NWO rewriting the Bible.

People are still trying to figure out how they knew when the Year 1 started 525 years later after using a different calendar with a different year ??

Who had all the papers from 500 years earlier "at the time" 😵‍💫

Sounds similar to this other thread I read recently about Dr. Days future predictions. It mentions re-wording the bible.

here's the thread - scroll down and click on the written account.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: Randyvine2
a reply to: Raggedyman

It seems odd that the text reads ears of corn. But now I
got it as far as the word korn but what about the mention
of ears?

Leviticus 2:14

14 And if thou offer a meat offering of thy firstfruits unto the Lord,
thou shalt offer for the meat offering of thy firstfruits green ears of
corn dried by the fire, even corn beaten out of full ears.

GREEN ears of corn? or Green ears of GRAIN?

I don't see how that works. Very odd.

Research “ears of wheat”

You are trying to 2020 americanise a 2000 year old book
Most Christians can’t read the bible, I get it, it’s tricky.

I have made worse mistakes in the past than yours, it’s not a simple book to read

originally posted by: JBHemi

Sounds similar to this other thread I read recently about Dr. Days future predictions. It mentions re-wording the bible.

here's the thread - scroll down and click on the written account.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Thanks for linking the thread mate and here it is from the link:

CHANGING THE BIBLE THROUGH REVISIONS OF KEY WORDS

In order to do this, the Bible will be changed. It will be rewritten to fit the new religion. Gradually, key words will be replaced with new words having various shades of meaning. Then the meaning attached to the new word can be close to the old word - and as time goes on, other shades of meaning of that word can be emphasized. and then gradually that word replaced with another word." I don't know if I'm making that clear. But the idea is that everything in Scripture need not be rewritten, just key words replaced by other words. And the variability in meaning attached to any word can be used as a tool to change the entire meaning of Scripture, and therefore make it acceptable to this new religion. Most people won't know the difference; and this was another one of the times where he said, "the few who do notice the difference won't be enough to matter."

link

other changes:

END OF SOUL
inserted: end of soul
removed: soul without end

Psalm 49:8 (KJV)

8 (For the redemption of their soul is precious, and it ceaseth for ever : )

The meaning has been changed to the opposite of what it once said. It used to read: “For the redemption of their soul is precious, and it ceaseth not forever.” Also notice the emoticon mocking the change. Also, forever should be one word.


HOPE
inserted: hope
removed: faith

Romans 8:24-25 (KJV)

24 For we are saved by hope: but hope that is seen is not hope: for what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for?


THERE IS NO GOD
inserted: there is no God
removed: there is God

biblechanges.tumblr.com...

-Jeremiah 20:7 (KJV)

7 O Lord, thou hast deceived me, and I was deceived; thou art stronger than I, and hast prevailed: I am in derision daily, every one mocketh me.

GOD DECEIVES
inserted: God deceives
removed: God dont deceives
This also suggests that Jeremiah was a false prophet deceived by God. Thou should be capitalized since it is referring to the Lord God. Also the words every one should be one word – everyone.

GOD IS DREADFUL
inserted: God is dreadful
removed: God is awesome
-Daniel 9:4 (KJV)

And I prayed unto the Lord my God, and made my confession, and said, O Lord, the great and dreadful God, keeping the covenant and mercy to them that love him, and to them that keep his commandments;

Dreadful was, and should be awesome. The words him and his should be capitalized since he is referring to God.

GOD IS TERRIBLE
inserted: God is terrible
removed: God is not terrible
-Psalm 47:2 (KJV)

For the Lord most high is terrible; he is a great King over all the earth.

Terrible should be awesome, and the word he should be capitalized.

King David would never have called the Lord terrible! King David was a man after God’s own heart. He should be capitalized.


LEASING
inserted: Leasing
removed: Lies
Psalm 4:2 (KJV)

O ye sons of men, how long will ye turn my glory into shame? how long will ye love vanity, and seek after leasing? Selah.

