A Greater Deception Than Evolution

Well, good morning, everyone! Sorry for that little delay, getting everything organized here.

Thank you so much for what was really unexpected, but really, indeed, it is a pleasure to serve you all.

Today, I want to talk to you, brethren, about what could be called a greater deception than evolution. You know, evolution is a great deception, but is that the greatest deception in the world today? The use of the Alexandrian text as a family of source texts is what they call the critical apparatus. It was the most original correct text, as they call it. It was the source of material which is critical to get the truth as original. It was using the Alexandrian text as that source, as it is commonly used today. It may have been, or it most probably is, one of the most effective deceptions by Satan towards mankind and towards us. It is a greater deception than the theory of evolution.

For that, I need to give you a little bit of background about the different manuscripts. In other words, translations or rather copies of copies of copies that have been found which are very old. That's what it is. The manuscripts are just copies of the original. The original is what they call an autograph. Then they recopy that and recopy that and recopy that for one very simple reason. You know, if you have any type of material over a long time, like if you use a Bible quite a lot, after a few years the pages start just about falling apart. After many years of usage, they actually fall apart, literally. And therefore, they had to recopy it to have a new copy of the same thing. But understand, they did not have photocopies or printing press, so they had to do it by hand. Now, the Jews had a very strict rule that they would count every line and they add each word, add a number, and they would add the value per line to make sure that it was spot on. But the Greeks don't have that.

And therefore, over time, many copies have been made and they've been found.

There is, basically, therefore, based on copies, what they call families, because they make a copy and from this copy they made a copy and from this copy they made a copy. So that's like one family. But from this copy, yeah, they made a copy and then they got two copies and then they just made copies and this made copies. Now, this is a different family. So you end up with different families of what we call manuscripts or copies of the original autograph. But understand, after the years, it's just copies of copies because the original autograph, it would have been, you know, perished. Now, another thing that is important to understand is a lot of these copies will not not last long because of things like humidity. I know, for instance, when I go to Brazil and I go into areas that are very humid, the paper of the Bible, the pages seem to deteriorate quicker and things like that. So these copies would fall apart quicker in humid places. So when they find copies, they find them in places which are arid, are dry, like around northern Egypt and around Palestine area because those areas are dry and therefore those manuscripts can last longer. And once they found them, they've got to put them in boxes or seal them so air doesn't get to them so they don't corrupt anymore. So what they now do is they make photographs or whatever and then they digitize them now to have that. But again, I understand these are copies of copies that have been of copies. So what happens when somebody copies, you may bring in an accidental mistake. You know, when you write something, you're meant to write something and then when you read it later on, it says, but that's not what I'm meant to write. Maybe you wrote something. So little innocent mistakes can happen. But because there are so many manuscripts, we can actually compare them and see where that one mistake comes out and it can quote-unquote delete it. So basically, most of the copies come from what is the area of Palestine and that area and that was in the older days in the Middle Ages under a kingdom called Byzantine. So those copies are called Byzantine texts. So what do we have? We have most families of the New Testament Greek and brethren today, I'm concentrating on the New Testament. Really, it's about the New Testament. The Old Testament is basically fairly clean because of the strictness that the Jews had adhered to. But the dilemma comes in the New Testament, which is in the Greek. And so the main families of Greek manuscripts can today be divided into two groups. One is the Byzantine family and the other one is the Alexandrian family. So I'm going to explain to you a little bit of background about these families so that then we can see, we're going to compare some of them, and we can see how corrupt one of them is.

Right, so the Byzantine text is basically the one that comes from the area of Palestine. In that area, Palestine, Turkey, those areas around there. That area was under a Byzantine government, and that's why they called it Byzantine. And those people were copying it and copying it and copying it and copying it. And so people would have the latest copy at their hand. And that's why it's called the received text. That is the Byzantine, the received text. They call it textus perceptus, which is the, let's call it the Latin word for received text. By received text means that you add and then you copy that and then now you've got the latest copy and then they copied it again. Now you got the latest copy. That is the one that is being received down the line.

That's the textus receptus, which is part of what we call the Byzantine family.

