from @renoomokri – Between The Egyptian Ankh and The ‘Christian’ Cross (Part 2)
That Masons, and Rosicrucians dominated the translation of Scripture into the King James Version of The Bible is a historic fact. Research it. Sir Francis Bacon, who was Lord High Councillor to King James I, was a Rosicrucian. That is a historical fact. The word Rosicrucian simply means “Order of the Rosy Cross”. It was their agenda to promote the Cross. The Cross plays a mystical role in their occult world. Many of those appointed into the committee that translated Scripture into KJV were Masons. That is a historical fact. And even Masons themselves regard the KJV as “The Great Light of Masonry”. Scripture tells us not to be “be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.”-Romans 12:2.
What better way to fulfil the above Scripture than to read Scripture in its original language and “conform” to it? If the original Scripture does not mention the word ‘Cross’, and instead uses the word tree, then who are you conforming with by arguing for and propagating the lie that Christ was crucified on a Cross? Certainly not God. Certainly not Scripture.
Why can we as Christians not learn from Muslims by learning and reading Scripture in the original language? I know of 7 year old Muslims who can read and recite the Quran in Arabic. Why can we not have adult Christians who can read and recite the Holy Scripture in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek? That is why I respect Apostle Johnson Suleman. He not only taught himself Greek. He went to Greece and stayed in a commune and read the original Scripture in its original language 34 good times! – #regrann