Leasing should be lies and the word how should be capitalized.


MORTGAGED
inserted: mortgaged
removed: used

Nehemiah 5:3 (KJV)

Some also there were that said, We have mortgaged our lands, vineyards, and houses, that we might buy corn, because of the dearth.

EVE IS NOW ADAM
inserted: them
removed: he
When God created mankind, he made them in the likeness of God. 2 He created them male and female and blessed them. And he named them “Mankind”[a] when they were created.

GOD NAME IS NOW THE RASTAFARIAN NAME OF GOD
inserted: jah (yah= the rastafarian name of god)
removed: Yaveh

biblechanges.tumblr.com...
mandelabiblechanges.com...
mandelabiblechanges.com

CONVERSATION
inserted: conversation
removed: former way of life
gal 1.
For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in——– the Jews’ religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it:

GOVERNORS
inserted: governors
removed: stewards
Galatians 4:Too

But is ——-under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father.

Used to be: guardians, stewards


REMOVED WOMEN (no gender)
inserted: blak -deleted word-
removed: these women
Galatians 4:Twentie Fore

Which things are an allegory: for these _______are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.

Used to be: these women, Mount Sanai, leads, Hagar

AFFECTIONS
inserted: affections
removed: passions
And they that are Christ’s have crucified———– the flesh with the affections and lusts.

AGES
inserted: ages
removed: generations

CONVESATION THE
inserted: conversation the old man
removed: life of the old man

SOMETIMES
inserted: sometimes
removed: once

For ye were sometimes darkness, but now are —-ye light in the Lord: walk as children of light:

Used to be: once

GOD AND THE FATHER
inserted: God and the Father ( 2 persons)
removed: God the Father ( 1 person )


GOD AND HIS FATHER
inserted: God and his Father ( 2 persons)
removed: God the Father ( 1 person )

RECORD:
inserted: record
removed: witness
For God is my record,
Used to be: For God is my witness,

CONSOLATION
inserted: consolatio
removed: encouragement

CONVERSATION
inserted: conversation
removed: citizenship
For our conversation is in heaven;
Used to be: citizenship

CAREFUL
inserted: careful
removed: anxious

PASSETH ALL
inserted: passeth all
removed: surpases

AFFECTION
inserted: afection
removed: mind

MORTIFY
inserted: mortify
removed: desire

BOWEL
inserted: bowel
removed: tender

ESTATE
inserted: estate
removed: state

SCIENCE
inserted: science
removed: knowledge

INCONTINENT
inserted: incontinent
removed: without self control

GAY CLOTHING
inserted: gay clothing
removed: fine raiment

DEVILS
inserted: devils
removed: demons (all cases of demons has been replaced by devils in the New Testament)

CONDEMNATION
inserted: condemnation
removed: judgment

MASTERS
inserted: masters
removed: teachers

AMAZEMENT
inserted: amazement
removed: terror

DEAD
inserted: dead
removed: spiritual dead

CHARITY
inserted: charity
removed: holy

POLLUTIONS
inserted: pollutions
removed: defilements

THE LORD
inserted: the Lord
removed: Our Lord


..and a a lot of more changes...

a reply to: Raggedyman

I have made worse mistakes in the past than yours, it’s not a simple book to read

Oh I'm well aware of that. I just have never run across this
before in my own un educated self studies. But I never pretend to
know what I'm talking about. I'd rather ask for help so Thank you
Reg. Much obliged. I love learning about the Bible it's shocking how
endless it is when you explore it. I don't think it's possible to know
it's depth. But it's the most super natural thing I've ever seen.