Basically what happened is the area of that Byzantine area, it actually ended up being taken out of them by the Moors and that being of their religious background, they were destroying things. So there was a man called Desiderus Erasmus that lived in that area of Byzantine in in a city there, Byzantium. And before that city was destroyed or taken over by the Moors, he ran away with less than six manuscripts. The symbol, the word MSS, means manuscript, manuscripts, MSS. If you just see MS means one manuscript, but if you see MSS means manuscript in plural. So that's what it means. So instead of repeating the word manuscript, time and time again, I'm just abbreviating it MSS, and that's what a lot of people use, MSS, manuscripts. So he fled with less than six. So maybe it was five, maybe it was four, we don't know. The history says he was less than six. And with those, it actually was what then became, because he took from that and he created a sum based on those manuscripts, he created one which was the one he used. So because remember these were copies, and if there were a little mistake, he said, okay, that is it. And he would combine them and he made one. And the third version, he went through it three times, the third version is the one that then of this individual Erasmus, and this was all in Greek. So there's not English, not Portuguese, was all in Greek. So he then made a Greek version, and that Greek version was then what was used to produce what we call the King James Version, or in Portuguese, is the ICF, which is the Almeida cruci de n'fiel. That's the kind of equivalent to the King James Version. Why? Because it was based on the textus receptors. The King James Version and the new King James Version are based on the textus receptors. So that's what happened. So in about 1609 through 1611, that third version of Erasmus was translated into English, and that became the King James Version that was published in 1611. The version for the Portuguese was done by an individual called Almeida, João Ferret at Almeida. He was born in 1628, and when he was 16 years old, he started translating the Bible. Imagine, 16 years old, he first translated it into Latin, Spanish, French, and Italian. And then he was not happy with that, or beg your pardon, from Latin, French, and Italian. He translated that into Portuguese. He was not happy with that. And then he went and he translated it from textus receptors, from the received text, and that's what they have to do in Portuguese. So in Portuguese, you have basically an equivalent to the King James Version, or new King James Version, which is what they call the ACF, the new King James Version, but it's called in Portuguese ACF.

Right. Then there is a second set of the Byzantine family, because what happened is, after the King James Version Bible was published, then they started doing digging and finding manuscripts in that area of Byzantine area, whether it was around the Jerusalem area or Turkey, whatever it was, but they found more and more and more and more and more and more Byzantine texts. And so those then are what we call the majority texts of the manuscripts. That's the majority of the Byzantine texts. As of today, they have discovered many, many of those manuscripts. So once again, these were found after the King James Version was published, and today they have more than 6,500 manuscripts from the Byzantine family.

And the point is, they basically are the same thing as the received texts.

They basically are the same thing as the received text. So the received text is pretty good, compared to the majority texts. There are a few differences, but they're basically the same thing.

Now, of those 6,500 manuscripts, there's about 5,000 of them. There's about 5,000 of them that are nearly complete. So when sometimes people talk about 5,000 manuscripts, that's the reason why they talk, because some of them are just a page or a section of a page or just a little piece, but about 5,000 of them are complete or nearly complete. So they have a pretty good basis to compare, and that gives us confidence that we actually have God's Word, that we have the truth.

These different families were marked with letters, for instance, a letter A and a letter B and a letter K and a letter something else. And one of those things is, for instance, letter K or whatever it is, and therefore some people give them maybe more friendly names. But those are just subsets of those many families. One of them that you'll probably start seeing a bit more, and you see it in Portuguese, is one called Family 35. Family 35 is one of those subsets of families of the Byzantine text, which is part of the majority text, of which the receptive text is also one of them.

So the Byzantine family has got various subsets. One of them is received text, and others are Family 35, and others are many others. So the recommendation in the church, by the way, is to take the majority text as the source, and basically the received text is basically the majority text. So the majority text is one of them, is the Byzantine text, and what happens is a number of scholars have taken these 500 manuscripts, and as groups of scholars have then developed one Greek version of these 5000.

And then another group of scholars did the same thing. So there's basically two groups of scholars. Now there's also individual people that have done it individually, but as groups of scholars, there are two groups of scholars that have done it. And one of them is Hodges and Festad. So it's Hodges and Festad majority text. Remember that's Greek. That is in Greek. That is just I've taken all these 5000 and says, okay, this is I went through the 5000, and I've merged them together, and this is the best whatever that's. And the other one is Robinson Pierpoint. Now I've got here a Greek majority text, which is based on one of those.

I can't remember now which one it is, but it's one of those. It's the Festad one. That's the Festad. So that has then been translated into English, and what this one has got very interesting is it's got the words in English, and it's got the, I mean, first got the words in Greek, then underneath it's got the literal translation in English of that word. So for each word in Greek, there's the word, the meaning of that word in English, but because it does not kind of make sense.

