The one world system

 A One-World System

1. One-world political government: Revelation 13:7, "And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations."
    

2. One-world economy: Revelation 13:17, "And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name."
    

3. One-world religious view: Revelation 13:11-12, "And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon.  And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed."

Again, we are living at a time in which it is not only possible for a world dictator of unprecedented authority to emerge - the Antichrist - it is also inevitable. God's Word states that only seven empires will exist in world history before Christ returns.  The verse proving this statement is Revelation 17:10, "There are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space." The five fallen empires referred to by John in this verse are Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Medo-Persia, and Greece. The one that ruled at the time John wrote the Book of Revelation was Rome. Rome gradually crumbled as a world power, and met their demise in 486 A.D.  No one nation has ruled the entire world since Rome. 

Please note that there will not be a one-world religion; but rather, a world religious view that will be adopted by all the different religious denominations. That one view is that there are many paths to the light. I recently heard apostate Joel Osteen say on Oprah that Jesus is the only way to Heaven, but then he said that “there are many paths to Jesus.” What a sorry rascal!!! Joel Osteen is a rotten compromiser, as unsaved as the day is long. No man is saved who believes that there are many paths to Jesus. My friend, there is only one path to Jesus and that is faith in THE GOSPEL that Christ died, was buried and resurrected after three days from the dead (1st Corinthians 15:1-4).

According to Revelation 13:10, one more final empire would arise, but there would first be a long delay. That global power would be the last, the "ten toes" (Daniel 2:41-42). Please note that this is NOT the "Revived Roman Empire" as some Bible scholars teach. The Bible says that the 7th power will be World Government. It is clear from the events in the world today, that Satan is working relentlessly to form a one-world system, a modern-day Babel, where men unite together in rebellion against their Creator. 

At Babel, all men united together in sin and rebellion, influencing one another for evil. Genesis 11:7-9 says that they were building a city and a tower. God stopped them. God separated them for their own good. Satan has desired ever since to unite mankind together against God, and to send the Antichrist. With the advent of modern technology, Satan is once again able to unite mankind against God. As the world comes together once again, apostasy abounds.

Take a look at the building in the photo to the right. It is the European Parliamentary building in Strasburg, France.

The building was modeled upon the famous painting by Pieter Brueghel's 'The Tower of Babel' (pictured left). 

The European Community created the European Monetary Institute in January 1994, and it is now a single currency. One can easily see the power, threat, and influence of the euro. We are headed towards a "cashless society" where every transaction will be done without physical money. This will give the government unprecedented power over everyone. Christians will be labeled as "terrorists," for preaching against sin. Warrants will be put out for their arrest. They will not be able to buy food without being caught, prosecuted, and even killed (John 16:2). 

In addition to its growing economic prowess, the European Union has already formulated common foreign and security policies with defense issues. The North American Union is already being formed, uniting Mexico with Canada and the United States. Soon, all defense policies will be made jointly. The European Union is rapidly dissolving the ideas of national sovereignty in a giant step toward Globalism and one-world government. The exact same thing is happening in the United States. Uncle Sam is taking steroids, and he's as corrupt as can be. The Super-state is preparing the way for a more powerful central government, one that will eventually be headed by a world dictator. With the passing of NDAA on December 31, 2011 the U.S. government can now make anyone disappear without a right to legal representation nor trial.

President George W. Bush is appointing military leaders throughout his administration in America. FEMA is being completely restructured, allegedly because of the failures which occurred after hurricane Katrina. The truth is that The White House deliberately did nothing after Katrina to give them an excuse to overhaul FEMA. Now they're going to militarize FEMA to accommodate their new American police state, and the American people are as naive and complacent as can be. Nationwide, America's local police departments are being militarized into thug squads. 

The days of officer friendly are over, now you get Darth Vader. 911 was deliberate, and George W. Bush had prior knowledge, which is why he sat there for 5 minutes after being told that the country was under attack. 911 gave the global monsters a pretext to attack Afghanistan, Iraq, and soon to be ... Iran. Americans have MUCH innocent blood on their hands as a nation. American's have already lost many of their freedoms via the Patriot Act, and laws are being passed regularly which are stripping away our rights. Americans are foolish to let this happen.

