LCMS-WELS-ELS-ELDONA Repudiate Inerrancy by Promoting the NIV-ESV Translations

The LCMS-WELS-ELS-ELDONA sects reject the ancient truth of Biblical inerrancy by embracing the NIV and ESV translations. 

These apostate factions get along well with ELCA because they share the same foundation - the modernized Greek text butchered by Hort-Wescott and further abused in its new disguise as the Nestle-Aland text. 

The traditional or received text (Textus Receptus for Latin 101 veterans) is not only consistent throughout, but exists in other forms as translations, church father quotations, and lectionaries. A lectionary can be dated one century and yet have a tradition going much earlier. As everyone knows - or should know - the publishing of Scripture is far more rigorous than ordinary books. 

Hort and Tiscendorf really wanted to derail the traditional text, so they took exceptions and made them the new norms. I have some interesting quotes about Hort's attitude and methods. In short, he did not reveal his new text until the English revision came out that matched it, 1881. Blowback was enormous because - suddenly - the Greek New Testament was quite different. 

This is a brief description of how this happened. Hort hated the traditional text and decided that later versions were identified by lots of extra words and verses. He liked the Vatican example (conveniently called Vaticanus) because so many words were missing. 

Here is the thinking - a manuscript gets more verbose over time, so we must find the original, clean copy. But that is nonsense. Apart from the overwhelming evidence behind the traditional text, there is this common sense answer to Hort. When we are writing or copying, what happens when an odious or troublesome term or event comes up? We avoid to edit that out or use circumlocutions. When one Yalie was told he would experience the worst pain in his life during one procedure, he explained, "It was everything they promised."

So - if an anti-Trinitarian does not like to equate Jesus with God, he will omit God and substitute a pronoun. 1 Timothy 3:16 is an example. And, the text may be worn and faded, which can yield the same result. 

Mark 16:9ff is beautifully in harmony with Matthew and Luke. One example of a manuscript dropping the ending has become faux-canonical already in the LCMS. (Seminex won!) In various modern translations, the ending is dropped to the footnote area or marked as dubious. "Some ancient witnesses say..."

There are hundreds of examples of this finessing, always reducing the text and its clarity.

Very few clergy know enough Greek to spot this, to follow the evidence, to care about the results. But the denominations and higher education have simply excluded anything KJV from the list. That is why Attempted Murder will be written to explain this so even a District President can understand.

Two fake doctors say, "And then we will remove the ending of Mark and still make a ton of money!"