Why? Because for instance, it's like if you translate from one language to another, you say it's a beautiful day, but in another language you say it's a day beautiful. You see, so the placing of words, sometimes of the nouns or adjectives are moved around. So it marks them with a number to put one first and then the other one, you know, so it gives you that. And then it also has got an interlinear because it's got a King James version next to it as well.

I think it's actually the new King James version, but anyway, that is one of the majority texts, and you can get these, you can order, you can buy, it's taken from the Greek, and you can get it in English. So it is very good to compare exactly what it is. As I said, there are others that have done it individually. Some scholars have taken one family of the Greek and have done a translation, but or they've taken one of those books, and have done an English translation.

What I do recommend is that when it's done by a group of people, it's always better than done by one individual person. Really follow that a group of people is better than one individual person. That is always the case, but this one happens to be done by one individual person, a certain Gary Ziola, and this individual took as basis the Robertson Pierpoint majority text, and then he made a few analytical comments on it as well.

So this is the analytical literal translation of the New Testament. It's also very interesting. So and then they are, as I mentioned, there are other people that use different families. Instead of using the 500, I beg your pardon, 5000 originals, they've used maybe just one of those families, and that is a certain individual called Pickering that made the family 35.

Interesting enough, this individual Pickering was living in Brazil. He worked in the Amazon, and he produced family 35, and it's also available in Portuguese. So one thing that amazes me is that in Portuguese there are many Bible versions. There are as many practically Bible versions in Portuguese as in English, and it's interesting that the Portuguese Bible versions were done practically soon after the King James Version by Almeida, and his original one was done in 1819, printed in London, and there are many copies in Portuguese as well.

So that is very very interesting as well. All right, so I think that covers about the Byzantine text. So as a summary, the Byzantine text is over 5000 nearly complete or complete texts, and it's just a wealth of information that you can double check and compare. So that's why the Church recommends the majority text, the Byzantine majority text, and the text receptors, which is the King James and the New King James, are the text receptors. It is very accurate against the majority text. Now, there is another family of manuscripts that basically are native of Egypt, Sinai, and Arabia, and basically come from an area where Alexandria, which is in Egypt, and it was discovered in the last two centuries, and it basically consists of three complete manuscripts, three almost complete manuscripts, and another few, one or two, in parts.

So that's it, five. Five. That's it. Now you've got five here. That's the Alexandrian text, of which three are nearly complete, I mean are complete or nearly complete, and one or two are incomplete. And yes, there are others. People say, yeah, but they are more than that. Yes, they are. And you know what? They are what they call pieces of papayri, which contain between one word and a maximum of four to five words.

So you can't construct the Bible from a little piece of paper that's got one word. You can't. So it's basically down to three pieces, maybe one or two more in parts, but basically three that are almost complete. So that's the Alexandrian text. That's basically what it is. Today, most scholars, most critics, recognize that some Byzantine manuscripts are just as old. Yeah, because they've been finding more and more, and they say, well, these are just as old.

But what has happened is, a belief has been propagated at a time when we originally found that the Alexandrian text of those Alexandrian manuscripts were very old. And yes, they are, like from the year 200 or 300. So they're very old. And so they said, because they're older, they're better.

Now, just because it's older is better. We'll look at that in a moment. But that is the point that today there are many Byzantine manuscripts that are just as old as the Alexandria. Okay, so there were basically two groups of scholars that worked on those Alexandrian manuscripts. There were basically two groups of scholars, and one of them was called a group of scholars that worked on those, called Nestle and the New Testament in Greek by Nestle and Allen. So it's the work of those two individuals. And today it's on the 28th edition, and that is Greek. In other words, they have taken those manuscripts and produced a Greek version of those manuscripts in today's Greek of what they believe that it is. They've taken away the little differences they created. That's the Nestle. Then there's the other group, the United Bible Society's Greek New Testament.

That is another group of scholars that took the same and came out with a slightly their own version of the Greek New Testament. Basically, what people use today is a combination of those two, and that's why they call them N-U. N from Nestle and U from United Bible Society, and they call them N-U. So if you look at some of your Bible and you see, oh, this is from the N-U, they actually mean is the Alexandrian text developed by those two groups of scholars. That's what that is.