Will they be leaving the purposeful mistranslations to not go against hierarchically challenged royal households?

a reply to: DISRAELI

when reading the post, I tried by myself at
www.biblegateway.com...

then, select the option to display ALL the bible versions in biblegateway.com

then compare each one.

do you realize that there are small changes gradually done.

obviously, you can find more information if you look for Illuminatti, Barbarians, New Order, etc
for example
from a 1960's conference audio available on youtube years ago:

"CHANGING THE BIBLE THROUGH REVISIONS OF KEY WORDS

In order to do this, the Bible will be changed. It will be rewritten to fit the new religion. Gradually, key words will be replaced with new words having various shades of meaning. Then the meaning attached to the new word can be close to the old word - and as time goes on, other shades of meaning of that word can be emphasized. and then gradually that word replaced with another word." I don't know if I'm making that clear. But the idea is that everything in Scripture need not be rewritten, just key words replaced by other words. And the variability in meaning attached to any word can be used as a tool to change the entire meaning of Scripture, and therefore make it acceptable to this new religion. Most people won't know the difference; and this was another one of the times where he said, "the few who do notice the difference won't be enough to matter."

transcription text from:
100777.com...


This changes in the bible were already known since a half century ago.

The information is neutral.

You can see now, a small part of the level of changes that have been done in the Bible, and how the meaning will lead to another religion.

And measure the level of changes done.

The importance of changing the Bible.


Let us analize one simple word, and their consequences:

HOPE
inserted: hope
removed: faith

If people have faith, they dont need the vaccines.

but now, people has hope that the vaccines will save them.

7.8 billion vaccines have been given according to ourworldindata.org...

One simple world changed, in the core of a religion,made easy that people accepted the vaccines.


They already knew the importance of the small, gradual changes in the religion.


It is not the same faith, than hope.

those changes lead to achieve the goals.

a reply to: lux666
It is not enough to show that different versions translate the Greek and Hebrew in different ways, which is all you're doing at the moment. That isn't enough. Since NO one English translation counts as "the original" version of the bIble, mere differences in wording do not count as "changes" in any sinister sense.

All the "changes" you have offered us so far are nothing more than harmless differences. I have shown this systematically for your first sample, though I haven't bothered to spend the time on your later lists.

You are on the wrong track. You have picked up the trail of a red herring.

Let them, apparently anyone changing Revelations is said to be cursed by God, so this should be interesting.

a reply to: Proto88
The question is wherher anything is really being "changed" in the sense meant by Revelation. I think not.

a reply to: lux666

Christianity has done this to the old testament for millenia, kind of Ironic now the NWO is doing it to the new testament lol

originally posted by: combatmaster
a reply to: lux666

Christianity has done this to the old testament for millenia, kind of Ironic now the NWO is doing it to the new testament lol

Can you show me where?
Be interested to see the evidence

Remember, people can still read the Dead Sea scrolls, so, guessing you are not being honest there

a reply to: DISRAELI

revelation? or revelations? a small change alters deeply.

preface:

I like to read the words of Jesus in aramaic. there are words that can not been understood if you dont go to the source. like "lamat",
or other example:

Eli, eli, lama sa bachtani,

if you dont undertstand that the particle "sa" means particle of future, then you go for a world without hope, contrary to the original meaning.

substitutions that alter the meaning are done with one or two replacements.

going to the theme:

Substitution of the original concepts:


what I am saying, and I repeat is this:

"the words that are being teached now to the population, are not the original meanings,because it include symbol substitution, because the new term includes a variant, that altered the original meaning."


first:
1)if you don't understand the difference between hope and faith
that made easy for more than 2 billion people loosing their faith and getting a vaccine shot, think again:

HOPE:
word inserted: HOPE
word removed: FAITH

let me show you more examples.

2)one was the removal of including God's divinity, indicated in the link of one post.

3)the separation of God.

4) the God that needs something to make, not the God creator.

so, if the removal of the attributes of God in the new Bible are not enough changes for you, lets go for the easy to understand:


5)Idolatry.
Do you understand the word?
it was replaced by image.

