Friday 30 April, 2021
Book Extra: The Spiritual Attack Against The Pure Word of God by Jeff Johnson
An In Depth Study Of The Authorized King James Bible vs. All Other 'Modern Versions'
'' This is the best book I've ever read about the King James! If you do not know why the King James is the only English Bible any Christian should ever use, then this is the book for you. It's a little long, but worth the read, as it shows beyond a shadow of a doubt, that all new versions of the Bible are satanic counterfeits, the results of satanic conspiracy and spiritual attack against the pure words of God. May you read this work, and take a stand for the King James Bible!''
T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S
Section Page
Title Page 1
Table of Contents 2
Foreword 4
Footnoting Methodology 5
Preface 6
Chapter 1: Bible Comparison: A Broad Analysis 7
Chapter 2: Bible Comparison: An Individual Analysis 20
Chapter 3: How Could This Happen? 38
Chapter 4: In the Beginning ... 42
Chapter 5: God's Truth: The Peshitta Bible (150 A.D.) 47
Chapter 6: God's Truth: The Italic Bible (157 A.D.) 48
Chapter 7: Satan's Counterfeit: The Origen-Eusebius Bible 50
Chapter 8: Satan's Counterfeit: Jerome's Latin Bible (380
A.D) 54
Chapter 9: Satan's Persecution of the True Church 57
Chapter 10: The Dark Ages (476 A.D. - 1453 A.D.) 60
Chapter 11: God's Truth: The Erasmus Bible (1522 A.D.) 61
Chapter 12: God's Truth: Luther's Bible (1522 A.D.) 65
Chapter 13: God's Truth: The Tyndale Bible (1525 A.D.) 66
Chapter 14: The Council Of Trent (1545 A.D.) 69
Chapter 15: The Roman Catholic Church 71
Chapter 16: The Jesuits 73
Chapter 17: Satan's Counterfeit: The Jesuit Bible 76
Chapter 18: God's Truth: The King James Bible (1611 A.D.) 79
Chapter 19: Modern Bible 'Claims' 85
Chapter 20: Satan's Counterfeits: Sinaiticus and Vaticanus
96
Chapter 21: Satan's Counterfeit: The Westcott and Hort Text
102
Chapter 22: Westcott and Hort 109
Chapter 23: Money Changers in the Temple 114
Chapter 24: God's Preserved Word 124
Chapter 25: New Age Doctrine 127
Chapter 26: Lexicons 135
Chapter 27: The Future? 140
Chapter 28: Conclusions 147
Chapter 29: Parting Comments 154
References 156
F O R E W O R D
When I began to research the Bible my intent was to use the
'version' I found to be most accurate. That effort has taken three years,
covered about 3,100 pages of research, and has resulted in this report.
To analyse the various Bibles required detailed 'verse by
verse' comparisons. In chapter 1 of this report, we will review 20 of those
verses. Those 20 scriptures were selected because they contain vital Christian
doctrine.
As we review each comparison, you will see a lot of subtle,
doctrinal, ramifications. Those subtleties are easily overlooked when just
casually reading through the Bible.
When I was in the middle of this research, and the doctrinal
implications surfaced; it became obvious that I needed to document my findings
for the benefit of others.
Now that I'm at the end of this project; I am convinced
that to be saved is the highest of all priorities. But, right after being
saved, the choice of which Bible to use is next in importance. This is
especially true for those whom God has called to teach; as Bible teachers will
affect a great number of people.
The bottom line is this: I think you will be amazed at what
is being taught in some of these 'Bibles'. I truly believe you will find this
report to be a real 'eye opener'.
Lastly, this entire study is purposely NOT COPYRIGHTED. I
have left this manuscript in electronic format so that it can be shared,
freely. You are welcome to copy all of it, or part of it, as the Lord leads.
To God belongs all the Glory!
- Jeff Johnson
F O O T N O T I N G M E T H O D O L O G Y
During the writing of this report I realized that, in its
final form, this information would be converted into ASCII text. ASCII text can
be uploaded to the Internet, uploaded to Christian Bulletin Boards, etc. Also,
ASCII text can be read by almost any word processor.
Unfortunately, ASCII text cannot handle the typical
"superscripts" used in footnoting. Translation into ASCII deletes all
superscripts, subscripts, bolding, etc. etc.
Since I wanted to document all my references (so the reader
can verify the facts), I have decided to use the following format for all
footnotes:
[S#P#]
Where, S# stands for source number and P# stands for page
number.
Thus: [S1P1] is source number 1, page number 1; and [S2P4-5]
is source number 2, pages 4 thru 5 etc. etc.
A list of the sources, their source numbers, as well as
their distributors, can be found in the References at the end of this report.
P R E F A C E
"No greater mischief can happen to a Christian people
than to have God's Word taken from them or falsified, so that they no longer
have it pure and clear. God grant that we and our descendants be not witnesses
of such a calamity. Let us not lose the Bible, but with diligence, in fear and
invocation of God, read and preach it".
- Martin Luther
C H A P T E R 1
B I B L E C O M P A R I S O N: A B R O A D A N A L Y S I S
In this chapter we compare the teaching in the Authorized
King James Bible to a broad array of 'modern versions'. The purpose is to note
the versions' effect on Christian doctrine. 20 verses, many of them familiar to
the reader, are used in this comparison.
When I say 'modern versions', I am referring to all other
'versions' except the Authorized King James Bible. 'Modern versions' include:
the NIV, the RSV, the NRSV, the NASV, the NKJV, the TEB, the LB, the AMP, etc.
etc.
The NIV, RSV, NASV etc. etc. fit the 'broad comparison'
profile contained in this chapter.
However, there are at least 3 modern versions which require
a specific 'individual' analysis. The 3 I am referring to are: The New King
James Version (NKJV), the Living Bible (LB), and the Amplified Bible (AMP).
The 'New King James Version', 'The Living Bible', and the
'Amplified Bible' are compared to the KJV in chapter 2.
To get the most out of this chapter, please compare the
verses with me, as you read along. You will need a 'modern version' and the
King James Bible.
If you have a NKJV, a LB, or an AMP, please read this
chapter before going on to chapter 2.
Now that you're ready, let's begin...
B I B L E Q U I Z: 2 0 Q U E S T I O N S
Bible Question #1: Who was it that saved Shadrach, Messach,
and Abednego from the fiery furnace?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Turn to Daniel 3:25. In this verse, Shadrach, Messach and
Abednego have been thrown into the fiery furnace. However, they are NOT alone!
Another one (a fourth) is there to deliver them!
Let's start off by looking at this verse in a 'modern
version'. (Notice: the wording in each 'modern version' will differ slightly
from all the others. But, those small differences, will not materially affect
this report).
Suffice it to say that, at the end of Daniel 3:25, a
'modern' version has a reading "similar to" the following:
"... and the appearance of the fourth is like a son of
the gods ..."
"A" son of the (plural) gods?! Who is that? What
is His name? Notice how that reading is very vague and
"non-descript".
But, look at this same verse in your King James Bible. The
Authorized (KJ) Bible says:
"... and the form of the fourth is like the Son of
God". I.e. Jesus Christ.
It was JESUS CHRIST, THE only begotten Son of God, who
delivered Shadrach, Messach and Abednego. Jesus saved them from the fiery
furnace; and it's Jesus who will save you and me from the fiery furnace (i.e.
from hell, from the lake of fire).
The Bible is clear: There is ONLY ONE SAVIOUR: The LORD
Jesus Christ, THE Son (capital S) of God (big G). Jesus is the ONLY one who
saves from the fiery furnace, NOT "a" son of the (plural) gods
(little g). Jesus saved in the past, He does it today, and He will save in the future!
Amen?
Bible Question #2: Who was Jesus' father?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The answer, of course, is that God was Jesus' father. Let's
look in a 'modern' version of the Bible, at Luke 2:33.
Starting in Luke 2:27 Simeon has gone into the temple to see
the baby Jesus (who is with Joseph and Mary). Again, depending on the
particular 'modern' version, in verse 33, it will say something similar to:
“... and his FATHER and mother were amazed at the things
which were spoken of him" [i.e. of Jesus].
What do you mean "... and his father ..." was
amazed at the things which were spoken of him?! Jesus' father was NOT Joseph!
Jesus' father was God!
Now, let's look in the Authorized King James Bible. The KJV
has the correct reading; in Luke 2:33 it says:
"And JOSEPH and his mother marvelled at those things
which were spoken of him".
For a 'modern' version (NIV, NASV, RSV etc.) to say Joseph
was Jesus' father is blasphemy! Think about the doctrinal implications: If
Jesus had only an earthly father and mother, then he is just any man. If he is
just any man, then we are still in our sins. If we are still in our sins, then
we are not saved! If we are not saved, then we have a big problem!
Bible Question #3: What was Jesus' purpose in coming to
earth?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Turn to Matthew 18:11. You may have a hard time finding this
verse. In many new, 'modern', versions this verse is missing! The verses are
numbered 10 then 12, 13, 14! Or you may find verse 11 is in brackets, casting
doubt as to whether it is scriptural.
Let's see what the Authorized King James says:
"For the Son of man is come TO SAVE THAT WHICH WAS
LOST."
This one verse, which summarizes Jesus' entire mission to
earth, is either ignored in 'new' versions; or it is put in brackets casting
doubt on it! This verse contains a KEY piece of Christian doctrine.
People have to know they are lost, i.e. that they have a
problem, to know they need a saviour.
Bible Question #4: Noah was a great man used by God to build
the Ark. To be called for such a task required Noah to be approved by the Lord
God. So, how was Noah 'justified' before God? Was Noah's justification by his
own works?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
For the answer, turn in your Bible to Genesis 6:8. In a
'modern version' it says something like:
"Noah found favour in the eyes of the Lord."
Now think what the word favour implies. Favour implies that
Noah was 'better' than others. Favour implies Noah was approved by God because
of his own 'good works'.
Now compare that to the KJV. It says:
"Noah found GRACE in the eyes of the Lord".
Even though Noah was used of God, he was also in need of
grace (just like all of us). Noah was NOT justified by his good works, but by
God's grace.
Look at verse 9: It says Noah walked with God. Notice that
Noah's walk with God occurs, in verse 9, AFTER Noah received grace from God, in
verse 8. Grace precedes our walk with God. We are NOT justified (NOR saved) by
our own works.
Remember, Noah got drunk on occasion (Gen 9:21). He was in
need of God's amazing grace. We are, too.
The consistent theme of the Bible is that we are saved by
God's grace and NOT by our own works. Grace and favour have two totally, different,
meanings.
The Authorized King James Bible is consistent with the
Bible's teachings. These 'modern versions' are not.
Bible Question #5: Why did Jesus Christ go to the cross?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Let's look at 2 verses. Turn to 1st Peter 4:1. In a 'modern'
version it says: "... Christ suffered ..."
In your Authorized King James Bible the full reading is
quoted as:
"... Christ suffered FOR US."
Notice the last two words give the FULL meaning. Leaving out
"for us" misses the point entirely!
This is confirmed again in 1 Corinthians 5:7b. In many 'new'
versions it says:
"For Christ, our Passover, has been sacrificed."
Again, the full reading is found in the King James Bible. It
says:
"For even Christ our Passover is sacrificed FOR
US."
Bible Question #6: How did Jesus' going to the cross bring
our redemption?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A 'modern' version will NOT tell you how! (In Colossians
1:14). It says (of Jesus):
"In whom we have redemption ..."
The full Christian doctrine is only included in the King
James reading of the same verse. Properly stated, it says (of Jesus):
"In whom we have redemption THROUGH HIS BLOOD ..."
Without the shedding of blood there is NO remission of sins.
Leaving out "the blood" misses a key point of doctrine (and leaves us
in our sins).
Bible Question #7: Who does Jesus "call" and what
does he "call" them to do?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The questions are getting harder! Open a 'modern' version to
Matthew 9:13b. It says something like:
"For I have not come to call the righteous, but
sinners".
Notice how the end of this verse begs the question:
"... call the righteous, but sinners TO WHAT?" Turn to the same verse
in the King James Bible:
"... For I am not come to call the righteous, but
sinners TO REPENTANCE".
Those last 2 words are crucial! Hell (and then the lake of
fire) will get all the sinners who don't repent. Jesus will get all the sinners
who do repent. There is a big difference in those two eternal outcomes. And,
there is a big difference in these two translations.
We are all sinners, and we must all repent, to be saved.
Bible Question #8: What happens to those who do not receive
the testimony of Jesus Christ, i.e. what happens the who do not receive the
gift of everlasting life?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In many 'modern' versions you won't find out! This is
because part of the verse is missing (in Mark 6:11). Let's turn there now. A
'modern' version reads something like:
"... shake the dust off your feet when you leave, as a
testimony against them."
However, the King James gives the full teaching:
"... shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony
against them. VERILY I SAY UNTO YOU, IT SHALL BE MORE TOLERABLE FOR SODOM AND
GOMORRHA IN THE DAY OF JUDGMENT, THAN FOR THAT CITY".
I think the reader will agree that this verse contains
important information we need to know!
Bible Question #9: After we repent, and are born again (come
to saving grace), what else does Jesus command us to do?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
There are many changes that come in our new birth/in our new
nature, but the answer I'm looking for is this: We are to make a public
profession of faith. Then we are to be baptized, by immersion, in water.
Let's look in Acts chapter 8, verses 35-37. In Acts 8:35
Philip, the Apostle, preached Jesus Christ to the eunuch. In verse 36 the
eunuch realized his need to be baptized. The eunuch then asks if he can be
baptized.
Now, take a look at Acts 8:37 in a 'modern' version of the
Bible. Many (but not all) 'modern' versions go from Acts chapter 8 verse 35, to
verse 36, then to 38. 38?! Where is verse 37 you ask? And, what did verse 37
say?
This key verse, properly included in the King James Bible,
tells us whom should be baptized. It says:
"... IF THOU BELIEVEST WITH ALL THINE HEART, THOU
MAYEST." And he [the eunuch] answered and said: "... I BELIEVE THAT
JESUS CHRIST IS THE SON OF GOD."
Numbering verses 35, 36, and then 38 is NOT the new math!
These 'modern' versions, which leave out verse 37, are
omitting the deity of Jesus Christ. Also, they are missing the key point: We
must make a PUBLIC profession of faith. We must believe that Jesus Christ is
the Son of God. If we do not know, believe, and confess that Jesus Christ is
the Son of God, our baptism only 'gets us wet'. Leaving out verse 37 omits a
major portion of Christian doctrine.
Omissions of doctrine and corruptions of doctrine are bad
news. In both cases, the reader is NOT getting the correct information he/she
needs to know.
Bible Question #10: Can you recite the Lord's prayer?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Lord's prayer, taught to us by Jesus, and recorded in
Luke 11:2-4 of the KJV, is as follows:
"... Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy
name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth. Give us
day by day our daily bread. And forgive us our sins; for we also forgive every
one that is indebted to us. And lead us not into temptation; but deliver us
from evil."
Now turn to Luke 11:2-4 in a 'modern' version and re-read
the Lord's prayer. The wording will be similar to:
"... Father, hallowed be Thy name. Thy Kingdom come.
Give us each day our daily bread. And forgive us our sins, for we ourselves
also forgive everyone who is indebted to us. And lead us not into
temptation".
Note this modern version states "Father" but then
leaves out "... WHICH ART IN HEAVEN ...". You don't know who you are
praying to, your Father in heaven, or to Satan!
It also leaves out "our" as in OUR father. We were
created by God who is "OUR" father. Satan is a father, but he is not
"OUR" father. Satan is the "father" of lies.
And this 'modern' version leaves out "THY WILL BE DONE,
AS IN HEAVEN, SO IN EARTH". By leaving out the fact that we are praying to
our Father WHOSE WILL IS DONE IN HEAVEN, this 'modern' version is re-directing
your prayer away from God and toward someone or something else (in another
place).
Lastly, there is a major omission in the last half of verse
4. Verse 4 states: "And lead us not into temptation". But this verse
then leaves out: "... BUT DELIVER US FROM EVIL ..."
Personally, I want to be delivered from evil! How about you?
I think the reader will agree: This 'modern version' is NOT
the "Lord's Prayer" you want to be praying! Think about it.
Bible Question #11: After our new birth, how are we supposed
to relate to God?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Once we are born again we have a new standard for our lives;
it is Jesus Christ. The Bible tells us how we are to relate to him. Please turn
to Ephesians 5:1 . In a 'new' version it says:
"... be imitators of God ..."
Compare this to the Authorized King James:
"Be ye therefore FOLLOWERS of God ..."
Even though we are born again; can we possibly imitate God?
Can we be the judge of the Universe? Can we be at all places at the same time?
No way. We have a new nature, sure; but we are still only men.
Think about it: only Satan tries to imitate God! Ever since
the garden of Eden, Satan has tried to direct worship toward HIMSELF. We, as
men, could NEVER imitate God. We are only men. We can only FOLLOW God!
Publishers of 'new', 'more up to date' versions are
encouraging us to be like Satan! (i.e. to think of ourselves as God).
Bible Question #12: While we're talking about Satan, now is
a good time to ask Bible question #12. What does the Bible say is the test for
the antichrist?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Let's turn to 1st John 4:3 . A 'modern' version says:
"and every spirit which does not confess Jesus is not
of God. This is the spirit of antichrist, of which you heard that it was
coming, and now it is in the world already."
Again, in 'modern' versions, key pieces of scripture are
left out. Compare this same verse with the FULL reading in the King James. In
the KJV it says:
"And every spirit that confesseth not that JESUS CHRIST
IS COME IN THE FLESH is not of God: and this is that [spirit] of antichrist,
whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the
world."
Remember, evil spirits did confess Jesus. In Luke 4:34 (and
in Mark 1:24) a man having a "spirit of an unclean devil" said to
Jesus:
"... Let [us] alone; what have we to do with thee,
[thou] JESUS of Nazareth? art thou come to destroy us? I know thee who thou
art; the Holy One of God."
Contrary to what 'modern' versions would tell you, the
antichrist DOES KNOW who Jesus is. But, what the antichrist CAN NOT say, is
that: "JESUS CHRIST IS COME IN THE FLESH".
Modern versions not only need to get their gospel straight;
they also need to correctly quote the true test for the antichrist.
Also, take a look at this: Compare 1st John 4:3 again
between a 'modern' version and the King James Bible. Look one more time at what
the 'new' version says:
"... which does not confess Jesus is ..."
But, in the King James it says:
"... that confesseth not that Jesus CHRIST is ..."
Besides the doctrinal error, these 'modern' versions
continually assault the Lordship and Deity of Jesus Christ. If the King James
says: "Jesus Christ", many times the modern versions will only say:
"Jesus". If the King James says: "Lord Jesus Christ, "many
times the 'modern' versions will only say: "Lord" or will only say:
"Jesus".
Bible Question #13: In the wilderness, when Satan tempted
Jesus to turn a stone into bread for food; what was Jesus' response?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Turn to Luke 4:4 . In a 'modern' version it reads: "...
man shall not live by bread alone".
Well, that's true and that's part of it. But, what about the
rest of the verse? Notice: words have been LEFT OUT in these 'modern versions'.
The Authorized (King James) Bible has the correct and full
reading. In Luke 4:4 it says:
"... man shall not live by bread alone, BUT BY EVERY
WORD OF GOD".
The fact that we are nourished by bread is true, but that is
only part of the story. Our lives are sustained by the Word of God. We need
bread to sustain our bodies; but, these 'modern' versions leave out our need
for the life sustaining Word of God.
Bible Question #14: Whom does Jesus say has
"everlasting life"?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
For the answer; open your Bible to John 6:47. In a 'modern
version' it says something like: "... he who believes has eternal life
..."
Notice how this does not make much sense. This verse does
not have enough information.
Compare this to the King James. In it, Jesus is quoted as
saying:
"... He that believeth ON ME hath everlasting
life."
Everyone who believes DOES NOT have everlasting life; only
those who believe ON JESUS. In John 6:47, the two words "ON ME" are
vital.
Jesus Christ is the rock of our salvation. We must believe
ON HIM to have everlasting life. Again, key Christian doctrine is missing.
How can missing information be a 'better', 'improved',
translation?
Bible Question #15: Who slew Goliath?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This is an easy one! Now turn to 2nd Samuel 21:19. Depending
on the 'modern version' it will say something like:
"... Elhanan ... killed Goliath ..."
What do you mean Elhanan killed Goliath!? This is wrong you
say. Most Sunday school children know that David slew Goliath! Well, you're
right. This is clearly in error.
Look at the same passage in your King James Bible. The
Authorized King James Bible has the correct reading which is:
"... Elhanan ... slew THE BROTHER OF Goliath ..."
Spiritually, as Christians, we are the equivalent of David.
Spiritually, Satan is the equivalent of Goliath. Just as David slew Goliath
(with a rock), we Christians are "more than conquerors" as we have
overcome (slew) Satan by the blood of the lamb (Jesus Christ, the rock!) and by
the word of our testimony. Not only are 'modern versions' in error; but major
doctrinal issues are involved here. Think about it.
Bible Question #16: Jesus said that our heavenly Father will
forgive us of our sins. However, we are told that; likewise, there is something
we must do. Do you remember what it is?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Let's turn, in a 'modern version' to Mark 11:26. Are you not
able to find it? Are the verses in Mark chapter 11 numbered 23, 24, 25 and then
27!? Is verse 26 missing? Well, there is nothing wrong with your eyesight!
Verse 26 is not there (or it is in brackets, casting doubt on it). It's ANOTHER
omission.
Now turn to the same verse in your Authorized (King James)
Version. The KJV says:
"BUT IF YE DO NOT FORGIVE, NEITHER WILL YOUR FATHER
WHICH IS IN HEAVEN FORGIVE YOUR TRESPASSES."
Oh, man! This is important to know! Leaving out verse 26,
leaves out an important piece of Christian doctrine. Verse 26 needs to be
there! And, that's why it is properly included in your King James Bible.
Bible Question #17: What did Jesus say about religious
hypocrisy?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
First, let's take a look in a 'modern' version of the Bible.
What does it say in Matthew 23:14?
Actually, it says nothing! ( The verse is missing in many
modern versions ).
For the word of God, turn to the same verse in your King
James Bible. What does it say?
"WOE UNTO YOU SCRIBES AND PHARISEES, HYPOCRITES! FOR YE
DEVOUR WIDOWS' HOUSES, AND FOR A PRETENCE MAKE LONG PRAYER: THEREFORE YE SHALL
RECEIVE THE GREATER DAMNATION."
Jesus does not like hypocrisy. Notice how God knows our
heart!
Bible Question #18: What did Jesus say we are to do relative
to each other?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
For the answer see: James 5:16. Many 'modern' versions say
something similar to:
"... confess your sins to one another ..."
( Notice this could lead to gossip and further sinning ).
But the King James says:
"... confess your FAULTS one to another ..."
Notice the 2 different words. The Bible says that ONLY God
can forgive sins. We are supposed to confess our SINS to Him. We should confess
our FAULTS to one another, but SINS are confessed to God. Faults and sins are
entirely different.
Can you see how 'modern' versions have led Catholics astray?
And, if it has led Catholics astray; couldn't the same thing happen to us if
we, our spouse, our children, or our pastor, uses a 'modern' version?
Bible Question #19: Do modern 'versions' of the Bible have
anyother problems?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unfortunately, the answer is yes. In the Bible, the New
Testament sometimes re-quotes the Old Testament. An example of this is in Mark
1:2
Compare the two Bibles again. In a 'new version' it says:
"As it is written in Isaiah the prophet, ..."
Compare this to the King James, it says:
"As it is written IN THE PROPHETS, ... "
Comment: The scripture quoted in Mark 1:2 DID NOT come from
Isaiah as stated in these 'modern' versions of the Bible. The scripture quoted
is from Malachi 3:1 ! Check it out.
Not only do 'modern' versions misquote God; they even
misquote themselves!
The KJV reading of: "As it is written IN THE PROPHETS,
... " is correct, because the verse is from Malachi 3:1, and Malachi was a
prophet!
So far we have seen all kinds of problems in these 'new',
'modern', 'more easily readable', 'more up to date', etc. etc. versions of the
Bible. This leads to the last Bible question:
Bible Question #20: Why is it important to have the true
Word of God (vs. a corruption)?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The answer, to our question, is found in 1 Peter 2:2. Please
turn there now.
In a 'modern version' it says:
"... long for the pure spiritual milk, that by it you
may grow up to salvation; "
The King James Bible tells us to:
"... desire the SINCERE milk OF THE WORD, that ye may
GROW thereby:"
My comment is that this verse, in 'new', 'modern,' versions,
contains 2 problems:
First, we are to desire the sincere milk OF THE WORD. The
purpose is "to grow thereby". Modern versions leave out "OF THE
WORD". It's God's word that feeds us. If, like the modern verse, we leave
out "the word" how can we grow? Or, if we get a corrupted translation,
how can we grow on 'junk food'?
Second, contrary to 'modern' versions, we DO NOT grow up to
salvation. That says salvation is by works! We are saved by grace, and not of
works, lest any man should boast. (Ephesians 2:8-9) Think about it.
In this chapter, we reviewed the doctrine contained in a
"broad" array of 'new', 'modern', 'more easily readable', versions of
the Bible. We compared 'modern' doctrine to the KJV. And, we have found
significant error.
But, all 'modern' versions do not follow this 'broad'
profile. So, in the next chapter, we will analyze 3 versions of the Bible which
need an individual, case by case, analysis.
C H A P T E R 2
B I B L E C O M P A R I S O N :
(A N I N D I V I D U A L A N A L Y S I S)
In chapter 1, we compared the King James Bible to a broad
array of 'new versions'. However, a few 'versions' need a case by case,
'individual', analysis.
In this chapter we will compare the 'New King James Version'
(NKJV), the 'Living Bible' (LB), and the 'Amplified Bible' (AMP) to the KJV.
The K J V V S. The N K J V
Gen 1:21
KJV: "And God created great WHALES ..."
NKJV: "So God created great sea creatures ..."
COMMENT: There is a difference between sea creatures and
whales.
Matt 12:40
KJV: "For as Jonas was three days and three nights in
the WHALES's belly ..."
NKJV: "For as Jonah was three days and three nights in
the belly of the great fish ..."
Gen. 2:7
KJV: "... and man became a living SOUL."
NKJV: "... and man became a living being."
Comment: A MAJOR difference between man and beast is that
man is the ONLY creature with a soul. New versions miss this
point.
Gen. 2:13
KJV: "... land of ETHIOPIA."
NKJV: "... land of Cush."
Comment: I know where Ethiopia is, but where is Cush?
Gen. 3:4-5
KJV: "And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not
surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye at thereof, then your eyes
shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods knowing good and evil."
NKJV: "Then the serpent said to the woman, "You
will not surely die. For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will
be opened, and you will be like God knowing good and evil."
COMMENT: This is major blasphemy! God (with a big G) is not
evil! Think about the difference.
Gen. 22:8
KJV: "And Abraham said, My son, God will provide
HIMSELF a lamb for a burnt offering ..."
NKJV: "And Abraham said, My son, God will provide for
Himself the lamb for a burnt offering.
Comment: It is true, as the NKJV says, that God did provide
FOR himself a sacrifice. However, that is only part of the story. The NKJV
totally misses the deeper, and more amazing truth: GOD WAS the sacrifice! The
KJV wording is perfect: "God will provide HIMSELF" (in the form of
his son Jesus Christ) as the sacrifice.
1 Ki.10:28
KJV: "and LINEN yarn: the king's merchants received the
LINEN yarn at a price."
NKJV: "and Keveh; the king's merchants bought them in
Keveh at the current price."
Comment: I know what linen is, but what is Keveh?
Dan. 3:25
KJV: "... and the form of the fourth is like THE SON OF
GOD."
NKJV: (footnote) "or a son of the gods"
COMMENT: See comments in chapter 1 of this report. There is
a big difference between "THE SON OF GOD" and a
son of 'plural' gods!
Zech 11:17
KJV: "Woe to the IDOL shepherd that leaveth the flock!
NKJV: "Woe to the worthless shepherd, who leaves the
flock"
Matt. 2:4
KJV: "... he (King Herod) DEMANDED of them where Christ
should be born."
NKJV: "... he inquired of them where Christ was to be
born."
COMMENT: King Herod, furious over the arrival of Jesus, (and
wanting to do away with Him) did not inquire where Christ
should be born, he DEMANDED to know!
Matt 18:11
KJV: "For the Son of Man IS come to save that which was
lost."
NKJV: "For the Son of Man has come to save that which
was lost."
Comment: The NJKV says Jesus Christ "has come" to
save that
which was lost; a PAST TENSE statement. The NKJV implies
that ALL who were to be saved, HAVE BEEN saved. Not true. Anyone TODAY can be
saved by Jesus. The correct reading is PRESENT TENSE. There are NUMEROUS places
where the NKJV changes the verb tense. These types of NKJV corruptions are very
subtle.
Matt 20:20
KJV: "Then came to him the mother of Zebedee's children
with her sons, WORSHIPPING him ..."
NKJV: "Then the mother of Zebedee's sons came to Him
with her sons, kneeling down ..."
COMMENT: Kneeling down is not even close to 'worship'.
John 1:3
KJV: "All things were made BY Him ..."
NKJV: "All things were made through Him ..."
COMMENT: 'BY' and through are totally different. Think about
it.
John 4:24
KJV: "God is A Spirit ..."
NKJV: "God is Spirit ..."
COMMENT: For the NKJV to say: "God is spirit" is
to infer that ALL spirits are God. Not true. We know there are evil spirits.
And we know in God there is NO evil. Thus the KJV is correct: God is 'A'
spirit.
Acts 12:4
KJV: "... after Easter ..."
NKJV: "... after Passover"
Acts 4:13
KJV: "Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John,
and perceived that they were unlearned and IGNORANT men ..."
NKJV: "Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and
John, and perceived that they were uneducated and untrained men ..."
COMMENT: Peter and John had been with Jesus for some time.
They WERE NOT untrained. Jesus HAD trained them. They were, however, ignorant
(In the eyes of the Pharisees).
Acts 17:22
KJV: "Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and
said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are TOO
SUPERSTITIOUS."
NKJV: "Then Paul stood in the midst of the Areopagus
and said, Men of Athens, I perceive that in all things you are very
religious;"
Comment: Come on! Being very religious and TOO SUPERSTITIOUS
are entirely different!
2 Cor. 2:17
KJV: "For we are not as many, which CORRUPT the Word of
God ..."
NKJV:"For we are not, as so many, peddling the Word of
God ..."
COMMENT: Peddling and corrupting are very different.
"Modern" versions try and hide from the truth they are 'corrupting'
the Word of God.
Gal. 2:20
KJV: "I AM crucified with Christ ..."
NKJV: "I have been crucified with Christ ..."
COMMENT: The NKJV is saying their crucifixion is over! Not
true. The believers crucifixion is an ongoing, PRESENT TENSE, transaction.
Eph. 5:1
KJV: "Therefore be FOLLOWERS of God ..."
NKJV: "Therefore be imitators of God ..."
Comment: See chapter 1 of this report for a full analysis.
Only Satan tries to imitate God as Satan wants to be worshipped AS God. Born
again believers cannot imitate God. We can't rule the universe. We can only
follow God. Remember Jesus DID NOT tell his "fishers of men" to
imitate Him. Jesus said: "follow me ...".
Philipians 3:8
KJV: "DUNG"
NKJV: "rubbish"
COMMENT: I have rubbish on the top of my office desk, but I
don't want 'dung' there!!!
1 Tim 6:10
KJV: "For the love of money is THE root of all evil
..."
NKJV: "For the love of money is a root of all kinds of
evil ..."
COMMENT: There is a big difference between the NKJV's
"a" root and the correct KJV reading of "THE" root.
1 Tim 6:20
KJV: "... oppositions of science falsely so
called"
NKJV: "... contradictions of what is falsely called
knowledge"
2 Tim 2:15
KJV: "STUDY to shew thyself approved unto God ..."