Right, so we have basically two New Testament families of Greek manuscripts. One is the Byzantine, which includes the text as receptors and the majority and the remaining text receptors is what is being written down from one to another, and the majority is the other 5,000 complete. And then there is the Alexandrian, which was basically just three, and the critics today say this is the best thing since the Slaso Breitapa thing. They say, well, we've got to use this one that comes from Egypt. Now, when you look at it, when the symbol of Egypt, which means sin, it kind of knowing that it makes you wonder about the value of those. But anyway, there are other translations. Yes, there are other translations that they find in manuscripts because they translated from the Greek into other languages long ago, like translated into Latin. They translated into Syrian and other languages, so there are other translations available as well, but they basically are versions of the Byzantine because they were translations from the Byzantine. They were not translations from Alexandria. Okay, so there's basically two families of texts, the Byzantine and Alexandria, and the Byzantines got a majority of manuscripts. Like I said, it's 6,500, but at least 5,000 is practically complete. So which text is therefore defined as the real one that people must use today?

Well, that is the Alexandria text. They said the Alexandria text is the one that we've got to use to make vowels from. Now, you can see the Alexandria text comes from three manuscripts that come from Egypt and which I'll prove to you that they've already been corrupted and twisted at that time by Gnosticism, by Gnosticism that already existing at that time. But the Byzantine text was kept clean. In other words, the majority text was kept clean. So again, the Alexandrian text is three manuscripts. The Byzantine is greater than 5,000. I know there's more than three and there's more than 5,000, but those are the ones that are basically complete. They are the basis. So there are many, many important differences between the Alexandrian and the Byzantine. I'll put it this way between the Alexandrian and the majority text. Okay, Byzantine means the majority text. That was 5,000. All right, there are many important differences.

However, between the text receptors and the majority, the differences are very small. That's why people say, well, when I use the King James Version or New King James Version, and in Portuguese it will be the ACF, the Almeida Corrugi d'Iffiel. So in Portuguese, those versions are text receptors, and therefore they are fairly accurate, very accurate, in a sense, because they're similar, very similar to the majority text. So yeah, we have a dilemma, because if your Bible is translated based on the Alexandrian text, which is already corrupt, plus any errors that the translators may make, you have corruption on top of corruption.

But if you have a cleaner source, like the majority text or the text receptors, your Bible will be a lot better. That is basically the nuts of it, the knock and bolts of it. That's the message I'm leaving with you. Now why this concern? Why do we have this concern? Because there has been an introduction by Satan, a false doctrine, into the manuscripts. Satan has put his dirty paws into everything, including old manuscripts, and therefore, that's why I started by saying, this is probably the greatest deception, greater than evolution. Then we have to be very careful. Now look at Deuteronomy 4 verse 2. Look at Deuteronomy 4 verse 2. So if you just turn to Deuteronomy 4 verse 2, basically there's an instruction there in the law which reads, don't change what I tell you. Deuteronomy 4 verse 2, it says, you shall not add to the world which I command you, nor take from it that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you. In other words, don't add or subtract. And I'm going to show you additions and subtractions. This is repeated in just a few pages ahead in Deuteronomy 12 verse 32. Deuteronomy 12 verse 32, it says, whatever I command you, be careful to observe it. You shall not add to it or take away from it. So be very careful, particularly with the Bible. And you and I know at the end of the book of Revelation, the book of Revelation, and you'll occasionally see that I put the title of a book in parents like there, which basically is the same word in Portuguese. So the book of Revelation, right at the end, in the last chapter, chapter 22, three or four verses before the end of the book, it says in verse 18 and 19, and it says, I testify to you, every one that hears the words of this prophecy of this book, if anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues written in the book.

And if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away from his part in the book of life. In other words, you will not have eternal life. So be careful. And therefore, we want to read what God inspired and not what has been adulterated by Satan. Now, I'm not saying that everybody that has done these translations are doing it deliberately. Many of them are just innocent people trying to do their best. But you and I need to be discerning and take this into consideration. Right. So what do we have is, besides introducing false doctrine into the manuscripts, then you have the additional problem of paraphrasing. Now, it's very dangerous when you and I paraphrase God's word, because if I'm paraphrasing, I am putting my understanding of what it means into it. So I said, oh well, this sentence means this. Therefore, I will say this is what it means. And this is a danger also for translators. If you translate, you say some words don't translate directly, and you say, well, it means this. So you translate maybe incorrectly. So you've got to be careful with paraphrasing. And so why do they make it easier like paraphrasing? Because they have a good intention between inverted commas to make the text easier for you to understand. And yes, some of them, they make it really nice and easy to understand and easy to read. The problem is sometimes, not every time, but sometimes that affects the real meaning and changes the real meaning. And because you're reading that Bible day in, day out, day in, day out, because it's got this easy to read stuff, you don't notice the other ones that have subtly been changed. And those become part of your inner program that you read it and read it and you read it and you read it and now you're being deceived. That's so clever. That's how Satan does. You tell a lie and you tell a lie and you tell more times the same lie. After a while, you're going to believe it. That's what's happening in the world today. You keep telling lies and the people after a while are going to believe it. So which Bible version should I use? So for us to answer that question, we're going to compare various families.

