INTENTIONAL attacks on the Bible in the new versions. Yup, Conspiracy.

Chris Pinto's radio show today is Ian Paisley and The Bible of Antichrist about a Bible that came out in the 70s designed to undermine the Deity of Christ and faith in the Bible. A production of Rome of course. How they intentionally mistranslated parts of the Bible to create contradictions between one part and another, such as between Old Testament passages and the New Testament passages that refer to them.

Pinto says his new film Tares Among the Wheat shows how this attack on the Bible came about slowly over the centuries.

Many of today's Bibles continue the same practice, making many the Bibles of Antichrist.

Chris Pinto's new film "Tares Among the Wheat" is available for pre-sale, out in September

The following is from the ad for Chris Pinto's new film Tares Among the Wheat

An Adullam Films Production
Written and Directed by Christian J. Pinto
Running Time: Approx 2.5 hours
DVD $24.95

- The sequel to "A Lamp in the Dark".

- “Tares Among the Wheat” will likely challenge what most scholars believe about Bible history, and the origins of the current wave of new translations that have flooded churches around the world.

- Enter a mysterious world of ancient manuscripts, assailed by forgeries, fakes, and theological intrigue of the highest order.

DESCRIPTION

In the 19th century, a revolution in biblical scholarship was prompted by the publication of a never-before-seen manuscript called Codex Sinaiticus. The work was allegedly “discovered” by a German scholar named Constantine von Tischendorf, who declared this to be the oldest Bible ever found. Tischendorf said he found the work in a rubbish basket at a Greek Orthodox monastery in Egypt. While many in the academic world did not fully believe his story, they were willing to accept his claims about the antiquity of the codex.

Yet shortly after his discovery was published, a renowned Greek paleographer named Constantine Simonides came forward and declared that the manuscript was no ancient text at all, but had been created by him in 1840. The controversy surrounding these events is, perhaps, the most incredible untold chapter in Bible history. It involves Jesuits, the Pope, a high-minded German, a committee of Anglo Romanists, and a mysterious Greek patriot. It is a story that (while quite true and well documented) a vast majority of modern academics know nothing about. Yet the subject matter dramatically impacts the world of biblical scholarship, even to this present hour. Most of what today’s scholars believe about manuscript evidence is based on the events of this era, and the footnotes in your Bible are the proof of it.

Topics discussed in this documentary:

1) New details about the Counter Reformation and its origins

2) Answers arguments concerning the Waldenses, Albigenses, Paulicans -- and the accusation that they were “Manichean heretics.”

3) History of how the Papacy was established in 606 A.D.

4) Italian missionary explains Rome’s works gospel vs. the gospel of grace

5) The Jesuit plan to seize control of the Bible.

6) The Oxford Movement and its use of “Protestants” as secret agents for Rome.

7) The Jesuit origins of higher criticism as a weapon against the Bible.

8) Rome’s history of creating forged manuscripts and fake relics.

9) The never-before-told history of Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus.

10) Westcott, Hort and the Revision of 1881.

Featured experts: Dr. David Brown, Dr. Henry Hudson, Dr. Ronald Cooke, Dr. Alan O’Reilly, Les Garrett, Roger Oakland, Dr. D.A. Waite, Dr. H.D. Williams.

AND: Chris Pinto’s Radio Show for today is about the new film.

The Roman Connection: Jesuitical plots to destroy faith in the Bible

Another Chris Pinto radio show, this one on the history of the Higher Biblical Criticism. Yes, there IS a Roman connection. The higher criticism was invented by Jesuits, the intention being to destroy the Bible which is the basis of Protestantism. They also had their hands in evolutionism, also helping to undermine faith in the Bible by falsifying the dating of the Bible, by for instance coming up with very old dates for human skulls, dates they pulled out of a hat. He says he's going to cover all this in a lot more detail in his forthcoming film Tares Among the Wheat.

On the radio show he has a clip of Bart Ehrman talking about the dating of manuscripts. This is the Bart Ehrman who fell away from his Christian faith by exposure to Higher Criticism under Bruce Metzger who was far from believing the Bible is the Word of God, and apparently also, naturally, had some kind of connection to Rome.

WE NEED A NEW PROTESTANT REFORMATION. PRAY AGAINST THE ROMAN ANTICHRIST, PRAY THAT WE CHRISTIAN DUPES LEARN THE TRUTH ABOUT THE HISTORY OF THESE THINGS.

The Roman Connection: Kurt Aland

A lady in England who likes this blog and likes doing some research into these things on her own sent me this picture, a heads-up about Kurt Aland, along with some interesting information about Hort's Catholic influences as well. Hope I have time to get to the latter eventually.

Seems to me I'd heard that Kurt Aland has some Catholic connections although I haven't been able to spend much time researching these things lately. That's Aland of the Nestle-Aland Greek Critical Text that underlies so many of today's English Bible versions, and that preserves the execrable Alexandrian texts so favored by Westcott and Hort. His credentials as shown at Wikipedia are pretty strictly Protestant, although I've been learning that Protestant affiliations do not always guarantee a truly Protestant background or mindset, as I'd suggest the picture demonstrates.

Besides the picture, the Wikipedia article suggests a less-than-pure Protestant worldview with this comment:

Among experts Aland proved himself to be an important ecumenist who has left the small range of German Protestantism far behind.

Chris Pinto's latest film on the history of the Bible, Tares Among the Wheat, is due out soon, and is promised to touch on the Catholic connection in the Bible versions issue. Go Chris Pinto! Pray for Chris Pinto!

We need this stuff. Let's pray for a new Protestant Reformation, pray against the Roman Antichrist, pray for more revelation of the truth about all these things.