The United States is being maliciously EXPLOITED for the purpose of achieving a one-world government. Our top leaders are as corrupt as can be--filled with lies, stealing, killing, and deceit. Our federal debt is over $9,000,000,000 as of March 2006, and it's only going to skyrocket higher. Record trade gap imbalances with China (a $725,800,000,000 deficit just in 2005 alone) is destroying America's economic future. China is loaning much of that money back to Americans, and we OWE them. The Bible plainly states, "...the borrower is servant to the lender" (Proverb 22:7). Our days are numbered as a nation. You can't squander money, and recklessly spend, without judgment day coming due. 

The U.S. government will one day default on it's debts, and the only inevitable recourse will be to surrender total U.S. sovereignty and rights to the CFR, UN, and World Bank... in return for a bail out. America as we've known it will be gone forever! In fact, I think we're already at that point. In addition, America's young people are being exploited as paid mercenaries to fight a war that has absolutely nothing to do with America's freedom. My advice to every parent in America, is to do everything possible to prevent your child from going into the military. I'm all for defending America; but, not for our young people being needlessly killed, for the agendas of the occult-inspired elite scum, who have zero loyalty for America.
 

The Antichrist and the End Times

In Daniel 9:27, we see this future Fuhrer making a peace contract with the nations of the earth for seven years. During the first half of this Tribulational period, the Antichrist is controlled by Satanic powers (Revelation 13:4). However, during the second forty-two months, Satan incarnates the body of this world dictator (Revelation 13:3). When Satan takes over the physical being of the Antichrist, he begins to call himself god, magnifying himself above every god (Daniel 11:36). How can we know with certainty that we are close to this historical moment? 

The World Council of Churches was formed in 1948, which would help lay the groundwork for the one-world, ecumenical, ecclesiastical, and false religious system; a counterfeit Christianity as described in Revelation 13:11 and 17:9. For more than fifty years now, the stage has been set for a world dictator to emerge, a man with power and authority far beyond the scope of Nebuchadnezzar or any of his successors. The world anxiously awaits his appearance. I have little doubt that this great imposter is alive and waiting in the wings. How close are we to the fateful day of his appearance? Here is what three citizens have said:

 "We are in a leaderless world," Walter Cronkite.

 "We have a rendezvous with a world dictator and his appearance may be soon," Julian Snyder.

 The internationally acclaimed Dr. Paul-Henri Spaak said, "Europe is looking for a man so powerful that he will hold the allegiance of all the people.  Be he man or devil we are ready to receive him."

However, it is not just a political leader for whom the world is looking. All the major religions discuss the emergence, in the last days, of a powerful and terrifying spiritual figure, someone who will ultimately proclaim himself to be God.  Today's widespread New Age philosophy is laying the groundwork for the Antichrist's global religious system. Did you know, for instance, that John Randolph Price, one of the world's principal New Age gurus, says his spirit guide revealed to him that 2.5 billion people may need to be wiped off the face of the earth, for their utopian spiritual dreams to be realized (Revelation 6:8; 9:18; 13:15; 20:4)? Could such an organization claiming a billion followers produce the  Antichrist? Definitely!

The New Age movement teaches that we are all "little gods." I believe the Antichrist will ride the crest of that belief and give it the credibility it does not deserve. However, the honeymoon for the Antichrist will not last forever. He will suffer a mortal head wound and come to his end, in a battle with Russia (Daniel 11:45). After being incarnated by Satan, he then rises from the dead and declares himself as the god of gods (Revelation 13:3). He demands that every human being worship him under penalty of death (Revelation 13:15). Is it not fitting that today's New Age leaders are already beginning to justify the mass slaughter that will follow?

The Antichrist will have more help, too, from someone known as "the false prophet." It is from the leadership of this false prophet, propped up by the revived European Empire, that all such latter-day prophecies emerge. Rome may again be the center of the world economically, politically, militarily, and spiritually. Those currently moving Europe in this direction seem inexplicably drawn to their fate. Perhaps you remember that in 1987, the Belgians minted the first ECU silver coins. Imprinted on them was the bust of Emperor Charles the Fifth, crowned head of the Holy Roman Empire in 1519. Why was Charles chosen to be immortalized on the first-ever European coin? Because of the striking geographical similarity between the European Community and the Holy Roman Empire.