You're going to compare Texas receptors or the majority text with Alexandria.

Right? And therefore, you're going to see how one is different and has been corrupted.

Now, the problem even gets more complicated because some of the Bibles today use a mixture of Texas receptors and Alexandria and they mix a little bit, mix and match when they feel like it. So you've got to be very careful and you've got to look at a number of them. So what I suggest is that various scriptures that I'm going to give to you, as let's call it, like a few ones to test your translation, use them to test. And you will know if your translation is basically based on the Lexington or if it's basically based on the majority text or the text receptors, because as I say, the text receptors is also good. So seeing that, we have many important differences between those two Texas. They are many important. And so we've got to focus on that. We're really not so worried about differences between the text receptors and the majority text because they are minor and they small and we can identify them a number of times. So let's go back onto that. So we're going to compare versions of the text receptors with versions of the Alexandrian text. And then we're going to see where those changes are. Now, also, I mentioned this before, but I just want to emphasize again that the Alexandrian text, which is the one that comes from Egypt, remember that Alexandria was a major center of Gnostic teaching at that time. Alexandria was a major center of Gnostic teaching. Therefore, it explains that second and third century. Therefore, it explains why their copies had those Gnostic teachings already inserted.

Therefore, that explains why those Gnostic teachings were already inserted into the Alexandrian text.

And we're going to focus on a few false ideas. So we're going to use a few false ideas as a basis to compare these different texts. And these are the basic ideas. The divinity of Christ. Some Gnostics believe that Christ was not divine. So let's look at some of those differences. Other ones is they want to do a way of God's law. So let's look at some scriptures that deal with God's law. And now the text receptors handles it. And now the Alexandrian handles it. Let's look at being anti-Jew or in other words, Judaizing. All these things are Judaizing. So let's look at things or concepts that bring that anti-Semitic approach. And then there are a number of few other small false ideas that we'll look at them as well. So I'm going to compare these Bible versions very quickly. For instance, compare versions between, as I said, in the Alexandrian text with the text receptors. Now understand that already there were ideas about the divinity of Christ. You can read in 1 John 4 verse 3 that there was a concept that Christ did not come in the flesh. So you can see that they were already kind of twisting who Christ was in whatever ways. So we'll go look at that. The first one that I look at is Matthew 8 verse 2. And so I have them there to make it easier for you to read and compare the New King James Version, which is text receptors, and in this case the NIV, the New International Version, which is an Alexandrian text, basically. And the New King James Version is, and behold a leper came and worshiped him, worshiped Christ, saying, Lord, if you are willing, you can make me clean. Do you remember that story? In the NIV it says, a man of leprosy came and knelt before Christ. How subtle that is. Instead of worship, he just knelt. Just like he just knelt in respect. That's a big difference. And you see, by just changing the word, the Greek word, and obviously the same thing in English or in Portuguese, you change the word and bang, you've changed the meaning. Let's look at the same example now with another scripture, which is Matthew 9 verse 18. The New King James reads, while he spoke these things to them, behold, a ruler came and worshiped him, saying, and you can read the rest of the story, but the NIV said, and while he was saying this, a ruler came and knelt before him and said. So again, the word worship was changed by knelt. Now, when you read it, it's so subtle, you don't even notice it. Would you? You wouldn't notice, but there it is, the subtlety of Satan.

Another one is 1 Timothy 3 verse 16. How many times have we read 1 Timothy 16? Many times, and it says, then without controversy, great is the mystery of godliness. God was manifested in the flesh.

The NIV says, he appeared in a body. He changed the word God to he.

How subtle. When you read it, and if you're just reading that Bible version, you don't even notice that.

But the idea is, in a version that is based on a cleaner text, he uses the word God. In a version that comes from a corrupt text because of Gnostic belief, they changed it to he. It wasn't a translator, needless case. It was just the source that he used, the source that he used to translate from. 4. Look at Ephesians 3 verse 9. It's an example of taking away. I put the word taking away because you remember we read in Revelation and the Deuteronomy, if you take away.

