are B.F wescott and Fenton J.A. Hort good scholars, are they occultist and bad? I want the truth about them and textual criticism.
Yes they were occultists. They were founding members of the Ghostly Guild, and complete heretics. I will get into this more when I have time. They Wescott even communicated with sprits that Bible believers would recognize as demons. (Unless his kids lied)
You are falsely assuming all the information I have gotten about these OCCULTISTS were from Riplinger. They were most defiantly Occultists.Well Riplinger's quote mine of his kid's writing can't be trusted, I'll tell you that much. While they said that Westcott did not see fit to continue in the groups because he found their spirituality lacking in comparison with his Anglicanism, she twists it to say the opposite, her reliability to quote sources correctly is greatly wanting.
They certainly weren't good scholars of the Bible. They came in with preconceived ideas about the bible and fit the manuscripts that supported their views, even though they mostly used two old and rubbish manuscripts that were basically found in garbage piles.
You are falsely assuming all the information I have gotten about these OCCULTISTS were from Riplinger. They were most defiantly Occultists.
That's true indeed! I certainly would not be referring to Saint Catherine's Monastery as a "rubbish dump".It is an urban myth that Sinaiticus was found among the garbage
but to say they criticized the Bible and made their own version isn't really the whole story.Google is your friend.
I dont know if they were occultists or not, but I would stay away from any scholars who think its their job to 'criticise' the Bible and make their own versions.
If you want the truth about them then read The Revision Revised by John William Burgon (1883) available from The Bible for Today (http://www.biblefortoday.org/). Burgon was an outstanding textual scholar in the 19th century in his own right, and he fully exposed the deceptive "scholarship" of Westcott and Hort. Scrivener, who was his contemporary and another outstanding textual scholar, concurred with him. There is evidence that W&H may have been Anglo-Catholics as well as occultists, but the real issue is their fabricated theory about the New Testament text, and their promotion of two ancient and extremely corrupt manuscripts -- Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus.are B.F wescott and Fenton J.A. Hort good scholars, are they occultist and bad? I want the truth about them and textual criticism.
Well Riplinger's quote mine of his kid's writing can't be trusted, I'll tell you that much. While they said that Westcott did not see fit to continue in the groups because he found their spirituality lacking in comparison with his Anglicanism, she twists it to say the opposite, her reliability to quote sources correctly is greatly wanting.
What does "subscribing" mean?