But what about the ten toes and the ten nations?  Hasn't the European Union evolved past this stage? Yes it has. That is to be expected. Remember that we are speaking of an eventual world government, not a regional one. The European Union began as ten nations. In fact, Daniel 7:24 shows us that a very significant eleventh nation arises. That was Spain. As of May 2006, there are 25 member nations. The European Super-state, I believe, will provide the platform and the structure for this world dictatorship (Daniel 7:23; Revelation 13:7). 

When Christ returns to establish His earthly kingdom, a grouping of ten kings, or ten divisions, or regions still remain (Daniel 2:44). Interestingly, all of the prime movers behind the globalist dream have divided the world into ten spheres.  The Trilateral Commission, the Council On Foreign Relations, the Bilderbergers, the Club of Rome, and others that promote a one-world federation eventually break up the globe into ten regions. One way or another God's Word will come to pass. Only now, after two great European wars have been fought and reunification has occurred, could the promises of the Bible about a world government centered in Rome be possible. 

Likewise, only now, as we are already in the new Millennium, the 21-century, the computer age, could such a world-government hope to keep track of all the commercial activities of every human being on the planet (Revelation 13:16: 17). What an up-to-date Book is the Bible! With all the GPS (Global Positioning Systems) being implemented, security cameras being installed by the tens-of-thousands, RFID chips being placed into everything, microchips smaller than the human eye can see, wireless video cameras as small as a dime... can you image what the next few decades will hold if the Lord doesn't return? The whole of man's knowledge doubles every 8 years; but, the wickedness of man never changes. Increased technology is a double-edged sword, and we will see Chimeras (half human/half animal) creatures in the near future on display for the public.

Soon the Rapture will occur, after which a time of unmitigated terror will engulf the globe. "Alas! for that day is great, so that none is like it: it is even the time of Jacob's trouble..." (Jeremiah 30:7).  Daniel 12:1 describes it as a "time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation." Jesus used almost the exact words in Matthew 24:21, "For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world." These things must happen. I believe they are right around the corner. But we should have no fear about them, not as True and Faithful Bible believers. 

Every believer will be raptured (caught up) into the clouds, to be with the Lord. This happens BEFORE the Tribulation Period occurs. This is termed a "Pretribulation Rapture," and it is Biblical. When these things come to pass, be not terrified (Luke 21:9). Why? Because Jesus said when these things come to pass, "Know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand" (Luke 21:31). This Scripture was spoken for those who will be saved during the Tribulation Period, and will turn to the Word of God for guidance.

We, the True and Faithful Bible believers who are prepared, will miss this horrendous hour. We will be gone before any part of the seven-year Tribulation Period begins. We will be caught up in the air to meet Jesus in the twinkling of an eye, according to 1st Corinthians 15:51-54. Then we shall return with the King seven years later to rule and reign (Revelation 20:4). Soon we will hear the shout "Come up hither"! (Revelation 4:1). Then eighty-four months later, the Lord returns with His heavenly entourage, to establish His Millennial Kingdom on earth (Jude 14; Revelation 19:14; 20:4).

My friend, the Rapture is near! Just read your daily newspaper or watch CNN or other stations, to see just how close we are to the "Blessed Hope."
 

The End is Drawing Nearer

From this final group of nations the figure known as the Antichrist emerges and reigns for a brief period--just eighty-four months (7-years). So the question: Is this period way off in the distant future? No! It must be around the corner. Although Jesus said that we wouldn't know the time of His return; He also said in Matthew 16:3...

"And in the morning, It will be foul weather to day: for the sky is red and lowring. O ye hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky; but can ye not discern the signs of the times?"

Old Testament saints didn't know the exact time when Christ would come; BUT, it was obvious when it happened to those who wanted to see the truth. The world is on the brink of submission to this latter-day power. 