Yeah, it's an example. New King James says, From the beginning of the ages has been hidden in God, who created all things through Jesus Christ.

In the NIV it says, and from the ages he kept hidden in God, who created all things. Full stop.

That is subtle because it just says that God created all things through Jesus Christ. But in the NIV it just deleted that section. That's it. Gone.

Another example is in Luke 3, I'll be important, 2 verse 33, still talking about the divinity of Christ. And Joseph and his mother marveled at those things which were spoken of in. That's the text of the receptors, the New King James. But look at the NIV, the Alexandrian.

The child's father and mother. Oh, subtle, isn't it? Because it's saying that Joseph was the father of Jesus, and he wasn't. The father of Jesus was God.

You see, that's why it says Joseph and his mother, in the original, in the correct version. Can you see the subtlety, how these changes have been made, and you can't tell me, oh, it was by accident. This was deliberate intent. I'm not saying of the translator of the NIV, but deliberate intent in the second and third century when they made those changes, because of nasty beliefs. Now, I've covered a few about the divinity of Christ. Let's now look at a few about the approach against God's law. And look at, the New King James says, to those who are under the law, as under the law, that I might win those that are under the law. I gave you a sermon just a couple of weeks back about saying that under the law means basically, I explained to you clearly, that means if you're under the law, that means you're under the penalty of the law, you know, that's, but then look at how they got it in NIV. It says, to those that are under the law, I become like the under the law, though I myself am not under the law.

There is nowhere there in the original. But you see, the subtlety is trying to inject into you the thought that you don't have to obey God's law. You see the subtlety? It's dangerous, brethren. It's poisonous. This is dangerous. You gotta avoid, you gotta avoid Bible translations based on the Alexandrian text, because you don't know when they're going to come and hit you from your blind spot when you're not expecting it. And they're all over. I'm just highlighting a few. They're all over. Now use these few for you to compare your Bible and see what's in your Bible.

Another one is look for verse 4. It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God. The N.I.D. says, Man shall not live by bread alone. Full stop. Wow!

That is subtle, brethren. That is dangerous. Another example. Revelation 22, verse 14. I've mentioned that a few times to some of you. So it says, Bless the Lord those who do His commandments that they may have the right to the tree of life. The N.I.D. says, Bless those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life. In fact, in some versions of Alexandrian, they add the words, wash the robes in the blood of the Lamb, which are not even there. As you can see, the Portuguese version has added that. I put that in red. They've added in the blood of the Lamb. Some Bible versions in English also have that, not all. So it just shows. You've got to be careful. Why? They do your way with the word, keep the commandments. Says, Oh well, just wash your robes. So just believe in Christ, and that's all you have to do. You don't have to obey. That is that concept coming through ever subtly coming through. Another one against the law is John 7, verse 8. Jesus saying, Go up to this feast. He's telling, it says, But I am not yet going up to the feast, for my time is not yet fulfilled. The word is, I am not yet going. The NIV say, or in this case, the NLT, the New Living Translation says, You go on, I am not going.

Full stop, I'm not going to the festival. That's what he said. He said, I'm not yet going. He's different than saying, I'm not going. Can you see how they change and corrupt God's word?

Galatians 3, verse 1. All foolish Galatians, who has bewitched you that you should not obey the truth before whose eyes Jesus was clearly portrayed among you as crucified? The NIV says, Oh, foolish Galatians, who has bewitched you before your very eyes Jesus was clearly portrayed as crucified. Do you see what they've deleted? Obey the truth. It's not even there. It's not even there.

Now, let's look at the concept of being against Jews, anti-Semitic, Judaism. And the eye is Mark 7, verse 19.

Because it entered not into his heart, but into the belly, and goes out into the draft, purging all needs. Now purging, it's like you purge, you know, you purge something and it actually takes all that out, you know, it's like an enemy, you know, just purge it all out. That's what it is. You purge it all out. But look at the NIV says, for it doesn't go into the heart, but into the stomach. And then out of the belly, out of his body, the same insane this Jesus declared all foods clean. It's not even there.

This is dangerous, brethren. This is poison.

This is poison. We've got to be careful of that. Look at another example in Acts 18 verse 21.

But took bread, I beg your pardon, took leave of them, saying, I must by all means keep this coming feast in Jerusalem. But I will return again to you, God willing.

Look at NIV, but he left and he promised, I'll come back if it's God's will. The mention about having to go to Jerusalem to keep the feast is gone. It's gone.