NKJV: "Be diligent to present yourself approved to
God..."
COMMENT: We are supposed to STUDY the Word of God.
Jude 15
KJV: "... and of all their hard SPEECHES which ungodly
sinners have spoken against Him."
NKJV: "... and of all the harsh things which ..."
COMMENT: There is a difference between speeches and things.
K J V V S. L B
In this section we compare the King James to the
"Living Bible" (LB). The Living Bible is a 'paraphrase'. In a
'paraphrased' Bible the renderings are arbitrary.
In this comparison we will show the result of a
'paraphrased' approach.
Lev. 3:13b
KJV: "AND THE SONS OF AARON SHALL SPRINKLE THE BLOOD
THEREOF UPON THE ALTAR ROUND ABOUT."
LB: "The priest shall throw its blood against the sides
of the altar."
Numbers 25:11
KJV: "PHINEHAS ... HATH TURNED MY WRATH AWAY FROM THE
CHILDREN OF ISRAEL."
LB: "Phinehas has turned away my anger for he was as
angry as I."
COMMENT: How can someone be as angry as God?
Judges 7:20b
KJV: "AND THEY CRIED, THE SWORD OF THE LORD AND OF
GIDEON."
LB: "All yelling for the Lord and for Gideon."
Comment: The two verses are not even close!
Judges 19:2
KJV: "AND HIS CONCUBINE PLAYED THE WHORE AGAINST
HIM."
LB: "But she became angry with him and ran away."
Comment: Are PLAYING THE WHORE and running away the same?
I Sam. 20:30
KJV: "THOU SON OF A PERVERSE REBELLIOUS WOMAN."
LB: "You son of a bitch."
Comment: Some 'modern' versions, like the LB, actually
contain vulgarity. Notice this verse. Also, take a look in an NIV 'bible' in
Ezekiel 23:20.
II Sam. 16:4b
KJV: "AND ZIBA SAID, I HUMBLY BESEECH THEE THAT I MAY
FIND GRACE IN THY SIGHT, MY LORD, O KING."
LB: "Thank you, thank you, sir, Ziba replied."
Comment: There is NO similarity between these two verses.
I Kings 18:27
KJV: "CRY ALOUD: FOR HE IS A GOD: EITHER HE IS TALKING,
OR HE IS PURSUING."
LB: "Perhaps he is talking to someone or else is out
sitting on the toilet."
Comment: Sitting on a toilet ???
II Kings 21:6b
KJV: "HE WROUGHT MUCH WICKEDNESS IN THE SIGHT OF THE
LORD, TO PROVOKE HIM TO ANGER."
LB: "So the Lord was very angry, for Manasseh was an
evil man in God's opinion."
COMMENT: In God's opinion?
II Chr. 26:4
KJV: "AND HE DID THAT WHICH WAS RIGHT IN THE SIGHT OF
THE LORD ACCORDING TO ALL THAT HIS FATHER AMAZIAH DID."
LB: "He followed in the footsteps of his father Amaziah
and was in general a good king as far as the Lord's opinion of him was
concerned."
COMMENT: Again, God does NOT have opinions. Men have
opinions.
Job 3:26
KJV: "I WAS NOT IN SAFETY. NEITHER HAD I REST, NEITHER
WAS I QUIET: YET TROUBLE CAME."
LB: "I was not fat and lazy yet trouble struck me
down."
Psalm 34:20
KJV: "HE KEEPETH ALL HIS BONES: NOT ONE OF THEM IS
BROKEN."
LB: "God even protects him from accidents."
COMMENT: There are NO ACCIDENTS with God!
Ezekiel 2:1
KJV: "AND HE SAID UNTO ME, SON OF MAN, STAND UPON THY
FEET, AND I WILL SPEAK UNTO THEE."
LB: "And he said unto me, Stand up, son of dust and I
will talk to you."
COMMENT: In the book of Ezekiel `son of dust' is used in
place of `son of man'. Does the term 'son of dust' sound as derogatory to you
like as it does to me?
Zech. 2:8
KJV: "HE THAT TOUCHETH YOU TOUCHETH THE APPLE OF HIS
EYE."
LB: "For he who harms you sticks his finger in Jehovah's
eye."
Zech. 13:6
KJV: "AND ONE SHALL SAY UNTO HIM, WHAT ARE THESE WOUNDS
IN THINE HANDS? THEN HE SHALL ANSWER, THOSE WITH WHICH I WAS WOUNDED IN THE
HOUSE OF MY FRIENDS."
LB: "And if someone asks then, what are these scars on
your chest and your back, you will say, I got into a brawl at the home of a
friend."
COMMENT: The footnote about this verse says: "That this
is not a passage referring to Christ is clear from the context. This is a false
prophet who is lying about the reasons for his scars." We wonder how the
editor of the LB (Taylor) came to know this.
Mark 9:29
KJV: "AND HE SAID UNTO THEM, THIS KIND CAN COME FORTH
BY NOTHING, BUT BY PRAYER AND FASTING."
LB: "Jesus replied, Cases like this require
prayer."
COMMENT: Notice: fasting is left out! Wonder why Satan does
not want us to fast?
Luke 23:42
KJV: "AND HE SAID UNTO JESUS, LORD, REMEMBER ME WHEN
THOU COMEST INTO THY KINGDOM."
LB: "Then he said, Jesus, remember me when you come
into your kingdom."
COMMENT: What justification is there to strip Jesus of his
title "Lord"?
John 1:17
KJV: "FOR THE LAW WAS GIVEN BY MOSES, BUT GRACE AND
TRUTH CAME BY JESUS CHRIST."
LB: "For Moses gave us only the law with its rigid
demands and merciless justice while Jesus Christ brought us loving forgiveness
as well."
COMMENT: The Old Testament contained God's mercy and grace,
too.
John 2:4
KJV: "WOMAN, WHAT HAVE I TO DO WITH THEE? MINE HOUR IS
NOT YET COME."
LB: "I can't help you now, He said, It isn't yet my
time for miracles."
COMMENT: His hour would come at Calvary. His HOUR and His
MIRACLES are not the same.
John 3:13
KJV: "AND NO MAN HATH ASCENDED UP TO HEAVEN, BUT HE
THAT CAME DOWN FROM HEAVEN, EVEN THE SON OF MAN WHICH IS IN HEAVEN."
LB: "For only I, the Messiah, have come to earth and
will return to heaven again."
Comment: Not true, LB! Remember the angels on Jacob's
ladder?
John 6:69
KJV: "AND WE BELIEVE AND ARE SURE THAT THOU ART THAT
CHRIST, THE SON OF THE LIVING GOD."
LB: "And we believe them and know you are the holy Son
of God."
COMMENT: The word Christ means "anointed". Why
does the LB strip him of his anointing?
John 13:26
KJV: "JESUS ANSWERED, HE IT IS, TO WHOM I SHALL GIVE A
SOP, WHEN I HAVE DIPPED IT."
LB: "He told me it is the one I honor by giving the
bread dipped in the sauce."
COMMENT: Was Jesus Christ really HONORING Judas?
Acts 9:5
KJV: "AND HE SAID, WHO ART THOU, LORD? AND THE LORD
SAID, I AM JESUS WHOM THOU PERSECUTEST: IT IS HARD FOR THEE TO KICK AGAINST THE
PRICKS."
LB: "Who is speaking sir, Paul asked. And the voice
replied, I am Jesus, the one you are persecuting. Now get up and go into the
city and await my further instructions."
COMMENT: Jesus title "LORD" is changed to `SIR'.
And Saul's name is changed to Paul.
I Cor. 16:22
KJV: "IF ANY MAN LOVE NOT THE LORD JESUS CHRIST, LET
HIM BE ANATHEMA MARANATHA."
LB: "If anyone does not love the Lord, that person is
cursed, Lord Jesus, come."
COMMENT: Once again; Jesus Christ is separated from title
'Lord'
II Cor. 8:9
KJV: "FOR YE KNOW THE GRACE OF OUR LORD JESUS
CHRIST."
LB: "You know how full of love and kindness our Lord
Jesus was."
COMMENT: Lord Jesus Christ is stripped down to: Lord Jesus.
I Tim. 2:5-6
KJV: "FOR THERE IS ONE GOD, AND ONE MEDIATOR BETWEEN
GOD AND MEN THE MAN CHRIST JESUS, WHO GAVE HIMSELF A RANSOM FOR ALL, TO BE
TESTIFIED IN DUE TIME."
LB: "That God is on one side and all the people on the
other side, and Christ Jesus Himself, man, is between them to bring them
together by giving His life for all mankind."
I Tim. 3:16
KJV: "AND WITHOUT CONTROVERSY GREAT IS THE MYSTERY OF
GODLINESS: GOD WAS MANIFEST IN THE FLESH."
LB: "It is quite true that the matter to live a godly
life is not an easy matter, but the answer lies in Christ who came to earth as
a man."
COMMENT: Remember the test for the anti-christ. The
anti-christ cannot say: "JESUS CHRIST IS COME IN THE FLESH". Notice
how the LB dances around this verse! Apparently the LB cannot say "GOD WAS
MANIFEST IN THE FLESH!
I John 1:7
KJV: "AND THE BLOOD OF JESUS CHRIST HIS SON CLEANSETH
US FROM ALL SIN."
LB: "The blood of Jesus, His Son, cleanses us from
every sin."
COMMENT: Jesus Christ is stripped down to Jesus.
Rev. 6:17
KJV: "FOR THE GREAT DAY OF HIS WRATH IS COME ..."
LB: "Because the great day of THEIR anger is come and
who can survive it?"
Comment: What do "HIS" wrath and "THEIR"
anger have in common?
K J V V S. A M P.
In this section we compare the King James to the
"Amplified Bible" (AMP). In this comparison, we will see the results
of an 'amplified' approach.
Gen 1:21
KJV: "And God created great WHALES ..."
AMP: "God created the great sea monsters ..."
Matt. 12:40
KJV: "For as Jonas was three days and three nights in
the WHALES's belly ..."
AMP: "For even as Jonah was three days and three nights
in the belly of the sea monster ..."
COMMENT: God creates monsters?
Gen. 2:7
KJV: "... and man became a living SOUL."
AMP: "... and man became a living being."
Comment: A MAJOR difference between man and beast is that
man is the ONLY creature with a SOUL.
Gen. 3:4-5
KJV: "And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not
surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes
shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods knowing good and evil."
AMP: "But the serpent said to the woman, You shall not
surely die. For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be
opened, and you will be as God, knowing the difference between good and
evil."
COMMENT: This is major blasphemy! God (with a big G) is not
evil! Think about the difference between "as gods" and "as
God".
Lev. 3:13b
KJV: "... and the sons of Aaron shall SPRINKLE the
blood thereof upon the altar round about."
AMP: "... and the sons of Aaron shall throw its blood
against the altar round about."
Judges 7:20b
KJV: "... and they cried, the sword OF the LORD, and OF
Gideon."
AMP: "... and they cried, The sword for the LORD and
Gideon."
Comment: Notice: "OF" was changed to
"FOR".
2 Sam. 21:19
KJV: "... Elhanan ... slew THE BROTHER OF Goliath
..."
AMP: "... Elhanan ... slew Goliath ..."
Comment: The scholars missed this one! Most Sunday school
children know that DAVID slew Goliath.
Daniel 3:25
KJV: "... and the form of the fourth is like THE SON OF
GOD."
AMP: "... And the form of the fourth is like a son of
the gods!"
COMMENT: It was Jesus Christ, THE SON OF GOD, who was with
Shadrach, Messach and Abednego. It was Jesus Christ who saved them from the
fiery furnace. And, it is Jesus Christ who saves you and me from the fiery
furnace (i.e. Hell). There is a big difference between "THE SON OF
GOD" and 'a son' of 'plural' gods! Think about it.
Zech. 11:17
KJV: "Woe to the IDOL shepherd that leaveth the
flock!"
AMP: "Woe to the worthless and foolish shepherd who
deserts the flock!"
Comment: Idol and worthless/foolish are very different.
Zech. 13:6
KJV: "And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds
IN THINE HANDS? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the
house of my friends."
AMP: "And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds
on your breast - between your hands? Then he will answer, Those with which I
was wounded [when disciplined] in the house of my (loving) friends."
COMMENT: Folks: This is a verse prophesying Jesus Christ.
Jesus was wounded IN HIS HANDS (and also on His back), BUT NOT ON HIS BREAST!
Also, Jesus WAS NOT BEING DISCIPLINED when He went to the cross! Jesus did
nothing wrong! And, lastly, Jesus WAS in the house of "His" friends,
but they WERE NOT BEING "loving" back to him!
Matt. 18:11
KJV: "For the Son of Man IS come to save that which was
lost."
AMP: "For the Son of man came to save (from the penalty
of eternal death) that which was lost."
Comment: The AMP says Jesus Christ "came" to save
that which was lost; a PAST TENSE statement. The AMP implies that ALL who were
to be saved, HAVE BEEN saved. Not true. Anyone, TODAY, can be saved by Jesus
Christ. The correct reading is PRESENT TENSE. This AMP corruption is very
subtle but very important.
Mark 1:2
KJV: "As it is written IN THE PROPHETS, Behold, I send
my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee."
AMP: "Just as it is written in the prophet Isaiah:
Behold, I send My messenger before Your face, who will make ready Your
way;"
Comment: Sometimes verses in the New Testament requote the
Old Testament. This is happening here. The verse being quoted is not in Isaiah,
as the AMP says, it is from Malachi 3:1. Check it out! Not only does the AMP
misquote the Word of God, it even mis-quotes itself. The KJV has the correct
reading: "As it is written in the prophets ...", because Malachi was
a prophet!
Luke 2:33
KJV: "And JOSEPH and his mother marvelled at those
things which were spoken of him."
AMP: "And His [legal] father and [His] mother were
marvelling at what was said about Him;"
Comment: This is blasphemy! Contrary to what the AMP would
say, Joseph WAS NOT Jesus' father! God WAS Jesus' father! Every Christian knows
this! And contrary to the AMP, God was also Jesus' LEGAL father. Think about
what the AMP is saying: If Jesus' had an earthly father, then He is just any
man. If He is just any man, then we are still in our sins. If we are still in
our sins, then we are not saved. If we are not saved, then we have a BIG
PROBLEM.
John 3:13
KJV: "And NO MAN hath ascended up to heaven, but he
that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven."
AMP: "And yet no one has ever gone up to heaven; but
there is One Who has come down from heaven, the Son of man [Himself], Who is -
dwells, Whose home is - in heaven."
Comment: Not true AMP. There HAVE BEEN others who have gone
up to heaven. Remember the angels of Jacob's ladder? They were ascending and
descending. The KJV has the correct reading which is: "... NO MAN hath
ascended up to heaven ..."
Acts 12:4
KJV: "... after Easter ..."
AMP: "... after the Passover ..."
Acts 17:22
KJV: "Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and
said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are TOO
SUPERSTITIOUS."
AMP: "So Paul, standing in the center of the Areopagus
[Mars Hill auditorium] said: Men of Athens, I perceive in every way - on every
hand and with every turn I make - that you are most religious ..."
Comment: Come on! Being "most religious" and
"TOO SUPERSTITIOUS" are entirely different!
1 Cor. 5:7b
KJV: "For even Christ our passover is sacrificed FOR
US:"
AMP: "... for Christ, our Passover [Lamb], has been
sacrificed."
COMMENT: Leaving out "FOR US" misses the point
entirely.
1 Cor. 16:22
KJV: "If any man love not the Lord JESUS CHRIST, let
him be Anathema Maranatha."
AMP: "If any one does not love the Lord ... he shall be
accursed ... "
COMMENT: Leaving out "JESUS CHRIST" leaves us
guessing as to whom the AMP wants us to love.
2 Cor. 2:17
KJV: "For we are not as many, which CORRUPT the Word of
God ..."
AMP: "For we are not, like so many ... peddling God's
Word ..."
COMMENT: Peddling and corrupting are very different.
'Modern' bibles try and hide from the truth that they are 'corrupting' the Word
of God.
Gal. 2:20
KJV: "I AM crucified with Christ ..."
AMP: "I have been crucified with Christ ..."
COMMENT: The AMP says their crucifixion is over! Not true.
The believers crucifixion is an ongoing, PRESENT TENSE, transaction.
Eph. 5:1
KJV: "Therefore be FOLLOWERS of God ..."
AMP: "Therefore be imitators of God ..."
Comment: The AMP documents Satan's position exactly. ONLY
Satan tries to IMITATE God as Satan wants to be worshipped AS God. Born again
believers cannot imitate God. We can't rule the universe. We can only follow
God. Remember Jesus DID NOT tell his "fishers of men" to imitate Him.
Jesus said: "follow me ...".
Philipians 3:8
KJV: "... and do count them but DUNG, that I may win
Christ,"
AMP: "... and consider it all to be mere rubbish
..."
1 Tim. 3:16
KJV: "... God was MANIFEST in the flesh ..."
AMP: "... He (God) was made visible in human flesh
..."
COMMENT: God wasn't just made visible, He was MANIFEST in
the flesh. The image of the beast, in Revelation, is going to be made visible!
1 Tim. 6:10
KJV: "For the love of money is THE root of all evil
..."
AMP: "For the love of money is a root of all kinds of
evil ..."
COMMENT: There is a big difference between AMP's
"a" root and the correct KJV reading of "THE" root.
1 Tim. 6:20
KJV: "... oppositions of SCIENCE falsely so
called"
AMP: "... contradictions in what is falsely called
knowledge"
1 Peter 2:2
KJV: "As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk OF THE
WORD, that ye may grow thereby:"
AMP: "Like new born babes ... desire - the pure
spiritual milk, that by it you may ... grow unto [completed] salvation."
COMMENT: The AMP leaves out "OF THE WORD". It's
God's Word that makes us grow. Also, unlike what the AMP says, we DO NOT grow
to "[completed] salvation". That says salvation is by works! That is
heresy. Remember: "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not
of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should
boast." (Ephesians 2: 8-9).
In chapters 1 and 2, we reviewed the doctrine contained in
'new', 'modern', 'more easily readable', versions of the Bible. Verses,
familiar to the reader, were used to compare 'modern' versions to the
Authorized King James Bible. As we have seen, 'new' versions contain major
error.
In a verse by verse (side by side) comparison, it has been
shown that 'modern' versions: Deny God was Jesus' father, omit the deity and
Lordship of Jesus Christ, omit Jesus' blood as the atonement for our sins,
corrupt the test for the antichrist, misquote Old Testament scripture, omit the
purpose of Jesus' coming to earth, omit the fact that Jesus was sacrificed FOR
US, omit the need for us to repent, omit the results of not receiving the gift
of everlasting life, corrupt the Lord's Prayer, and even misquote Bible stories
that most Sunday School children could repeat correctly.
In 'modern' versions we are told: There is more than 1 God,
that Joseph was Jesus' father, that justification/salvation is by works, that
we should try and imitate God (i.e. be like Satan), that anyone who believes
anything is saved, etc. etc. Clearly, something is wrong! So, are these
examples the "ONLY" problems in 'new' versions of the Bible? The
answer, unfortunately, is no. Further research into 'new' versions shows that,
not counting the Old Testament, there have been about 5,337 changes in the New
Testament alone!
Now, could random chance cause 5,337 problems in the New
Testament? Could key Christian doctrine become messed up by one verse
mistranslated here, one verse mistranslated there? How could ANY mistranslation
(or corruption) come about; since 'modern' translators have the King James
Bible to check their work?
No dear reader; random chance cannot explain this. Something
else is wrong! Somehow, the straight path in the King James Bible has become a
crooked path in these new 'versions'. How did 'new' versions become filled with
so much error? We will answer that question in the next chapter.
C H A P T E R 3
H O W C O U L D T H I S H A P P E N ?
In the Authorized King James Bible the Old Testament comes
from a Hebrew text called the 'Massoretic Text'; and, the New Testament comes
from a Greek text called the 'Textus Receptus'. MANY PEOPLE ASSUME THAT MODERN
VERSIONS ARE SIMPLY WORDING 'UPDATES' TO THE SAME HEBREW AND GREEK TEXTS (i.e. updates
to the Massoretic Text and updates to the Textus Receptus). This is what I
thought. To me, this was a logical assumption. But, I found out there was a
problem with my assumption; it was wrong!
Actually, a DIFFERENT Old Testament Hebrew text and a DIFFERENT
New Testament Greek text have been SUBSTITUTED in place of the Massoretic Text
and in place of the Textus Receptus.
As to the Old Testament, we learn that: "The NKJV and
all new versions have abandoned the Traditional Hebrew, Ben Chayyim Massoretic
Text, and follow Rudolph Kittel's 1937 corruption, Biblia Hebraica ..."
[S3P594].
Reader note: Rudolph Kittel was "... a German
rationalistic higher critic ... [who rejected] Biblical inerrancy and [was]
firmly devoted to evolutionism" [S19P9]. And the younger Kittel (Gerhard
Kittel) was the chief architect of Hitler's anti-semitism. It was Gerhard
Kittel who made the extermination of Jews "theologically respectable"
[S3P593].
As to the New Testament we find out that: "In our day
there are ... about 110 ... translations of the Bible or New Testament ... in
the English language alone ... Of those 110 ... only the King James Version
(Authorized) is translated from the Received Text (Textus Receptus). All the
others, even though no two of them agree with each other, were translated from
... the ... Westcott and Hort Text" [S14P3-4].
When this Westcott and Hort Greek text is compared with the
more than 5,000 known Greek New Testament manuscripts, it is found to DIS-AGREE
with them in 90-95% of the cases!
When the Textus Receptus is compared with the 5,000 known
Greek New Testament manuscripts, it is found to AGREE with them in 90-95% of
the cases.
Rudolph Kittel's corrupted O.T. text and Westcott and Hort's
corrupted N.T. text form the basis for more than 110 'modern' versions.
With a bad underlying Hebrew O.T. text, and with a bad
underlying Greek N.T. text, it DOESN'T MATTER how good a job a translation
committee tries to do: A house built on sand will fall. Thus, there are really
only 2 'versions' of the Bible: The Authorized King James Bible based on the
Massoretic Text and Textus Receptus, and then ALL the other 'modern versions'
based on 'different' Old and New Testaments.
The 'new' Bibles which publishers want to sell you, are NOT
new translations of the same, original, texts. Instead, they are a total
departure, based on a bad foundation.
B I B L E P U B L I
S H E R S C H A N G E G O D ' S W O R D S O N
P U R P O S E
Although 'new versions' come from the SAME CORRUPTED TEXTS,
they are all DIFFERENT from each other! Sounds amazing, but it is true! One
reason new versions differ from each other is that they have to! What I'm
saying is this:
For a 'new' version to be called a 'new' version, Bible
publishers MUST change God's words (and ignore His warning in the book of
Revelation). If they don't change God's words, they can't call it a 'NEW'
version!
So 'new', 'modern' versions come from corrupted, underlying
texts. Then, on top of that, publishers purposely change the translation so
they can sell it as a 'new' version!
Now, 'different' and 'changed' products are fine in the
business world, because this maximizes profits. But, 'different' and 'changed'
Bibles are DISASTROUS for Christian doctrine!
Think about this: Do you remember that game you played as a
child? You know the one where one person would tell something to a second. Then
that person would tell the same thing to a third. This would continue until the
last person would tell it to the first person.
Do you remember how the message was so messed up, by the
time it came around, that the first person could not recognize his/her own
message? The message that came back was not even close to the original! And
that was when everyone was TRYING to repeat the SAME message!
The message the Bible is repeating is the message of
salvation. We're talking about people's souls, here. We are talking about where
they will live for eternity. We're talking about an important message.
But, 'new', 'modern' versions (and their publishers) are
ignoring God's warning in Revelation and are PURPOSELY CHANGING the message
from Bible to Bible.
God says: straight is the path and narrow is the way that
leads to life eternal. And broad is the way that leads to destruction. (Matthew
7:13-14).
Clearly, 'modern' versions are on the wrong path. And with
more than 110+ of these in print; a broad road is being offered.
So, which path do we want to take? Should we take the path
that leads to life eternal or the broad road? And, which path should we teach,
encourage our family and friends to take?
W H A T D O I D
O N O W ?
Ok, you've been sold (or given) a 'new', 'modern' version of
the Bible. A good question would be: What do I do now?
I wrestled with this question for some time, before making
the following recommendations:
In my opinion, you have a DEFECTIVE PRODUCT. I think you
should go back to the store (or person) who sold you/gave you that 'modern'
Bible. I would take 30 minutes to talk with them. In Christian love, I would
take some sample verses of key Christian doctrine, agree on the right answer,
and then show them the error.
If you were RECENTLY SOLD the 'modern' Bible; then, you have
at least 3 options. In preference order, I would:
1) Trade in the 'modern' Bible for a King James Bible.
If they won't do that, then I would:
2) Ask for your money back and go get a King James Bible at
another store.
If they won't give you your money back, then I would:
3) Take the 'modern' Bible, mark up these sample errors, and
show them to others. I recommend showing them to: your pastor/Bible study
leader, your family, and your relatives.
NOTE: I would NOT personally USE a corrupted version in my
daily walk nor in my daily feeding on God's Word. I would ONLY use the
corrupted version to show others the error so they STAY OFF OF THE BROAD ROAD !
W E N E E D T O T
U R N A R O U N D A N D
G O B A C K!
Clearly 'modern versions' are going down the wrong road.
And, worse than that, they are trying to get Christians to go down the wrong road
with them!
When travellers realize they are lost, or when they realize
they are going down the wrong road; they stop, turn around, and go back to
where they took the wrong turn. Then, they get started onto the right road.
We need to stop, go back, and retrace the path of the Bible.
We will review the history of 'corrupted' versions; and, we will review the
history of the King James Bible. By doing so, we will find out how 'modern'
versions got onto the wrong road.
To re-trace the path, requires that we go back to the
beginning ...
C H A P T E R 4
" I N T H E B E G I N N I N G . . . "
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with
God and the Word was God" (John 1:1).
When the Word was written down, the Word was then called
'Scripture'.
The original recordings of Scripture are called
'autographs'. Animal skins and papyrus (paper) were used for these first
autographs. Unfortunately, because of decay, these original autographs no
longer exist. What does remain are copies, made by scribes, of these original
autographs. These scribal copies are called 'manuscripts'.
The manuscripts of the Old Testament were written in Hebrew
and the manuscripts of the New Testament were written in Greek. We do not have
many Old Testament manuscripts. But, we have more than 5,000 New Testament
manuscripts.
From these manuscripts variant readings are analyzed and an
agreed upon master 'text' is derived. From the agreed upon 'master text' a
Bible can then be translated into the desired language.
Thus our Bible was first the Word of God, then an original
'autograph', then a scribal copy 'manuscript', then an agreed upon 'master
text', then an English Bible.
G O D ' S T R U T H
T H E O L D T E S T A M E N T T E X T
"The Bible was written from 1650 BC to 90 AD"
[S4P96]. (These dates include both the Old and New Testaments). As to the Old
Testament:
"The Hebrew Scriptures were written by Moses and the
prophets and other inspired men to whom God had given prophetic gifts"
[S8P7].
The Old Testament text (Hebrew scriptures) were passed down
both orally and in the written form. As to the oral tradition, we know the
following:
"The original Hebrew manuscripts were not 'pointed',
that is, the written text was made up of consonants, without the vowel sounds that
make words pronounceable. The spoken text was passed down through the centuries
by the Hebrew priests, who by their public reading of the Scriptures gave full
understanding to the consonantal text" [S15P7].
This oral tradition continued until:
"... a Jewish sect known as the Massoretes, concerned
that the demise of this oral tradition would make the Hebrew Scriptures
incomprehensible, set out to produce a standardized copy of the Hebrew Old
Testament complete with vowel sounds" [S15P7].
Thus, the Massoretes standardized the Hebrew Text, giving us
the 'written tradition'.
In Alfred Levell's book "The Old Is Better"; we
are told how the Old Testament was copied and passed down in written form:
"For the Old Testament, the copying was done with
extreme care by the Jewish priesthood in the centuries before Christ ... After
the time of Christ, copies were made by Jewish scribes, and especially by those
from the 6th century onward called the Massoretes, who took extraordinary pains
to ensure the correctness of their copies" [S13P17].
The extraordinary pains that the Massoretes used included:
"... many complicated safeguards ... such as counting
the number of times each letter of the alphabet occurs in each book"
[S8P13].
David Fuller expands on the care which went into copying the
Hebrew manuscripts. He says:
"The Jews cherished the highest awe and veneration for
their sacred writings which they regarded as the 'Oracles of God'. They
maintained that God had more care of the letters and syllables of the Law than
of the stars of heaven, and that upon each tittle of it, mountains of doctrine
hung ... In the transcription of an authorized synagogue manuscript, rules were
enforced of the minutest character. The copyist must write with a particular
ink, on a particular parchment. He must write in so many columns, of such a
size, and containing just so many lines and words. No word to be written
without previously looking at the original. The copy, when completed, must be
examined and compared within thirty days; if four errors were found on one
parchment; the examination went no farther - the whole was rejected"
[S2P112-113]
In his book "God Wrote Only One Bible", Jasper
James Ray also speaks about the carefulness of the scribes:
"In making copies of the original manuscripts, the
Jewish scribes exercised the greatest possible care. When they wrote the name
of God in any form they were to reverently wipe their pen, and wash their whole
body before writing 'Jehovah' lest that holy name should be tainted even in writing.
The new copy was examined and carefully checked with the original almost
immediately, and it is said that if only one incorrect letter was discovered
the whole copy was rejected. Each new copy had to be made from an approved
manuscript, written with a special kind of ink, upon skins made from a 'clean'
animal. The writer had to pronounce aloud each word before writing it. In no
case was the word to be written from memory. They counted, not only the words,
but every letter, and how many times each letter occurred, and compared it to
the original" [S4P94-95].
Notice: These 2 previous historical accounts differ slightly
in a couple of places: namely did 1 or 4 errors cause the rejection of the
whole copy; and did the copy get examined almost immediately or within 30 days.
Suffice it to say that, even though these 2 quotes differ somewhat, the copies
were made with extreme care. And, that is the point.
Therefore, we can have confidence in the Massoretic Old
Testament text, because of what we have just learned, as well as:
"... the extreme reverence with which the Jews regarded
their Scriptures affords a powerful guarantee against any deliberate corruption
of the text" [S2P118].
And the Massoretic Old Testament has also been confirmed
through other means, namely the:
"... many secondary witnesses ... including
translations into other languages, quotations used by friends and enemies of
biblical religion, and evidence from early printed texts" [S18P153].
Additionally, David Fuller points out (about the Massoretic
Old Testament text):
"The Old Testament, precisely as we have it, was
endorsed by Jesus Christ, the Son of God ... The Old Testament was our Lord's
only study book .... Five hundred and four times is the Old Testament quoted in
the New" [S2P113-114].
In the booklet "God's Inspired Preserved Bible"
the author says (of the Massoretic Text):
"As a summary we may say that 10% of Christ's words
were taken directly from the Old Testament" [S7P7].
Thus, the Massoretic Old Testament Text has been carefully
reproduced and has been attested to by Jesus Christ. It is this Massoretic
Text, which forms the Old Testament, of our King James Bible.
G O D ' S T R U T H
T H E N E W T E S T A M E N T T E X T
"The books which make up the Bible were written over a
period of 1700 years from 1650 B.C. to 90 A.D. by men who were directly
inspired by God" [S4P96]. (These dates include both the Old and New
Testaments).
As to the New Testament:
"The last of the Apostles to pass away was John. His
death is usually placed about 100 A.D. In his closing days he co-operated in
collecting and forming of those writings we call the New Testament"
[S4P94].
"John the Apostle was said to be about the only writer
of the New Testament who did not die a violent death as a martyr. Then,
following the completion of the New Testament, most of the men who translated
the Bible manuscripts into the language of the common people were put to death.
History reveals the surprising fact that it was members of the clergy, those
supposed to be ministers of Christ, who directed and carried out the cruel
deeds of martyrdom" [S4P96].