Hey, Church: check out my Catholicism blog and read some of the stuff I've listed there in the right hand margin. If I can I'll try to come back and put the links here as well.

[Just a little side note: I've got a ton of stuff I'd love to get to for this blog and other blogs, and other projects on top of that, the Lord willing, AND I'm physically in bad shape which is contributing to the lag, having to get medical tests done and hoping for a hip replacement in the near future that might make a huge difference in my "quality of life," again Lord willing. So if anyone is inclined to pray for me PLEASE DO SO. Thank you!]

Encounter with the assertion that all the texts we have are God's word

Is there something wrong with the attitude that ALL the Bibles we have are from God? This is the mainstream idea, and it's presented as a matter of faith in God's preservation of His word. Yes, they'll say there are some "translations" that are to be avoided because they are designed to give a liberal spin on certain concepts and thereby deviate from the true word of God, but we have thousands of Bible texts and can trust that they are God's preserved revelation to us.

What is not recognized in all this is that the Greek texts themselves are not all trustworthy. This ought to be pretty well known by now, but apparently it's overcome by the propaganda that treats the Alexandrian texts as just other valid texts among the collection of texts. The small percentage of differences among the many texts of the Bible is always noted, as if in proof that they're basically all the word of God, but this overlooks that the KIND of differences in some cases has an effect beyond their proportion.

Here's a common scenario: A whole passage familiar from the King James is left out of a Greek text regarded as among the oldest. Its supposed age of course raises doubt about the other manuscripts that contain the passage, that were the basis for the King James. These texts are in the great majority but they are more recent. It is assumed that the older text is more authentic because closer to the autographs or original writings. It is then logically explained that the passage must have been added by a scribe somewhere along the line and copied into the majority manuscripts although it didn't really belong to the originals or autographs. It continues to be included in some of today's Bibles nevertheless simply because it's familiar and traditional although not authentic. So anyone who is aware of this supposed history of the passage has now been infected with doubt about its authenticity, and whether it is admitted or not, with doubt about the authenticity of the word of God itself.

Simply taking the stance that all of the texts are God's word sounds on the surface like an admirable attitude of faith. We simply trust that God has provided us what we need in His word. But this has the effect of obscuring the fact that knowledge about some kinds of differences among the texts leads to undermining that very trust that they are God's word. It amounts to a denial of a real problem and has the effect of facilitating what is being denied, as others do study the differences and learn from them to distrust God's word.*

And anyone who tries to show that the supposedly earlier texts are not authentic but were corrupted in the early years -- as John Burgon does -- is dismissed as a "conspiracy theorist." Well, what if there WAS a conspiracy and its aim was to accomplish exactly what has happened, undermining trust in the word of God? The evidence does in fact point in that direction.

==================================
*Bart Ehrman was a victim of this kind of scholarship, and he's been very vocal in spreading his own destroyed trust in the word of God to the church at large. If there is a conspiracy here -- Jesuits? -- they must be very pleased with their work.

The King James Bible a production of Rome???

Brief note on Chris Pinto radio show today (5/21/12):

He discusses a recent claim in a Catholic publication that Rome supposedly had a hand in the making of the King James Bible. What a laugh, a sardonic laugh I'm afraid. They said it was the product of Catholic priests! Ha!

Yes, many of the Protestant Reformers had been Catholic priests -- who LEFT the Roman Church when they discovered its false teachings which included its denial of the Bible's primary authority.

For centuries the King James Bible was regarded as the pinnacle of the achievements of the Protestant Reformation and the enemy of Rome. Now all of a sudden they want to claim it as their own work.

Pinto on the King James Bible: Rome again, out to kill the Protestant Reformation

Chris Pinto has yet to take a position I object to and rarely fails to teach me something important as well. I know my blogs are becoming something like a Chris Pinto fan club, but that's because I believe what he has to offer Christians is crucially needed -- and on the very subjects some of my different blogs are intended to address.

Here he is on The King James Bible. This radio show was on July 4, 2011, and you may have to look a a page or two ahead of the linked page to find it since the page numbers keep changing as new shows are added. [Later: Must recommend the next radio show as well, on the same page, Rome vs. the Bible].

His defense of the King James is excellent. He calls himself "King James Mostly" which could describe me too, except that he's Textus Receptus Only, which I could also call myself, except that I want a label that indicates that I'm against the English translation of the Revision of 1881 as much as I'm against the corrupted Greek texts they used. So I'm really anti-Westcott and Hort. Nevertheless, in this radio show he makes a fine case for the English of the King James as well. [I gather that the main reason he's "King James Mostly" is that he's against the fanatical King James Only camp, as I also am, accepting that other translations are also the word of God, while believing that the King James is the best translation we have.]

He does believe that the Bibles that have come out since the Revision of 1881 are being pushed by Rome, no surprise since he has uncovered all kinds of influences of the hand of Rome in other areas including political movements, wars, secret societies and all the other religions of the world. Rome's influence on the Bible Revision is something I would never have discovered if it weren't for his work.

I read enough of Westcott and Hort to recognize that they hated the King James Bible with an irrational hatred, which Pinto of course shows to be the attitude of Rome as well, since the King James represents the Protestant Reformation which is her greatest enemy. I had also noted some remarks by Westcott and Hort that showed them to be favorable to Rome, but nothing like a smoking gun that would demonstrate with any certainty that their destructive 1881 Revision had the same intention as Rome's behind it, quite simply to destroy the word of God. Pinto makes this a far more likely possibility than I could have guessed.

You also have to see his film A Lamp in the Dark which you can find at Noise of Thunder dot com, and I'm looking forward to his next film on the Bible, Tares Among the Wheat which I understand will be out in a few weeks.

As usual, I believe Pinto's work should be known by all Christians.