It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
It takes average a year to read the bible and Bacon not only read but rewrite this within months? He must have been non human..
He considered superstitions and theological interpretations to be "Idols of the Theatre", misleading and false notions of truth:
There must be theologians who can read Greek or Hebrew, you'd think if the KJB was that far off they would say something about it.
The Douay - Rheims is a Catholic approved version, so is the New American Bible. Also the Jerusalem Bible and New Jerusalem Bible are approved. There may be more. Catholics may read any version they choose, but the risk of error goes up with the unofficial versions. Only official versions are used in Church teachings and documents.
So which Bible do you trust or is that the whole point? A general pan against Christianity at it's foundation in the Bible?
OOOOPS, you might have missed this:
However the 33rd degree - Knights Templar - being the highest is inaccurate. Or at least the wording you have used, implying the Templars are the highest degree, this may not be intentional on your behalf.
As for the Shakespearen twist, that is because Bacon was the force behind Shakespeare.Who was a spy and courier pidgeon for the Monarchy.His plays were encoded.
Psalms 46 is not unknown to cipher enthusiasts. This is the famous Psalms where it has been written that Shakespeare wrote his name in cipher. You see, the 46th word from the beginning is "Shake", and the 46th word from the end (not counting the final "Selah") is "Speare". The theory goes that Shakespeare was 46 years old when the KJV was printed.
Indeed, but the KJB is the only Bible that most of us can read; only a handful of us here can read Hebrew or Greek. Thus, most of the population is misled because of the KJB.
Not true. The RCC has an available version. This is not the same as the KJV as mentioned previously.
OP's source is Tony Bushby, who wrote a book called The Bible Fraud, which is a complete work of fiction, passed off as fact. His crazy theories are debunked in numerous places, including here, but what jumped out at me from that page was this:
Even if everything that you're say is true; they didn't CREATE The Bible just edited it. The Bible already existed for a long time before that in the original Greek and Hebrew, so the words and core beliefs will still be mostly the same.
When ancient scribes copied earlier books, they wrote notes on the margins of the page (marginal glosses) to correct their text—especially if a scribe accidentally omitted a word or line—and to comment about the text. When later scribes were copying the copy, they were sometimes uncertain if a note was intended to be included as part of the text. See textual criticism. Over time, different regions evolved different versions, each with its own assemblage of omissions and additions.
These issues notwithstanding, the text of the LXX is generally close to that of the Masoretes and vulgate. For example, Genesis 4:1-6 is identical in both the LXX, Vulgate and the Masoretic Text. Likewise, Genesis 4:8 to the end of the chapter is the same. There is only one noticeable difference in that chapter, at 4:7, to wit:
Genesis 4:7, LXX (NETS): If you offer correctly but do not divide correctly, have you not sinned? Be still; his recourse is to you, and you will rule over him.
Genesis 4:7, Masoretic (NRSV): If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin is lurking at the door; its desire is for you, but you must master it.
Genesis 4:7, Latin Vulgate (Douay-Rheims): If thou do well, shalt thou not receive? but if ill, shall not sin forthwith be present at the door? but the lust thereof shall be under thee, and thou shalt have dominion over it.
This instance illustrates the complexity of assessing differences between the LXX and the Masoretic Text as well as the Vulgate.
The earliest labors of the Masoretes included standardizing division of the text into books, sections, paragraphs, verses, and clauses (probably in the chronological order here enumerated); the fixing of the orthography, pronunciation, and cantillation; the introduction or final adoption of the square characters with the five final letters (comp. Numbers and Numerals); some textual changes to guard against blasphemy and the like (though these changes may pre-date the Masoretes - see Tikkune Soferim); the enumeration of letters, words, verses, etc., and the substitution of some words for others in public reading.
.....
The assumed emendations are of four general types:
- Removal of unseemly expressions used in reference to God; e.g., the substitution of ("to bless") for ("to curse") in certain passages.
- Safeguarding of the Tetragrammaton; e.g. substitution of "Elohim" for "YHVH" in some passages.
- Removal of application of the names of pagan gods, e.g. the change of the name "Ishbaal" to "Ishbosheth."
- Safeguarding the unity of divine worship at Jerusalem.
i think the whole issue here is this Jesus thing, it's always some kind of undermining of the divinity of Jesus..
would an updated translation change the core elements of the redemption story? would dates, times, places, people, events suddenly be entirely new things?...i'd like to know this, i don't want what i THINK the truth is, i just want the truth.. if some space lizard eats me when i die, fine..
fast forward this >> if "secret societies" just run everything then what are they even fighting against?