We now have about 5,000 manuscripts of the New Testament.
These manuscripts were written in Greek. And, as we have said earlier; the
Greek Text used in the King James Bible, agrees with 90-95% of these 5,000
manuscripts.
Later, we will discuss the 5-10% of the manuscripts and why
they are different.
Because the King James New Testament agrees with the
majority of these 5,000 manuscripts, it is called the 'Majority Text'. It has
also been referred to as the 'Traditional Text' and it is also called 'The
Textus Receptus'.
The New Testament of the KJV got its name 'Textus Receptus'
because; in 1624 the Elzevir brothers printed, in the preface of their 1624
edition of the Greek New Testament, the following words (translated into
English):
"Therefore thou hastthe text (textum) now received
(receptum) by all, in which we give nothing altered or corrupt. From Textum
Receptum came the words we now use as the Textus Receptus, or Received
Text" [S4P96].
So the King James Bible is called the 'Majority Text', the
'Traditional Text', the 'Textus Receptus' and the 'Received Text'. All of these
names refer to the SAME Greek New Testament Text. All of these names refer to
the King James Bible.
For this report I will be use the term 'Traditional Majority
Text' to describe the text which underlies the King James Bible.
And, I will use the term 'Corrupted Minority Text' to
describe the substitute text used in 'modern' versions.
Now, let's trace the history of both the 'Traditional
Majority Text' and the 'Corrupted Minority Text' and their translations into
various languages.
C H A P T E R 5
G O D ' S T R U T H
T H E P E S H I T T
A B I B L E ( 150 A.D. )
( The Traditional Majority Text In Syrian )
After the Apostle John died, the Church used its collection
of New Testament manuscripts. With the guidance of the Holy Spirit, these
separate manuscripts were brought together into codex (book) form.
In the very early years of the Church, the Traditional
Majority Text (i.e. the Bible) was called the Greek Vulgate; Greek because it
was written in Greek and Vulgate because Vulgate means:
"... that which is popular; the usual or best known,
and most used by the majority of the people" [S4P97].
Then around 150 A.D. the Greek Vulgate (the Traditional
Majority Text) was translated into Syrian. This Bible, for the Syrian Church,
was named the 'Peshitta Bible'. Syriac scholars state that the Peshitta Bible
was:
"... careful, faithful, simple, direct, literal
version, clear and forceful in style" [S4P97].
In his book: "Believing Bible Study", Edward F.
Hills compares the Syrian Peshitta Bible to the Traditional Majority Greek
Text:
"The Peshitta Syriac version agrees closely with the
Traditional text found in the vast majority of the Greek New Testament
manuscripts ..." and he says: "... the Peshitta was regarded as one
of the most important witnesses to the antiquity of the Traditional text"
[S8P94].
The statement above is VERY, VERY, important. The original
reason (i.e. excuse) given by Westcott and Hort to make a 'new' (i.e.
corrupted) Greek New Testament was that the Textus Receptus did not date back
to the early manuscripts. The quote above shows the 'Traditional Majority
Text', i.e. the text used in the King James Bible, dates back to the early
Syrian Church, and thus to the earliest manuscripts.
It used to be that: "... some scholars of the
nineteenth century believed that the 'Majority Text' was a fourth century
recension and did not represent the earliest manuscripts ... This [theory] has
been abandoned by most present day scholars" [S3P480].
Isn't it appropriate that the Traditional Majority Text can
be traced back to the early Church in Syria. I say this because it was in
Syria, specifically at Antioch the capital of Syria, where believers were first
called 'Christians'! ( Acts 11:26 ).
C H A P T E R 6
G O D ' S T R U T H
T H E I T A L I
C B I B L E ( 157 A.D. )
( The Traditional Majority Text In Latin )
At the same time as the Syrian translation, but in another
part of the world; the common language of Italy, France, and Great Britain was
not Syrian, but Latin. Thus, for these countries, a Bible was needed in Latin.
Therefore, the original Greek Vulgate (The Traditional Majority Text) was
translated from Greek into Latin. This is believed to have occurred no later
than 157 A.D.
"One of the first of these Latin Bibles was for the
Waldenses in northern Italy ..." [S4P98]. The Waldenses were: "lineal
descendents of the Italic Church" [S4P98-99]. More will be said of the
Waldenses later on, but as for the Italic Church suffice it to say that:
"Allix, an outstanding scholar, testifies that enemies
had corrupted many manuscripts, while the Italic Church handed them down in
their apostolic purity" [S4P98].
Augustine, speaking of the Latin Bibles, said: "Now
among translations themselves the Italian (Old Itala) is to be preferred to
others, for it keeps closer to the words without prejudice to clearness of
expression" [S2P208].
Dr. Nolan, who acquired fame for his Greek and Latin
scholarship, traced the history of the 'Traditional Majority Text' to the
Waldenses of the Italic Church. He says the Traditional Majority Text was:
"... adopted into the version that prevailed in the
Latin Church" [S4P99].
This means:
"... the basis for the King James Bible has been proven
to be in harmony with translations which go back to the second century"
[S4P99].
This statement about the Italic Bible of 157 A.D., along
with the statement about the Syrian Peshitta Bible of 150 A.D., both date the
'Traditional Majority Text' with the earliest Church manuscripts.
For terminology sake we will call this Latin Bible the 'Old
Latin'. And, as history shows, it's this 'Old Latin' Bible which agrees with
the 'Traditional Majority Text' used in the King James Bible.
This Old Latin Bible saw widespread use. In his book:
"An Understandable History of the Bible", Reverend Gipp says:
"The true gospel was fast spreading all over Europe due
to the Old Latin translation ..." [S1P82].
He goes on to say that:
"The Old Latin Vulgate was used by the Christians in
the churches ... throughout Europe. This Latin version became so used and
beloved by orthodox Christians and was in such common use by the common people
that it assumed the term 'Vulgate' as a name. Vulgate ... which is Latin for
common" [S1P67].
S A T A N I S N O T
F A R B E H I N D
In the Garden of Eden, after God spoke with Adam, Satan came
by to offer his own translation!
It seems to follow; that whenever God makes His original,
it's not long before Satan comes by with a counterfeit.
Satan will offer a counterfeit to God's original Greek Bible
as well as a counterfeit to God's original 'Old Latin' Bible, and on and on.
As David Fuller points out in his book "Which
Bible?": "From the beginning there has been no pause in the assault
on God's Son and God's Word" [S2P4].
The following quote, referring to Christ's victory at
Calvary, summarizes Satan's actions against God's Bible:
"Vanquished by The Word Incarnate, Satan next directed
his subtle malice against The Word written" [S2P96].
C H A P T E R 7
S A T A N ' S C O U N T E R F E I T
T H E O R I G I N - E U S E B I U S B I B L E
( The Corrupted Minority Text In Greek )
To attack God's true Word, Satan had to come up with a
corruption. The history goes as follows:
Around the year 200 A.D. a man named Clement:
"... founded the 'Catechetical School' at Alexandria.
He brought the wisdom of the world into the teachings of the Christian faith
and began to collect a group of corrupt manuscripts" [S7P8]. "Clement
expressly tells us that he would not hand down Christian teachings, pure and
unmixed, but rather clothed with precepts of pagan philosophy" [S2P191].
These 'historically early' changes to God's Word were also
verified by Colwell who found that: "... as early as A.D. 200 scribes were
altering manuscripts, changing them from a Majority-type text to a minority
type" [S3P484] ).
These changes to the Word of God took place at Alexandria,
Egypt.
READER NOTE: "... it was Antioch that the Holy Spirit
chose for the base of Christian operations" [S1P51]. Thus, Antioch was
good.
But, we must remember that Egypt was bad. In the Word, God
says Egypt is: "... the house of bondage" (Exodus 20:2). Egypt is:
"... the iron furnace" (Deuteronomy 4:20).
It was the Egyptians whom Abraham thought would kill him
after seeing he had a beautiful wife (Genesis 12:2). It was in Egypt that Joseph
was sold into slavery (Genesis 37:36). It was in Egypt that Israel had
taskmasters set over them to afflict them with burdens (Exodus 1:11). It was
about Egypt that God said to Israel: "Ye shall henceforth return no more
that way" (Deuteronomy 17:16). And, it was in Jeremiah 46:25 that God
promises to bring punishment onto Egypt.
Thus, Egypt is a type of this world, it is evil. And, as for
Alexandria, Egypt; it was a: "... pagan city known for its education and
philosophy ..." [S1P51].
Now, back to the story:
"... The best known graduate of this Alexandrian School
was Origen who followed Clement as the head of the school. He became the most
influential leader of his generation. He edited a six column Bible called the
'Hexapla'. Each of the columns had a different version of the Bible. He
continually changed Bible verses that did not agree with his liberal ideas. He
spiritualized God's Word. He believed Christ to be a created being just as
Jehovah's Witnesses teach today" [S7P8].
Also:
"Origin did not believe that Jesus lived physically on
earth!" [S5P65]. We know: "Origin was the first person to teach
purgatory" [S1P75] and that Origin was quoted to say: "The laws of
men appear more excellent and reasonable than the laws of God" [S3P527].
And, we also know that: "Origin was baptized as an infant, and he gave no
indication that he was spiritually saved" [S4P112].
In her book "New Age Bible Versions" [S3P529] G.A.
Riplinger tells us the church rejected Origin because of his heretical beliefs.
For example, Origin believed (against scripture) that:
1) The soul is preexistent; Jesus took on some preexistent
human soul.
2) There was no physical resurrection of Christ nor will
there be a second coming. Man will not have a physical resurrection.
3) Hell is non existent; purgatory, of which Paul and Peter
must partake, does exist.
4) All, including the devil, will be reconciled to God.
5) The sun, moon, and stars are living creatures.
6) Emasculation, of which he partook, is called for, for
males.
Origin was also the author of the 'Septuagint'. The
Septuagint is a Greek translation of the Old Testament. Remember, it was the
Massoretic Old Testament Text which Jesus quoted when he walked the earth. And,
it was the Massoretic Old Testament Text that has been verified.
Yet, some 'modern textual critics' use the Greek Septuagint
to determine the wording of 'new versions'. Instead of using the proven Hebrew
Massoretic Old Testament Text, some translators admitted they used Origin's
Septuagint. For instance; the NIV translators said they used the Old Testament
Text that was: "standardized early in the third century by Origin"
[S3P537].
Thus, we see that Origin was a key participant in the
corruption of God's Word.
"It is clear that Origin is not a safe guide in textual
criticism any more than in theology" [S7P8]. "Origin, though once
exalted by modern day Christianity as a trustworthy authority, has since been
found to have been a heretic who interpreted the Bible in the light of Greek
philosophy ..." [S1P74].
C O N S T A N T I N E
After Origin, "The next step in corrupting the Bible
was taken in the time of Constantine." [S7P8].
In 331 A.D. Constantine was the Emperor of Rome and he
sought to: "... unite Christianity with pagan Rome" [S2P195]. He regarded
himself as: "... the director and guardian of ... [the] world church"
[S2P195]. "Constantine, the wolf of Paganism, openly assumed the sheep's
clothing of the Christian religion" [S4P19]. "He accepted the
Christian faith for political purposes and ordered a Bible that would appeal to
the masses. Eusebius, a follower of Origin, was chosen for this task. This was
the beginning of the Arian controversy concerning the Deity of our Lord and the
spirit of ecumenism" [S7P8].
At this point, let's pause for some clarification and
definition:
A) The Arian controversy is the belief that Jesus Christ was
a created being. i.e. that Jesus is: "the eldest and highest of creatures,
rather than God manifest in the flesh" [S3P535]. The ramification is that
Christ is fallen, is less than God, and is not equal to God. This is heresy.
B) Ecumenism is the belief in a one world church where I'm
OK, your OK, we're all OK. The ramification here is that no one is a sinner.
Therefore, we do not need to be saved. This is NOT scriptural. This is a big
lie. ( Note: Ecumenism is happening today ).
The truth is: "The Bible God wrote through holy men,
does not teach ecumenicalism, i.e. that all religious systems should be united
into one world-wide fellowship. Instead the Word of God teaches
fellowship-separation between true believers and false professors"
[S4P113].
Now, back to the history of the Bible. Eusebius has just
been chosen by the so called 'Christian' Emperor Constantine to produce a
corrupted Bible 'for the masses'. From historical records we know that:
"Eusebius was a great admirer of Origen and a student
of his philosophy. He had just edited the fifth column of the 'Hexapla' which
was Origin's Bible. Constantine chose this, and asked Eusebius to prepare 50
copies for him ... The Emperor Constantine gave orders that ... this edition
should be used in the Churches" [S4P18-19].
"Together Constantine and Eusebius called for religious
toleration, which is invariably followed by amalgamation. To placate both
Christian and heathen, they took a 'middle of the road position' regarding the
deity of Christ. Consequently ... the doctrine that Jesus was 'the eldest and
highest of creatures', rather than 'God manifest in the flesh', was adopted
..." [S3P535]. And: "... the amalgamation of heathen and Christian
doctrine - smoothing out differences thereby allowing for unity - was perfect
for Constantine's purposes" [S3P535].
Thus, Eusebius carried on Origin's work in corrupting the
scriptures. And, as it turns out:
"Many of the important variations in the modern
versions may be traced to the influence of Eusebius and Origin ..."
[S2P3].
Looking back at this point in history, G.A Riplinger makes
an interesting observation. In her book "New Age Bible Versions" she
says:
"Corrupt bibles, with their loose doctrine, seem to
create loose living in A.D. 333 and in the 1990's" [S3P536].
That's something to think about.
C H A P T E R 8
S A T A N ' S C O U N T E R F E I T
J E R O M E ' S L A T I N B I B L E ( 380 A.D. )
( The Corrupted Minority Text In Latin )
After Origin, Constantine, and Eusebius:
The "... corruption of God's Word was taken over by
Jerome who was called upon by the Pope to prepare a Bible that would favor the
Roman Catholic teaching" [S7P8]. "Jerome was furnished with all the
funds that he needed and was assisted by many scribes and copyists"
[S2P217].
"Jerome in his early years had been brought up with an
enmity to the Received text, then universally known as the Greek Vulgate ...
The hostility of Jerome to the Received Text made him necessary to the
Papacy" [S2P219].
"Jerome was devotedly committed to the textural
criticism of Origin, an admirer of Origen's critical principles ..."
[S2P218]. To corrupt the Bible, Jerome went to "... the famous library of
Eusebius ... where the voluminous manuscripts of Origin had been
preserved" [S2P218].
As to the manuscripts of Origin and Eusebius, we know that:
"it was from this type of manuscript that Jerome translated ..."
[S2P195]. And we also know that Jerome's translation "... became the
authorized Catholic Bible for all time" [S2P195].
"... It was through Jerome that ... Apocryphal books
were placed in the Bible. These were soon accepted by the Roman Catholic Church
as authoritative" [S7P8]. "Jerome admitted that these ... DID NOT
belong with the other writings of the Bible. Nevertheless, the Papacy endorsed
them ..." [S2P218].
In his book "An Understandable History Of The
Bible" Reverend Gipp tells us that:
"Rome enlisted the help of a loyal subject by the name
of Jerome. He quickly translated the corrupt Local Text into Latin. This
version included the Apocryphal books ... which no Bible believing Christian
accepts as authentic" [S1P82].
"The Latin version of Jerome, translated by order of
the Roman Catholic Church, was published in about 380 A.D. It was rejected by
real Christians until approximately 1280 A.D. The Roman Catholic Church chose
the name 'Vulgate' ... for Jerome's translation in an attempt to deceive loyal
Christians into thinking that it was the true common Bible of the people ... It
would seem that such deception lacks a little in Christian ethics, if not
honesty" [S1P68].
But: "The name 'Vulgate' on the flyleaf of Jerome's
unreliable translation did little to help sales. The Old Latin Bible, or
'Italic' as it is sometimes called, was held fast by all true Christians
..." [S1P83]. Thus: "The common people recognized the true Word of
God because the Holy Spirit bears witness to it" [S1P82].
So: "... the people for centuries refused to supplant
their old Latin Bibles ... The old Latin versions were used longest by the
western Christians who would not bow to ... Rome" [S1P84]. "True
Protestants have always rejected ... Roman Catholicism and maintained the very
opposite" [S12P103].
This 'Old Latin' Bible was:
"... universally accepted by faithful Christians
..." [S1P68] and that "... it was responsible for keeping the Roman
Catholic Church contained to southern Italy for years. It was not until the
Roman Catholic Church successfully eliminated this Book through persecutions,
torture, Bible burnings, and murder that it could capture Europe in its web of
superstitious paganism" [S1P68].
Reverend Gipp says:
"Perhaps we should learn a lesson. Where the ... King
James Bible reigns, God blesses .... Oh, that America could but look at what
has happened to England ... Yes, the sun began to set on the British Empire in
1904, when the British Foreign Bible Society changed from the pure Textus
Receptus ..." [S1P69].
Thus, Satan used Jerome and the Catholic Church to
substitute his counterfeit Latin Bible. But, this corruption "... which we
will now call Jerome's translation - did not gain immediate acceptance
everywhere. It took nine hundred years to bring that about. Purer Latin Bibles
than Jerome's had already a deep place in the affections in the West. Yet
steadily through the years, the Catholic Church has uniformly rejected the
Received Text wherever translated from the Greek into Latin and exalted Jerome's
..." [S2P220].
T W O B I B L E S T R E A M S
In the history of the Bible, we see the development of two
'streams' of Bibles: God's true Word and Satan's counterfeit. This started in
the Garden of Eden and continues today. In fact, every Bible both old and
'new', and every Bible in every language, falls into one of these two
categories.
We also see that some people are (knowingly or unknowingly)
propagating the corruption and some are passing on the original.
In the next chapter we will break from our historical study
and look at the personal side of the struggle for God's Word. We will look at a
group of people, within the 'true Church', called the Waldenses.
The Waldenses, of the Italian Church, are trying to pass on
God's original Bible.
Their's is an interesting story. Let's review the role they
played in history.
C H A P T E R 9
S A T A N ' S P E R S E C U T I O N
O F T H E T R U E C H U R C H
( One Example: The History Of The Waldenses )
Previously, we mentioned a group of people named the
Waldenses (or Waldensians). We said that they made sure God's Word was kept
pure. We said this in connection with the Italic Bible of the Italian Church.
In this chapter, we will examine their role in history.
As to these people we know that:
"The Waldenses were among the first of the peoples of
Europe to obtain a translation of the Holy Scriptures. Hundreds of years before
the reformation, they possessed the Bible in manuscript in their native tongue.
They had the truth unadulterated, and this rendered them the special objects of
hatred and persecution ..." [S2P215].
"The Waldenses of northern Italy were foremost among
the primitive Christians of Europe in their resistance of the Papacy. They not
only sustained the weight of Rome's oppression but also they were successful in
retaining the torch of truth until the reformation took it from their hands and
held it aloft to the world" [S2P205].
When Constantine became Emperor and 'called a truce' with
the Christians, his effort was only a 'surface gesture'. Constantine was
actually a wolf in sheep's clothing. Beneath his sheep's wool, he was actually
trying to unite pagan Rome with the true Church and thus dilute Christian
doctrine with the heretical teachings of Rome. History records that the Waldenses
did not fall for this deception. For instance:
"... when Christianity, emerging from the long
persecutions of pagan Rome, was raised to imperial favor by the Emperor
Constantine, the Italic Church in northern Italy - later the Waldenses - is
seen as standing in opposition to papal Rome" [S2P207].
Thus, the Waldenses remained steadfast in their faith. They
could not be moved by 'the carrot' (i.e. a deceptive truce) nor could they be
moved by 'the stick' (i.e. persecution).
In his book "Which Bible?", David Otis Fuller
exposes Rome's efforts against the Waldenses:
"The agents of the Papacy have done their utmost to
calumniate their [The Waldenses] character, to destroy the records of their
noble past, and to leave no trace of the cruel persecution they underwent. They
went even further-they made use of words written against ancient heresies to
strike out the name of the heretics and fill the blank space by inserting the
name of the Waldenses. Just as if, in a book, written to record the lawless
deeds of some bandit like Jesse James, his name should be stricken out and the
name of Abraham Lincoln substituted" [S2P205].
Not only was the character of the Waldenses corrupted in the
documentation that has remained, but other records of the Waldenses were blatantly
destroyed:
"The destruction of Waldensian records, beginning about
600 A.D. by Gregory the I, was carried through with thoroughness by the secret
agents of the Papacy" [S2P206].
And if this was not bad enough, the Waldenses were
physically persecuted by Rome.
"History does not afford a record of cruelty greater
than that manifested by Rome toward the Waldenses. It is impossible to write
the inspiring history of this persecuted people, whose origin goes back to
apostolic days and whose history is ornamented with stories of gripping
interest. Rome has obliterated the records" [S2P206].
In his book "An Understandable History Of The
Bible", Reverend Gipp says:
"We find that Rome's wicked persecutions of the
Waldenses culminated in a devastating massacre of their number in 1655. They
were hounded as 'heretics' until the mid 1800's when their persistence paid off
and the vile actions against them ceased" [S1P85-86].
We owe a lot to the Waldenses:
"To Christians such as these, preserving apostolic Christianity,
the world owes gratitude for the true text of the Bible. It is not true, as
Rome claims, that she gave the Bible to the world. What she gave was an impure
text, a text with thousands of verses so changed as to make a way for her
unscriptural doctrines" [S2P214-215].
So "Throughout the centuries, the Waldenses ... had
sown the seed ..." [S2P224].
Thus, the name 'Waldenses' is forever recorded in history.
For us, they passed on the pure Word of God (until the reformation would do it
in mass). They withstood Rome. They held fast in their faith. And, they did
this even unto death by massacre.
There is no telling how many souls were saved because of the
Waldenses. Maybe yours, maybe mine. No one knows.
This chapter is dedicated to the Waldenses, and to the role
they played, in history, to preserve God's Word. Now, back to the history of
our Bible.
C H A P T E R 1 0
T H E D A R K A G E S ( 476 A.D. - 1453 A.D. )
Beginning around 476 A.D., the world entered 'The Dark
Ages'. This lasted almost 1,000 years.
In this short chapter, we will explore the cause of 'Dark
Ages'.
When we last left the history of the Bible, the Catholic
Church hired Jerome to make a corrupted Latin Bible. The purpose was to go up
against the true Latin Bible ( the Italic Bible ) of the early Italian Church.
Jerome completed his corruption in 380 A.D., and the
Catholic Church adopted Jerome's corrupted Bible as their standard. In addition
to Jerome's Latin Bible, the Papacy adopted another measure to: "... keep
Europe under its domination" [S2P216]. We find out that:
"... the Papacy was against the flow of Greek language
and literature to Western Europe. All the treasures of the classical past were
held back in the Eastern Roman Empire, whose capital was Constantinople. For
nearly one thousand years, the western part of Europe was a stranger to the
Greek tongue" [S2P216]. "The West became exclusively Latin, as well
as estranged from the East; with local exceptions ... the use and knowledge of
the Greek language died out in Western Europe" [S2P216].
"When the use and knowledge of Greek died out in
Western Europe, all the valuable Greek records, history, archaeology,
literature, and science remained untranslated and unavailable to Western
energies. No wonder, then, that this opposition to using the achievements of
the past brought on the Dark Ages (476 A.D. to 1453 A.D.)" [S2P216].
Thus, the people were denied access to valuable Greek
records. And they were fed Jerome's corrupted Bible.
So, during this 1,000 year timeframe, the sun came up every
day, just like it had since creation. The Dark Ages DID NOT refer to a
'celestial problem'. No, the Dark Ages referred to a 'spiritual problem'.
The Church needs to learn a lesson from the 'Dark Ages'.
Edward F. Hills tells us the bottom line:
"From the study of the Bible and Church history two
conclusions may be safely drawn. First, spiritual darkness and apostasy ALWAYS
begin with false notions concerning faith. Second, reformation and revival
ALWAYS REQUIRE the correction of these errors ..." [S8P55].
C H A P T E R 1 1
G O D ' S T R U T H
E R A S M U S ' B I B L E ( 1516 A.D. )
( The Traditional Majority Text In Greek )
As you remember from the last chapter, the Papacy cut off
Western Europe from Greek literature. Also, the Papacy substituted Jerome's
corrupted Bible for God's true Bible. This brought on the 'Dark Ages'.
For almost 1,000 years ( 476 A.D. - 1453 A.D. ), the world
went through a time of spiritual darkness.
Also, in the last chapter we learned that: "spiritual
darkness and apostasy ... begin with false notions concerning faith"
[S8P55] and "reformation and revival ... require the correction of these
errors ..." [S8P55].
God moved in a mighty way and the 'Dark Ages' ended in 1453.
Then, 1 year later in 1454, printing with movable type was invented.
Movable type printing, along with revival, spread God's Word
quickly.
We pick up our study of the Bible, during this God given
revival, which history has named: 'The Reformation'.
E R A S M U S
One person who changed the world, during the reformation,
was Erasmus. Erasmus was a "... giant intellect and scholar ..."
[S2P225]. And, Erasmus' name: "... was a household word all over the known
world ..." [S10P4].
History records that:
"Probably the most important figure in the renaissance
of learning and religion was Erasmus. He traveled around Europe's great
learning centers, such as Oxford, Cambridge, Paris, Rome and others. He left
his mark in history as the editor of the first published Greek New Testament
printed in 1516" [S9P4].
Endowed by God: "... with a mind that could do ten
hours work in one, Erasmus, during his mature years ... was the intellectual
giant of Europe. He was ever collecting, comparing, writing, and publishing.
Europe was rocked from end to end by his books which exposed the ignorance of
the monks, the superstitions of the priesthood, the bigotry, and the childish
and coarse religion of the day" [S2P225].
"... Erasmus looked for manuscripts ... during his
travels and ... he borrowed them from everyone he could" [S8P193].
"There were hundreds of manuscripts which Erasmus examined, and he did;
but he used only a few" [S2P226].
So why did Erasmus use only a few manuscripts, when he had
personal access to hundreds of them? This question is answered consistently
from author to author. For instance:
David Otis Fuller says: "The vast majority of
manuscripts are practically all the Received Text" [S2P226].
And Barry Burton says: "The vast majority of Greek
manuscripts agree together. They have been passed down thru the centuries by
true Bible-believing Christians. In 1516 Erasmus compiled, edited, and printed
the Greek 'Textus Receptus'. This is the text that the Protestants of the
Reformation KNEW to be the Word of God (inerrant and infallible)"
[S5P59-60].
Even ENEMIES of the Traditional Majority Text concede that:
"The manuscripts Erasmus used, differ, for the most part, only in small
and insignificant details from the bulk of the cursive manuscripts ..."
[S2P227].
Erasmus examined every manuscript he could find and he found
agreement among them. From the massive collection of manuscripts, Erasmus
selected a sample to use. We find out that:
Erasmus' Greek New Testament was produced from: "...
nine manuscripts chosen from a very large mass" [S10P4].
So these manuscripts were in agreement; but what about their
quality?
David Otis Fuller says (of Erasmus' text):
"Moreover the text he chose had an outstanding history
in the Greek, the Syrian, and the Waldensian Churches, and ... it constituted
an irresistible argument for and proof of God's providence" [S2P227].
So, not only did these manuscripts agree with each other,
but they had an excellent history.
Now, did Erasmus' great knowledge and detailed Godly effort
result in a trouble free life? Hardly! We discover that:
"It is customary even today with those who are bitter
against the pure teachings of the Received Text, to sneer at Erasmus. No
perversion of the facts is too great to belittle his work" [S2P225].
Thus, the greatest mind of that day had enemies. For
example, in 1521, Erasmus said:
"I did my best with the New Testament but it provoked
endless quarrels. Edward Lee pretended to have found 300 errors. They appointed
a commission, which professed to have found bushels of them. Every dinner-table
rang with the blunders of Erasmus. I required particulars, and could not have
them" [S2P226].
"... I required particulars and could not have them
..." I think that says it all.
We see Erasmus taking a stand for God's Word. We see him
trying to understand the comments of his detractors, in an effort to do the
best possible work; yet there were never any 'facts' to discuss.
The quote above gives insight into the true 'problem'. The
people who sneered at the greatest mind of their day weren't actually against
Erasmus; they were against God's Holy Word. They were against the Traditional
Majority Text.
And, although some tried to belittle his work, history is
very clear about Erasmus' personal worth and character:
"... while he lived, Europe was at his feet. Several
times the King of England offered him any position in the kingdom, at his own
price; the Emperor of Germany did the same. The Pope offered to make him a
cardinal. This he steadfastly refused, as he would not compromise his conscience.
In fact, had he been so minded, he perhaps could have made himself Pope. France
and Spain sought him to be a dweller in their realm; while Holland prepared to
claim him as her most distinguished citizen" [S2P225-226].
And so, Erasmus went on with his work ...
"Book after book came from his hand. Faster and faster
came the demands for his publications. But his crowning work was the New
Testament in Greek. At last after one thousand years the New Testament was
printed (1516 A.D.) in the original tongue ... the world ... read the pure
story of the gospels. The effect was marvelous. At once, all recognized the
great value of his work which for over four hundred years (1516 to 1930) was to
hold the dominant place in the era of Bibles. Translation after translation has
been taken from it, such as the German, and the English, and others [S2P226].
Thus: "The God who brought the New Testament text
safely through the ancient and medieval manuscript period did not fumble when
it came time to transfer this text to the modern printed page" [S8P196].
Finally, the 'Dark Ages' passed:
"When the 1,000 years had gone by, strains of new
gladness were heard. Gradually these grew in crescendo until the whole choir of
voices broke forth as Erasmus presented his first Greek New Testament at the
feet of Europe. Then followed a full century of the greatest scholars of
language and literature the world ever saw" [S2P225].
C H A P T E R 1 2
G O D ' S T R U T H
L U T H E R ' S B I B L E ( 1522 A.D. )
( The Traditional Majority Text In German )
In the previous chapter, we learned that Erasmus' Greek New
Testament found its way into Bibles of several languages. One of those was the
translation, into German, by Martin Luther.
We pick up the history of the Bible in Whittenberg, Germany:
"A major blow to the authority of Rome came in 1517,
when a young Catholic priest by the name of Martin Luther nailed his historic
95 theses on the church door in Whittenberg. The nail drove deep into the
hearts of truly born-again Christians who had for centuries been laboring under
the tyranny of the Roman Catholic Church ..." [S1P86].
History tells us that "... Martin Luther brought in the
Protestant Reformation by insisting on the difference between faith and
works" [S8P56]. From this ... the fires of reformation were kindled"
[S1P86]
"Within 35 years after Luther had nailed his theses
upon the door of the Cathedral of Whittenberg, and launched his attacks upon
the errors and corrupt practices of Rome, the Protestant Reformation was
thoroughly established. The great contributing factor to this spiritual
upheaval was the translation by Luther of the Greek New Testament of Erasmus
into German" [S1P232].
"The most vital and immovable weapon in Luther's
arsenal came in the form of the New Testament of 1522. This put the pure words
... back into the hands of 'Bible starved' Christians. The reformation ran wild
across the continent, fueled by this faithful translation. Rome at this point
was totally helpless to stop it" [S1P86-87].
"The medieval Papacy awakened from its superstitious
lethargy to see that in one-third of a century, the Reformation had carried
away two-thirds of Europe. Germany, England, the Scandinavian countries,
Holland, and Switzerland had become Protestant. France, Poland, Bavaria,
Austria, and Belgium were swinging that way" [S1P232].
And so: "... Constantinople fell in 1453, ... Europe
awoke as from the dead ... Columbus discovered America. Erasmus printed the
Greek New Testament. Luther assailed the corruptions of the ... church. Revival
of learning and the Reformation followed swiftly" [S2P217].
C H A P T E R 1 3
G O D ' S T R U T H
T H E T Y N D A L E B I B L E ( 1525 A.D. )
( The Traditional Majority Text In English )
Throughout history the Roman Catholic Church has
'stonewalled' efforts to give God's Holy Word to the common person.