Reverend, you know, the concept was Judaizing God's holidays and keeping the festivals and all that. Oh, that's Jewish things, you see. So they're doing away with that kind of. Now, there's other false ideas that come in. Look at this one. This is basically the idea of the Gnostic idea that Virgin Mary was virgin and that was it. It was always virgin. Never had more children. You see, that's what the Catholic Church teaches. Well, the Virgin Mary was virgin and never had any more children. And Yah is an example. He says, and it did not know her, that is, Joseph did not know her until she had brought forth a firstborn son.

The key word is firstborn son, which means there was a secondborn and a thirdborn. But the NIV says, but he took no union with her until she gave birth to a son.

So it is very subtle, but you can see it's hitting that concept. Well, she never had any more children.

Now, brethren, in many of the examples I'm using the NIV, I could have used other versions. Just for me, it was easier just to go to one version and keep it in that version. So I'm not necessarily only criticizing the NIV. The principle, Yah, is criticizing versions that come from or are based on the Alexandrian text. That is the basic point. Other ideas, Yah. That's Romans 8 verse 1. In Romans 8 verse 1, it says, there is therefore no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. That is the New King James Version. It says, there is no condemnation those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. The NIV says, therefore, there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.

There is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. So therefore, the centers who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit, has been erased. Basically saying that we don't have a responsibility. Well, just accept Christ, and you don't have to do anything else. You don't have to do anything else.

So there are many examples. Here's another example. Mark 9 verse 29. And so he said to them, this kind can come out by nothing but prayer and fasting. Now you remember the section that was about a demon that couldn't come out, and they needed to pray and fast. The NIV says, this kind can come out only by prayer.

Doing away with fasting. Can you see how many little ideas subtly are injected by these changes of the Alexandrian text?

And there are many verses that are missing in the Alexandrian text. You'd probably never notice because generally the NIV Bible puts a whole bunch of texts next, verses next to each other, and then it's got verse 21, verse 22, 23, and then a next paragraph, then you can see, oh, it's verse 25. But the other verses in the middle, the number disappears. They're not there. You look at it carefully. In Matthew 17, 21, 18, 11, 23, 14 are not in the NIV. In fact, you look at it, and it jumps, for instance, from Matthew 1720 to 1722.

In Mark, the same thing, Mark 716, Mark 914, Mark 946, Mark 1126, Mark 1528. They're also not there. And also, there's a whole section missing in Mark 16, verse 9320.

In Luke 1736, it's not there. In Acts 15, verse 34, 28, verse 29, "'Prevent this is only a touch of a few things.' I'm just giving you a feel.

Clearly, it's not meant to be a comprehensive determination of every single difference, but it's just enough, I think, to give you an understanding that the Alexandrian text is a deception. And all, practically all modern translations are based on the Alexandrian text. Do you know that? Practically all modern translations are based on the Alexandrian text. Therefore, oh yeah, they're nice to read and easy to read. Be careful, because this is subtly, as you read it, it's subtly getting into your mind. I strongly recommend you to avoid those translations based on the Alexandrian text.

But Satan didn't stop with the Alexandrian text. I mean, he doesn't stop. He keeps putting his fingers, his dirty paws, all over the place. And so, he even infiltrated the text receptors. And you, therefore, have to be careful. I'm going to give you an example that you are pretty aware that is wrong in the text receptors. In other words, it was copied and copied and copied, and we got the later copy, but there was at the time of the 1300s, when they injected a false understanding about Trinity into the text. And that is in John 1st John 5 verse 7 and 8, which reads, and I put it, the section which they added in a different text type, in a different font for you to see it clearly, because it reads in the New King James, which has got this addition, which is incorrect, which is in the text receptors, for there are three that bear witness. And then he says, in heaven the father, and so it goes on. And then at the end, at the end of the bracket, says, the spirit, the water, and the blood, and these three agree as one. What it should read is, these two verses should read, for there are three that testify, or there are witnesses, the spirit, the water, and the blood. And if you read in the context, you can see that makes sense. You read in the context there of 1st John. So, so it's not just that the text receptors is perfect. That's why I'm saying, compare it with the majority text. That's why it's good to have a version with with the majority text for you to compare and pick up any little nuance that might may appear. Here's another example. Now, this is a different. Now, this is not in the manuscripts. This is not a fault of the text. This is a change made by the translator, because the translator changed. Okay, so we have in the King James Version, and in New King James, says, learn or no man judge you. You know this collagions to 16 and 17. In meat, or in drink, or in regard to a holy day, or regarding the foods, or the Sabbath day, these are shadows of things to come, but the body is of Christ.

