“SPIRITUAL DECEPTION IN
THE HIGHEST”
An In Depth Study Of:
The Authorized King James Bible
vs.
All Other 'Modern Versions'
INTRODUCTORY PAGES
by Jeff Johnson
T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S
**INTRODUCTORY PAGES**
Foreword
Footnoting Methodology
Preface
**PART ONE**
Chapter 1: Bible Comparison: A Broad Analysis
Chapter 2: Bible Comparison: An Individual Analysis
Chapter 3: How Could This Happen?
Chapter 4: In The Beginning ...
Chapter 5: God's Truth: The Peshitta Bible (150 A.D.)
Chapter 6: God's Truth: The Italic Bible (157 A.D.)
Chapter 7: Satan's Counterfeit: The Origen-Eusebius Bible
Chapter 8: Satan's Counterfeit: Jerome's Latin Bible (380 A.D)
Chapter 9: Satan's Persecution Of The True Church
Chapter 10: The Dark Ages (476 A.D. - 1453 A.D.)
Chapter 11: God's Truth: The Erasmus Bible (1522 A.D.)
Chapter 12: God's Truth: Luther's Bible (1522 A.D.)
Chapter 13: God's Truth: The Tyndale Bible (1525 A.D.)
Chapter 14: The Council Of Trent (1545 A.D.)
Chapter 15: The Roman Catholic Church
**PART TWO**
Chapter 16: The Jesuits
Chapter 17: Satan's Counterfeit: The Jesuit Bible
Chapter 18: God's Truth: The King James Bible (1611 A.D.)
Chapter 19: Modern Bible 'Claims'
Chapter 20: Satan's Counterfeits: Sinaiticus and Vaticanus
Chapter 21: Satan's Counterfeit: The Westcott and Hort Text
Chapter 22: Westcott and Hort
Chapter 23: Money Changers In The Temple
Chapter 24: God's Preserved Word
Chapter 25: New Age Doctrine
Chapter 26: Lexicons
Chapter 27: The Future?
Chapter 28: Conclusions
Chapter 29: Parting Comments
References
* * *
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: How many Gods are there?
We know there is only 1 God. "Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is
one Lord" (De. 6:4).
Now, turn to Daniel 3:25. In this verse, Shadrach, Meshach and
Abed-nego have been thrown into the fiery furnace. However, they are not
alone. Another one (a fourth) is there to help them.
Look at this verse in a 'modern version'. (Notice: the wording in
each 'modern version' will differ from others. But, those small
differences, will not materially affect this report).
Suffice it to say that, at the end of Daniel 3:25, the '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 gods?! There is only 1 God!
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 was with
Shadrach, Meshach and Abed-nego. Jesus protected them from the fiery
furnace; and it's Jesus who will protect you and me from the fiery
furnace (i.e. hell).
Now, who would think there is more than 1 God? Well, Satan does.
Remember what he said to Eve in Genesis 3:5 ?
"... ye shall be as gods ..."!
Satan believes there is more than 1 God as he believes that HE is
EQUAL to God.
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 favor in the eyes of the Lord."
Now think what the word favor implies. Favor implies that Noah was
'better' than others. Favor 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 favor 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".
The last 2 words of this verse are crucial! In the end, Satan gets
all the sinners who don't repent. Jesus gets 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 those 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 any other 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.
K J V V S. 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.
Matthew 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
eat 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.
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 ...".
Philip 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 b----."
Comment: Some 'modern' versions, like the LB,
actually contain vulgarity. Notice this verse.
Also, take a look in an NIV 'bible' at 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 does "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. 2:13 KJV: "... land of ETHIOPIA."
AMP: "... 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 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, Meshach and Abed-nego. 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
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 ...".
Philip 3:8 KJV: "... and do count them but DUNG, that I may
win Christ,"
AMP: "... and consider it all to be mere rubbish
..."
COMMENT: I have rubbish on the top of my office desk,
but I don't want 'dung' there!!!
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 Pe. 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 1 verse mistranslated
here, 1 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 'Masoretic 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 Masoretic 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 Masoretic
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 Masoretic
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 DISAGREE
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 Masoretic 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/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 travelers 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 Masoretic, 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 Masoretes 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 Masoretes, who took extraordinary
pains to ensure the correctness of their copies" [S13P17].
The extraordinary pains that the Masoretes 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 Masoretic 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 Masoretic 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 Masoretic 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 Masoretic Text):
"As a summary we may say that 10% of Christ's words were taken
directly from the Old Testament" [S7P7].
Thus, the Masoretic Old Testament Text has been carefully reproduced
and has been attested to by Jesus Christ. It is this Masoretic 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 has the 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 (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 Masoretic Old Testament Text which Jesus quoted
when he walked the earth. And, it was the Masoretic 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 Masoretic 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].
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 suchdeception 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 was mistaken. 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 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 the
Majority Greek New Testament text, then called 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).
************ CONTINUED IN PART II OF II***********
