Thread: Two Major Reasons For the Falling Away of II Thessalonians 2: 3-4
Admin
Two Major Reasons For the Falling Away of II Thessalonians 2: 3-4
Posted : 18 Sep, 2012 05:26 PM
Two Major Reasons For the Falling Away of II Thessalonians 2: 3-4
Two influences that originated in England during the 19th century, and gained great momentum in the U.S. have contributed a great deal to the falling away of II Thessalonians 2: 3-4 and to church Christians being deceived by false prophets as shown in Matthew 24: 11, I Timothy 4: 1-2, II Timothy 4: 3-4, and II Peter 2: 1-3.
These two influences were dispensationalism and the Westcott-Hort Greek text of 1881 which they created to unseat the Textus Receptus and the King James Version. Both influences gradually weakened faith.
As Luke 13: 21 says these influences as leaven were hid in most of evangelical Christianity until "the whole was leavened." The two influences worked together to undermine faith in the word of God; the influences were additive in weakening faith in God and in his word.
This does not mean that all followers of dispensationalism have used new translations based upon the Westcott-Hort. But - since most church Christians have been using the New Translations based upon Westcott-Hort, this meant that most dispensationalists also used the same translations, since the majority of church Christians are followers of dispensationalism to some extent. Although some dispensationalists use the King James Version, the influence of Westcott-Hort has not been overcome at all.
And - many Christians in the reformed camp also use the Westcott-Hort derived versions. In fact, the Reformed people in the churches, or most of them, defend the entire church as the beast of Revelation 17: 9-11 against those who have heeded Revelation 18: 4 and have come out of "her."
The purpose of this thread is to support the Textus Receptus-King James Version, and to show that the wrecking machine that is Westcott-Hort is something to get off of, to come out of "her" as Revelation 18: 4 says, so that those who come out of the Westcott-Hort influence are not partakers of her sins and do not receive her plagues. Revelation 18: 4 is a call to come out of the apostate system - but Westcott-Hort helped make it apostate.
Dean Gotcher, the authority on the use of the dialectic in society and in Christian discourse, on his website, http://www.authorityresearch.com/ARTICLES_Other/Source of the King James Bible.htm
says "Faith does not come by hearing mans opinion of God's word (there is no certainty, conviction, or conversion in opinions), but rather faith comes by hearing God's word itself. It is important you know (you are certain) that what you are hearing, reading, studying, preaching, and teaching is God's word. "Man does not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the God." Jesus quoting Deuteronomy 8:3 What eventually became entitled the Textus Receptus or the "received text" (1633) was first presented by Erasmus (Novum Instrumentum omne, 1516). It was compiled from several manuscripts from the 'Majority text,' i.e. the Byzantine (Syrian) text, which were a large number of manuscripts and fragments originally protected by the eastern church from the western church's (Roman Catholics church's) efforts to destroy them, and therefore were not accessible to the western world until after the 1453 conquest of Constantinople by the Ottoman Empire. By Christians fleeing from the east into the west, these guarded manuscripts were eventually accessible to western scholars.
Today there is a major move to confuse the Protestant Church and bring it back under Roman Catholic rule (the "ecumenical" movement). By discrediting the use of the Textus Receptus as God's Word, examining (and thus negating) the Word of God in the "light" of Gnostic text, the Protestant Church is being seduced, deceived, and manipulated, drawn away from the preaching and teaching of sound doctrine and into the dialoguing of mans opinions. The Alexandrian and Origen text (Gnostic texts) are the basis for almost all contemporary translations.
Oregenes Adamantius 185-245 AD, was a Greek, Egyptian-born Gnostic writer, teacher, & mystic, who, with his contingent of scribes, synthesized philosophical teachings into the scriptures (which no longer made them God's word but rather the opinions of men, needing enlightened men thereon to interpret them). These Gnostic texts, with their humanistic, philosophical base, have opened the churches and seminaries up to humanistic reasoning (higher criticism or vain speculations) and dialogue, with the opinions of men in control of the meaning of God and His Word. Almost all translations today carry this error (heresy).
Most Christians who detected the error of the "Church Growth Movement," the emergent church, etc. were using translations from the Textus Receptus (King James, Geneva, Tyndale, Luther, etc. bibles) They discerned the compromise, i.e. the structural change of the word of God, and the resulting humanism being practiced within the "contemporary" church, by their having been raised in Churches using translations from the Textus Receptus."
On a Christian forum a guy said "In His great wisdom, our God has allowed these texts to be there and although I believe some mischief has come from them, it has provoked another in depth study of God's great Word."
"These texts" are the Westcott-Hort Greek text and its English offspring, including the New International Version..
Romans 9: 21: "Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?"
Luke 17: 1 "It is impossible but that offences will come: but woe unto him, through whom they come!"
John 8: 35; "And the servant abideth not in the house for ever: but the Son abideth ever."
Two Major Reasons For the Falling Away of II Thessalonians 2: 3-4
Posted : 18 Sep, 2012 06:11 PM
Since you brought up this subject, I'd like to add a quick footnote. For those who might not be aware of the various translation methods that are used, here is a very brief explanation. I am going to suggest that method one is the most reliable and accurate. In my opinion, the other two methods particularly the third method leave plenty of room for error and probably should be avoided. Not all Bibles are created equal.
There are essentially three methods of translation:
1.
Literal - A literal or word for word translation strives to render the original Hebrew and Greek words with their English counterparts while adapting the original grammar to English grammar. Examples are King James Version (KJV), New American Standard Bible (NASB)
2.
Dynamic Equivalence - �Dynamic equivalency� means that the Bible is translated thought-for-thought rather than word-for-word. This method attempts to keep a constant historical distance with regard to history and facts, but updates the writing style and grammar. Examples: New International Version (NIV), Revised English Bible (REB).
3.
Free translation (paraphrase). Translates the ideas from the original text but without being constrained by the original words or language. Seeks to eliminate historical distance. Readable, but possibly not precise. Examples: The Living Bible (TLB), The Message.