But a man named Tyndale would champion the cause of the
common man.
"The first printed English version of the Bible was
that of William Tyndale, one of England's first Protestant martyrs"
[S12P214]. "The burning desire to give the common people the Holy Word of
God was the reason Tyndale translated it into English" [S2P239].
Tyndale was born: "... in the county of Gloucester near
the Welsh border, about 1484" [S9P5]. "Tyndale entered Magdalen Hall
at Oxford at an early age, completing his graduate work there. Further studies
were done in Cambridge, which was also a center for reform. Many of the
reformation martyrs were from Cambridge" [S9P5] Tyndale: "... went from
Oxford to Cambridge to learn Greek under Erasmus, who was teaching there from
1510 to 1514" [S12P214].
Tyndale was: "... completely at home in eight
languages, French, Hebrew, Greek, German, Spanish, Dutch, Latin and in his own
tongue. He could speak any one of the seven as well as his mother tongue. He
translated all of the New Testament and part of the Old, from the Greek or
Hebrew, into English. His English was so perfect that the King James
translators used 85% of his translation without changing a word. That was a
miracle, because those scholars naturally would wish to use their own way of
translating, but instead gave Tyndale's choice of words and phrases the
preference" [S10P4].
In a dispute with a learned man, who put the Pope's laws
above God's laws, Tyndale said: "If God spare my life, ere many years, I
will cause a boy that driveth a plough to know more of the Scripture than thou
..." [S2P229].
For this, Tyndale: "... was called before a council to
answer charges of heresy" [S9P5].
"From that moment ... his life was one of continual
sacrifice and persecution" [S2P229].
"About 1520 he became attached to the doctrines of the
Reformation and conceived the idea of translating the Scriptures into
English" [S12P214].
To find a place to translate the Bible, Tyndale went to see
Bishop Tonstall. The purpose was to:
"... ask for a place for his employ ... The Bishop had
no room for him. It had been decreed at the Council of Constance in 1417, that
the Scriptures were NOT to be translated into the vernacular ... Tyndale wrote
that ... there was not only no room in the Bishop's palace to translate the
Bible, but not in all of England" [S9P5].
Unable to translate the Bible in England, Tyndale:
"... set out for the Continent in the spring of 1524
and seems to have visited Hamburg and Wittenberg. In that same year (probably
at Wittenberg) he translated the New Testament from Greek into English for
dissemination in his native land. It is estimated that 18,000 copies of this version
were printed on the Continent of Europe between 1525 and 1528 and shipped
secretly to England. After this Tyndale continued to live on the Continent as a
fugitive, constantly evading the efforts of the English authorities to have him
tracked down and arrested. But in spite of this ever present danger his
literary activity was remarkable. In 1530-31 he published portions of the Old
Testament which he had translated from the Hebrew and in 1534 a revision both
of this translation and also of his New Testament. In this same year he left
his place of concealment and settled in Antwerp, evidently under the impression
that the progress of the Reformation in England had made this move a safe one.
In so thinking, however, he wasmistaken. Betrayed by a friend, he was
imprisoned in 1535 and executed the following year. According to Foxe, his
dying prayer was this: "Lord, open the King of England's eyes"
[S12P214]. "Henry VIII had banned all Bibles printed in English in his
realm. Eleven months after Tyndale's death Henry gave the order to print the
Bible in English ..." [S10P5].
As to translating from Greek into English (vs from Latin
into English) Tyndale said:
"The Greek tongue agreeth more with the English than
with Latin. And the properties of the Hebrew tongue agreeth a thousand times
more with the English than with the Latin. The manner of speaking is both one;
so that in a thousand places thou needest not but to translate into the
English, word for word: when thou must seek a compass in the Latin" [S6P86].
And where did Tyndale get the Greek text that he used for
his English translation?
His text: "... came from the pure Greek text of
Erasmus" [S2P222].
As to the quality of his English translation, Tyndale said:
"I call God to record, against the day we shall appear
before our Lord Jesus Christ to give a reckoning of our doings, that I never
altered one syllable of God's Word against my conscience, nor would to this
day, if all that is in the earth-whether it be honour, pleasure, or
riches-might be given me" [S6P85].
And so: "William Tyndale translated from the original
Greek into English ... For this he was imprisoned in 1535 for about 18 months,
afterwards strangled and burnt at the stake in October, 1536" [S9P4-5].
"His great offense was that he had translated the Scriptures into English
and was making copies available against the wishes of the Roman Catholic
hierarchy" [S2P3].
"But his life's work had been completed. He had laid
securely the foundations of the English Bible" [S12P214].
C H A P T E R 1 4
T H E C O U N C I L O F T R E N T ( 1545 A.D. )
( Satan Is Not Far Behind )
The reformation is running wild across Europe. There is
revival in the land. Major changes are occurring and the good news of the
gospel of grace is spreading. Many people are being blessed and many are
thankful.
However, not everyone likes the gospel of grace. There are
enemies to this good news.
In this chapter, Satan is once again seeking to kill, steal,
and destroy. And, he is seeking those he may 'use'.
"In 1545 the Roman Catholic Church formed the Council
of Trent" [S1P87]. "The Council of Trent was dominated by the
Jesuits" [S2P235]. The purpose was to: "... undermine the Bible, then
destroy the Protestant teaching and doctrine" [S2P237].
"The Council of Trent systematically denied the
teachings of the Reformation. The Council decreed that 'tradition' was on equal
authority with the Bible" [S1P87].
The Council of Trent also decreed that:
"... justification was not by faith alone in the shed
blood of Jesus Christ. In fact it stated that anyone believing in this vital
Bible doctrine was CURSED" [S1P87].
The council's exact words were:
"If anyone saith that justifying faith is nothing else
but confidence in the divine mercy which remits sins for Christ's sake or that
this confidence alone is that whereby we are justified, let him be
ANATHEMA" [S1P87].
"Now we see that the Roman Catholic Church is guilty of
officially cursing Jesus Christ! Would God use this 'Church' to preserve his
Words?" [S1P87].
So this was the 'policy' of the Council of Trent. But what
about the results?
Specifically, history records that:
1) The Council of Trent condemned: "That Holy
Scriptures contained all the things necessary for salvation ..."
2) The Council of Trent condemned: "That the meaning of
Scripture is plain, and that it can be understood without commentary with the
help of Christ's Spirit".
3) As to certain books in the Traditional Majority Text, the
Council of Trent condemned them saying: "... they were apocryphal and not
canonical".
4) The Council of Trent also said that: "... lay
members of the church had NO RIGHT to interpret the Scriptures apart from the
Clergy" [S2P237].
5) "The Council of Trent, after a prolonged and stormy
session, also issued a decree that the entire Old Testament, including the
Apocryphal books, were to be received and venerated with unwritten tradition as
the Word of God" [S4P100].
6) On April 8th 1546, the Council of Trent declared that
Jerome's, corrupted, Latin Bible was: "... the authentic Bible of the
Roman Church" [S4P99].
And lastly:
"The Papal machine officially closed all investigation
into the Greek and Hebrew manuscripts in 1546, at the Council of Trent, by
declaring -without a single German philologist, historian, or scholar present -
that the corrupt manuscripts ... are the inspired, canonical scriptures, and
that anyone who does not go along with them is anathema - ACCURSED"
[S11P61].
So we see Satan using the Roman Catholic 'Church', the
Jesuits, and the Council of Trent to resist the Reformation and to resist the
spread of the true Word of God.
C H A P T E R 1 5
T H E R O M A N C A T H O L I C C H U R C H
In chapter 7 of his book: "An Understandable History Of
The Bible", Reverend Gipp gives us some insight into the Roman Catholic
'Church'. He first begins with a contrast:
"It is necessary to salvation that every man should
submit to the Pope." (Boniface VIII Unum Sanctum, 1303.) [S1P80].
"FOR BY GRACE ARE YE SAVED THROUGH FAITH; AND THAT NOT
OF YOURSELVES: IT IS THE GIFT OF GOD: NOT OF WORKS LEST ANY MAN SHOULD
BOAST." (Ephesians 2:8-9) [S1P80].
As Reverend Gipp says: "Here lie two totally
contradictory statements. They cannot both be correct. The one which you
believe will depend on the authority you accept" [S1P80].
"The Roman Catholic Church has always been antagonistic
to the doctrine of salvation by grace. If salvation is by grace, who needs
mass? If salvation is by grace, who needs to fear purgatory? If Jesus Christ is
our mediator, who needs the Pope? If the Pope cannot intimidate people into
obeying him, how can he force a nation to obey him?" [S1P80]
"Rome can only rule over ignorant fear-filled people.
The true Bible turns 'unlearned and ignorant' men into gospel preachers and
casts out 'all fear' [S1P80-81].
"The true Bible is the arch-enemy of the Roman Catholic
Church [S1P80-81].
Therefore, Rome wanted a 'different' Bible. So:
"Rome received the corrupted ... text ... and further
revised it to suit her own needs" [S1P81]. "This text suited the
Roman Catholic Church well since it attacked the doctrines of the Bible. Rome
is wise. To attack salvation by grace directly would expose her plot to all. So
instead she used subtlety. The Roman Catholic Church strips Jesus Christ of His
deity, separates the divine title "Lord" and "Christ" from
the human name Jesus, having the thief on the cross address Him as
"Jesus" instead of "Lord" (Luke 23:42). It also removes the
testimony to His deity in Acts 8:37, and it eliminates the Trinity in I John
5:7" [S1P81].
And so, summarizing the corrupted Minority Text: "Its
two outstanding trademarks are that orthodox Christianity has never used it,
and that the Roman Catholic Church has militantly (read that 'bloodily')
supported it" [S1P69].
As to the gospel of Christ: "Would not a weakening of
the place of Jesus Christ weaken the Roman Catholic Church's reason for even
existing? The answer is 'No'. The Roman Catholic 'Church' does not even claim
to represent the gospel of Jesus Christ" [S1P81].
Romanist Carl Adam admits this:
"We Catholics acknowledge readily, without any shame -
nay with pride - that Catholicism cannot be identified simply and wholly with
primitive Christianity, nor even with the gospel of Christ" [S1P81].
Thus we see the TRUE 'doctrine' of Rome! Now, let's find out
what Rome substitutes in place of the gospel of Jesus Christ:
"The vacancy left by the removal of Christ would be
easily filled by Mary and other 'saints' along with a chain of ritualism so
rigid that no practitioner would have time to 'think' about the true
gospel" [S1P82].
What else does history record about Rome? Some samples:
1) "In the fourteenth century the church of Rome ...
canonized Buddha as a saint" [S3P140].
2) It was Rome who: "... burned persons who provided
the Bible in a language the laity could read for themselves" [S3P140].
3) In the 16th century: "... the Roman Catholic Church
put out the Majority Greek New Testament text, then placed the Textus Receptus,
on 'The Index' of forbidden books" [S3P140].
4) It was Rome who was responsible for crucifying Christ
(Matt.27:35).
5) It was Rome who was responsible for throwing Peter into
prison (Acts 12:4 ).
6) It was Rome who was responsible for cutting off James'
head (Acts 12:1). and ....
7) It was Rome who was responsible for killing Paul (2 Tim
4:6).
C H A P T E R 1 6
T H E J E S U I T ' S
( "Satan's Plain-Clothesmen" )
In the previous chapter Satan used both Rome and the Roman
Catholic 'Church'.
In this chapter he will use the 'Jesuits'.
"The founder of the Jesuits was a Spaniard, Ignatius
Loyola... [S2P232], As to his character, Ignatius "... was known as a
youth to be treacherous, brutal, and vindictive" [S1P88]. Later in life,
it is said he was "... unruly and conceited ..." [S1P88].
Also, it is this same Ignatius Loyola that: "... the
Catholic Church has canonized and made Saint Ignatius" [S2P232].
"Wounded at the siege of Pampeluna (1521 A.D.) so that
his military career was over, Ignatius turned his thoughts to spiritual
conquests and spiritual glory. Soon afterwards, he wrote a book called:
"Spiritual Exercises", which did more than any other document to
erect a new papal theocracy and to bring about the establishment of the
infallibility of the Pope. In other words, Catholicism since the reformation is
a new Catholicism. It is more fanatical and intolerant" [S2P232].
It is said that Ignatius Loyola "... produced an elite
force of men, extremely loyal to the Pope, who would set about to undermine
Protestantism and 'heresy' throughout the world. Their training would require
fourteen years of testing and trials designed to leave them with no will at all.
They were to learn to be obedient. Loyola taught that their only desire was to
serve the Pope" [S1P88].
"The head of the Jesuits is called the 'Black Pope' and
holds the title of General, just as in the military. That they were to be
unquestionably loyal to this man and their church is reflected in Loyola's own
words, "Let us be convinced that all is well and right when the superior
commands it". Also: "... even if God gave you an animal without sense
for master, you will not hesitate to obey him, as master and guide, because God
ordained it to be so." He further elaborates: "We must see black as
white, if the Church says so" [S1P88].
"The Jesuits were to be the Vatican's
'plainclothesmen'. They were founded to be a secret society, a society that was
to slide in behind the scenes and capture the positions of leadership"
[S1P89].
"Politics are their main field of action, as all the
efforts of these 'directors' concentrate on one aim: the SUBMISSION of the
world to the papacy, and to attain this the heads must be conquered first"
[S1P89].
"The Jesuit priests were not required to dress in the
traditional garb of the Roman Catholic priests. In fact their dress was a major
part of their disguise" [S1P89].
And "Murder is not above the 'means' which might be necessary
to reach the desired 'end'. The General of the Jesuits will forgive any sins
which are committed by the members of this Satanic order" [S1P91].
"He [the Jesuit General] also absolves the irregularity
issuing, from bigamy, injuries done to others, murder, assassination ... as
long as these wicked deeds were not publicly known and this cause a
scandal" [S1P91].
"That the Jesuit priests have such liberties as murder
is reflected in the following ... quote from Paris' book 'The Secret History Of
The Jesuits'" [S1P91].
"Amongst the most criminal jesuitic maxims, there is
one which roused public indignation to the highest point and deserves to be
examined; it is: ... A monk or priest is allowed to kill those who are ready to
slander him or his community ..." [S1P91].
Also, the Jesuits can murder if: "... a Father,
yielding to temptation, abuses a woman and she publicizes what has happened,
and because of it dishonours him, this same Father can kill her to avoid
disgrace!" [S1P91].
These are some of the Jesuits' beliefs. But what about their
practice? What have they actually done?
"In 1572, the Jesuits, with the help of Prince Henry
III were responsible for the St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre. At this infamous
event, which took place on August 15, 1572, the Jesuits murdered the Huguenot
(Protestant) leaders gathered in Paris for the wedding of Princess Margaret, a
Roman Catholic, and Henry of Navarre, a Huguenot. The murders inspired Roman
Catholics to slaughter thousands of Huguenot men, women, and children. Henry of
Navarre was not killed but was forced to renounce Protestantism, although his
renounciation was insincere, and he remained a Protestant until 1593. The
number of victims in this Jesuit conspiracy is estimated to be at least 10,000.
In 1589, when Henry III was no longer useful to the Roman Catholic Church, he
was assassinated by a monk by the name of Jacques Clement. Clement was called
an 'angel' by the Jesuit priest, Camelot. Another Jesuit priest by the name of
Guigard, who was eventually hanged, taught his students that Clement did
nothing wrong. In fact he voiced rerets that Henry III had not been murdered
earlier at the St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre. He instructed them with lessons
such as this: ... Jacques Clement has done a meritorious act inspired by the
Holy Spirit. If we can make war against the King then let's do it; if we cannot
make war against him, then let's put him to death ... we made a big mistake at
the St. Bartholomew; we should have bled the royal vein ..." [S1P91-92].
As bad as that was, "The Jesuit's murderous ways were
not yet completed in the history of the French Protestants! When Henry III was
murdered, Henry of Navarre a Huguenot [Protestant], came to power. A hope for a
Catholic rebellion never materialized, and Henry IV was allowed to reign. In
1592, an attempt was made to assassinate the Protestant king by a man named
Barriere. Barriere admitted that he had been INSTRUCTED TO DO SO by a Father
Varade, A JESUIT PRIEST. In 1594, another attempt was made by Jean Chatel who
had been TAUGHT by Jesuit teachers and had confessed to the Jesuits what he was
about to do. It was at that time that Father Guigard, the Jesuit teacher
previously mentioned was hanged for his connection with this plot"
[S1P92-93].
Six years later, "In 1598, King Henry IV issued the
Edict of Nantes, granting religious freedom to the Huguenots [Protestants].
They were allowed full civil rights and the right to hold public worship
services in towns where they had congregations" [S1P93].
Well "This was the last straw! Henry the IV had to be
eliminated! This time the Jesuits would allow for more careful planning. Edmund
Paris details the assassination of King Henry IV:
... On the 16th of May, 1610, on the eve of his campaign
against Austria, he was murdered by Ravaillac who confessed having been
inspired by the writings of Fathers Mariana and Suarez. These two sanctioned
the murders of heretic 'tyrants' or those INSUFFICIENTLY DEVOTED to the
Papacy's interests. The duke of Epernon, who made the king read a letter while
the assassin was lying in wait, was a notorious friend of the Jesuits, and
Michelet proved that they knew of this attempt. In fact, Ravaillac had confessed
to the Jesuit Father d'Aubigny just before and, when the judges interrogated
the priest, he merely replied that God had given him the gift to forget
immediately what he heard in the confessional" [S1P93].
Reverend Gipp says: "This is the spirit of our enemy!
THIS is the ruthlessness of the Roman Catholic Church against those who will
not bow their knee to Rome! Would God use this church to preserve his word?
[S1P93-94]
Do these two doctrines (Protestantism and Catholicism) have
anything in common? Obviously, not!
Should Protestants form 'pacts' or 'agreements' with
Catholics? I think not.
The Protestant and Catholic beliefs are 180 degrees apart.
These two belief systems are diametrically opposed to one another and will
always be that way.
C H A P T E R 1 7
T H E J E S U I T B I B L E ( 1582 A.D. )
( The Corrupted Minority Text In English )
The previous chapter explored some of the differences
between Catholicism and Protestantism. We concluded the two doctrines are 180
degrees apart. And we learned that Catholic doctrine is trying to infiltrate
God's Bible.
At this point in our study of the Bible, God is using: The
Greek text of Erasmus (1522 A.D.), the Tyndale English Bible (1525 A.D.), and
Luther's German Bible (1525 A.D.).
Satan is using the Roman Catholics and the Jesuits.
In this chapter there will be ANOTHER attack on God's true
Word.
T H E S T R U G G L E
"Sixty years elapsed from the close of the Council of
Trent (1563) to the landing of Pilgrims in America. During those sixty years,
England had been changing from a Catholic nation to a Bible-loving people.
Since 1525, when Tyndale's Bible appeared, the Scriptures had obtained a wide
circulation. As Tyndale foresaw, the influence of the Divine Word had weaned
the people away from pomp and ceremony in religion. But this result had not
been obtained without years of struggle. Spain at that time was not only the
greatest nation in the world, but was also fanatically Catholic. All the new
world belonged to Spain, she ruled the seas and dominated Europe. The Spanish
sovereign and the Papacy united in their efforts to send into England bands of
highly trained Jesuits. By these, plot after plot was hatched to place a
Catholic ruler on England's throne" [S2P237-8].
"At the same time, the Jesuits were acting to turn the
English people from the Bible, back to Romanism. As a means to this end, they
brought forth in English a Bible of their own ... If England could be retained
in the Catholic column, Spain and England together would see to it that all
America, north and south, would be Catholic. In fact, wherever the
English-speaking race extended, Catholicism would reign. If this result were to
be thwarted, it was necessary to meet the danger brought about by the Jesuit
Version" [S2P238].
"So powerful was the swing toward Protestantism during
the reign of Queen Elizabeth, and so strong the love for Tyndale's Version,
that there was neither place nor Catholic scholarship enough in England to
bring forth a Catholic Bible in strength. Priests were in prison for their
plotting, and many fled to the Continent. There they founded schools to train
English youth and send them back to England as priests. Two of these colleges
alone sent over, in a few years, not less than three hundred priests" [S2P238-9].
"The most prominent of these colleges, called
seminaries, was at Rheims, France. Here the Jesuits assembled a company of
learned scholars. From here they kept the Pope informed of the changes of the
situation in England, and from here they directed the movements of Philip II of
Spain as he prepared a great fleet to crush England and bring it back to the
feet of the Pope" [S2P239].
"The burning desire to give the common people the Holy
Word of God was the reason why Tyndale had translated it into English. No such
reason impelled the Jesuits at Rheims" [S2P239]. The purpose of the Jesuit
New Testament was: "... to do on the inside of England what the great navy
of Philip II was to do on the outside. One was to be used as a moral attack,
the other as a physical attack - both to reclaim England" [S2P237-9].
We pick up the history of the Bible in 1582:
T H E S P I R I T U
A L A T T A C K
"About 1582 ... the Jesuit Bible was launched to
destroy Tyndale's English Version" [S2P233].
"The appearance of the Jesuit New Testament of 1582
produced consternation in England. It was understood at once to be a menace
against the new English unity" [S2P239].
"Immediately the scholarship of England was astir.
Queen Elizabeth sent forth the call ... to ... undertake the task of answering
the objectionable matter contained in the Jesuit Version" [S2P239-240].
Thomas Cartwright undertook the task. "With inescapable
logic, he marshalled the facts of his vast learning and leveled blow after blow
against this latest and most dangerous product of Catholic theology"
[S2P240].
Thus, Cartwright defended the English people against the
spiritual attack. But, that was only 1/2 the battle ...
T H E P H Y S I C A
L A T T A C K
"Meanwhile, 136 great Spanish galleons, some armed with
50 canons, were slowly sailing up the English channel to make England Catholic.
England had NO SHIPS. Elizabeth asked Parliament for 15 men-of-war - they voted
30. With these, assisted by harbor tugs under Drake, England sailed forth to
meet the GREATEST FLEET the world has ever seen. All England teemed with
excitement" [S2P240].
Cartwright sent forth the Word of God against Satan's lies.
With Drake, a type of 'David' was sent forth against an attacking Goliath.
Now, which side do you think God was on?
T H E O U T C O M E:
G O D P R O T E C T S H I S O W N !
Although England was outgunned by every measurable
indication (in the physical), history has forever recorded the results:
"... the Armada was crushed, and England became a great
sea power" [S2P240].
Hallelujah! Praise God!
T H E P E R F E C T M A S T E R P I E C E
"Flushed with their glorious victory over the Jesuit
Bible of 1582, and over the Spanish Armada of 1588, every energy pulsating with
certainty and hope, English Protestantism brought forth a perfect
masterpiece" [S2P242].
This perfect masterpiece: "... was not taken from the
Latin in either the Old or the New Testament, but from the languages in which
God originally wrote His Word, namely, from the Hebrew in the Old Testament and
from the Greek in the New Testament" [S2P242].
English Protestantism: "... gave to the world what has
been considered by hosts of scholars, the greatest version produced in any
language, - The King James Bible, called 'The Miracle of English Prose'"
[S2P242].
C H A P T E R 1 8
G O D ' S T R U T H:
T H E K I N G J A M E S B I B L E ( 1611 A.D. )
T H E M I R A C L E O F E N G L I S H P R O S E
( The Traditional Majority Text In English)
T H E B A C K G R O U N D
"Just prior to the translation of the King James Bible,
England had broken free of the yoke of Rome. Shortly after the Authorized
Version was published, England once again started down the road back to Rome.
For a brief 'parenthesis' in English history, England was free of Roman
influence just long enough to translate and propagate a perfect Bible"
[S1P161].
The King James Bible "... was produced during a brief
period following the overthrow of Roman authority and prior to the apostasy of
the Church of England. It was translated in the era when the still young
English language was at its height of purity" [S1P183].
And God foresaw the widespread use of the English language.
Notice that:
"English is the language of this world. English is
taught to Russian pilots, because it is universal. It is learned by Oriental
businessmen, because it is universal. It was the first language spoken on the
moon" [S1P40].
And, God gave us the BEST English:
"The English language in 1611 was in the very best
condition ... Each word was broad, simple, and generic. That is to say, words
were capable of containing in themselves not only their central thoughts, but
also all the different shades of meaning which were attached to that central thought.
Since then, words have lost that living, pliable breadth.
Vast additions have been made to the English vocabulary during the past 300
years, so that several words are now necessary to convey the same meaning which
formerly was conveyed by one" [S2P246-247].
"The English language has degenerated from what it was
in 1611 to what it is today. Those claiming to put the Bible in 'modern
English' are actually, though possibly not intentionally, trying to force the
pure words of God into a degenerated vocabulary of today!" [S1P41].
And so, "Not only was the English language by 1611 in a
more opportune condition than it had ever been before or ever would again, but
the Hebrew and the Greek likewise had been brought up with the accumulated
treasures of their materials to a splendid working point. The age was not
distracted by the rush of mechanical and industrial achievements. Moreover
linguistic scholarship was at its peak. Men of giant minds, supported by
excellent physical health, had possessed in a splendid state of perfection a
knowledge of the languages and literature necessary for the ripest Biblical
scholarship" [S2P244-245].
T H E C A L L
"On July 22, 1604, King James of England announced that
he had appointed 54 Hebrew and Greek scholars to produce a Bible, which we know
today as the King James, or Authorized Version" [S16P7].
And, it was understood that if 54 scholars were not enough:
"... ALL the learned men of the land could be called
upon by letter for their judgment" [S2P257].
"The Kings order was carried out with utmost zeal and
knowledge in an orderly manner" [S9P1] and "... because of the
careful planning the whole project was completed in less than seven years"
[S8P64].
T H E M E N O F T H E K I N G J A M E S B I B L E
"Without any question there never has been a greater
group of scholars gathered together at one time than the ... translators of the
King James Version" [S10P5].
"The most qualified of the entire English speaking
world were summoned ..." [S9P1]. "They were all eminent scholars, and
they all had great reverence for the Word of God, being wholly committed to its
inspiration and infallibility ..." [S13P7].
"No one can study the lives of those men who gave us
the King James Bible without being impressed with their profound and varied
learning" [S2P258].
"Scholar for scholar, the men on the King James
translating committee were far greater men of God than Westcott, Hort, or any
other new translator. They were not only educated in a powerful, anti-Roman
atmosphere, but they looked at the manuscripts which they handled as the Holy
Word of God" [S1P182].
"Let me show you a few of the translators of the
Authorized Version. JOHN BOIS was able to read the Bible in Hebrew when five
years of age! When 14 he was a proficient Greek scholar and for years he spent
from 4 o'clock in the morning til eight at night in the Cambridge library
studying manuscripts and languages... LANCELOT ANDREWS was the overall
chairman, who was fluent in twenty languages, the greatest linguist of his day.
He spent five hours a day in prayer and was so respected by the kings that
orders were given, whenever Andrews was in court, there was to be no levity, no
joking ... JOHN CHEDDERTON, he knew Greek, Hebrew and Latin as well as you and
I know English, and better" [S10P5].
T H E O R G A N I Z E D A P P R O A C H
"Originally 54 scholars were on the list but deaths and
withdrawals reduced it finally to 47" [S8P64].
"These men were organized into six groups which were to
meet separately. Two groups met at Cambridge, two at Oxford and two at
Westminster. Each group was designated a certain portion of Scripture to
translate into the English language" [S16P7].
"Each scholar first made his own translation, then
passed it on to be reviewed by each other member of his group. When each
section had completed a book of the Bible, it was sent to the other five groups
for their independent criticism. In this way each book went thru the hands of
the entire body of translators. To guard further against possible errors
another committee was formed by selecting two from each of the three companies.
Then the entire version came before this select group where all differences of
opinion were ironed out. It put the finishing touches upon the work, and in
1611 prepared it for the printers" [S4P102-103].
All of the work was done in the open.
T H E M A N U S C R I P T S U S E D B Y T H E
K I N G J A M E S T R A N S L A T O R S
"... it was ... the principle of the numerical majority
of the readings which gave us the ... Textus Receptus" [S13P17].
"Dean Burgon a learned textural critic and collator of
Manuscripts, Presbendary Miller, Dr. Scrivener and others, uphold the Textus
Receptus because of the immense number of manuscripts which are in agreement
with it" [S4P28].
The KJV agrees with the massive amount of witnesses (more
than 5,000 Greek manuscripts) and also: "Virtually no [KJV] MSS are known
to be copies of any others ..." [S6P57].
Thus, when we say that the majority of the 5,000 witnesses
agree with the King James Bible, we are saying that these 5,000 witnesses are
'INDEPENDENT' witnesses.
"We can safely conclude from scholars on both sides of
the issue that the vast majority of manuscripts agrees with the readings in the
King James Version ... [And] Not only does the KJV have a firmer foundation
numerically, but also geographically. It comes from numerous localities
..." [S3P479].
Thus, the testimony to the validity of the King James Bible
is deep: 5,000 independent witnesses. And, the testimony is wide: these witnesses
come from a variety of locations.
But what about the corrupted minority of Greek texts? Did
the King James translators know about these manuscripts? Did they use them?
History documents that:
"... the translators of 1611 had available ALL of the
variant readings of these manuscripts and rejected them" [S2P254].
Thus, the King James translators knew about the corrupted
minority of manuscripts and they rejected this corruption.
The KJV translators went on to make a Bible which has been
shown to be in agreement with the majority of the Greek texts.
To make the King James Bible, the translators selected and
used a representative sample of the majority texts. This was easy to do because
the majority texts agree with one another.
Specifically:
"The [KJV] translators drew on the earlier 16th century
translations, such as the Bishop's Bible and the Geneva Bible, but especially
on Tyndale's translation. His was a very great influence on the Authorised
Version - it has been said that some 80% or more of the AV derives from
Tyndale. In a sense the AV was the culmination of nearly a century of Bible
translation ... it came out of the Reformation which was the greatest revival
since the first Christian Pentecost" [S13P8].
As for the Geneva Bible, it: "... was the first English
Bible to have verse numbers; the first to use italics for words that were not
in the original languages, but necessary for understanding the English; the
first to use the Roman type, rather than the Gothic (Old English); and they
were small and inexpensive" [S9P2].
The King James Bible followed the example of the Geneva
Bible. In other words, in the KJV: "All words which were not found in the
Hebrew and Greek Manuscripts, were placed in italics. In this way these men
[the KJV translators] made a vast difference between the words given by
inspiration of God, and the words originating in the thoughts of men. This is
the way it should be" [S4P103].
( Reader note: 'Modern' versions DO NOT separate God's Words
from man's words. Instead the two are mixed together ).
"In conclusion, recent scholarship demonstrates that
the majority of manuscripts, as seen in the traditional Greek Textus Receptus,
and its translation, the King James Version, represent the earliest, broadest
(numerically and geographically) and most consistent edition of the New
Testament" [S3P503].
T H E R E S U L T S : R A V E R E V I E W S !
What do you get when you start with the true Word of God and
then add: the anointing of the Holy Spirit, godly men in excellent health, an
optimum work environment, an organized work approach, and a system of quality
control though comprehensive peer reviews?
You get the following:
"The KJV reverberates with eternal familiarity"
[S6Pvi].
Of the Bible: Queen Victoria said: "... That book
accounts for the supremacy of England", George Washington said: "It
is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible",
Patrick Henry boasted: "The bible is worth all other books which have ever
been printed" [S9P3].
"Priests, atheists, skeptics, devotees, agnostics, and
evangelists, are generally agreed that the Authorized version of the English
Bible is the BEST example of English literature that the world HAS EVER SEEN
..." [S2P260].
Ivy league scholars have selected the King James Bible as:
"one of the FINEST samples of writing styles IN EXISTENCE" [S3P212].
"... 250 different versions of the Bible were tried in
England between 1611 and now, but they ALL FELL FLAT before the majesty of the
King James" [S2P253].
"[The King James Bible] was accepted in common use by
the people, without coercion, and has been blessed of God as no other book of
any language ..." [S9P1].