IMAGE
word inserted: IMAGE
word removed: Idolaty.

the error is that not all the images are idolatry,
and that not all the idolaty is in the way of image.
idolatry means that the object that you adore is the physical object, and you recognize it as YOUR GOD.

if you say again that idolatry is the same than image, and that it does not affect anything important then, this proves your error:

as God made the man at their image an likeness
then
God made the man at their idolatry and likeness

then image is not synonym of idolatry.
because GOD DOES NOT ADORE YOU, AND YOU ARE NOT THE GOD'S GOD.

because YOU ARE NOT THE SYMBOL THAT GOD IDOLIZES.
YOU ARE NOT IDOLIZE BY GOD

YOU ARE NOT HIGHER, YOU ARE NOT OVER GOD


because "image" is not the same that "idolatry".

do you understand now that the replacements of symbols altered the BIBLE?

do you sustain, again, that the word "image" is the same that the world "idolatry"?
do you say again that substitution do not change the meaning?


Other example that you accepted as equivalent words and meanings:

6)
alienigen is a synonim of alien.
but you accepted that alien is a valid synomym of foreigner. equivalent words.
then, you are saying that they are alienigen

whis is false, foreigner is not synonym of alienigen.

that error , that you accepted as valid as synonyms words with double meaning introduced on purpose.
new words that are different from the original, having as consequence the alteration of the first meaning, on purpose.

you can continue thinking that the Bible was not altered. that is your sight.



the targeted changes to specific keywords in the Bible altered deeply the original meaning of the Bible.

He who has ears to hear, let him hear

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: combatmaster
a reply to: lux666

Christianity has done this to the old testament for millenia, kind of Ironic now the NWO is doing it to the new testament lol

Can you show me where?
Be interested to see the evidence

Remember, people can still read the Dead Sea scrolls, so, guessing you are not being honest there

The Torah text has been intentionally mistranslated by Christianity for the sake of trying to legitimize the new testament claims. This is not new nor is it a theory, it is an undisputed historical fact! As a hebrew speaker it is quite funny to me how desperate the early christian scholars must've been, judging by their deliberate mistranslations and wild changes to the original 5 books of moses.

Im not gonna list it here as there are numerous examples. But if you're curious check out rabbi tovia singer on youtube. its more efficient that way!

a reply to: DISRAELI

Apocalypse didn't mean doomporn originally ether, besides, languages are prone to change. Was it an actual animal, or something else that was called a Camel?

a reply to: lux666

The Bible was not originally written in English (it was originally written in Koine Greek, Classical Hebrew, Imperial Aramaic, Common Aramaic, and possibly, Latin), and the English language is in constant flux, with new words being added, and meanings of words changed all the time.

For instance, the English language words 'awful' and 'awesome' were both used to describe things that filled one with awe, but in modern usage have become diametrically opposite to each other in meaning.

All previous versions, paraphrase's, and translations of the Bible are still available and readable for comparison by Bible students.

The King James Versions of the Bible are not particularly true to the literal meanings of the original texts and have several anachronisms and false assumptions that were included into the translation.

Classical Hebrew is particularly resistant to change of the meanings of words because the etymology is hierarchical, with meanings for every letter, groupings of letters, and words. If one were to change the meaning of a word in Hebrew, it would have to reflect in a change in the meanings of the sub components of the word, right down to the letter basis, and so would affect the meanings of all the words made out of those letters.

Similarly, with Koine Greek there is a great specificity to the meanings of words. Whereas in English we use one word to describe love, Koine Greek uses seven, all with different nuances of meaning. Similar to the way that Eskimo's have hundreds of words to describe snow, that sort of specificity makes a language form resistant to the approximate misapplication of language and idiom that eventually leads to words gaining different meanings.

originally posted by: Proto88
Let them, apparently anyone changing Revelations is said to be cursed by God, so this should be interesting.

So, when someone says that the vaccine is 'The Mark of the Beast', they aren't changing meanings away from what is literally said, like that it is a visible marking, taken in the forehead and right wrist, and that it's purpose is purely for commerce, and that it is representative of a numerical identifier of a particular person?

originally posted by: lux666
what I am saying, and I repeat is this:
the words that are being teaching now by the people are not the original meanings. because it include symbol substitution, because the new term includes a variant, that altered the original meaning.

