The congregation I worship with is a Messianic group, made up of a mix multitude of Jews and Gentiles. I have been studying the scriptures from the Hebraic perspective for several years and would like to review the source you mentioned. It may be a good resource to add to my library.
Thank you for your time.
Shalom
Due to my back and other pains, I don't keep a set daily schedule but I am up and down at various times during both the day and the night. I feel no need to burden anyone with what I go through daily and therefore will get more directly to the response.
Rather than just simply accept without question whatever someone may say especially regarding the things and nature of God and HIS only begotten son Jesus, I try to thoroughly research various sources. One of the sites I have visited is http://www.karaite-korner.org/
To understand what that group is about, I would refer you to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karaite_Judaism
Please keep in mind that Wiki is open to posting by various anomyous sources and oftentimes presents conflicting views.
One thing we often forget is that during the second temple days, many of the scribes and priests were no longer being derived from their God mandated hereditary sources but were appointees of the ruling Roman authorities. Often times those appointed ones pushed what the Roman governors wanted them to emphasize and not what the scriptures actually stated. Scriptures were often deliberately modified to say something different than what was originally intended. The further away from Jesus’ time we get, the more the scriptures have been modified.
Therefore to avoid being influenced by what might possibly be a modified script, we should always strive to use the oldest manuscripts available and give preference to the older manuscripts when variances arise. This is especially true regarding some of the newer manuscripts which are traced back to sources outside of Jerusalem such as the Alexandrian and Vatican manuscripts.
The older manuscripts such as the textus Receptus are more likely to represent what was originally written than are newer manuscripts which may represent a particular sect or denominational view. This holds true for bibles with most of the newer bibles being derived from newer manuscripts which results in all of the newer translations missing several thousand verses which were present in the earlier King James versions. I refer you to: http://www.moresureword.com/KJVonlyYES.htm and http://www.moresureword.com/alcuppit.htm for further info.
Once again, I must caution you to seek the full truth and not blindly accept whatever I or anyone else may say. Research out the full truth of what Al Cuppett and Jim Searchy state.
It's taking even longer to reply since I am also reviewing these sources during my reply to you for my own benefit as well. Even though I have read them previously, I am now rereading them and following the very interesting links.