The KJV: "... has proven itself for almost 400 years,
it is the most beautiful, it bears the most fruit, it produces spiritual
revival, it is easiest to memorize, its readers are the most zealous to read it
often" [S9P2].
"But upon the whole the version of 1611 ... is probably
the best version ever made for public use. It is not simply a translation, but
a living reproduction of the original scriptures in idiomatic English, by men
as reverent and devout as they were learned. It reads like an original work,
such as the prophets and apostles might have written in the seventeenth century
for English readers. It reveals an easy mastery of the rich resources of the
English language, the most cosmopolitan of all modern languages, and blends
with singular felicity Saxon force and Latin melody. Even its prose reads like
poetry, and sounds like music. It is the first of English classics, and the
greatest modern authors have drawn inspiration from this pure well of English
undefiled. Its best recommendation is its universal adoption and use ... Next
to Christianity itself, the version of 1611 is the greatest boon which a kind
Providence has bestowed upon the English race. It carries with it to the ends
of the globe all that is trulyvaluable in our civilization, and gives strength,
beauty, and happiness to our domestic, social, and national life" [S6P96].
"The Majority text, it must be remembered, is
relatively uniform in its general character with comparatively low amounts of
variation between its major representatives. NO ONE HAS YET EXPLAINED how a
long, slow process spread out over many centuries as well as over a wide
geographical area, and involving a multitude of copyists, who often knew
nothing of the state of the text outside of their own monasteries or
scriptoria, could achieve this widespread uniformity out of the diversity
presented by the earlier forms of text ... an unguided process achieving
relative stability and uniformity in the diversified textual, historical, and
cultural circumstances in which the New Testament was copied, imposes
IMPOSSIBLE strains on the imagination" [S2P34]
"Herein lies the greatest weakness of contemporary
textual criticism. Denying to the Majority text any claim to represent the
actual form of the original text, it is nevertheless unable to explain its
rise, its comparative uniformity, and its dominance in any satisfactory manner.
All of these factors CAN be rationally accounted for, however, IF THE MAJORITY
TEXT REPRESENTS SIMPLY THE CONTINUOUS TRANSMISSION OF THE ORIGINAL TEXT FROM
THE VERY FIRST" [S2P34].
C H A P T E R 1 9
M O D E R N B I B L E ' C L A I M S '
In the last chapter we learned that:
"... The KJV reverberates with ETERNAL FAMILIARITY ...
Priests, atheists, skeptics, devotees, agnostics, and evangelists, are
generally agreed that the Authorized version of the English Bible is the BEST
EXAMPLE OF ENGLISH LITERATURE that the world HAS EVER SEEN ... Ivy league
scholars have selected the King James Bible as ONE OF THE FINEST SAMPLES OF
WRITING STYLES IN EXISTENCE ... The KJV ... has proven itself for almost 400
years, it is the MOST BEAUTIFUL, it BEARS THE MOST FRUIT, it produces SPIRITUAL
REVIVAL, it is the EASIEST TO MEMORIZE ... the version of 1611 ... is probably
the BEST version EVER MADE ... etc. etc. etc.
Now contrast those quotes with sales pitches for 'modern
versions':
... the King James Bible is too hard to understand ... its
words are archaic ... people don't understand it ... it has thee's and thou's
.... today's Christian needs is a 'more readable' version ... etc. etc.
These two views are diametrically opposed to one another.
Only one of them is true. Either the King James Bible IS the ... BEST EXAMPLE
of English literature the world HAS EVER SEEN or it ISN'T.
So, should we believe:
A) The 'non-financially' compensated comments of the first
view?
or:
B) Should we believe 'salesmen' and 'marketing ads' ?
Instead of emotionally (and philosophically) debating this
question, let's get the facts.
Sales pitches for new, modern, versions contain several
'claims'. In this chapter, we will test them for truth.
R E A D A B I L I T Y
One persistent advertisement is that new versions are
'easier to read'. If this is true, it is easily verified.
The Flesch-Kincaid research company has a formula which
measures the grade level of a book. The higher the grade level the more
education is required. And, the lower the grade level, the less education is
required.
The Flesch-Kincaid formula is:
Grade level = (.39) times (the average number of words per
sentence) + (11.8) times (the average number of syllables per word) minus
(15.59)
From this formula; fewer syllables per word lowers the grade
level and/or shorter sentences lowers the grade level. Both make sense.
Now, let's compare some 'modern' versions to the King James
Bible.
In her excellent book "New Age Bible Versions", on
page 196, G.A. Riplinger gives us the Flesch-Kincaid readability results of
various 'Bibles'. In her first analysis, she compares the average grade level
required to read the first chapter of the first and last books of both the Old
and New Testaments. Her chart follows:
Name KJV NASB NKJV TEV NIV
Of Grade Grade Grade Grade Grade
Book Level Level Level Level Level
~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~
Gen. 1 4.4 4.7 5.2 5.1 5.1
Mal. 1 4.6 5.1 4.6 5.4 4.8
Matt. 1 6.7 6.8 10.3 11.8 16.4
Rev. 1 7.5 7.7 7.7 6.4 7.1
———————————————————
Grade
Level 5.8 6.1 6.9 7.2 8.4
Average
Analytical data confirms that it's the KING JAMES BIBLE that
requires the LEAST amount of education, NOT the 'modern versions'.
Think about it. God is willing than none should perish (2
Peter 3:9). Now; if you were God, and you wanted everyone to be saved, would
you make your Bible hard to understand? Of course not.
You would make the message of salvation so simple anyone
(and everyone) could understand it. This is what God has done in the
Traditional Majority Text (King James Bible).
Also, notice that the NEW King James Version IS NOT an
improvement over the KJV. The NKJV requires an additional grade level INCREASE
in education compared to the KJV.
Continuing her analysis, G.A Riplinger says:
"To extend the inquiry, one each of the three
book-types (Gospel, Pauline epistle, and General epistle) were surveyed. The resulting
data confirms the readability of the KJV" [S3P196].
Name KJV TEV NKJV NIV NASB
Of Grade Grade Grade Grade Grade
Book Level Level Level Level Level
~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~
John 1:1-21 3.6 5.9 3.9 3.6 4.2
Gal. 1:1-21 8.6 6.7 8.9 9.8 10.4
James 1:1-21 5.7 6.0 6.4 6.5 7.0
——————————————————-
Grade
Level 6.0 6.2 6.4 6.6 7.2
Average
An objective analysis uncovers the truth. 'New versions' are
actually HARDER TO READ, not easier. The claim that new versions are easier to
read is ANOTHER lie. And who is the father of lies ?
"Why is the KJV easier to read? The KJV uses one or two
syllable words while the new versions substitute complex multi-syllable words
and phrases" [S3P196]
For instance: The following is a sample of the hard words
used in the NASB vs. the easy words used in the KJV. This sample analysis is
also courtesy of G.A. Riplinger [S3P197-208].
NASB vs KJV
Hard Easy
Word Word
Verse (NASB) (KJV)
Matt. 1:11 deportation carried away
Matt. 2:16 environs coasts
Matt. 9:18 synagogue-official certain ruler
Matt. 11:26 well pleasing good
Matt. 14:24 but the boat was was now in the
already many stadia away midst of the sea
Matt. 14:24 battered tossed
Matt. 15:6 invalidated made
Matt. 16:27 recompense reward
Matt. 25:10 make the purchase buy
Matt. 26:59 in order that to they might
Matt. 27:27 Praetorium common hall
Matt. 27:27 whole Roman cohort band of soldiers
Mark 2:21 unshrunk new
Mark 15:18 acclaim salute
Luke 5:29 reclining at table sat
Luke 6:22 ostracize separate you
from their company
Luke 6:49 collapsed fell
Luke 7:2 highly regarded dear
Luke 7:32 sang a dirge have mourned
Luke 8:31 the abyss the deep
John 10:23 portico porch
John 16:26 on your behalf for you
John 17:4 accomplished finished
John 18:1 ravine brook
John 19:20 inscription title
John 21:7 stripped for work naked
Acts 11:24 considerable numbers much people
Acts 12:21 rostrum throne
Acts 27:18 jettison the cargo lighten the ship
Romans 9:29 posterity seed
2 Cor. 11:32 the ethnarch the governor
Gal. 1:14 contemporaries equals
Phil. 4:9 practice do
1 Thess. 2:17 having been bereft being taken
of you from you
1 Thess. 5:1 epochs seasons
1 Thess. 5:14 admonish warn
1 Tim. 1:15 foremost of all chief
1 Tim. 3:3 uncontentious not a brawler
1 Tim. 5:12 previous pledge first faith
Titus 1:6 dissipation riot
Titus 3:10 factious heretick
Heb. 7:2 apportioned gave
Heb. 12:1 encumbrance weight
Rev. 4:1 standing was
Rev. 11:11 who were beholding saw
them
Rev. 18:2 prison of every bird cage
M E M O R I Z A T I O N O F S C R I P T U R E
"The memorization of scripture, which is the 'sword of
the Spirit', is a necessary self-defense against sin. Simple sentence structure
and single syllable words certainly simplify this task. Satan strives to stop
this safeguard against sin, so new versions keep the 'sword' wrapped in a
sheath of words" [S3P204]. For example:
Syllable Comparison: NASB vs KJV
NASB # Of KJV # Of
Verse Wording Syllables Wording Syllables
Matt. 26:41 Keep watching 3 Watch and pray 6 and praying
Matt. 26:59 in order that they 6 to 1
might
Matt. 28:5 you are looking 5 seek 1
for
Mark 1:34 who he was 3 him 1
Mark 1:41 am willing 3 will 1
Mark 2:7 speak that way? 8 speak blasphemies 4
He is blaspheming
Mark 3:3 Rise and come 5 Stand forth 2
forward
Mark 13:37 Be on the alert 5 Watch 1
Mark 16:8 astonishment had 7 were amazed 3
gripped them
Luke 1:80 continued to grow 5 grew 1
Luke 5:26 seized with 6 amazed 1
astonishment
Luke 6:8 what they were 5 their thoughts 2
thinking
Luke 7:5 it was he who 4 he hath 2
Luke 7:26 one who is more 4 much more 2
Luke 8:45 Who is the one 7 Who touched me? 3
who touched me?
Luke 8:50 Do not be afraid 9 Fear not 2
any longer
Luke 10:9 those in it who are 5 the 1
Luke 16:3 am not strong 6 cannot 2
enough to
Luke 18:3 Give me legal 12 avenge 2
protection from
my opponent
Luke 20:37 in the passage 7 at 1
about the
John 19:3 And they began to 11 said 1
come up to him
and say
John 19:3 to give Him blows 7 they smote him 3
in the face
Eph. 1:4 with a view to 4 until 1
Rev. 7:15 spread his 8 dwell 1
tabernacle over
=================== === ==
TOTAL SYLLABLE COUNT : 148 42
After comparing these two columns; it is no wonder G.A.
Riplinger says: "The sentence structure of the new versions can only be
called a labyrinth" [S3P207].
READER NOTE: The Word is "The Sword of the
Spirit". When G.A. Riplinger says that: "The memorization of
scripture is a necessary self-defense against sin" and that: "simple
sentence structure and single syllable words ... simplify this task"; I
believe she has hit on a very SUBTLE but EXTREMELY important point.
The memorization of scripture REQUIRES repetition. And, it
requires hearing the SAME words again and again. When each 'modern' version,
substitutes different words (so it can 'sell itself' as a 'new' version), it
hinders and confuses the memorization of scripture.
When Jesus was tempted by Satan in the wilderness, I suspect
He DID NOT have scrolls of scripture with him. Nor do I think He fumbled around
with which version to quote back to Satan. The only thing Jesus had was the
Word, memorized! Think about it!
NKJV vs KJV
"Only a multi-million dollar marketing campaign could
capture unsuspecting customers for the New King James Version camp. An actual
collation of its text proves it MORE DIFFICULT, not 'clearer', as claimed.
Second grade students can define ALL of the following sample KJV words, but
NONE of their NKJV substitutes" [S3P208].
Hard Easy
Word Word
Verse (NKJV) (KJV)
2 Cor. 5:2 habitation house
Eccl. 2:3 gratify give
Is. 28:1,4 verdant fat
Deut. 28:50 elderly old
Judges 19:29 limb bones
Ps. 43:1 Vindicate Judge
Rom. 14:13 resolve judge
Josh. 22:24 descendants children
Acts 17:22 the Areopagus Mars' Hill
Ez. 31:4 rivulets little rivers
New Test. hades hell
1 Kings 10:28 Keva linen yarn
1 Sam. 13:21 pim file
John 18:28 Praetorium judgement hall
Rom. 13:1 governing higher powers
authorities
Gal. 5:4 estranged no effect
Is. 2:16 sloops pictures
Lam. 5:3 waif fatherless
1 Sam. 10:19 clans thousands
Acts 27:17 Syrtis Sands quicksand
2 Cor. 11:5 eminent chiefest
Job 2:10 adversity evil
1 Sam. 16:14 distressing evil
Jer. 19:3 catastrophe evil
2 Kings 22:16 calamity evil
Eccl. 12:1 difficult evil
Eccl. 8:5 harmful evil
Ezek. 5:16 terrible evil
Ezek. 5:17 wild evil
2 Sam. 17:14 disaster evil
1 Kings 17:20 tragedy evil
Prov. 16:4 doom evil
Jer. 44:17 trouble evil
Amos 9:4 harm evil
Job 2:10 adversity evil
Syllable Comparison: NKJV vs. KJV
Not only are the words simpler in the KJV (vs. NKJV) but the
syllable count is less, too. For example:
NKJV # Of KJV # Of
Verse Wording Syllables Wording Syllables
1 Cor. 3:3 behaving like 6 walk as men 3
mere men
2 Cor 11:29 do not burn 8 burn not 2
with indignation
Ps. 40:9 I have proclaimed 8 I have preached 3
the good news of
1 Cor 11:10 a symbol of 8 power 2
authority
1 Sam 25:12 on their heels 4 their way 2
================== === ===
TOTAL SYLLABLE COUNT : 34 12
And lastly; let's compare the NIV syllable count to the KJV:
Syllable Comparison: NIV vs. KJV
NIV # Of KJV # Of
Verse Wording Syllables Wording Syllables
1 Cor. 10:7 indulge in 6 rose up to play 4
revelry
Lev. 14:2 regulations for 15 law of leprosy 5
infectious skin
diseases and
mildew
Lev. 11:30 skink 1 snail 1
2 Chron. 2:2 conscripted 3 told 1
Rom. 1:28 think it 4 like 1
worthwhile
Eph. 4:16 supporting 6 joint 1
ligament
Luke 10:35 reimburse 3 repay 2
Luke 11:26 final condition 5 last state 2
================== === ===
TOTAL SYLLABLE COUNT: 43 17
"So the reader will not think 'select' verses are
presented, a thorough comparison of one book, Hebrews follows. The NIV's
vocabulary evades both young and old alike" [S3P209].
Further Syllable Comparison: NIV vs. KJV
NIV # Of KJV # Of
Verse Wording Syllables Wording Syllables
Heb. 1:2 universe 3 worlds 1
Heb. 1:3 radiance 3 brightness 2
Heb. 1:3 representation 5 image 2
Heb. 1:3 sustaining 3 upholding 3
Heb. 1:3 provided 8 purged 1
purification
Heb. 1:4 superior to 5 better than 3
Heb. 2:3 announced 2 spoken 2
Heb. 2:10 exists 2 are 1
Heb. 4:2 combine 2 mixed 1
Heb. 4:15 sympathize 3 be touched 2
Heb. 5:7 his reverent 7 he feared 2
submission
Heb. 5:10 designated 4 called 1
Heb. 5:13 not acquainted 4 unskillful 3
Heb. 6:6 subjecting him to 5 put him to 3
Heb. 7:16 indestructible 5 endless 2
Heb. 8:13 obsolete 3 old 1
Heb. 10:26 deliberately 5 wilfully 3
Heb. 10:27 expectation 4 looking for 3
Heb. 11:5 experience death 5 see death 2
Heb. 11:22 exodus 3 departing 3
================== === ===
TOTAL SYLLABLE COUNT: 81 41
F E W E R ' D I F F E R E N T ' W O R D S
Not only does the King James use simpler words, but it also
uses a shorter vocabulary of 'different' words. In his book "The Majority
Text", Theodore Letis points out:
"The AV contains only about six thousand words as
compared to Shakespeare's fifteen to twenty thousand and Milton's thirteen
thousand ..." [S6P87].
U N R E C O G N I Z E D W O R D S
What about the King James' words we don't recognize? G.A.
Riplinger responds to this question:
"The ... words in the KJV, which are unfamiliar, at
first glance, to dictionary shy Americans are actually simpler and more
accurate than their new substitutes. A 'stomacher' for example (Isa. 3:24) is
NOT a belt, as new versions indicate, but a chest ornament. (It seems the only
'simpler' words in new versions are incorrect or from a corrupt Greek text.)
New versions not only do not improve the KJV's 'sackbut' (Daniel 3:7), calling
it a 'trigon', but in the same sentence change the KJV's simple 'harp' to a
'zither' [S3P210].
T H E E ' S A N D T H O U ' S
A second claim is that: 'thee', 'thou', 'thy', and 'thine'
are out of date. The 'pitch' is that these words were spoken in 1611, are
archaic, and need to be eliminated.
Let's examine this claim. In his book 'The King James
Version Defended', Edward F. Hills gives us some interesting insight into these
words. On page 218, he says:
"... the English of the King James Version is not the
English of the 17th century ... It is Biblical English, which was not used on
ordinary occasions even by the translators who produced the King James Version.
As H. Wheeler Robinson (1940) pointed out, one need only compare the preface
written by the translators with the text of their translation to feel the
difference in style ... The King James Version ... owes its merit, not to 17th
century English - which was very different - but to its faithful translation of
the original. Its style is that of the Hebrew and the New Testament Greek. Even
in their use of thee and thou the translators were not following 17th century
English usage but biblical usage, for at the time these translators were doing
their work these singular forms had already been replaced by the plural you in
polite conversation" [S12P218].
In his book 'The Old Is Better', Alfred E. Levell also
comments on the need for thee's and thou's. On page 31, he says:
"Why did the AV translators not adopt the up to date
English of their time? For one reason ... accuracy of translation! Whenever the
Hebrew and Greek texts use the singular of the pronoun, so does the AV; and
whenever those texts use the plural, so does the AV ... There is a distinct
loss of accuracy in translation if 'You' is used for singular as well as the
plural: it becomes an ambiguous word ... Thus in Luke 22:31-32 the Lord says to
Peter "Satan hath desired to have you, to sift you as wheat,"
"you" here referring to Peter and the other disciples; "But I
have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not," "thee" and
"thy" referring to Peter only. Such shades in meaning are completely
lost when 'you' is used throughout" [S13P31].
The words: 'thee', 'thou', 'thy' and 'thine' are clearly
needed. The Holy Spirit picked these words for a reason: It is to distinguish
the 'singular you' from the 'plural you' for the purpose of clarity. Praise God!
Objective, analytical, data shows new versions are NOT
EASIER to read, they are HARDER. Also, new versions are wordier, have more
syllables per word, and use harder words.
The words God chose, for His Traditional Majority Text, are
simpler. And, like the use of 'thee', 'thou', 'thy' and 'thine'; each word was
chosen for a reason. We may or may not understand each word, but it is there
for a purpose; just like you and I are here for a purpose.
Lately; Bible publishers are trying to tell Christians the
King James Bible is 'hard to understand'. Their 'claim' is that we need to buy
a 'new version'.
Well, if the King James Bible is 'hard to understand', then
this is a very, very, RECENT phenomenon. Our grandparents were able to read the
King James!
And, how would Bible publishers explain this supposed
problem with King James 'readability' when we are actually MORE EDUCATED than
our grandparents?
No; their claim does not make sense. Something else is
wrong.
T H E T R U E P R O B L E M
The truth is that the King James Bible is NOT the problem.
"The real gap is one of distance between God and man,
not a lapse between us and Father Time ... The spiritual chasm is so vast that
even those close to Jesus could not understand him. He was NOT speaking archaic
Aramaic to Mary and Joseph yet, "they understood NOT the saying which he
spake unto them". Obsolete words were NOT the obstacle when he asked
Peter, "Are ye also yet WITHOUT understanding?" [S3P635].
Something to think about.
C H A P T E R 2 0
S A T A N ' S C O U N T E R F E I T S :
T H E S I N A I T I C U S A N D V A T I C A N U S T E X T S
( Corrupted Minority Texts In Greek )
"In our day there are reputed to be about 110 so-called
translations of the Bible or New Testament in the English language alone ... Of
those 110 versions only the King James Version (Authorized) is translated from
the Received Text (Textus Receptus). All the others, even though no two of them
agree with each other, were translated from another source. That other source
is the Misters Westcott and Hort Text" [S14P3-4].
Jasper James Ray 'echoes' the same report. He says all
modern Bibles since 1611 are: "... for the most part, in agreement with
the Greek Text of Westcott and Hort" [S4P29].
So, where did the Greek Text of Westcott and Hort come from?
"The Greek text of Westcott and Hort is ... from a very
limited and select number of manuscripts" [S4P27]. "The Westcott and
Hort Greek New Testament was primarily based on the Vaticanus (B) and
Sinaiticus (Aleph) manuscripts of the fourth century, both of which originated
from the Alexandrian School" [S1P9].
In this chapter we discuss the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus
manuscripts.
The reader should note that 'Vaticanus' is sometimes called
'Codex Vaticanus'. The word 'Codex' means the manuscript is in 'book' form,
verses a scroll. Vaticanus is also called 'B'.
Sinaiticus is also referred to as 'Codex Sinaiticus'. Again
the word Codex meaning this manuscript is also in 'book' form, verses scroll.
Sometimes Sinaiticus is also called 'Aleph'.
In summary: "The text of Westcott and Hort is
practically the text of Aleph and B" [S2P136]. i.e. Sinaiticus and
Vaticanus.
V A T I C A N U S
Vaticanus: " ... was written on fine vellum (tanned
animal skins) and remains in excellent condition. It was found in the Vatican
Library in 1481 A.D." [S5P60]
In spite of being in excellent condition:
"This Codex omits portions of Scripture vital to
Christian doctrine. Vaticanus omits Genesis 1:1 - Genesis 46:28, Psalms 106 -
138, Matthew 16:2,3; Romans 16:24; the Pauline Pastorial Epistles; Revelation;
and everything in Hebrews after 9:14" [S1P72]. "These parts were
probably left out on purpose" [S5P60].
"Moreover having been found in the Vatican library, the
suspicion was all the more compounded. We must recall that the Renaissance was
lifting the great curtain hiding medieval superstition and forged documents,
allowing the light to shine in ..." [S6P135].
"According to authorities the date of its writing is
placed within the years 325 A.D. to 350 A.D." [S4P20].
"Vaticanus, though intact physically, is found to be of
very poor literary quality. Dr. Martin declares, 'B' exhibits numerous places
where the scribe has written the same word or phrase twice in succession"
[S1P72].
"Besides all that - in the gospels alone it leaves out
237 words, 452 clauses and 748 whole sentences, which hundreds of later copies
agree together as having the SAME words in the SAME places, the SAME clauses in
the SAME places and the SAME sentences in the SAME places" [S5P60].
"It seems suspicious indeed that a MSS possessed by the
Roman Catholic Church omits the portion of the book of Hebrews which exposes
the 'mass' as totally useless. (Please read Hebrews 10:10-12). The 'mass' in
conjunction with the false doctrine of purgatory go hand in hand to form a
perpetual money making machine for Rome. Without one or the other the Roman
Catholic Church would go broke!" [S1P72].
G.A Riplinger adds the following about Vaticanus (i.e. 'B'):
"The use of recent technology such as the vidicon
camera, which creates a digital form of faint writing, recording it on magnetic
tape and reproducing it by an electro-optical process, reveals that B has been
altered by at least two hands, one being as late as the twelfth century ... A few
passages ... remain to show the original appearance of the first hand. The
corrector omitted [things] he believed to be incorrect" [S3P551].
"B agrees with the Textus Receptus only about 50% of
the time. It differs from the Majority Greek in nearly 8,000 places, amounting
to about one change per verse. It omits several thousand key words from the
Gospels, nearly 1,000 complete sentences, and 500 clauses. It adds
approximately 500 words, substitutes or modifies nearly 2,000 and transposes
word order in about 2,000 places. It has nearly 600 readings THAT DO NOT OCCUR
IN ANY OTHER MANUSCRIPT ..." [S3P551].
And: "Linguistic scholars have observed that B is
reminiscent of classical and Platonic Greek, NOT the Koine [common] Greek of
the New Testament ..." [S3P551].
"Protestant theologians question its lack of use by
anyone for 1300 years-then its sudden 'discovery' in the Vatican in 1481"
[S3P552].
"Its [i.e. Vaticanus'] immediate use to suppress the
Reformation and its subsequent release in 1582 as the Jesuit-Rheims Bible are
logical, considering the manuscripts omission of anti-Catholic sections and
books (ie Hebrews 9:14 and Revelation etc.)" [S3P552].
Also, Vaticanus: "... agrees essentially with Origen's
Hexapla, omitting the deity of Christ frequently ..." [S3P552].
In summary, history records that:
"... Vaticanus was available to the King James
translators but they didn't use it because they knew it was unreliable"
[S5P60].
S I N A I T I C U S
"The Sinaiticus is a manuscript that was found in 1844
in a trash pile in St. Catherine's Monastery near Mt. Sinai, by a man named Mr.
Tichendorf" [S5P61].
"The date of its writing is placed at around 340 A.D.
..." [S4P20].
"The Sinaiticus is extremely unreliable, proven by
examining the manuscript itself. John Burgon spent years examining every
available manuscript of the New Testament" [S5P61]. He writes about
Sinaiticus:
"On many occasions 10, 20, 30, 40 words are dropped
through very carelessness. Letters, words or even whole sentences are
frequently written twice over, or begun and immediately cancelled; while ... a
clause is omitted because it happens to end in the same words as the clause
proceeding, [this] occurs no less than 115 times in the New Testament"
[S5P61].
"On nearly every page of the manuscript there are
corrections and revisions done by TEN different people" [S5P61].
Dr. Scrivener agrees with John Burgon. Dr. Scrivener says
(of Codex Sinaiticus):
"... it is clear that this document was corrected by
ten different scribes at different periods". He tells of "the
occurrence of so many different styles of handwriting, apparently due to penmen
removed from each other by centuries, which deform by their corrections every
page of this venerable looking document" [S2P307-308].
And Dr. M. Reynolds tells us:
"Tischendorf, the discoverer of the Sinaiticus
manuscript noted at least 12,000 changes which had been made ... by OTHERS than
the original copyist" [S17P3].
G.A. Riplinger cites some 'advanced' analysis of Sinaiticus:
"[With] more recent detailed scrutiny of the manuscript
... by the use of [the] ultra-violet lamp, Milne and Skeat discovered that the
original reading in the manuscript was erased ... [in places]" [S3P552].
In Sinaiticus: "There are about 9,000 changes from ...
the Majority ... Text, amounting to one difference in every verse. It omits
some 4,000 words from the Gospels, adds 1,000, repositions 2,000 and alters
another 1,000. It has approximately 1,500 readings that DO NOT APPEAR IN ANY
OTHER MANUSCRIPT ..." [S3P552-553].
"Philip Mauro was a brilliant lawyer who was admitted
to the bar of the Supreme Court in April 1892. He wrote a book called 'Which
Version' in the early 1900's" [S5P61]. He writes concerning Sinaiticus ...
"From these facts, therefore, we deduce: ... the impurity
of the Codex Sinaiticus, in every part of it, was fully recognized by those who
were best acquainted with it, and ... it was finally cast aside as WORTHLESS
for any practical purpose" [S5P61].
S I N A I T I C U S
A N D V A T I C A N U S
Since the Vaticanus originated between 325 A.D. and 350 A.D;
and since the Sinaiticus originated about 340 A.D. :
"Several textural authorities believe that the Sinaitic
and Vatican manuscripts are two extant copies of the 50 Greek manuscripts
copied for Constantine by Eusebius in 331 A.D." [S4P19].
One of those authorities is Dr. Herman C. Hoskier. He says:
"My thesis is then that B (Vaticanus) and Aleph
(Sinaiticus) ... are Egyptian revisions current between A.D. 200-400 and
abandoned between 500 and 1881, merely revived in our day ..." [S3P550].
Do you remember in an earlier chapter we talked about
Constantine? We said that, on the surface, he put on the 'robe' of
Christianity. But, behind the scenes, he had Eusebius prepare 50 corrupt Bibles
from the heretical teachings of Origin.
It's possible that we have 2 copies of Satan's corrupted
minority Greek texts resurfacing again from the year 331 A.D. Westcott and Hort
then use these 2 corrupt texts to produce their own corrupt Greek text.
K E Y E V E N T S
Let's summarize some key events in the history of the
corrupted minority text:
- Satan's lies in the Garden of Eden ( about 4,000 B.C. )
- Origin's 'Hexapla' Bible ( 200 A.D. )
- Eusebius' 50 Bibles for Constantine ( 331 A.D.)
- Jerome's Latin Bible ( 380 A.D. )
- Jesuit Bible ( 1582 A.D. )
and now, add to that:
- Vaticanus ( 1481 A.D. )
- Sinaiticus ( 1844 A.D. )
Now, whether or not Vaticanus and Sinaiticus are actually
two of Eusebius' 50 Bibles is not fully proven (at this time). It is, however,
consistent, with the facts.
Since these two texts are forerunners of 'modern' versions;
the key question is: What is contained in these manuscripts?
A N A N A L Y S I S
O F :
S I N A I T I C U S
A N D V A T I C A N U S
"The Vaticanus and Sinaiticus both leave out the last
12 verses of Mark, concerning the resurrection of Christ. But, there is not one
other manuscript ... that leave out this passage" [S5P62].
"Aleph and B differ from one another IN THREE THOUSAND
PLACES in the Gospels alone - not including differences in spelling"
[S6P43].
Of Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, John Burgon says: "It is
in fact easier to find two consecutive verses in which these two MSS. differ
the one from the other, than two consecutive verses in which they entirely
agree" [S15P16].
G.A. Riplinger points out that:
"Neither Aleph nor B ends with the book of Revelation.
Vaticanus (B) completely eliminates Revelation, thereby disobeying God's
command 'not to take away from the words of this book'. Sinaiticus (Aleph) adds
two books after Revelation ... These two books: The Shepherd of Hermas and The
Epistle of Barnabas, spell out in detail the New Age scenario, including
commands to do the things God specifically forbids, such as:
1) Take 'the name' of the beast
2) Give 'up to the beast'
3) Form a one world government
4) Kill those not receiving his 'name'
5) Worship female virgins
6) Receive 'another spirit'
7) Seek power
8) Believe that God is immanent in his creation, as a
pantheistic, monistic Hindu God
9) Avoid marriage, permit fornication
10) Abstain from fasting
11) Subscribe to the New Age Race Root Theory
12) Be saved by being baptized and keeping the 'twelve'
mandates of the Antichrist [S3P557].
"Long ago Burgon and Miller (1896) pointed out the
heretical trait in Aleph and B, and their observations have never been
refuted" [S8P77].
"Burgon's position remains absolutely unshaken ... He
maintains that Aleph and B had been tampered with and revised and proved it in
his "Causes of the Corruption of the Traditional Text""
[S2P141].
"Many scholars today disagree with Westcott and Hort,
noting the poor character of these minority manuscripts. Moody Vice President,
Alfred Martin, calls Aleph and B 'depraved'. Dean John Burgon writes: 'I have
convinced myself by laborious collation that they are the most corrupt of all.
They are depositories of the largest amount of fabricated and intentional
perversions of the truth which are discoverable in any copies of the word of
God. They exhibit a fabricated text...[and are] shamefully mutilated'"
[S3P546].