The KJV is not 'the one that almost all churches read', and Catholics do not believe it is 'the true Bible to follow.'
Your source offers no evidence that Bacon had anything to do with the KJV.
On 25 June 1607 Sir Francis Bacon was appointed Solicitor-General and Chief Advisor to the Crown. He had presented new ideas to the Government for the Reformation of the church and was officially instructed to commence restructuring the Bible. Research in the Records Office of the British Museum revealed that original documents still exist which refer to important proceedings associated with Sir Francis Bacon's involvement with the editing of both the Old and New Testaments They revealed that he personally selected and paid the revisers of the New Testament who completed their task.
The first English language manuscripts of the Bible remained in Bacon's possession for nearly a year. During that time:
...he hammered the various styles of the translators into the unity, rhythm, and music of Shakespearean prose, wrote the Prefaces and created the whole scheme of the Authorized Version.
Regarding the months of editing work applied to the Bible by Bacon, his biographer, William T.Smedley, confirmed the extent of the editing:
It will eventually be proved that the whole structure of the Authorized Bible was Francis Bacon's. He was an ardent student not only of the Bible, but also of early manuscripts. St Augustine, St Jerome, and writers of theological works, were studied by him with industry.
At the completion of the editing, Sir Francis Bacon and King James I had a series of meetings to finalize editorial matters associated with the new Bible. It was at this time that King James ordered a "Dedication to the King" to be drawn up and included in the opening pages. He also wanted the phrase "Appointed to be read in the Churches" to appear on the title page. This was an announcement clarifying that King James had personally given the church "Special Command" for this particular version of the Bible to be used in preference to the vast array of Greek and Latin Vulgate Bibles current at the time.
Who keeps coming up with this nonsense when we have dead sea scrolls and other discovered ancient texts to back up what's in the Bible as we know it today?
I am not an expert in "Free Masonry", but I don't believe there are any other secrets.
If the "Free Masons" are truly "enlightened", then you have nothing to fear. If not than you should be very afraid of men who believe they can usher in the Messianic Age apart from following the "Spirit of Love", "Christ Jesus".
I can call the entire list not only a joke, but a scam if we are "supposed" to make these come true.....
So, where can one get a bible written before the KJV? In English.
It's available online in many places.
1. Douai-Rheims. The original Catholic Bible in English, pre-dating the King James Version (1611). It was translated from the Latin Vulgate, the Church's official Scripture text, by English Catholics in exile on the continent. The NT was completed and published in 1582 when the English College (the seminary for English Catholics) was located at Rheims. The Old Testament was published in 1610 when the College was located at Douai. Bishop Challoner's 1750 edition, and subsequent revisions by others up to the 20th century, is the most common edition. Retains some archaic English.
There have now been translations from the original sources into English and other languages using modern technology and they do Not differ from the King James bible which would show it was tampered with.
The first English language manuscripts of the Bible remained in Bacon's possession for nearly a year. During that time:
...he hammered the various styles of the translators into the unity, rhythm, and music of Shakespearean prose, wrote the Prefaces and created the whole scheme of the Authorized Version.
Regarding the months of editing work applied to the Bible by Bacon, his biographer, William T.Smedley, confirmed the extent of the editing:
It will eventually be proved that the whole structure of the Authorized Bible was Francis Bacon's.
You can get them just as easy as any other bible. I have heard that the Holy Bible was once #1 on the book ban recomended by the RCC, but people have always had the ability to get a Catholic bible.
For that, we will need someone that can A): find the closest Bibles possible to the originals Greek and Hebrew ones (which seems to be the Septuagint and the Masoretic), B): learn fluently Greek and Hebrew, C): take all the versions and compare it to the originals ones, and D): publish the results and telling people what has been changed. If one of you guys can find someone willing to do that, it would be great! For now, it only seems like words and phrasings that changed, and certains meanings, like replacing "bless" by "curse".
drop me a pm one day if you get some of Conrad's work?
I may be misunderstanding you, but the New American Bible is a Catholic Bible, translated from the original languages. It was completed within the last 50 years. Is that what you're looking for?
Why must this conversation always come down to what we are doing with our genitalia?
I see lots of morbidly obese people walking err waddling into church, why aren't they condemned for their gluttony or sloth?
If you do well, you can hold up your head; but if not, sin is a demon lurking at the door: his urge is toward you, yet you can be his master.
If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin is lurking at the door; its desire is for you, but you must master it.