You are welcome and encouraged to leave feedback to any of the Bible Resources on this site, for discussion, inquiry or just plain comment.
General feedback about the Resources as a whole can be left in the Comments box at the bottom of this page, but if you’ve got something to say on one of the Resources in particular, go to the appropriate linked page below. Thank you.
Feedback and Discussion on The 1550 Textus Receptus Stephanus at this link.
Feedback and Discussion on The Ben Chayyim Hebrew Scriptures at this link.
Feedback and Discussion on The Prophetic Messages of W. M. Branham at this link.
Feedback and Discussion on The Six Days of Creation at this link.
Feedback and Discussion on The First Church of Rome at this link.
Feedback and Discussion on The True Date of the Exodus at this link.
Feedback and Discussion on The Sinaitic Exodus Inscriptions at this link.
Feedback and Discussion on Prophetic Reckoner of the Visions of Daniel at this link.
Feedback and Discussion on The Stones on the High Priest’s Breastplate at this link.
Feedback and Discussion on The Great Bible Text Fraud at this link.
Feedback and Discussion on The Catastrophe at the Crucifixion AD 33 at this link.
Feedback and Discussion on Bible Teaching on Men’s and Women’s Clothes at this link.
Feedback and Discussion on Bible Teaching on Hair at this link.
Feedback and Discussion on Peter Never Was in Rome at this link.
Feedback and Discussion on The True Date of Jesus’ Birth at this link.
Feedback and Discussion on The Original Christian Quran at this link.
Feedback and Discussion on The Cult of the Nicolaitans and Bishop Nicolaus of Myra at this link.
General comments about the Bible Resources as a whole can be left in the Comment box below. Thank you.
The Truth will set you free!
I read most of The Great Bible Text Fraud, very enlightening. For some time now, I feel that God has lead me to the 1550 TR as the perfectly preserved text. I’m not certain at this point about the Old Testament though. I remember you saying something along the lines of the idea that the Masoretes changed the text was an antisemitic slander, but doesn’t the Septuagint readings preponderate in the NT quotations? It’s not unthinkable to me seeing as it is unconverted Jews who rejected Jesus that were the scribes involved. The Dead Sea Scrolls as far as I know are fragmentary save Isaiah, but I’ve read they are closer to the LXX than the Masoretic Text. Could you please shed some light on this issue, and why you believe the Ben Chayyim is the perfectly preserved text of the Old Testament? Also, is it the same as the Leningrad Codex? Do modern editions of the OT like the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia alter the text? Thank you in advance for anything you may teach me on this issue and God bless you!
God bless you too. On the Septuagint text generally versus the Hebrew you can have a look at http://www.christianhospitality.org/resources/6-days-creation-online/content/6-days-creation33.html#Section626-21-01, which shows how and why the Greek text was altered to suit Egyptian pagan chronology. The New Testament quotations usually, but not always, follow the “Septuagint”, that is the commonly available Greek texts of the time. I put “Septuagint” in quotation marks because we actually have a variety of Greek texts, some of which (Symmachus and Theodotion for example), were deliberately edited to reflect anti-Christian Rabbinic exegesis. The true text of the Old Testament Hebrew Scriptures was preserved by the Apostolic Bible-believers amongst the people of Hilary and Martin of Tours, depending on Origen’s Hexaplaric text, and Hilary’s translation was largely cribbed by Jerome (Vulgate). We can see from the Vulgate how closely this accords with the Masoretic text, and with Ben Chayyim. The principles of Divine Preservation dictate that God’s believers through the ages have always had available to them the inerrant Word (any other soul-food being poisonous), and that applies to the Reformation saints, whose Hebrew text was Ben Chayyim. That was the same for most Rabbis up to the nineteenth century when modernism began to infect them too.