Of Sinaiticus and Vaticanus we can say that:
"The longer we ponder the evidence ... the more obvious
it becomes that the texts ... were the handiwork of heretics who for some
reason were reluctant to acknowledge Jesus to be the Son of God" [S8P77].
C H A P T E R 2 1
S A T A N ' S C O U N T E R F E I T
T H E W E S T C O T T A N D H O R T T E X T (1881 A.D.)
( The Corrupted Minority Text In Greek )
In the last chapter, we learned 'Codex Vaticanus' and 'Codex
Sinaiticus' are two manuscripts from the corrupted minority of Greek texts.
'Vaticanus' was found in the Vatican library. 'Sinaiticus'
was found in a Mt. Sinai trash can.
We also know these 2 manuscripts form the basis for the
Westcott and Hort Greek text. And, the corrupt Westcott and Hort Greek text
forms the basis for 'modern' versions of the Bible.
In this chapter Westcott and Hort use the Vaticanus and
Sinaiticus manuscripts to make their 'own' Greek text. This they submit to a
Bible translation committee. The result will be the "English Revised
Version of 1881". Later on, other 'modern versions' will follow the
W&H text.
We pick up the history of the Bible, in England, in 1870.
T H E B A C K G R O U N D
"In 1870, the Convention of the Church of England
commissioned a revision of the Authorized Version" [S1P162].
A revision committee was assembled.
The Revision Committee was instructed: "... NOT to deal
with the underlying Greek text of the Authorized Version. They were instructed
to do as follows: (1) to introduce AS FEW alterations as possible into the text
of the King James Bible, and (2) to limit ... the expression of any alterations
TO THE LANGUAGE of the Authorized Version" [S1P163].
"Westcott and Hort had other plans. They had edited the
corrupt Vatican and Sinaitic manuscripts ... and produced their own Greek text.
Wisely they had never published it" [S1P163].
"Westcott and Hort had been working together on their
text since 1853; in 1870 they printed a tentative edition for private
distribution only. This they circulated under pledge of secrecy within the
company of New Testament revisers, of which they were members (of which came
the Revised Version of 1881). It soon became evident that the New Testament
committee was NOT going to be content merely to revise the Authorized Version,
but was determined to revise the UNDERLYING Greek text radically"
[S2P153-154].
In November of 1870, Westcott said: "In a few minutes I
go with Lightfoot to Westminster. More will come of these meetings, I think,
than simply a revised version" [S1P162-163].
Hort to Westcott: "This may sound like cowardice-I have
a craving that our text should be cast upon the world before we deal with
matters likely to brand us with suspicion" [S3P407-408]
Westcott to Hort: "... strike blindly ... much evil
would result from a public discussion" [S3P408].
A U N I T A R I A
N A T
C O M M U N I O N ?
"When the company of New Testament revisers (for the
Revised Version) were ready to begin their work, a communion service was held
in Westminster Abbey. A Unitarian member of the committee partook along with
the others. There was serious criticism of this ... The upper house of the
Convocation of Canterbury passed a resolution that NO person who denied the
deity of Christ should take part in the work" [S2P156].
"Westcott expressed his loyalty to apostasy when he
threatened to quit if the Convocation were successful in ejecting Smith [the
Unitarian] from the Committee. 'I never felt more clear as to my duty. If the
Company accepts the dictation of the Convocation, my work must end. I see no
escape from the conclusion'" [S1P165].
Westcott and Hort found an ally for their plan to abolish
the Traditional Majority Text, when Dr. Vance Smith, a Christ denying,
Unitarian preacher, was seated on the committee.
As to the Unitarian, Dr. Hort said: "It is, I think,
difficult to measure the weight of the acceptance won before the hand for the
Revision by the single fact of our welcoming a Unitarian" [S1P165].
D R. S M I T H
What were some of Dr. Smith's beliefs? Dr. Smith called the
belief in Christ's 2nd coming 'erroneous'. He said:
"This idea of the Second Coming ought now to be passed
by as a merely TEMPORARY incident of early Christian belief. Like many another
ERROR, it has answered its TRANSITORY PURPOSE in the providential plan, and may
well, at length, be left to rest in peace" [S1P165].
T H E R E V I S E D V E R S I O N C O M M I T T E E
Dr. Vance Smith was NOT the only problem within the translation
committee. The following quote summarizes the members in general:
"The reputations of the committee members were so
tainted that Queen Elizabeth and her chaplain ... refused to give it official
sanction ... Half the Church of England declined involvement, as did the
American branch ..." [S3P435]. Also: "Others ... left after seeing
the SINISTER character of the 'New' Greek text" [S3P435].
When comparing the scholars of his day to those of the King
James committee: Bishop Ellicott, the CHAIRMAN of the Revised Version
Committee, said:
"We have certainly NOT YET ACQUIRED sufficient critical
judgment for any Body of Revisors to undertake such a work as this"
[S3P435].
(Please note: "Advocates of modern versions assume that
they are the product of scholarship far superior to that of the translators of
the King James Version of 1611, but this assumption is not supported by the
facts" [S2P13]).
It was said that Bishop Ellicott was the committee chairman.
Actually, the FIRST chairman was Bishop Wilberforce. One meeting, was enough
for him. He wrote to a friend: "What can be done in this most miserable
business?" [S2P291] "Unable to bear the situation, he absented
himself and never took part in the proceedings ... One factor had disturbed him
considerably - the presence of Dr. G. Vance Smith, the Unitarian ..."
[S2P291].
B E H I N D T H E S C E N E S
When the King James Bible was translated from Hebrew/Greek
into English each scholar first made his own translation. His work was passed
on to other scholars within his own section for review. This work was then
passed on to other sections for their review. Lastly, the work went to a final
committee to iron out differences. All the work was done in the open.
The work of Westcott and Hort was VERY different:
"The Old Testament committee met together SECRETLY as
one body for ten years. The New Testament committee also met together SECRETLY
for ten years. All was done in secret" [S4P103-104].
"This arrangement left the committee at the mercy of a
determined triumvirate to lead the weak and to dominate the rest. All reports
indicate that an iron rule of silence was imposed upon these revisers during
all that time. The public was kept in suspense all the long, weary ten years.
And ONLY after elaborate plans had been laid to throw the Revised Version all
at once upon the market to effect a tremendous sale, did the world know what
had gone on" [S2P257-258].
This same tactic, of buying sight unseen, was used to 'sell'
the RSV Bible on September 30th, 1952. We know that: "Pastors had no
opportunity to review the new Bible, yet they were asked to open their churches
for a tremendous advertising campaign" [S4P104].
T H E T R A N S L A T I O N B E G I N S
Once the corrupted Old Testament and corrupted New Testament
were ready, Reverend Gipp tells us how Westcott and Hort manipulated the
English translation:
"Since the Committee had been instructed not to deal
with matters of the Greek text, and the Westcott and Hort text had not been
published, it was necessary for the two Cambridge Catholics to submit it little
by little to the committee" [S1P163].
Jasper James Ray also confirms the same report:
"The unpublished new Greek Text of Westcott and Hort,
upon which they had been working for 20 years was, portion by portion, secretly
committed into the hands of the Revision Committee" [S4P104].
"Had it been published earlier, it [the Westcott and
Hort text] assuredly would have been exposed as corrupt and unfit for
translation into English" [S1P163].
Once the corrupted text was submitted ...
"The Revisers of 1881 followed the guidance of ...
Westcott and Hort who were CONSTANTLY at their elbows ..." [S4P25].
"The committee of the Revised Version was dominated and practically
controlled by Westcott and Hort ..." [S2P106].
There were; however, some committee members who actually
OPPOSED Westcott and Hort. We learn that:
"The MINORITY in the committee was represented
principally by Dr. Scrivener, probably the FOREMOST scholar of the day in
manuscripts of the Greek New Testament and the history of the Text. If we may
believe the words of Chairman Ellicott, the countless divisions in the
committee over the Greek Text 'was often a kind of critical DUEL between Dr. Hort
and Dr. Scrivener'" [S2P291].
But, most committee members were 'duped' by Westcott and
Hort ...
"Westcott and Hort were so successful at their secret
task of subtly guiding the decision of the Revision Committee that many
Committee members did not suspect they had been used by the Cambridge duo
..." [S1P166-167].
T H E R E S U L T S O F W E S T C O T T A N D H O R T
Estimates differ as to the EXACT number of changes which
were made to the underlying Greek New Testament. For instance:
"Scrivener counted the number of changes in the
underlying Greek text of the Revised Version as 5,788" [S2P154].
Jasper James Ray says "... the Greek text of Westcott
and Hort contains 5,337 changes from the Greek Textus Receptus" [S4P27].
David Otis Fuller believes that: "The Revisers ... made
36,000 changes in the English ... and nearly 6,000 changes in the Greek Text'
[S2P298].
Whether or not the underlying Greek text was changed in
'5,337' or '5,788' or 'nearly 6,000' places, the text is SIGNIFICANTLY
different. So different in fact that J.J. Ray points out:
"The Revision of 1881, the American Standard Version of
1901 and the Revised Standard Version Bibles are IN NO TRUE SENSE a revision of
the King James of 1611. If they were they would follow the same Greek text
..." [S16P5].
Of his text Westcott himself said: "The value of the
revision is most clearly seen when the student considers together a
considerable group of passages, which bear upon some article of faith. The
ACCUMULATION OF SMALL DETAILS then produces the FULL EFFECT" [S4P26].
"Dr. Ellicott ... declared that they had made between
eight and nine changes in every five verses, and in about every ten verses
three of these were made for critical purposes" [S4P26].
Lest anyone think the changes to the Greek text are minor;
Hort himself says:
"It is quite impossible to judge the value of what
appears to be trifling alterations merely by reading them one after another.
Taken together, they have often IMPORTANT bearings which FEW would think of at
first ..." [S3P432].
Dr. Vance, the Unitarian on the committee, said of the
W&H text:
"It has been ... said that the changes of translation
... are of little importance from a doctrinal point of view ... Any such
statement is CONTRARY to the facts" [S3P432].
Scholars reviewed the W&H text and concluded that:
"... they have given us a DIFFERENT Bible constructed
upon a DIFFERENT foundation" [S4P30].
E.W Colwell, a preeminent textual scholar said of the
W&H text: "The text ... is not reconstructed it is constructed; it is
an ARTIFICIAL entity that NEVER EXISTED" [S3P433].
The Westcott and Hort text: "... deviated the FURTHEST
possible from the Received Text", "a VIOLENT RECOIL from the
Traditional Greek Text", "the most vicious Recension of the original
Greek IN EXISTENCE", "seriously mutilated and otherwise grossly
depraved ...", and "the passages in dispute are of GREAT
IMPORTANCE" [S3P432].
John Burgon said of the W&H text:
"... the Greek Text which they have INVENTED proves to
be hopelessly depraved ... The underlying Greek is a MANUFACTURED article
throughout ... The New Greek Text was FULL OF ERRORS from beginning to end ...
" [S3P433].
John Burgon said to Westcott and Hort:
"It was no part of your instructions to INVENT a new
Greek Text, or indeed to MEDDLE with the original Greek at all ... By your OWN
confession - you and your colleges knew yourselves to be INCOMPETENT. Shame on
[those] most incompetent men who ... occupied themselves ... with FALSIFYING
the inspired Greek Text ... Who will venture to predict the amount of MISCHIEF
which must follow if the 'New' Greek Text ... should become used"
[S3P433].
Immortal words indeed:
"... Who will venture to predict the amount of mischief
which must follow if the 'New' Greek Text ... should become used".
The W&H corrupted Greek Text is now in more than 110+
'modern' versions.
"... all Greek texts produced since 1611, which are in
agreement with Westcott and Hort are founded upon the same quicksands ... Since
Westcott and Hort's text is corrupt, all in agreement with it are corrupt
also" [S4P29].
T H E P U B L I C R E S P O N S E
When the 'New' Greek Text was finally brought into the open
and published, there was a public outcry from conservative and moderate
Christians.
In Hort's own words:
"... the abuse we are receiving ... The crisis is a
very grave one and we ought ... to resist the Moderates in their attempts to
carry out the demands of a noisy public opinion" [S3P436].
M A S S D E C E P T I O N
And so the foundation for a 'mass deception' had been laid
by Satan through his use of Westcott and Hort.
In summary; we can trace 'modern corruptions' back to the
1881 English Revised Version Of Westcott and Hort:
"All modern translations, such as the New American
Standard Version, are linked to the Revised Standard Version of 1952, which is
a revision of the American Standard Version of 1901, which was originally
marketed as the American Revised Version -- an American creation growing from
the English Revised Version of 1881" [S1P197].
C H A P T E R 2 2
W E S T C O T T A N D H O R T
We have studied the work of Westcott and Hort. It's time to
look at these men, personally.
H O R T
Our study of Hort starts with his mother. As to his mother,
Hort said in his biography:
"Her religious feelings were deep and warm ... [H]is
mother was ... an adherent of the Evangelical school and she was to a certain
degree hampered by it ... She was unable to enter into his theological views
which to her generation seemed a desertion of the ancient way; thus
pathetically enough, there came to be a barrier between mother and son ...
[Concerning] her point of view, ... he ... had to recognize that the point of
view was different. SHE STUDIED AND KNEW HER BIBLE WELL" [S3P627].
Hort's mother also tried to 'evangelize' him. For instance,
his mother wrote to him pleading that Hort would not miss:
"... the many mansions of our Heavenly Father's House
..." [S3P627]. She went on to say to him: "... and my darling, Now
happy it will be if we all meet there; no one missing of all our
household" [S3P627].
Through Hort's own biography we see that his mother was an
Evangelical and she 'evangelized' her son.
So, if Hort was saved, why did his mother try to save him?
Or, put another way; if Hort was a Christian, why would he need saving?
The answer to this question is also in Hort's biography. In
it he states he: "outgrew the Evangelical teaching which he came to regard
as sectarian ... fanaticism ... perverted" [S3P627].
Apparently, Hort was not saved. As to his views about
secular topics, we know that:
Hort did not think much of Abraham Lincoln. Of Lincoln, Hort
said: "I cannot see that he has shown any special virtues or statesmanlike
capacities" [S1P128].
Hort said he had: "... a deep HATRED of democracy in
all forms" [S3P419].
Hort WAS interested in communism. He said: "I have
pretty much made up my mind to devote my three or four years up here to the
study of this subject of Communism" [S1P129].
Hort did not like America. To him America was: "a
STANDING MENACE to the whole civilization" [S3P418].
As to Hort's views on 'spiritual' topics, we know that: Hort
did not believe in the authority of the Bible. While mocking an Evangelical,
Hort is quoted as saying: "[There are] SERIOUS differences between us on
the subject of authority, and ESPECIALLY on the AUTHORITY of the bible"
[S3P627-8].
Hort called God's Traditional Majority Text that: "...
vile Textus Receptus ..." [S10P7].
According to Hort, Hell is not a place. Hort said Hell was:
"figurative" [S3P296].
Hort did not believe in Eden. His quote follows: "I am
inclined to think NO SUCH STATE as 'Eden' ... EVER EXISTED ..." [S2P280].
Hort did not believe in Christ's atonement for sins:
"Certainly NOTHING can be more unscriptural than ... Christ's bearing our
sins to His death; ... that is ... an almost UNIVERSAL HERESY" [S10P7].
Hort did not believe that people were saved by being 'born
again'. Hort believed people were saved by water baptism; he stated:
"Baptism assures us that we are children of God, members of Christ and His
body, and heirs of the heavenly kingdom" [S1P126].
Unfortunately, this belief may have cost his own son's soul.
In the following quote, Hort is talking to his son and assuring him that he was
saved by water baptism as a baby. Hort tells his son: "You were ... born
of Christian parents ... While yet as an infant you were claimed for God by
being made in Baptism an UNCONSCIOUS member of His Church ..." [S1P126].
Hort was not Protestant, but was in reality, Catholic. He
says: "... the pure Romish view seems to me nearer ... the truth than the
Evangelical" [S1P126].
Hort believed his salvation was at least partially dependent
on 'the sacraments'. Hort: "We dare not forsake the sacraments or God will
forsake us" [S2P280].
Hort was involved in Mariolotry (worshipping Mary). Hort
said: "I have been persuaded for years that Mary-worship and Jesus-worship
have very much in common ..." [S10P7].
Hort was NOT competent in Greek. He said: "I had no
idea ... of the importance of texts having read SO LITTLE GREEK ..."
[S10P7].
Hort also began looking into the occult. In his words:
"Westcott, Gorham, C. B. Scott, Benson, Bradshaw, Luard and I have started
a society for the investigation of ghosts, and all supernatural appearances,
... being all disposed to believe that such things really exist ... Our own
temporary name is the Ghostly Guild" [S10P7].
And, although Hort did not like evangelistic Christians,
calling them 'unsound' and 'perverted'; Hort was evangelistic when it came to
recruiting for his Ghostly Guild club. Hort said to a friend: "I sent you
two ghostly papers; you can have more if you want them; but I find they go very
fast and the 750 copies which we printed go by no means far enough"
[S3P406].
And lastly, Hort was deceived by Darwin. He said: "Have
you read Darwin? ... in spite of difficulties, I am inclined to think it
unanswerable ..." [S10P7].
W E S T C O T T
As to Westcott, we know that:
Westcott rejected the Bible as infallible: "... I too
must DISCLAIM ... infallibility ... the more I learn, the more ... fresh doubts
come ... I REJECT the word infallibility ..."[S1P139].
Westcott did not believe the first 3 chapters of Genesis. He
said: "NO ONE now, I suppose, holds that the first three chapters of
Genesis ... give a LITERAL history ..." [S2P280].
Westcott was NOT concerned about Hell. Westcott said Hell
is: "not the place of punishment of the guilty" [S3P296].
Westcott did not believe in Jesus' miracles; of them, he
said: "I never read an account of a miracle, but I seem instinctively to
feel its IMPROBABILITY ..." [S1P132].
Westcott believed that Jesus' second coming was spiritual
and not physical; he said: "I hold very strongly that the Fall of
Jerusalem was the coming which ... fulfilled the Lord's words ..." [S1P132].
Of heaven, Westcott said: "... heaven is a state, not a
place ..." [S1P133].
"As a Cambridge undergraduate, Westcott organized a
club and chose for its name 'Hermes'. The designation is derived from 'the god
of magic ... and occult wisdom, the conductor of Souls to Hades, ... Lord of
Death ... cunning and trickery". [S3P400].
Who does 'Hermes' refer to? Luciferian H.P. Blavatsky
identifies Hermes as Satan: "Satan or Hermes are all one ... He is called
the dragon ... the serpent ..." [S3P400].
We also know that Westcott took part in "... prayers
for the dead" [S1P142].
And Westcott's son Arthur recalls his father's:
"tradition of reading Goblin stories at Christmas" [S3P424].
(Reader note: Webster defines Goblin as "an ugly,
grotesque, evil, malignant being or spirit" [S3P424]).
And lastly; it was Westcott who was selected to write the
section on Origen in the "Dictionary of 'Christian' Biography"
[S3P528].
W E S T C O T T A N D H O R T
It's interesting to note that:
"All corrupt Bible scholars, from Augustine to Hort,
believed in religious evolution ... [But] To teach that the new 'bibles' are
progressive improvement is to slander God, for it implies that the Holy Spirit
... has better material to work with in the twentieth century than He had in
the seventeenth, eighteenth, and nineteenth centuries" [S11P120].
"... its time to turn away from the teaching that
Westcott and Hort were two born again, Bible believing scholars. They were
not" [S1P220].
Dr. Ralph I. Yarnell says: "As far as I have been able
to discover, both men [Westcott and Hort] were liberals and by no means
Fundamentalists, IF they were saved AT ALL ..." [S14P3]
It is obvious that Westcott and Hort did not believe the
Bible. And, as Jakob Van Bruggen points out, this is a big problem:
"Whether one believes the Bible or not will affect the
way a person translates some passages" [S6P105].
David Otis Fuller states the same point in different words:
Westcott and Hort's conclusions "... must always be open to suspicion if
... [they do not] ... accept the Bible as the very Word of God" [S2P157].
Or put another way: "A Bible believing Christian can
NEVER be content to follow the leadership of those who do not recognize the
Bible as the verbally inspired Word of God" [S2P172].
And, to Westcott and Hort's use of a minority of CORRUPT
manuscripts as the FOUNDATION for their Greek New Testament, Burgon said:
"They ... invent ... theories because ... a few against
the many requires ingenuity ... for its support" [S2P91].
Knowing what we now know about Westcott and Hort, we must
ask: Was their 'new' Greek Text an effort to establish a 'new' text? Or, was it
actually an effort to abolish an old one? Were their efforts REALLY for
'greater accuracy'? Or, was this an excuse to replace the Textus Receptus?
C H A P T E R 2 3
M O N E Y C H A N G E R S I N T H E T E M P L E
In this chapter we discuss the 'marketing' of new versions.
Our first topic: The characteristics of a 'false prophet'.
T H E F A L S E P R O P H E T
"... all the versions ... in the last one hundred years
immediately compared themselves to one version; a version written three hundred
years ago ..." [S11P126].
"... every new Bible is introduced as being 'better'
than the Authorized Version. It may also be noted that every false prophet is
introduced as better than Jesus Christ. Mohammed had supposedly come to finish
the work which Christ began. Charles Manson claimed that he was Jesus Christ.
Sun Nyung Moon claims to have to finished the job which Jesus Christ failed to
finish. Jim Jones claimed to be Jesus Christ. The Beatles claimed to be more
popular than Jesus Christ" [S1P173].
"Notice that Jim Jones did not claim to be Mohammed.
Notice that Moon did not claim to be the replacement for Buddha. All the false
prophets attack Jesus Christ. Notice the Good News for Modern Man does not
claim to be better than the American Standard Version, but it does claim to be better
than the Authorized Version. Notice also that the New International Version
does not claim to be better than the American Standard Version; it claims to be
better than the Authorized Version. A false prophet can always be recognized,
because he attacks the true prophet" [S1P173-4].
Our next topic, in the marketing of new versions, is
'marketing fanfare'.
M A R K E T I N G F A N F A R E
All the 'new versions' are promoted with great fanfare and
expensive advertising budgets. Whereas: "... the Authorized Version is the
only Bible ever released WITHOUT fanfare" [S1P215].
Why are expensive advertising budgets justified? Because new
versions are financially copyrighted !
F I N A N C I A L C O P Y R I G H T S
'Modern' versions are financially copyrighted. Why is this?
"God has only one Bible. All the other versions ... are
not Bibles, but books of men" [S7P13].
'Modern versions' are copyrighted because they are the
product of men's efforts, not God's.
Contrast this to the text of the King James Bible. The KJV
text can be copied, reproduced, quoted etc. etc. without any intervention by
man.
Peter Ruckman points out:
"The AV has no financial copyright. It has the Crown
Copyright, which only applies to Bible publishers in the United Kingdom, and
this copyright DOES NOT demand money from anyone who wishes to quote, cite,
reproduce, or print any passage from it" [S11P20].
Barry Burton says the: "Thomas Nelson Co. has a
copyright notice in the front of ... King James Bibles that they print. It makes
it APPEAR that they have the copyright to the King James Bible. HOWEVER ... if
you call the Thomas Nelson Company, they will tell you that they do not have a
copyright on the King James text (the Bible itself). What they have copyrighted
are the notes and the layout" [S5P80].
P R O P H E S Y F U L F I L L E D
Publishers of 'modern Bibles' are the fulfillment of the
prophecy of the Apostle Paul. Remember how Paul said: "We are not the MANY
which corrupt the word of God ..." (2 Co. 2:17). Paul also said:
"Professing themselves to be WISE, they became FOOLS" (Romans 1:22)
... "Who CHANGED the TRUTH of God into a LIE ..." (Romans 1:25).
"When men change the Word of God, they invariably are
WORSHIPPING THEMSELVES ... no matter how sincere they may be, they are setting
themselves up as knowing better than God and able to correct God" [S14P3].
And the Apostle Paul was concerned for those being misled.
To the Galatians he said: "I marvel that ye are SO SOON REMOVED from him
that called you into the grace of Christ unto another Gospel: Which is NOT
ANOTHER; but there be SOME that trouble you, and would PERVERT the gospel of
Christ" (Galatians 1:6-7).
Therefore we are told: "... [henceforth] be no more
children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by
the sleight of men, [and] cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to
deceive;" (Ephesians 4:14).
In 2nd Peter 2:1-2 we are told: "... there were false
prophets also among the people, even as there shall be FALSE TEACHERS among
you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that
brought them, and bring upon themselves SWIFT destruction. And MANY shall
follow their pernicious ways ...".
"How sad it is that while the Bible warns us of false
teachers, so few present-day preachers and evangelists give any warning to our
people" [S7P14].
T H E M A N Y W H I C H C O R R U P T
Who are the "... MANY which corrupt the word of God
..."? Who are the people on 'new version' translating committees?
Reverend Gipp researched the committee membership of the
Revised Standard Version. The following are his findings about some of the RSV
members and their beliefs:
R S V C O M M I T T E E M E M B E R S H I P
Edgar Goodspeed: "Goodspeed called Genesis the product of
an 'Oriental' story teller at his best" [S1P198]. "Goodspeed did not
believe in the deity of Jesus Christ" [S1P197]. "Goodspeed said
Jesus' youth was probably one of the dawning and increasing dissatisfaction
with the prevalent form of the Jewish religion in Nazareth and in his own home.
HE DID NOT IN THOSE EARLY YEARS SEE WHAT HE COULD DO ABOUT IT ..."
[S1P197-8].
Julius Brewer: Julius Brewer, said: "The dates and
figures found in the first five books of the Bible turn out to be altogether
unreliable" [S1P198-9].
Henry Cadbury: Henry Cadbury believed Jesus Christ was a man
who TOLD STORIES: "He was given to OVERSTATEMENTS, in his case, not a
personal idiosyncrasy, but a characteristic of the Oriental world"
[S1P199].
Walter Bowie: Walter Bowie believed the Old Testament was
LEGEND, not fact. He says in reference to Abraham: "The story of Abraham
comes down from the ancient times; and how much of it is FACT and how much of
it is LEGEND, NO ONE can positively tell" [S1P199].
Of Jacob wrestling with the Angel, Bowie says: "The man
of whom these words were written (Genesis 32:31) belongs to a time so long ago
that it is UNCERTAIN whether it records HISTORY or LEGEND" [S1P199].
Walter Bowie did not believe in the miracle of the burning
bush: "One day he (Moses) had a vision. In the shimmering heat of the
desert, beneath the blaze of that Eastern sun, he saw a bush that SEEMED to be
on fire, and the bush was not consumed" [S1P199].
Clarence Craig: Clarence Craig denied the bodily
resurrection of Jesus Christ: "It is to be remembered that there were no
eyewitnesses of the resurrection of Jesus. No canonical gospel PRESUMED to
describe Jesus emerging from the tomb. The mere fact that the tomb was found
empty was CAPABLE OF MANY EXPLANATIONS. THE VERY LAST ONE THAT WOULD BE
CREDIBLE TO A MODERN MAN WOULD BE THE EXPLANATION OF A PHYSICAL RESURRECTION OF
THE BODY" [S1P200].
Craig also believed that Christ's second coming was
spiritual, not physical: "In other words, the coming of Christ is TO THE
HEARTS of those who love him. IT IS NOT HOPE FOR SOME FUTURE TIME, but a
present reality of faith" [S1P200].
Craig said God is NOT able to preserve His Word. "If
God wrote His revelation in an inerrant book, He certainly FAILED to provide
any means by which this could be passed on without contamination ..."
[S1P200].
Frederick Grant: Against scripture, Frederick Grant (like
Westcott and Hort) prayed for the dead: "... CEASE NOT TO PRAY, for they
are living still, in this world or the other, and still have need of prayers"
[S1P200].
Willard Sperry: Willard Sperry disliked the Gospel of John:
"SOME of these sayings, it is true, come from the fourth Gospel (John),
AND WE DO NOT PRESS THAT GOSPEL FOR TOO GREAT VERBAL ACCURACY IN ITS RECORD OF
THE SAYINGS OF JESUS" [S1P201].
William Irwin: William Irwin thought Jewish prophets
inflated the God of the Bible: "The prophets were forced by the disasters
that befell to do some hard painful thinking. THEY WERE FORCED BY THE HISTORY
OF THEIR OWN TIMES TO REVISE THEIR MESSAGES AGAIN AND AGAIN IN ORDER TO KEEP UP
WITH THE PROGRESS OF THE AGE. THE ASSYRIANS AND THE BABYLONIANS FORCED THEM TO
REVISE THEIR CONCEPTION OF YAHWEH FROM TIME TO TIME UNTIL THEY FINALLY MADE HIM
GOD OF THE UNIVERSE" [S1P201].
Fleming James: Fleming James said of Moses' writing the
first five books of the Bible: "The idea has been shown by scholars to be
UNTENABLE on many grounds" [S1P201].
Fleming also doubted the miracle of the Red Sea crossing:
"What really happened at the Red Sea WE CAN NO LONGER REALLY KNOW ... THE
SAME MAY BE SAID OF THE PLAGUES" [S1P202].
Concerning Elijah in 2 Kings 1:10, Fleming said: "The
narrative of calling down fire from heaven upon soldiers sent to arrest him is
PLAINLY LEGENDARY" [S1P202].
Millar Burrows: Millar Burrows summarized the true
convictions of the RSV revisors in his quote: "We CANNOT take the Bible as
a whole and in every part as stating with divine authority what we must believe
and do" [S1P202-3].
O T H E R R E V I S I O N C O M M I T T E E S
But, what about other 'new' versions and their revision
committee memberships. Reverend Gipp researched this and found:
"... secrecy surrounding translations such as the New
American Standard Version and the New International Version. The Lockman
Foundation has elected to remain anonymous" [S1P196].
Reverend Gipp goes on to say: "This is, of course, the
safest method, as it prevents investigative eyes from uncovering truths
..." [S1P196].
G.A Riplinger also researched new version translating
committees. She says: "The NASB committee list remained a closely guarded
secret for over 30 years, lest conservative Christians catch a glimpse of the
liberal membership" [S3P491].
Of one NASB committee member G.A. Riplinger adds that:
"Dr. Frank Logsdon has renounced his participation. At numerous speaking
engagements he denounced his part in what he now perceives to be a heretical
version" [S3P491]. "I may be in trouble with God" because of it,
he confesses [S3P491].
As to the NIV committee, Reverend Gipp says: "The
translating committee of the New International Version is ... nameless"
[S1P196].
Of this 'nameless' NIV committee, Reverend Gipp concludes:
"We are assured of their 'scholarship' although words
without proof, ring of a snake oil salesman in the days of the Old West" [S1P196].
Q U O T E S F R O M N E W V E R S I O N E D I T O R S A N D
/ O R D I R E C T O R S
Although groups (like the Lockman Foundation) try to keep
their translating committee memberships a secret; information eventually leaks
out. For instance; some 'new version' editors have written books and/or
articles about their work. This, of course, exposes their participation.
From these published works we can gain insight into their
beliefs. In this short section we will document the beliefs of some new version
editors and/or directors.
Quotes from: Professor C.H. Dodd
Director of Translation For the New English Bible:
"The old dogmatic view of the Bible therefore, is not
only open to attack from the standpoint of science and historical criticism,
BUT IF TAKEN SERIOUSLY it BECOMES A DANGER to religion and public morals."
(The Bible is a danger?) [S5P68].
"God is the author, NOT of the Bible BUT of the life in
which the authors of the Bible partake, and of which they tell in such
IMPERFECT HUMAN WORDS as they could command." (God did not write the
Bible?) [S5P68].
"The most downright claims to infallibility are made by
the apocalypist, as for example in the New Testament Revelation (see 22:6, 16,
18-19) a book which some of the wisest thinkers of the early Church wished to
exclude from the canon, and which as a whole, is SUB-CHRISTIAN in tone and
outlook." (Revelation is sub-Christian?) [S5P69].
"God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten
Son - The expression evidently ANTHROPOMORPHIC. It is a MYTHOLOGICAL way of
saying that in Christ God gives of His own Being ..." (John 3:16 is a
myth?) [S5P69].