This is the point you are not proving, because there are no genuine instances of it in the examples you are quoting.

2)one was the removal of including God's divinity, indicated in the link of one post.

You haven't quoted a reference, so I don't know which verse you're talking about.

3)the separation of God.

You haven't quoted a reference, so I don't know which verse you're talking about

4) the God that needs something to make, not the God creator.

I remember this one. Isn't this the case in Hebrews, where you said that "builder" is good and "maker" is bad, and I pointed out that the RSV uses both of them. I think the overtones which you are discovering here are imaginary.

Idolatry, you understand the word?
it was replaced by images.

IMAGE
word inserted: IMAGE
word removed: Idolaty.

I've already commented on that one. I pointed out that the two words have the same meaning. I pointed out that all the traditional translations have "graven image" in the second commandment. That is because the image is a physical object- "graven" means "carved with a chisel". Again, the difference in overtones is imaginary. You are engaged in the exercise of looking for monsters under the bed.

I note your counter-argument, that in Genesis ch1 the word "image" is used in a different way.
Your error in that counter-argumentis the assumption that a word must have exactly the same meaning every time it is used. That assumption is invalid. It is not true in ordinary use of language, because the meaning of words varies according to context and the people using it, and also over time. The exact meaning of words also varies within the Bible for exactly the same reasons. "Every word must have a single clearly defined meaning" is a convention which lawyers find necessary, and it gets applied in the Bible only because so many modern readers approach the Bible with a legalistic mindset. Especially if they're American.

So "image" measn "likeness" in Genesis ch1, but that says nothing about its usage in the Old Testament laws.

but you say that alien is correct syonim of foreigner.
then, you are saying that they are alienigen.

whis is false.

No, it is true that "alien" and "foreigner" are the same word.
"Alien" comes from the Latin word "ALIENUS", which means "belonging to another".
Therefore it has been used for centuries to mean "belonging to another country".
Hence the line in Keats about Ruth "standing in tears amidst the alien corn".
Hence the complaint that the "migrants" crossing the American borders are "illegal aliens".
"Alien" in the sense of "belonging to another planet" is a very recent addition to the meaning of the word.
So I must repeat; changing "foreigner" to "alien", or voce-versa, does not involve a change of meaning.

the alteration of the original meaning, on purpose

This neatly sums up the two big faults in your approach.

1) You are failing to understand that changing the wording does NOT necessarily change the meaning.
2) You really, really struggle to find any "purpose" that is being achieved by these changes. You are chasing monsters which are not there.

if you dont understand the difference between hope and faith,who leat to more 2 billion people loosing their faith and getting a vaccine shot, think again:

This is the only "purpose" that you have been able to produce, so I will take that issue last.

Firstly, you have not quoted any reference for this exchange. If it took place, it might have been becasue the translators saw the word ELPIS ("hope") in the Greek text instead of the word PISTIS ("faith"). That was certainly the case in the earlier example I looked at, when you objected to the word "son", and I pointed out that the Greek text in that place had HUIOS, which means "son".

Secondly, there is nothing wrong with the word "hope". It is used many times in the New Testament. Your reaction may be influenced by the modern usage, which makes "hope" a rather tentaive and uncertain thing, but in the New Testament, as I like to point out, "Hope" is nothing less that Faith as applied to the future.

Thirdly. your explanation of the significance of the change is nonsense.
Let me tell you bluntly that NOTHING in the Christian faith demands rejection of the vaccine. Whatever the medical rights and wrongs, it is not a theological issue. If events have made it a political issue, that doessn't make it a theological issue either. So there is no reason why "abandonment of faith" should be needed to encourage people to take up the vaccine, and no reason why it should have that effect. Even if the NWO wanted to get people to take the vaccine, it would not occur to them to take such a roundabout way of doing it. They would see no connection between the vaccine and faith, and and they would not expect anyone else to find one.

You are following a false trail.