

Anyways, we read in 1 Corinthians 10 the following,
"The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?" (1 Corinthians 10:16).

The word “The bread” occurs 46 times in 46 verses of the Bible.

The phrase “temple of” (think about an empty temple or vessel) is found 46 times in the Bible. The phrase “the temple” is found in 23 books of the Bible.

The phrase “the word of God” occurs 46 times in the Bible.

The Word of God was made flesh.

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." (John 1:1).

"And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth." (John 1:14).

"And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war." (Revelation 19:11).

"And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God." (Revelation 19:13).

In Genesis 2:23-24 Adam speaks exactly 46 words:

“And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.”

“conceived” 46 times in the Bible
“multiply” 46 times in the Bible.
“the flesh” 46 times in the NT
“the seed” found in 46 verses of the OT

“Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?” (Romans 9:21).

“vessel” 46 times in the Bible
“the vessels” 46 chapters of the Bible.

In Luke chapter 2, we see this in verse 46.

"And it came to pass, that after three days they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing them, and asking them questions." (Luke 2:46).

While the text is referring primarily to the physical temple here, the secondary spiritual meaning should not be missed.

"...They found him in the temple, ...." (Luke 2:46).

They found the him [The Living Word of God] in the temple (in His physical body or flesh) (i.e. For the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us - John 1:14).

What is also interesting is that the Bible mentions the words "the doctors" found him [Jesus].

"...the doctors...." (Luke 2:46).

While these were Doctors of what we would call today as: "Doctors of Theology," a secondary metaphorical meaning implies that they were like medical doctors. For a medical doctor's job is to examine the body and to see if everything is working normally and or to treat the sick or injured; And these men were examining the Word made flesh (John 1:14). These men were examining the Word made flesh and his words (Which were also called, "the Word of God.").

Luke who wrote this gospel was a physician, as well. How fitting for the text by which we hold so dear today in our hands and or cherish on our mobile devices (or computer).

What an amazing number we find in our Bible:

The Amazing Bible Number 46.

This number is not a guide to rule our life by like in false numerology, but it is simply a number that speaks to how special God's Word is, and makes us appreciate His Word as being divine and amazing.

I hope that what I said here helps to build up your faith in Jesus Christ, and His word (Which today has taken form as our Holy Bible that we have available to us in so many ways).

Blessings to you all in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.

 

[RLT63]

To all:

The Septuagint (the LXX) has the Apocrypha in it.
The Apocrypha teaches…

#1. Praying to the dead.
#2. Purgatory.
#3. An angel of God lying.
#4. Sorcery (Witchcraft).

How can Jesus quote something that contradicts other Scriptures?
The Apocrypha is also used for the Roman Catholic Bible, and the Roman Catholic Vulgate.

There is only one letter (Letter of Aristeas) that suggests that it the LXX existed before Christ.

The article on Wikipedia even talks about the unreliability of this letter.

Letter of Aristeas - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The early church fathers witnesses to the LXX are not reliable witnesses because many of the so called early church fathers are into Catholic practices.

Check out this article here on the early church fathers being tied to Rome (or Roman Catholic practices).

Church Fathers: A Door to Rome

A Survey of Young Fundamentalists - Article by David Cloud

www.wayoflife.org

In fact, it makes sense why Catholics (supposed early church fathers) would support the LXX because it has the Apocrypha in it. Again, the Apocrypha is favored by Catholics and so the LXX is very pro-Catholic. If you are a Catholic, then of course you are going to defend the LXX to your last dying breath. If you have a “hate on” for the King James Bible, King James, and those who follow it as their authority, this may be the case, as well. In either case, the facts of Scripture are there for anyone to see that would refute the existence of an LXX.

Jesus mentioned jots and tittles. This is Hebrew and not Greek.
Jesus did not even want to have anything to do with the Gentiles because He was first sent to the lost house of the tribe of Israel.
It was not until AFTER the resurrection, that the Gentiles were later included.
Jesus said salvation was of the Jews.
Gentiles were generally considered as dogs.
So the whole idea of a Gentile translation of the Old Testament just does not jive or hold water with what we read in the Bible.

So the LXX is a fraud. It’s only promoted by those who are into Textual Criticism (Which is tied to Catholicism and Liberalism).
Granted, there are many Textual Critics who are Protestant and or evangelical who would not agree that Textual Criticism is tied to Catholicism and Liberalism but it’s true. For the facts of history bear this truth out (Whether they see these facts or not).

Textual Criticism Drawn From the Wells of Infidelity

Textual Criticism Drawn From the Wells of Infidelity

www.wayoflife.org

Why is it okay for you to quote Wikipedia but when I posted a link to Wikipedia you said it was run by an atheist and unreliable?

 

[Jim B]

<snip>

I hope that what I said here helps to build up your faith in Jesus Christ, and His word (Which today has taken form as our Holy Bible that we have available to us in so many ways).

Blessings to you all in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.

At last!!! Thank you for writing "... which today has taken form as our Holy Bible that we have available to us in so many ways)". So, Bible translations other than the KJV are useful. There is light here!!!

 

[RLT63]

Why do you care so much about Westcott and Hort??? No modern translation group that I know of uses Westcott and Hort; they do their own research and textual criticism. Try reading the introductions to the modern Bibles that you object to and see if you can find that they depended on Westcott and Hort. Personally, I have never found that to be the case, but I would be happy to be proven wrong if you can show me evidence to the contrary.

One of my favorite translations is the NRSVue (New Revised Standard Version updated edition), published in 2022. Here is part of their introduction...

"The New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition reflects discoveries of ancient texts and new insights made in the 30 years since the NRSV was last revised. The newly updated translation offers clearer, more direct, and inclusive language, and increased cultural sensitivity absent of the unintended biases of prior versions. ... The NRSV Updated Edition is the result of rigorous biblical scholarship to give readers access to the most inclusive, informed, and reliable text available. As new manuscripts came to light following the 1989 introduction of the NRSV, an improvement was undertaken to ensure the accuracy, clarity, and modernity of the updated translation ... The NRSV Updated Edition sets out to be the most literal translation of the Bible available to date with its clear use of unambiguous and unbiased language. The new version gives English Bible readers access to the most meticulously researched, rigorously reviewed, and faithfully accurate translation on the market. It is also the most ecumenical Bible with acceptance by Christian churches of Protestant, Anglican, Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, African American, and Evangelical traditions ... As the most widely authorized Bible for use as an ecumenical and interfaith resource, The NRSV Updated Edition is considered the most clear and accurate version because it utilizes the most literal forms of translation. Some Bible translators use a word-for-word approach, others rely heavily on the context to convey the meaning of scripture. Following the tradition of Bruce M. Metzger, reviewers and editors for the NRSV Updated Edition were guided by the maxim “as literal as possible, as free as necessary” to present the most accurate as possible renderings of the biblical text. Therefore, it is important for the reader to understand the provenance of his or her preferred Bible version, its translation methodology, use of ancient text discoveries, translation methods and language conventions when selecting a preferred version."

I see no mention of Wescott and Hort here! Do you???

I think the claim is that the Critical Text mostly agrees with Westcott and Hort’s version, not that any of the latest Bibles were translated from their text. N-A in 2018 and W-H in 1881: How Similar?