"MOSES HAS LEFT US NO WRITINGS, and we know little of
him with certainty." [S5P69] ( Reader note: Professor Dodd really missed
this one. Apparently he has not STUDIED the Bible. Up to the time of the
writing of the 2nd book of the Bible [Exodus], in Exodus 24:4 it says: "Moses
wrote ALL the words of the LORD ...". Many scholars believe Moses then
went on to write, not only the first two books, but the FIRST 5 BOOKS of the
Bible ).
"For indeed the bare idea of vicarious expiation
(substitutionary atonement) is NOT WHOLLY RATIONAL ..." [S5P69]. ( Jesus'
dying for our sins is not rational? )
Quotes from: Edwin Palmer
Coordinator Of: 'All The Work On The NIV Bible'
"[T]his [his NIV Bible] shows the GREAT ERROR that is
so prevalent today in some orthodox Protestant circles, namely that
regeneration depends upon faith ... and that in order to be born again a man
must first accept Jesus as his Savior ..." [S3P231].
"... that Christ loved the whole world equally and gave
himself up for the world is WRONG" [S3P231].
"[There are] few clear and decisive texts that declare
Jesus is God" [S3P305].
"The committee DID NOT FEEL BOUND TO THE HEBREW TEXT
..." [S3P292].
A P O S T A S Y A N D S I N
Peter Ruckman has noticed a couple of common threads in 'new
versions' and in their translating committees. He says:
"You cannot uncover an apostasy without discussing SIN.
You cannot fix the blame for apostasy without talking about SIN, and the surest
proof of this is the fact that the word [sin] is never mentioned in one single
preface by any revision committee since 1611. The AV translators used the word
[sin] in their dedicatory ..." [S11P123].
Peter Ruckman also noticed another common thread. He says:
"There hasn't been ONE man on any revision committee
since 1880 who was a strong evangelistic preacher against SIN: not one
man" [S11P123].
T H E C H O I C E O F B I B L E
The "... Christian makes perhaps no more crucial
decision than choosing a Bible" [S6Pv].
Yet: "The average Christian is not aware of what is
taking place. History contrasts the sacrificial lives of the early English
translators to the cavalier life styles: the zeal of the martyrs for the glory
of God, against the modern popularity and profit motivated efforts to replace
the Word of God in English" [S9P13].
Even Christian ministers are NOT aware of what is taking
place:
"The mass of Christian ministers today ... don't know
what they have in their hand, and if they have an AV ... they strongly doubt
that they have anything more than a 'poor' translation of the 'original'
..." [S11P12].
"The Church ... has abdicated her role as guardian of
the Bible and has turned such responsibility over to HIRELINGS who market
various, conflicting translations to the confusion and dis-array of the
Church" [S6Pii]. Therefore, "... the Bible publishing industry ...
now determine[s] the texts of scripture" [S6Pii].
But: "If you have two books that both claim to be the
Word of God and they contradict each other you must draw one of two
conclusions. Either one of them is the word of God and the other is not, or,
neither of them is the Word of God" [S14P7].
Therefore we find "... sincere believers are in a state
of bewildering confusion today, because of the multiplicity of Bible versions
... They CANNOT ALL be the Word of God" [S4P92].
The truth is that "Satan has from the beginning ...
done everything ... to destroy, belittle, and malign the Word of God. Today he
is using a new tactic, that of ... multiplicity of Bible versions 'so called'
..." [S14P22].
Thus, the Church's worst threat is not external, it is
internal: "... the plunder of God's people will be an INSIDE JOB as
'thieves enter in among you' (Acts 20:30) [S3P393].
As Christians, let us REJECT these 'new' versions which
"... ignore the over 5000 Greek MSS ..." [S3P475].
T H E F A T E O F S
O M E ' N E W V E R S I O N ' E D I T O R S
God says: "Therefore, behold, I am against the
prophets, saith the Lord, that steal my words ..." (Jeremiah 23:30). And
God also says: "... If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add
unto him the plagues that are written in this book: (Revelation 22:18b)
"And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this
prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the
holy city, and from the things which are written in this book" (Revelation
22:19).
So, what happened to those who have changed God's words?
"A surprising number of new version editors have
permanently lost their ability to speak ..." [S3P2].
For instance: The Living Bible; Ken Taylor editor:
In July 1972, Time magazine recorded that:
"Mysteriously half way through the paraphrase Taylor lost his voice and
still speaks in a hoarse whisper" [S3P447]
(Please note: The introduction to the Catholic Edition of
Taylor's Bible warns: "[T]his translation CANNOT BE USED AS A BASIS for
Doctrinal or traditional disputes ... People from various Doctrinal traditions
may ... be CHAGRINED at the particular translations found within this
volume" [S3P447] ).
American Standard Version; Philip Schaff:
Early warnings came to Schaff in 1854: "... his voice
so affected that he could not speak in public so as to be heard". Then in
1892: "... the power of articulate speech GONE" [S3P447].
'New Greek Text'; Tregelles:
S.P. Tragelles was the author of a 'New Greek Text'. This
text influenced Westcott and Hort. Of Tragelles, it was written that he was:
"scarcely able to speak audibly" [S3P448].
Westcott and Hort Greek Text; Westcott:
Westcott's own biographer stated, in 1858, that Westcott:
"... was quite inaudible". Then by 1870: "His voice reached few
and was understood by fewer" [S3P448].
The New Testament in Modern English; J.B. Phillips
J.B. Phillips says (in his own autobiography): "I was
still doing a fair measure of speaking in schools and churches until the late
summer of 1961. And then quite suddenly my speaking, writing and communication
powers stopped. I was not in panic but I was certainly ALARMED, and when a few
weeks rest brought no improvement I cancelled all speaking engagements for the
rest of the year" [S3P448].
Lastly; "Insanity marked another prominent new version
editor whose commitments to mental institutions served as bookends to a life
fraught with derangement and hallucinosis" [S3P2].
In summary: "Modern translators of the Bible are true
successors of Jehoikim, the King of Jerusalem, whose mutilation of Scripture is
given in Jeremiah 36:22-23" [S7P2]. (Note how Jehoikim died. It is found
in Jeremiah 22:18-19).
W H A T A R E T H E R E S U L T S ?
"What have all these versions done for our Lord and for
His Church? Are more people reading and practicing the Bible? Are more souls
being saved? Is there less confusion regarding the inspiration of the
Scriptures since they appeared on the scene? You know as well as I do that
modern versions have brought confusion and compromise ..." [S7P10].
These 'corrupted versions', which dis-agree among
themselves, have made it virtually impossible for the congregation to follow
along with their pastor during the reading of scripture.
And 'new versions' do not contain the same words in our
traditional gospel songs. Thus, hymnals and 'new versions' do not agree,
either!
A R E M O R E C O M I N G ?
At this juncture, a good question would be: Is the latest
'version', that is on the market today, the last one which will be sold to the
Christian public?
The NIV translators give us the answer:
"[T]he work of translation is NEVER wholly
finished" [S3P583].
Therefore, if we can believe these translators, the Bible
industry PLANS to remain in apostasy. How sad.
R O A D T O R I C H E S
"... it is fair to say that the entire American Bible
publishing industry is travelling this road to riches [through the] use of
CONTINUOUS revisionism of their various COPYRIGHTED editions of the Word"
[S6P19]. "In short, the road to profits in the free enterprise system is
CHANGE. While this law is valid for business in general it is absolutely
INIMICAL to the timeless ... Christian faith" [S6P21].
Since the English Revised Version of 1881 "... the
flood gates have been opened and we are now deluged with many different ...
Greek New Testaments ... mutilated in bewildering confusion" [S2P178].
T H E G R E A T B A T T L E
"When we receive the Traditional New Testament as the
true text, then we see the history of the New Testament text as a GREAT BATTLE
between Christ and Satan. Always Satan has been corrupting and mutilating the
true text. Always Christ has been preserving it through the guidance of His
all-governing providence. And this battle is going on right now. As
Bible-believing Christians therefore we follow every detail of this long
conflict with intense interest and gladly volunteer to fight this good fight of
faith with all our might in our own day and age" [S8P53].
C H A P T E R 2 4
G O D ' S P R E S E R V E D W O R D
The foreword to the NASB Bible says that ONLY the originals
were inspired. It says: "The New American Standard Bible has been produced
with the conviction that the words of scripture AS ORIGINALLY PENNED in the
Hebrew and Greek were inspired by God" [S5P76].
Today it is taught that: "... God wrote the originals
perfectly, but that there is NO perfect translation. Yet, there is NO scripture
that teaches any such thing! [S1P170].
We are told that God CAN NOT use Holy men to translate His
Word (from the Traditional Majority Text) into the various world languages.
Yet, if God used Holy men to write His originals, why can't
He use Holy men to translate his Word?
Something is wrong, here. The logic, in what we're being
told, does not make sense.
So, in this chapter, let's examine what God said about His
Word.
W H A T G O D S A I D A B O U T H I S W O R D
"FOREVER, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven."
(Psalm 119:89)
" ... thou hast magnified thy word above ALL thy
name." (Psalm 138:2)
"The words of the Lord [are] pure words: [as] silver
tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt KEEP THEM, O
Lord, thou shalt PRESERVE them from this generation for ever." (Psalm
12:6-7)
"Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words SHALL
NOT pass away." (Luke 21:33)
"The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word
of our God SHALL STAND FOR EVER." (Isaiah 40:8)
" ... the scripture CANNOT be broken;" (John
10:35)
And, lest any of us think that God cannot accomplish His promises;
God has already anticipated our doubts. He says:
"Behold, I [am] the LORD, the God of all flesh: is
there any thing too hard for me? (Jeremiah 32:27).
I N S P I R E D A N D P R E S E R V E D
Contrary to what we're being told, God says that his word is
WITH us and is PRESERVED forever.
Reverend Gipp agrees and points out:
" ... the Bible is a spiritual book which God exerted
supernatural force to conceive, and it is reasonable to assume that He could
exert the same supernatural force to PRESERVE it" [S1P49].
Edward Hills comments:
"... why would God infallibly inspire these original
manuscripts if He did not intend to PRESERVE their texts by His special
providence down through the ages?" [S8P55].
"... if the providential PRESERVATION of the Scriptures
is not important, why is the infallible INSPIRATION of the original Scriptures
important? [S12P225].
"Every argument for inerrant, infallible INSPIRATION
applies also for inerrant, infallible PRESERVATION. It is the same God!"
[S1P170].
"If the doctrine of the Divine inspiration of the Old
and New Testament scriptures is true doctrine, the doctrine of the providential
preservation of the scriptures MUST also be a true doctrine. It must be that
down through the centuries God has exercised a special providential control
over the copying of the scriptures ... so that trustworthy representatives of
the original text have been available to God's people in every age"
[S6P192-3].
"There exists NO reason for supposing that the divine
agent who ... gave to mankind the scriptures ... straightway abdicated his
office, took no further care of his work, [and] abandoned these precious
writings to their fate" [S2P124].
Or put another way:
"Are we to simply believe that, for a millenium and a
half, the New Testament languished textually until it was providentially
rescued in the last century by two random discoveries: in a Vatican archive and
in a Mount Sinai wastebasket ...? [S6Pvii].
" ... if God has not preserved His words ... then he
has done something which He has never done before. He has wasted His
time!" [S1P21].
No dear reader, God has not wasted His time. He has, in
fact, preserved his Words. For instance:
"A.W. Pink ... wrote that the indestructibility of the
Bible is proof that the Author is Divine... A very small percentage of books
survive more than twenty years, a yet smaller percent last a hundred years, and
only an INSIGNIFICANT fraction ... have lived a thousand years" [S7P1].
As Dean Burgon (1883) pointed out, the history of the New
Testament text is the history of a conflict between God and Satan. Soon after
the New Testament books were written Satan corrupted their texts by means of
heretics and misguided critics whom he had raised up. These assaults, however,
on the integrity of the Word were repulsed by the providence of God, who guided
true believers to reject these false teachings and to preserve the True Text in
the majority of the Greek New Testament manuscripts [S12P231].
So, we know God HAS preserved His Word.
W H I C H B I B L E ?
Therefore, the question before us today is this: Which of
the two Bible 'types' is the true Word of God ?
"The fact that there is ONE God plainly tells us that
there can only be ONE correct reading concerning any discrepancy between these
two groups" [S1P48].
"... the whole controversy may be reduced to the
following narrow issue: Does ... Scripture dwell with the VAST multitude of
copies ... concerning which nothing is more remarkable than the MARVELOUS
AGREEMENT which subsists between them? Or is it ... with a very LITTLE handful
of manuscripts, which at once differ from the great bulk of witnesses, and ...
also amongst themselves" [S2P124-5].
"It is certainly much more reasonable to believe ...
that the true New Testament text has been preserved in the vast majority of the
New Testament manuscripts than to suppose with Westcott and Hort that the true
text is ... found in ... codex B, now securely locked up in the library of the
Pope ..." [S2P103].
"Number is the most ordinary ingredient of weight. If
ten witnesses are called into court and nine give the same account while one
contradicts the other nine, which will be accepted? [S2P125].
And if 10 witnesses are good, how much more valuable is the
testimony of 5,000?
C H A P T E R 2 5
N E W A G E D O C T R I N E
In the word, it says: "... we are not as MANY which
corrupt the Word of God". ( 2Co 2:17 )
The Bible tells us that MANY people are trying to corrupt
the Word of God.
In previous chapters we have seen SOME of the heresy which
has crept into these 'modern' versions of the Bible. We have seen the denial of
the deity of Jesus, the removal of Jesus' blood as the atonement for our sins,
we have seen Catholic doctrine, etc. etc.
In this chapter we will look at another category of
corruption included in 'modern' versions: It is 'New Age Doctrine'.
Q U E S T I O N S F O R N E W A G E R S
In this section we will pose several questions to 'New
Agers'. We will then analyze their response(s) and check for the presence of
'New Age' doctrine in 'new versions' of the Bible.
Question #1 For New Agers: Who is God?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"WE ARE ALL 100% divine" - Maharishi [S3P184].
"ALL MEN are innate divinity" - Annie Besant
[S3P184].
"The knowingness of OUR divinity is the highest
intelligence ... YOU are divine. But YOU must continually remember YOUR
Divinity ... we had all forgotten we were EACH Divine" - Shirley MacLaine
[S3P184].
"We need a World Religion ... based on DIVINE ESSENCE
IN EACH PERSON. Peace can only come when we recognize THE DIVINITY IN EACH
PERSON" - Lola Davis [S3P184].
The first 'New Age' belief is that MAN is divine, i.e. God.
Now let's see if that corrupt doctrine is in 'new versions'.
Scripture Scripture Reading Scripture Reading
Verse ( NASB ) KJV
Psalm 8:5 Yet Thou hast made him For thou hast made him
a little lower than GOD a little lower than
the ANGELS
"New versions fall back into ... a belief in the
divinity of man" [S3P184].
Not only do some 'new versions' place man up with God, but
these 'new versions' also change God from the personage of the Trinity to a
'nature' or 'divine nature'. In other words, 'new versions' lower God. For
example:
Scripture Scripture Reading Scripture Reading
Verse ( NASB, NIV ) KJV
Romans 1:20 divine nature Godhead
Question #2 For New Agers: Are devils real?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"[T]he Church is wrong with calling them Devils ...
[T]he word demon however, as in the case of Socrates, and in the spirit of the
meaning given to it by the whole of antiquity, stand[s] for the Guardian Spirit
or Angel not a Devil of Satanic descent as Theology would have it ... Demons is
a very loose word to use as it applies to ... minor Gods; ... there are no
devils" - Luciferian, Mme. Blavatsky [S3P218-9].
A second 'New Age' belief is that there are no such things
as 'devils'. Let's look at some 'new versions' to check for this error.
Scripture Scripture Reading Scripture Reading
Verse ( NASB, NIV, RSV, NKJV ) KJV
Deut. 32:17 demons devils
Psalm 106:37 demons devils
Matt. 8:16 demons devils
Matt. 8:31 demons devils
Matt. 9:34 demons devils
Matt. 10:8 demons devils
Matt. 12:24 demons devils
Indeed, new versions ignore the existence of devils. New
versions change 'devils' to 'demons'.
Question #3 For New Agers: Are Christians Slaves or Servants
of Christ
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
First off; let's define those terms. Per Webster's
dictionary:
Servant: "... one who exerts himself for the benefit of
another master ... as a public servant, an official of the government".
[S3P221]
Slave: "... a person HELD in bondage, a thrall. One who
has LOST CONTROL of himself, freedom of action. A drudge." [S3P221].
According to Webster, there is a big difference between
servants and slaves. Servants work because they WANT TO. Servants have RETAINED
their freedom. Slaves work because they HAVE TO. Slaves have LOST their
freedom.
So how do New Agers see Christians? "The New Agers see
... Christ's Church as:
'... bigoted and cruel to all who do not choose to be it's
SLAVES'" [S3P223].
New Age leaders say Adam was a 'SLAVE' before he ate from
the Tree of Life. He was then 'emancipated' just like Lucifer, who '...
preferred free will to passive slavery'.
Another New Age author writes:
'[D]ogmas have made weaklings and SLAVES of men ...
Justification by faith and vicarious atonement were taught as Gospel truth and
man became a greater SLAVE than before'" [S3P223].
Thus, New Agers see Christians as 'slaves' of Christ. Now,
let's see if this 'New Age' belief is in some 'modern' versions. (The following
table is from [S3P224-225]).
Scripture Scripture Reading Scripture Reading
Verse ( NASB, NIV, RSV, NKJV ) KJV
Mark 10:44 slave servant
1 Co. 7:21 slave servant
1 Co. 7:22 slave servant
Eph. 6:8 slaves servants
Sure enough, 'New Age Doctrine' can be added to our list of
errors contained in 'new versions'.
Question #4 For New Agers: Who does 'Christ' refer to?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Roy Livesey: author and publisher of the New Age Bulletin,
in England, says:
"Christ, however doesn't refer to the Lord Jesus Christ
but to the World Teacher" [S3P322].
Thus, New Agers change Jesus Christ (the Master) to just a
"teacher". Let's see if 'new versions' do the same. ( The following
table is from [S3P323] ).
Scripture Scripture Reading Scripture Reading
Verse ( NASB, NIV, etc. etc.) KJV
Matt. 8:19 Teacher Master
Matt. 17:24 teacher master
Matt. 23:8 Teacher Master
Mark 4:38 Teacher Master
Mark 5:35 Teacher Master
Mark 13:1 Teacher Master
Mark 14:14 Teacher Master
Luke 3:12 Teacher Master
Luke 8:49 Teacher Master
Luke 11:45 Teacher Master
Luke 12:13 Teacher Master
Luke 18:18 Teacher Master
Luke 19:39 Teacher Master
Luke 20:21 Teacher Master
Luke 20:39 Teacher Master
Luke 21:7 Teacher Master
Luke 22:11 Teacher Master
John 4:31 Rabbi Master
John 11:8 Rabbi Master
John 11:28 Rabbi Master
John 20:16 Rabbi Master
Question #5 For New Agers: Is doctrine important?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Edwin Luzer: "Doctrine is NOT IMPORTANT [in the New
Age]. What is important is religious experience" [S3P328].
Once Jesus is no longer 'Master', notice what happens to
Christian doctrine: doctrine is then no longer important! In new versions,
doctrine is 'watered down' to the generic term: 'teaching'. For example: ( The
following table is from [S3P326-327] ).
Scripture Scripture Reading Scripture Reading
Verse ( NASB, NIV, etc. etc. ) KJV
Matt. 7:28 teaching doctrine
Matt. 16:12 teaching doctrine
Matt. 22:33 teaching doctrine
Mark 1:22 teaching doctrine
Mark 1:27 teaching doctrine
Mark 4:2 teaching doctrine
Mark 11:18 teaching doctrine
Mark 12:38 teaching doctrine
Luke 4:32 teaching doctrine
John 7:16 teaching doctrine
John 7:17 teaching doctrine
John 18:19 teaching doctrine
Acts 2:42 teaching doctrine
Acts 13:12 teaching doctrine
Acts 17:19 teaching doctrine
Romans 6:17 teaching doctrine
Romans 16:17 teaching doctrine
1 Co. 14:6 teaching doctrine
1 Co. 14:26 teaching doctrine
1 Tim. 1:10 teaching doctrine
1 Tim.4:13 teaching doctrine
1 Tim.4:16 teaching doctrine
1 Tim.5:17 teaching doctrine
2 Tim.3:10 teaching doctrine
2 Tim.3:16 teaching doctrine
2 John 1:9 teaching doctrine
Rev. 2:14, 15, 24 teaching doctrine
Does this remind you of 2nd Timothy 4:3 ? i.e.:
"For the time will come when they will NOT ENDURE SOUND
DOCTRINE; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves TEACHERS
..." [S3P327].
As Christians we KNOW doctrine is important! Religious
historian David L. Johnson says:
"Doctrine specifically states that which is of ULTIMATE
CONCERN" [S3P327].
Or put another way:
"Our plan of action REQUIRES ... sound doctrine. [I]t
is the formal BASIS of our opinions and beliefs. If we do not maintain good
doctrine then all manner of BAD TEACHING can creep into the Church"
[S3P327].
( And isn't this happening in these 'new versions' ? )
Question #6 For New Agers: Is God going to judge the world?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ramtha: "God ... will allow you to be and do ANYTHING
you wish and hold you JUDGELESS. God HAS NEVER judged anyone." [S3P287].
Comment: "Since the destruction of the earth is a
result of God's judgment, those verses describing the severity of that judgment
are 'softened up' or omitted. (The following table is from [S3P286-287]).
Scripture Scripture Reading Scripture Reading
Verse ( NASB, NIV, etc. ) KJV
Mark 6:11 omitted the day of judgement
Mark 9:44 omitted Where their worm
dieth not, and the
fire is not quenched
Mark 9:46 omitted Where their worm
dieth not, and the
fire is not quenched
Luke 17:36 omitted Two men shall be
in the field;
the one shall be
taken, and the other eft.
Question #7 For New Agers: Where do sinners go when they
die?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
H.P. Blavatsky: " ... Hell and its sovereign are both
INVENTIONS of Christianity." [S3P291].
Let's see what this 'New Age' belief has done to 'modern'
versions:
( The following table is from [S3P292] ).
Scripture Scripture Reading Scripture Reading
Verse ( NIV ) KJV
Deut. 32:22 death hell
Job 26:6 death hell
Prov. 23:14 death hell
Prov. 27:20 death hell
Isa. 28:18 death hell
Notice that Hell, a place of eternal torment and punishment,
has been changed to the generic term: 'death'.
Question #8 For New Agers:
In the end times, what will happen to the earth?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
First off; let's see what God says in the KJV:
"... the earth also and the works that are therein
shall be BURNED UP." ( II Peter 3:10 ).
"Luciferian H.P. Blavatsky: 'Both Jesus and St. John
the Baptist preached the end of the Age ... So little did the UNINITIATED
CHRISTIANS understand that they accepted the words of Jesus literally and
firmly believed he meant the end of the world'" [S3P283].
New Agers believe that this 'world' will remain. They DO NOT
believe the world will burn up as stated in the Bible. Instead New Agers
believe in a nebulous concept of one age ending and a 'New Age' then beginning.
Now, let's see if this 'New Age' belief has been injected
into 'modern' versions. ( The following table is from [S3P285] ).
Scripture Scripture Reading Scripture Reading
Verse ( NASB, NIV, etc. ) KJV
Dan. 12:13 end of the age end of the days
Matt. 13:39 end of the age end of the world
Matt. 13:40 end of the age end of this world
Matt. 13:49 end of the age at the end of the world
Matt. 28:20 I am with you always lo, I am with you
even to the end of alway, even unto
the age the end of the world
The 'New Age' corruption, that the sinful earth will remain,
is also included in 'new versions'.
As G.A. Riplinger points out: "If the world ends the
sinner has nothing to stand on; if the age ends, he merely changes his
calendar" [S3P285].
Something to think about.
C H A P T E R 2 6
L E X I C O N S
There is one last way the Word of God is corrupted ...
In her book "New Age Bible Versions" G.A.
Riplinger discusses lexicons. On page 601, she says:
"The Greek and Hebrew Lexicons and dictionaries are
written by men, 'most of whom are unbelievers', writes Princeton and Yale
scholar Edward Hills. A few examples will suffice: 1) The New
Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew-English Lexicon's editor (Briggs) was defrocked by
the 'liberal' Presbyterian Church for his 'liberalism'. 2) Trench, author of
the much used: "Synonyms of the New Testament", was a member of Westcott's
esoteric clubs, as was Alford, whose Greek reference works are still used. 3)
J. Henry Thayer, author of the "New Thayer's Greek Lexicon", was a
Unitarian who vehemently denied the deity of Christ. (Thayer was also the
dominant member of the ASV committee!) His lexicon contains a seldom noticed
warning by the publisher in its introduction (p. vii). It cautions readers to
watch for adulterations in the work relating to the deity of Christ and the
Trinity. 4) The acclaimed A.T. Robertson's "Greek Grammar" also sends
up a red flag in its preface saying, 'The text of Westcott and Hort is followed
inall its essentials'. 5) Conclusions drawn by Kurt and Barbara Aland of the
"Nestles-Aland Greek New Testament" elicit the response by Philip Comfort
that "the Alands' designations must be taken with caution". 6) James
Strong, author of "Strong's Concordance" was a member of the corrupt
ASV Committee" [S3P601].
Lexicons corrupt the word of God. In this chapter we will
see how that happens.
U S I N G A L E X I C O N
A 'lexicon' can be used two different ways:
M E T H O D 1
In method 1, the Christian looks up an English word in their
King James Bible. If a 'lexicon' is used, it cross references the Bible's
original English word to the Bible's original Hebrew/Greek word. Then the
Christian is given the lexicon's 'new' English translation of that original
Hebrew/Greek Word.
Notice how the Christian makes a 360 degree circle from the
Holy Spirit's chosen English word, to the Holy Spirit's chosen Hebrew/Greek word,
to "another" English word chosen by MAN!
Since God is perfect, and man is not, this method corrupts
God's Word.
Notice also, method #1 approaches the Word of God by
'doubting' him. i.e. by doubting His choice of the original English words.
That is how some people use a lexicon. Knowingly or
unknowingly Christians are being misled from what God wants them to know, to
what man and/or Satan puts in place of God's original!
Thus, a Christian may have God's Word (from their King James
Bible), but they can get 'derailed' by reading man's words in place of God's
Words!
E X A M P L E O
F M E T H O D 1
The following is an example of using method 1. Let's see how
God's Word gets corrupted.
In the King James Bible, in Isaiah 7:14, it says:
"... Behold, a VIRGIN shall conceive, and bear a son
...".
If I look up the original Hebrew word for 'virgin' in a
corrupted (but popular) Strong's lexicon, it says the original Hebrew word is:
'al-maw'.
To that original word 'al-maw', Strong gives his definitions.
That's right 'plural' definitions! Strong says al-maw is a "young
woman" and could EITHER be A) of marriageable age or B) maid or newly
married.
Notice Strong NEVER translates it "virgin"!
Think about it.
The Holy Spirit translated 'al-maw' as "virgin".
For a "virgin" to conceive is an obvious MIRACLE.
But Strong says an 'equivalent translation' is "young
woman"!
There are two MAJOR problems with Strong's translation:
1) If a "young woman" gave birth to Jesus, this is
NOT a miracle. Young women give birth all the time! By Strong's definition,
Jesus is just ANY man. If Jesus is just any man, then we are still in our sins.
If we are still in our sins, then we are not saved. If we are not saved, then
we have a big, big, problem.
2) In Strong's definition 'A' he says "of marriageable
age". Strong does not say Mary was married, only that she was of
marriageable age. In Strong's definition 'B' he has 2 translations: 1) maid
(i.e. a woman who is not married) or 2) newly married. Thus, in most of these
definitions, Strong is inferring that Mary is unmarried. Since Mary is pregnant
and Strong is inferring that she is unmarried, Strong is calling Mary a whore !
Folks, this is heresy. Lexicons are apostate and are ANOTHER
way to corrupt the Word of God.
M E T H O D 2
The second method for using a lexicon, is the approach of
"faith". In this approach we say: God I know you picked these
original English words for a reason, I just don't understand why.
Then, you look up the original Holy Spirit chosen
Hebrew/Greek word for the original Holy Spirit chosen English word. You compare
the places where the Holy Spirit translated the original Hebrew/Greek word into
the same (or sometimes) different English words. By using this method #2, you
will gain insight into God's Word.
Method #2 is the ONLY way to use a lexicon, and that's if
you use a lexicon AT ALL.
E X A M P L E O F M E T H O D 2
The following is an example of method 2.
In 1st Corinthians 13:13, in the KJV, its says: "...
faith, hope and charity, these three; but the greatest of these is
charity"
In new versions it says: "... faith, hope and love,
these three; but the greatest of these is love".
Some people 'like' the new version's translation. However,
the 'new version' does not give the FULL meaning.
If I use Strong's lexicon and look up the original Greek
word I find it is "agape". In the King James Bible, the Holy Spirit
translated agape as 'charity' in 1st Corinthians 13:13 BUT the Holy Spirit
translated agape as 'love' in Matthew 24:12.
Remember, we said earlier there are two ways to approach
God's Word: doubt or faith.
When I first read this, I approached the Word in doubt. I
did not understand why the word 'charity' was used in 1Co 13:13. In my position
of doubt, I went to the Lord to ask him why He said 'charity'. I received NO
insight. I received NOTHING. Total void.
This kept bothering me. Eventually I wearied of getting no
response and I finally took the approach of faith. I said:
"Lord I KNOW you chose the word 'charity' for a REASON.
I don't know why. Lord, you are not the problem, I am the problem. I just don't
understand. As your Word says; please give me wisdom and 'upbraideth me
not'".
At that moment of faith; the Lord gave me insight into His
Word:
The insight was this: Charity is a form of love. It is
consistent with love. But the word charity contains the FULL meaning. The
reason is this: If I love my wife, my wife can love me back. Therefore 'what
thanks have ye'. If I love my wife and my wife loves me back, I am being
REPAID.
The Bible is very clear about giving: 'GIVE EXPECTING
NOTHING in return', 'it is more blessed to GIVE, than to receive, 'for God so
loved the world that he GAVE his only begotten son ...'
But 'charity', by definition, is giving when you do not
expect to be repaid. When we give our time and money to a charity, we don't get
a check back in the mail !
Thus, charity is a HIGHER form of giving than just love.
When Jesus gave His life for us He was being 'charitable'.
He was giving and getting nothing in return. What He gave to us we can NEVER
FULLY repay. Giving when you expect 'nothing back' is charity.
Thus, the full meaning is in the King James: "...
faith, hope, CHARITY, these three; but the greatest of these is CHARITY".
B E C A R E F U L !
Man made definitions in lexicons are corrupt. If a lexicon
is used AT ALL, method 2 is the only way to go. Only method 2 approaches the
Word in a position 'of faith'. Method 2 safely bypasses the man-made
definitions. And, only method 2, gives insight into God's Word.
B E W A R E O F T H E C O U N T E R F E I T
In effect, the men who write lexicons are saying: "Yea,
hath God said?" And these same men then say: "God did not say the
English words that are in your King James Bible, what God really meant was
....".
Then the 'counterfeit' is given to the Christian. Lexicons
are subtle and devious in their methodology. G.A. Riplinger believes we should
rename them: "Lucifer's Lexicons" [S3P591].
C H A P T E R 2 7
T H E F U T U R E ?
In previous chapters we focused on 'facts' i.e. historical
facts, Bible verse comparisons, Bible readability scores, personal biographies,
etc. etc. In those chapters data was available because we were dealing with the
past and with the present.
In this chapter the topic is 'The Future'. Since we will be
discussing the future, we are limited to 'speculation'. No one knows 'the
facts' about the future!