What, in first place to note, is the word is, is in italics. So that was added by the translators, thinking that gonna make it easier, or the bodies of Christ, but the body of Christ, that means is the Church of God. And so if you read, let no man judge you, but the body of Christ, that means, let no man make a decision about what you, how you keep the holy days, or how you don't keep the holy days, or how you keep the feast, or how you don't keep the feast, what you eat or don't eat, let no man judge you, but God's Church. That's what it's saying. You see, so, but look at the New Living Translation, how they've altered that. Look at the subtlety, how they've altered that. They said, don't let anyone condemn you for what you eat or drink, or for not celebrating certain holy days, or a new moon, ceremonies, or sabbaths. Let no man condemn you for what you eat or for not celebrating. That is not what it says.

Now, I fell on this trap a few weeks ago. I didn't know that the New Living Translation said that. So there was somebody that came out of the church and said, well, you know, and they said, and I'm in Colossians 2 16. And I said, okay, let me show, let me read it in your Bible, because I didn't know the New Living Translation was so corrupt because the translator made that change. And so he opened this Bible, which is New Living Translation. I read this, I couldn't believe my eyes. I couldn't believe my eyes. And in front of him, I was kind of caught on OS.

You see, you've got to be careful because there's these modern translators and you don't know what this translator has decided to add besides all these other things that you don't know, because you don't know what translation has got. Typically you say, okay, let's show it. And it's better if I ask you, well, you read it in your Bible, right? But now you are reading your Bible, and he says, what? And I was, I can't believe what I'm reading here. And when I tried to explain to him, he said, oh, well, goodbye. I'm not coming back. So I felt bad. And I said, well, I'm not I felt bad about that. And I learned to listen. But, and yeah, is why I'm mentioning that because I was shocked when I saw that I was shocked. Not every Alexandrian version does that because that's a translation, a translator, alteration. So you've got to be careful with that. So Satan doesn't stop. This doesn't stop. There's no perfect translation today or perfect version. Full stop. There's no perfect. Now, if you read Zephaniah 3 verse 9, it reads, for then I'll restore to the people's pure language that's in the world tomorrow. That word could also be translated as lip, mouth and lip, that they may call on the name of the Lord to serving with one accord. Now, we always understood this and correctly understand this, that this would imply a new language in the world tomorrow, a pure language in the world tomorrow. But read the context that is actually talking about a pure lip, a pure mouth, a clean mouth, that you may all call upon the name of the Lord to serving one accord. So it's going to be some sort of a pure form of worship. So one of the things I tried to explain to you many times that when we read something in the Bible, you need to read another layer underneath it. It's always got like a double meaning. It's got a double meaning. And so, yes, a pure language, but it means I would not be surprised a clean worship. And for you to have a clean worship, what do you need? A clean Bible. So I believe in the world tomorrow, we will have a clean Bible. None of this rubbish in it. It will be clean. So that's what I believe. It will be a pure worship with the pure Word of God, a pure Bible. But today, we're not there yet. So we've got to do the best with what we can, with what we've got.

So which version? Which version should I use? I can't tell you, use this version or that version. All I can tell you is the basic principles, the basic principles that you need to take in consideration. Avoid the Alexandrian version, because I've shown you it's not good.

The difference between the text receptors and the majority are very minor, so that's fair.

Use a version based on the text receptors or the majority text. So use a version that is based on the Byzantine text, either on text receptors on the majority version, a majority text. And then compare translations. Yeah, compare. Look at this. Look at that. Oh, okay. And also, use reliable study guides. Bible study guides, like UCG's booklets, which are called the Bible study guides, are reliable. They've been carefully studied and used them to help you point out some errors in some translations. Not again. So Satan, understand, now as we come to a conclusion, I want to just wrap it up with a few comments. Satan, the deceiver, does not stop. He doesn't stop. He keeps going. But God is faithful and has given us His Word. And if we are careful, we can actually get His Word, His pure, clean Word. We can get it.

Knowing the pitfalls, like I've shown you, some of the pitfalls, it can help you not to fall in them because you know what's coming, so it can help you not to fall in them. Adulterated manuscripts and versions from adulterated manuscripts, and namely Alexandria manuscript, it's spiritually deadly. It's spiritually deadly, which leads many away from the truth. So leading many away from the truth, that we've got to be careful. And therefore, please be careful. Be wise as a serpent by selecting the Wise Bible version.