F A C T S S E P A R A
T E D F R O M S P E C U L A T I O N
I have purposely separated this chapter on 'The Future' from
all other chapters. This was done so that 'facts' are separated from
'speculation'.
D I F F E R E N C E S
O F O P I N I O N
This is a 'Future Shock' kind of chapter. My speculation of
the future may differ from yours, the reader. Or, we may be in TOTAL agreement!
Whatever the agreement level, I believe this chapter presents some logical and
possible, maybe even probable, scenarios of the future.
The purpose of this chapter is to encourage and stimulate
thought.
But, let's keep in mind only God knows the future, and; this
is a chapter written by a man.
C H A P T E R T O P I C S
In this chapter we will discuss:
1) Where Bible 'revisionism' may be going and
2) The possible future of the Bible, the Church, and the
world.
C O N F U S I O N
The Bible says God IS NOT the author of confusion (1Co
14:33). Since 'modern versions' dis-agree among themselves, and since this is
causing confusion in the Church; I believe we can conclude that these books (
i.e. new versions ) are NOT from God.
And, if they are not from God, they must be from Satan.
T H E B A C K D R O P
"Satan wants to be worshipped" [S1P25].
Also: "Satan's first interest HAS ALWAYS BEEN
'revision' (Gen 3:1-4) [S11P121].
W H E R E I S B I B L E R E V I S I O N I S M G O I N G ?
One way to know where the future is going is to look back at
the past. One way to see where 'new versions' are headed is to go back to the
Garden of Eden.
It was in the Garden of Eden where we saw Satan's
methodology. Let's study Satan's tricks.
S A T A N ' S 3 S T E P
P L A N
In the Garden of Eden, God spoke to Adam. Then, Satan came
to Eve and said:
"... Yea, hath God said ..." ( Genesis 3:1 )
Thus, step 1 in Satan's methodology, was to question whether
God spoke AT ALL.
Next Satan said to Eve:
"... Ye shall not surely die:" ( Genesis 3:4 )
Thus, step 2 in Satan's methodology, was to ATTACK what God
DID SAY.
Lastly, Satan said to Eve:
"... ye shall be as gods ..." ( Genesis 3:5 )
Thus; step 3 in Satan's methodology, was to SUBSTITUTE his
ULTIMATE LIE.
W H E R E A R E W E
N O W ?
God has already told us the truth. He gave us His
Traditional Majority Text. So where are we in Satan's 3 step methodology?
Satan's 'new versions' deny Jesus' deity, i.e. they deny
that 'Jesus IS God'. In effect, these new versions 'infer' that God has NOT
SPOKEN AT ALL.
From the 3 step model, we can say the world HAS PASSED step
1.
Second; some 'new versions', like the RSV, include
statements like:
"... the King James Version has grave defects"
[S5P76]. This statement, as well as the fact that 'new versions' change God's
Words, are DIRECT ATTACKS on what God DID SAY.
From the 3 step model, we can conclude the world has PASSED
step 2.
In the last step, Satan's substitutes his ULTIMATE LIE:
"... ye shall be as gods ..." ( Genesis 3:5 ). As we have seen 'new
versions' contain the 'New Age' belief that man is divine, i.e. God. Thus, the
world may be 'in', or may be 'entering', step 3.
Jasper James Ray thinks that the world has NOT YET fully
entered into step 3.
He says: "... [the] conflicting and confusing Bible
Versions ... appear to be part of a 'Brain Washing' process, to PREPARE both
clergy and laity for the reception of the 'EVOLVING BIBLE'" [S4P115].
He goes on to say: "... the Ecumenical Church must
replace [The King James Bible] with a 'MAN-MADE-BIBLE' in which all
'objectional doctrines' have been removed. A Bible that answers this
description is said to be WELL ON IT'S WAY" [S4P114].
Peter Ruckman gives his forecast for 'new Bible versions'.
He says:
"What is shaping up now is A 'MUTUAL' BIBLE that
Catholics and apostate Protestants WILL 'SHARE' ..." [S11P10].
G.A. Riplinger also believes we have NOT YET entered step 3.
She believes that we have not yet seen the ULTIMATE LIE, i.e. the ULTIMATE
SATANIC BIBLE. In her book: "New Age Bible Versions" she says:
"Satan recognizes that a bible is needed to control the
masses. The DEVELOPMENT of a New Age Bible is among his top priorities"
[S3P15].
She says: "The devious strategy that seems to be paying
off for the New Age is that of revising or updating the Bible to make it more
'meaningful to modern times'" [S3P16].
She believes that: "The New Age Bible will be the
unholy vessel into which the Antichrist will pour these doctrines of devils. It
will incorporate the major doctrines of the [One World] religion" [S3P16].
Reverend Samuel C. Gipp takes Satan's three step methodology
and summarizes how he thinks God's truth will be changed, by Satan, into Satan's
ULTIMATE LIE and into the ULTIMATE SATANIC BIBLE. Gipp's chart follows:
[S1P216].
God's Truth Satan's Counterfeits Satan's ULTIMATE
Counterfeit
One God Many "gods" Satan is "god" of
this world
One Christ Many "anti-christs" The Antichrist
One Church Many false churches One ultimate church, Rome
One Bible (AV) Many "Bibles" (ASV, One ultimate
false "Bible"
NIV, etc. )
In summary, these authors believe we are somewhere between
step 2 and step 3.
T H E S O F T E N I
N G
"Christians today do not realize they 'need a better
translation' until they are TOLD SO by the Bible salesmen ..." [S1P83].
Notice how the public is first 'softened up' to the concept
of receiving a corrupted Bible before the actual sale takes place!
For Satan to 'sell' his ULTIMATE SATANIC BIBLE (step 3), may
require FURTHER 'softening' of the public.
Texe Marrs, a researcher of the 'New Age Movement',
discusses how this 'softening' is occurring today and how it could occur in the
future:
"For centuries Satan has inspired scientists and pseudo
scientists to label Christians as unsophisticated and behind-the-times. Many of
these ... secular humanists' arguments will become part of the New Age Bible.
The bible that is developed by the Antichrist will be applauded as fully
keeping with the high-tech age. Furthermore, New Age citizens will be told that
the New Age scriptures CAN BE CHANGED whenever new scientific discoveries
suggest revision is needed" [S3P555-556].
T H E 'F I N A
L B I B L E' R E V I S I O N C O M M I T T E E
To develop a 'Final Bible' requires a 'Final Bible Revision
Committee! '
New Age leader, Vera Alder, describes who might be on this
committee, and how it could possibly operate. She says:
"[T]he World Government and its Spiritual Cabinet of
12, headed by 'the Christ' will study all archaeological archives ... From it,
the 'Research Panel' would develop the 'New' Bible of a World Religion which
would be the BASIS of future education" [S3P555].
H E A D Q U A R T E R S
Where would the 'Apostate Church' be headquartered and whom
would it include?
G.A. Riplinger quotes Dave Hunt as saying:
"There seems little doubt that this false abominable
last-days religious system called Mystery Babylon (Revelation 17:5) will have
its headquarters AT THE VATICAN" [S3P133].
And "While its headquarters will be at Rome, this false
religious system will represent ALL CHURCHES, denominations, cults and
religions joined into one" [S3P133].
T H E P O P E ?
"The blueprint for the New World Order, by Vera Alder,
calls for the POPE to take his rightful 'position'" [S3P135]
"The Head of the Spiritual Cabinet would therefore have
to be the most spiritually developed MAN in the world ... He would occupy the
position which could have been that of the POPE ALL ALONG" [S3P135-6].
W O R S H I P T H E D R A G O N ?
G.A. Riplinger asks: "Are new versions preparing
mankind to receive the Antichrist and 'worship the dragon'?" [S3P17]
She thinks the answer is yes.
"... Catholics and unwary Protestants, with their Gnostic
Vatican manuscript under their arm, are being steered into the waiting arms of
the one world church of the Antichrist" [S3P498].
"Naive Christians pass over the esoteric terminology
and philosophy in new versions because, as Moody's 'Agony of Deceit' points
out:
"[T]hey are unaware that they are repeating the errors
of the past. Because they do not understand Greek philosophy or Oriental
mysticism, or 19th century theosophy [Luciferism], they do not know how
seriously they have been affected by such thinking" [S3P23].
M O V E M E N T T O W A R D ' T H E E N D T I M E S '
"Satan's objective is to unite the world under a man
wholly given over to him ..." [S3P421]. This will occur sometime during
the 'End Times'.
As we look around, there are signs that the world is moving
toward the 'End Times' with its 'One World Religion'. For example:
"Efforts to have the United Nations declare 1993: 'The
International Year of Religious Understanding' have been made" [S3P461].
Also, U.N. Assistant Secretary General Robert Miller has called for a
"universal bible" [S3P3].
E V E R Y M A N D I D
T H A T W H I C H W A S
R I G H T I N H I S
O W N E Y E S
"New Ager Vera Alder says ... 'It is likely that a NEW
KIND OF RELIGION will develop in which EACH MAN will discover and work out his
OWN sermons FOR HIMSELF'" [S3P504].
"J.B. Phillips touts the reader of his forward to the
NASB Interlinear Greek-English New Testament to 'TRY AND MAKE HIS OWN
TRANSLATION'" [S3P504-5].
David Spangler, a Luciferian (one who worships Satan) said:
"The evolution of the race is for every man NOT to
learn to OBEY the law but to BE the law ... We can take all the scriptures ...
and have a JOLLY GOOD BONFIRE ... Once you ARE the truth, you do not need it
EXTERNALLY represented" [S3P507].
Don't these last statements sound a lot like the scripture:
"... every man did [that which was] right in his own eyes" (Judges
17:6)?
W H E R E I S T H E C H U R C H N O W ?
Sometimes, we can be 'too close' to a problem to see it
clearly. As the saying goes: 'we can't see the forest for the trees'. Since we
are 'the Church', and since we are discussing where the Church is headed, let's
see where outsiders believe 'the Church' is headed:
"Starhawk, a self proclaimed witch remarks: 'I am VERY
GLAD to discover such movement within Christian churches that is sympathetic to
the PAGAN SPIRIT'" [S3P23].
T H E U L T I M A T E Q U E S T I O N
In summary, the future is really headed toward ONE question:
"The final conflict will come down to 'Who is
God?'" [S3P301].
Is it Jesus Christ, or is it Satan ?
The sheep are going to be separated from the goats; and what
we are, is our choice !
C H A P T E R 2 8
C O N C L U S I O N S
Today: "Biblical Christianity is facing one of its
biggest tests as the twentieth century closes: A return to Papal Rome of the
'separated brethren'; A continuing stream of 'new' bibles, with NO END in
sight; A decadent morality rivaling that of Noah's day; A revival of witchcraft
and other ancient religions; and OLD heresies with NEW names. [With] The
prospect of a [one] world government forcing conformity in religion; Christians
had better be CERTAIN that they have the RIGHT SWORD, to '... earnestly contend
for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints' (Jude 3) [S9P11-12].
And the 'right sword' is the Traditional Majority Text, the
English translation being the King James Bible.
As we have seen in this report: "The New International
Version, New American Bible, New American Standard, New Jerusalem, New English
Bible, and the New Revised Standard are not so 'NEW', ... but are merely an
encore of the 'New' Age esotericism of Plato, Saccus, Clement and Origen
..." [S3P545]. For instance: "The divinity of man, of all men, was
taught ... from the writings of Origen and Clement. Plato is saturated with
it" [S3P527].
Right now "... we are ... in the middle of a Bible
translation explosion - a veritable flood of 'new' Bible translations,
versions, paraphrases, all claiming to be the 'most accurate', the 'most readable',
and the most 'up to date'" [S17P1].
Publishers of 'modern' Bibles tell us their versions are the
'best' translation of the Word of God. Then, a year or 2 later, they use the
exact same words AGAIN when they come out with a newer version (i.e. when they
want us to BUY again). There are now more than 120 of these "BEST
TRANSLATIONS" of the Word of God.
That's right 120!
Notice that, at the beginning of this article, there were
110 'versions' of the Bible. At the end of this article there are now 120.
From the time I started writing to the end of this report,
10 new 'versions' have been added!
Would it surprise the reader if I said they were corrupt
also?
The publishers of 'new versions' are telling us that, since
the last version, 'new information' has been found that sheds 'new light' on
God's Word.
Think about it, publishers are saying that we do not have
God's Word, today. They are saying we have to keep looking for it!
C O M E , L E T U S R E A S O N T O G E T H E R
Would Jesus Christ leave the world, for the last 2,000
years, WITHOUT leaving us his true New Testament Word? Would He NEGLECT
everyone for the last 2,000 years?
The simple truth is this: When Jesus Christ left the earth,
he left MANY witnesses. Those witnesses wrote down what Jesus said and did. In
fact, Jesus left so many witnesses that there are still more than 5,000 Greek
New Testament manuscripts which EXIST TODAY. The early church had those
witnesses. We have them, too.
From those 5,000 New Testament witnesses we can take ANY
Bible and test it for accuracy.
The King James Bible has been found to AGREE with those
5,000 witnesses in 90-95% of the cases. That agreement level is why the King
James is called: 'The Majority Text'.
So, we do have God's Word, and we have it, today.
If, on the other hand, we take the Westcott and Hort New
Testament text (which underpins 'modern' versions) and if we compare it to the
5,000 Greek New Testament manuscripts; we find that it DISAGREES with 90-95% of
the witnesses. That is why it is called the 'Minority Text'.
The bottom line is this: Jesus said you will know a tree by
its fruit.
As a Christian, you need to compare the 'fruit' of these
Bibles and decide whether you believe the King James Bible (The Majority Text)
contains the Word of God, or whether the Word of God is in these 'modern'
versions (the Minority Text).
Remember that the Bible is not just any book; it is the Word
of God, and is, therefore, subject to spiritual attack.
In fact it is due to SPIRITUAL ATTACK, that there EVEN
EXISTS a MINORITY of the 5,000 Greek New Testament texts which ARE CORRUPTED.
Without that spiritual attack, the King James Bible would have agreed with 100%
of the 5,000 Greek New Testament witnesses.
Remember also: Jesus has the name above all names (Philip.
2:9). And the Bible goes on to say that: God has MAGNIFIED HIS WORD ABOVE ALL
HIS NAME (Psalms 138:2).
Wow! That is getting up there!
Thus, when we are talking about the Word of God, we are
discussing a VERY, VERY, important topic.
This report was written for the Glory of God and to point
everyone toward His True Word.
- THY WORD have I hid in my heart that I might not sin
against thee. ( Ps 119:11 )
- I will delight myself in thy statutes: I will not forget
THY WORD. ( Ps 119:16 )
- For ever, O Lord, THY WORD is settled in heaven. (Ps
119:89)
- I have refrained my feet from every evil way, that I might
keep THY WORD. ( Ps 119:101 )
- THY WORD [is] a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my
path. ( Ps 119:105 )
- Thou [art] my hiding place and my shield: I hope in THY
WORD. ( Ps 119:114 )
- THY WORD [is] true [from] the beginning: and every one of
thy righteous judgments [endureth] for ever. ( Ps 119:160 )
A R E T H E S E B I B L E S ?
Throughout this report I have called the NIV, the NASB, the
AMP, the RSV, the LB, the NRSV etc. etc. 'new versions'. I have also called
them 'new Bibles'. And add to that the fact they are also sometimes called
'revisions'. But:
1) Are these 'corruptions' REALLY 'Bibles'?
2) Are these 'corruptions' REALLY new 'versions'?
3) Are these 'corruptions' REALLY 'revisions'?
I called them 'Bibles' and 'versions', to establish 'a
common dialogue' between myself and the reader. But, let's analyze this issue.
Q U E S T I O N # 1
To the question: Are these 'corruptions' REALLY 'revisions'?
David Otis Fuller responds:
"The Revision of 1881, the American Standard Version of
1901, and the Revised Standard Version ... are IN NO TRUE SENSE a revision of
the King James of 1611. If they were they would have followed the SAME Greek
text, the Textus Receptus, and thus would contain the SAME verses"
[S16P5].
'New corruptions' DO NOT follow the same texts. Therefore,
they ARE NOT 'revisions'.
Q U E S T I O N # 2
To the question: Are these 'corruptions' REALLY 'new
versions'? David Otis Fuller responds again:
"A VERSION is that which is TRANSLATED, or rendered
FROM ONE LANGUAGE to ANOTHER. The Textus Receptus IS NOT a version. It is
composed of the basic manuscript copies from which the King James [English]
VERSION was made" [S16P5].
Since all of these 'new corruptions' are in the SAME
language, they ARE NOT 'new versions'. Martin Luther's German Bible IS a 'new
version'. It is translated, from the same Traditional Majority Text, into a
different language, i.e. German.
Q U E S T I O N # 3
To the last question: Are these 'corruptions' REALLY
'Bibles'?
A 'Bible' is a book written by God. Since there is only 1
God, ALL OF THE BOOKS WHICH ARE REALLY BIBLES WOULD AGREE WITH EACH OTHER. This
is because God is CONSISTENT and faithful. Also, the true Bible written by God,
would be FREELY available to all His people; as, God is willing that ALL should
be saved. It would NOT be financially copyrighted by men. Men CANNOT take
credit for God's labor.
"God has only one Bible. All the others ... are NOT
Bibles BUT BOOKS OF MEN" [S7P13]. '
Modern corruptions' are financially copyrighted because they
are the product of MEN'S efforts, not God's.
Thus, these modern 'books' ARE NOT Bibles.
W H A T A R E W E D E A L I N G W I T H ?
So what are we really dealing with when we are discussing
these 'books of men'.
First off, I believe they are NOT 'revisions', they are NOT
'versions', and they are NOT 'Bibles'. That is what THEY ARE NOT. So what are
they?
There are at least two words, that I can think of, which
accurately describe these 'books of men'. Those words are: 'Forgeries' and
'Counterfeits'.
A forgery and/or a counterfeit is something that tries to LOOK
like the original, but isn't. A forgery and/or a counterfeit tries to pass
itself off as the original, but never makes it OBVIOUS that it is a fake. A
forgery/counterfeit always takes a SUBTLE approach.
W H Y C O U N T E R F E I T ?
WHY is there an effort to counterfeit the Word of God? This
question is easily answered.
We have all seen the TV ads for 'counterfeit diamonds'.
Counterfeit diamonds are called Cubic Zirconias.
But, we have NEVER seen a TV ad for a 'counterfeit Cubic
Zirconia'. Why is that?
The reason is that diamonds are VALUABLE. A Cubic Zirconia
is only of 'nominal' value. Items which are counterfeited are those of HIGH
VALUE. Diamonds are counterfeited, the US dollar is counterfeited, etc. etc.
But, there is no reason to counterfeit a Cubic Zirconia.
Thus the TRUE, original Word of God MUST BE EXTREMELY
VALUABLE. The actual Word of God MUST BE ABSOLUTELY TRUE.
- If God says we MUST be Born Again, then it is TRUE and
VALUABLE.
- If God says Jesus saves us from Hell, then it is TRUE and
VALUABLE.
- If God says we can be divinely healed, then it is TRUE and
VALUABLE.
- If God says we can speak in new tongues, then it is TRUE
and VALUABLE.
- If God gives the test for Antichrist, then it is be TRUE
and VALUABLE.
And on and on.
C O U N T E R F E I T S O F M E N ?
So are these books 'counterfeits of men'? Is this 6,000 year
historical struggle for the Word of God a 'struggle between men'?
In this report, Protestants seem to be struggling against
the Jesuits, the Catholics, and the "... MANY which ... corrupt the Word
of God".
But the Bible is very clear about our problem: "For we
wrestle NOT against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against
powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness
in high [places]" ( Ephesians 6:12 ).
Thus, these 'counterfeits' are not from men, but from Satan
himself. Yes, Satan is 'using' these men. And yes, we need to be 'aware' of the
men Satan is using.
But, in reality it is a spiritual struggle. We are really
struggling against the 'father of lies'.
Thus, it was Satan who used Rudolph Kittel to make the
corrupted Old Testament manuscript. It was Satan who used Westcott and Hort to
make the corrupted New Testament manuscript. And these corrupt manuscripts form
the foundation for 120 modern 'counterfeits'.
Because this is a struggle against 'wickedness in high
places' we are NOT talking about an earthly 'flesh to flesh' deception.
Instead, we are talking about "Spiritual Deception In the Highest".
I F Y O U L I K E
T H I S R E P O R T
If you like this report, you are welcome to copy it and pass
it on to others.
In conclusion, I think the following quote really 'sums
things up'!
D O W E N E E D
A N E W V E R S I O N ?
Dr. Martyn Lloyd Jones, a highly respected theologian of
this century commented on these 'new versions'. He said:
"... the most popular of all the proposals at the
present moment is to have a new translation of the Bible ... The argument is
that people are not reading the Bible any longer because they do not understand
the its language ... What does your modern man ... know about justification,
sanctification, and all the biblical terms?
... we are told the thing that is necessary is to have a
translation that Tom, Dick, and Harry will understand, and I began to feel ...
that we had almost reached the stage in which the Authorized Version was being
dismissed, to be thrown into the limbo of things forgotten, no longer of any
value. Need I apologise for saying a word in favor of the Authorized Version
...
It is a basic proposition laid down by the Protestant
Reformers, that we must have a Bible 'understanded of the people'. That is
common sense ... we must never be obscurantists. We must never approach the
Bible in a mere antiquarian spirit ... but it does seem to me that there is a
very grave danger incipient in so much of the argument that is being presented
today for these new translations. There is a danger, I say, of surrendering
something that is vital and essential ...
Take the argument that the modern man does not understand
such terms as justification, sanctification and so on. I want to ask a
question. When did the ordinary man ever understand those terms? ... Did the
colliers to whom John Wesley and George Whitfield preached in the 18th century
understand? They had not even been to a day school ... they could not read,
they could not write. Yet these were the terms that were used. This was the
version that was used - the Authorized Version. The common people have never
understood these terms ... we are concerned here about something spiritual;
something which does not belong to this world at all; which, as the apostle
Paul reminds us, the princes of this world do not know. Human wisdom is of no
value here - it is a spiritual truth. This is the truth about God primarily,
and because of that it is a mystery ...
Yet we are told - it must be in such simple terms and
language that anybody taking it up and reading it is going to understand all
about it. My friends this is sheer nonsense. What we must do is educate the
masses of the people up to the Bible, not bring the Bible down to their level.
One of the greatest troubles today is that everything is being brought down to
the same level; everything is cheapened. The common man is the standard of
authority; he decides everything, and everything has to be brought down to him
...
Are we to do that with the Word of God? I say no! What has
happened in the past has been this. Ignorant, illiterate people, in this
country and in foreign countries, coming into salvation have been educated up
to the book and have begun to understand it, to glory in it, and to praise God
for it, and I say that we need to do the same at this present time. What we
need is therefore, not to replace the Authorized Version ... We need rather to
reach and train people up to the standard and language, the dignity and the
glory of the old Authorized Version" [S6P103-4].
C H A P T E R 2 9
P A R T I N G C O M M E N T S
I hope this report has been useful to you.
When I began researching the Bible, I did not fully
comprehend the depth and breadth of the spiritual battle which has, is, and
will continue to take place.
This research has been a real 'eye opener' for me.
With the exception of one chapter devoted to 'speculating'
about the future, this article has been based on 'factual data'. Factual data
included Bible verse comparisons, historical facts, personal biographies, etc.
etc.
Those facts were documented by approximately 500 footnotes.
Therefore, the reader can trace all of the information.
The early Church verified everything the Apostle Paul told
them. You should verify everything Jeff Johnson tells you. You should review
this information and decide if; I have said the truth.
Jesus said that you shall know the truth and the truth shall
set you free. You need to decide what you believe to be true.
This entire study is purposely NOT COPYRIGHTED. I have left
this manuscript in electronic format so that it may be shared, freely. You are
welcome to copy all of it, or part of it, as the Lord leads.
God belongs ALL the Glory!
A N O T H E R E Y
E O P E N E R
This article discussed some 'eye opening' facts about the
Bible. We saw how God's truth has (and is) being corrupted. False teaching
abounds.
On the same topic of Truth and the Bible:
Did you know that ACTUAL archaeological and geological data
agrees with the Biblical account of the creation, the fall, and the flood?
That's right! Contrary to what we've been told, God's Word
AGREES with the facts. The truth is this: the earth, moon, sun, and the
universe are actually very young; just like the Bible says. Engineering data
and scientific data agrees with God's Word. You CAN be an engineer and/or a
scientist and NOT compromise your Christian beliefs. The two are actually
consistent.
If you want to find out more about how God's Bible agrees
with scientific data, I would refer you to:
The Institute For Creation Research
P.O. Box 2667
El Cajon, California 92021
www.icr.org
Phone: (619) 448-0900
or to:
Creation Science Evangelism
29 Cummings Road
Pensacola, Florida 32503
www.drdino.com
( 850 ) 479-3466
The staff at ICR, and at CSE, include PHD's. These people
are highly intelligent Christians.
Their information is ANOTHER eye opener!
Again, I hope this article has been useful to you.
D E D I C A T O R Y
This article is dedicated to the King of Kings, and the Lord
of Lords: Jesus Christ; the "Word made flesh".
Since there is only one God; there is only one Bible.
Now, to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, to the only
wise God; to God be the glory, now and for ever more. AMEN.
Jeff Johnson
705 Baxter Drive
Plano, Texas 75025
R E F E R E N C E S
More information is available on this important subject.
For those of you who wish to go further in this study, the
following are my references.
As you know from the section on "Footnoting
Methodology"; the following format was used for the footnotes:
[S#P#]
Where: S# is the source number and P# is the page number.
Thus: [S1P1] is source number 1, page number 1; and [S2P4-5]
is source number 2, pages 4 through 5 etc. etc.
Each source number, source material and distributor of the
material is listed below.
Also, if it was available, I included the phone number, fax
number, and web site for the 'distributors' of this material.
As you know, phone numbers (especially area codes) can
change. Addresses are more stable.
Source Source Distributor
Number Material Of The Material
1 "An Understandable History Bible Believers Baptist
Of The Bible" Bookstore
by: Rev. Samuel C. Gipp 1252 East Aurora Road
( Book, 242 pages ) Macedonia, Ohio 44506
Phone: (216) 467-1611
2 "Which Bible" Eye Opener Publishers
by: David Otis Fuller P. O. Box 7944
ISBN 0-944355-24-2 Eugene, Oregon 97401
( Book, 350 pages )
3 "New Age Bible Versions" Chick Publications
by: G.A. Riplinger P. O. Box 662
ISBN: 0-9635845-0-2 Chino, Calif. 91708-0662
( Book, 690 pages )
Phone: (909) 987-0771
Fax: (909) 941-8128
Web: http://chick.com
4 "God Wrote Only One Bible" Eye Opener Publishers
by: Jasper James Ray P. O. Box 7944
( Book, 122 pages ) Eugene, Oregon 97401
5 "Let's Weigh The Evidence" Chick Publications
by: Larry Burton P. O. Box 662
ISBN: 0-937958-17-4 Chino, Calif. 91708-0662
( Book, 95 pages )
Phone: (909) 987-0771
Fax: (909) 941-8128
Web: http://chick.com
6 "The Majority Text: Essays Institute For Biblical
And Reviews In The Textual Studies
Continuing Debate" 2233 Michigan Street N.E.
by: Theodore P. Letis Grand Rapids, MI. 49503
ISBN: 0-944355-00-5
( Book, 210 pages ) Phone: (616) 456-8190
Fax: (616) 949-7540
7 "God's Inspired Preserved Bible" Bible Baptist
Bookstore
Publ. by: The Peoples Gospel Hr. P.O. Box 7135
( Book, 67 pages ) Pensacola, Florida 32514
Phone: 1-800-659-1478
8 "Believing Bible Study" Eye Opener Publishers
by: Edward F. Hills P. O. Box 7944
ISBN 0-915923-01-7 Eugene, Oregon 97401
( Book, 258 pages )
9 "The Legacy Of Our Institute For Biblical
English Bible" Textual Studies
by: John Wesley Sawyer 2233 Michigan Street N.E.
( Booklet, 15 pages ) Grand Rapids, MI. 49503
Phone: (616) 456-8190
Fax: (616) 949-7540
10 "A Position Paper On The Institute For Biblical
Versions Of The Bible" Textual Studies
by: David Otis Fuller 2233 Michigan Street N.E.
( Booklet, 8 pages ) Grand Rapids, MI. 49503
Phone: (616) 456-8190
Fax: (616) 949-7540
11 "The Bible Bable" Bible Baptist Bookstore
by: Peter S. Ruckman P.O. Box 7135
( Book 129 pages ) Pensacola, Florida 32514
Phone: 1-800-659-1478
12 "The King James Version Defended" Eye Opener
Publishers
by: Edward F. Hills P. O. Box 7944
ISBN 0-915923-00-9 Eugene, Oregon 97401
( Book, 280 pages )
13 "The Old Is Better" Eye Opener Publishers
by: Alfred Levell P. O. Box 7944
ISBN 0-903556-87-1 Eugene, Oregon 97401
( Book, 61 pages )
14 "A Fresh Look At The Institute For Biblical
King James Bible" Textual Studies
by: Dr. Ralph I. Yarnell 2233 Michigan Street N.E.
( Booklet, 35 pages ) Grand Rapids, MI. 49503
Phone: (616) 456-8190
Fax: (616) 949-7540
15 "New International Version: What Trinitarian Bible
Society
Today's Christian Needs To Know 1710 Richmond Street N.W.
About The NIV" Grand Rapids, MI. 49504
by: G.W. Anderson and
D.E. Anderson Phone: (616) 453-2892
( Booklet, 33 pages )
16 "God Wrote Only One Bible" Eye Opener
Publishers
by: Jasper James Ray P. O. Box 7944
( Pamphlet, 8 pages ) Eugene, Oregon 97401
17 "Modern Versions Are Institute For Biblical
Dangerous" Textual Studies
by: Dr. M. H. Reynolds 2233 Michigan Street N.E.
( Pamphlet, 8 pages ) Grand Rapids, MI. 49503
Phone: (616) 456-8190
Fax: (616) 949-7540
18 "The Origin Of The Bible" Joshua's Christian
Bookstores
by: Philip Comfort
ISBN: 0-8423-4735-6
( Book, 308 pages )
19 "A Creationist's Defense Of The Institute For
Creation
King James Bible" Research
by: Dr. Henry M. Morris P.O. Box 2667
( Pamphlet, 18 pages ) El Cajon, California 92021
Phone: (619) 448-0900
********** THE END ! ********
Thank you for posting this article. I really reading it. https://voyance-telephone-gaia.com
ReplyDeleteVery detailed post on wonderful ideas. It would be really helpful lottery sambad
ReplyDeleteMuch thanks to you to such an extent. That will be valuable to everyone who uses it, including myself.
ReplyDeletegce question and answer 2019
This is such an amazing blog, meaningful content with some meaning unlike those useless blogs on the internet. 2021 waec gce mathematics expo answer
ReplyDeleteThis is such an amazing blog, meaningful content with some meaning unlike those useless blogs on the internet. entertainment news
ReplyDeleteVery likely I’m going to bookmark your blog . You absolutely have wonderful stories. Cheers for sharing with us your blog. movie news
ReplyDeleteawesome post i really enjoyed reading this article which explained everything in very easy manner. i will visit this blog once again to get such an important information which i keep on regularly looking for North American Bancard ISO Program
ReplyDeleteI admit, I have not been on this web page in a long time... however it was another joy to see It is such an important topic and ignored by so many, even professionals. I thank you to help making people more aware of possible issues. Aplikasi Saham
ReplyDeleteNice knowledge gaining article. This post is really the best on this valuable topic.Analisa Harga Saham
ReplyDeleteHello sir, your web site is lovingly serviced and saved as much as date. So it should be, thanks for sharing Solicitude en liña de visa de Canadá
ReplyDeleteNice knowledge gaining article. This post is really the best on this valuable topic. ການຂໍວີຊາການາດາ
ReplyDelete