Take a look at the photo to the right. Why do people worship a statue of a sinful man?  Pope John Paul II was a Hell-deserving sinner, like anyone else (Romans 3:10;23). So why do people worship him?  It is because Satan, through false religion, has BLINDED the masses to believe many lies (2nd Corinthians 4:4). 

If people will worship the Pope, who does NO miracles; then they will surely worship the antichrist, who will.

The revived Roman Empire is presently assembling and organizing itself under the aegis of the European Union, a federal Super-state that will form the basis for the last one-world government. This dictatorship under Antichrist rules with supernatural power, advanced twenty-first century technological police-state know-how, and unthinkable terror. Is it in the making? Judge for yourself.

Why The Antichrist Must Come Soon

Perhaps you are one of many Americans who thought the idea of jets spraying Chemtrails as a weapon is crazy. After years of denial from government, military, and environmental agencies, the truth is now confirmed... jet fuel is being mixed with chemicals and sprayed into our atmosphere.

On October 2, 2001, Congressman Dennis Kucinich from Ohio introduced H.R. 2977 during the 1st Session of the 107th Congress of the United States. This is documented proof that weaponized Chemtrails do exist.

The “Space Preservation Act of 2001” seeks to “preserve the cooperative, peaceful uses of space for the benefit of all humankind by permanently prohibiting the basing of weapons in space by the United States, and to require the President to take action and implement a world treaty banning space-based weapons.”

In the bill Chemtrails are listed as an “exotic weapons system.” I couldn't make this stuff up if I tried. The complete text of the bill may be found at Clifford Carnicom's website, “Chemtrail Crimes and Coverup Documented.” Truth is stranger than fiction.

The bill also addresses such things as particle beams, electromagnetic radiation, plasma, or extremely low frequency (ELF) or ultra low frequency (ULF) energy radiation, and mind-control as weapons...

SOURCE: Rep. Kucinich's HR 2977 Names Chemtrails As An 'Exotic Weapon'

To see text of HR 2977:

http://www.carnicom.com/hr2977.htm

 

Rep. Kucinich's Bill is listed at this U.S. Government site:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/L?c107:./list/c107h.lst:2901

---

Revelation 17:10-11, “And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space. And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.”

       The Bible speaks of 8 kings. At the time Revelation 17:10-11 was written, 5 kings had come and gone, one was in power, and 2 were yet to come in the future. This is a fascinating teaching in the Word of God, and an important key to understanding Biblical prophecy. The following Old Testament passage if Scripture explains Nebuchadnezzar's image (which he saw in a dream from God) to the right...

Daniel 2:31-35, “Thou, O king, sawest, and behold a great image. This great image, whose brightness was excellent, stood before thee; and the form thereof was terrible. This image's head was of fine gold, his breast and his arms of silver, his belly and his thighs of brass, Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image upon his feet that were of iron and clay, and brake them to pieces. Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshingfloors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth.”

The kings are world powers throughout history. At present, there have been 6 world powers. These are (in chronological order): Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece and Rome. The 7th king will be world government (aka, the New World Order). The man of sin, the Antichrist, is the 8th and final king and will arise FROM the 7th kingdom. The “stone” cut out of the mountain without hands will be the Second Coming of the precious Lord Jesus Christ in power, preeminence and prophetic fulfillment. Even so, come, Lord Jesus!

We see these different world powers mentioned throughout the Scriptures...

• In the Old Testament, Moses lived during the reign of Egypt as a world power.
• We read about Isaiah during the time of Assyria as a world power.
• Babylon ruled the world during the times of Daniel, Jeremiah and Ezekiel.
• Daniel, Ezra and Nehemiah lived during the times of Medo-Persian power.
• The reign of Greece occurred during the silent years between the Old and New Testaments, when the Septuagint was written (a Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures).
• And finally, we see Rome as a world power during the time of our Lord Jesus Christ throughout the New Testament. It is very interesting to see these 6 world powers mentioned throughout the Scriptures, beginning with Egypt and ending with Rome.

Studying the Scriptures, with these different corresponding and reigning secular world powers in view, opens a whole new understanding to the Word of God concerning history and Biblical prophecy. No other book in existence has this unique feature, that is, spanning thousands of years and prophetic in nature. The Bible is composed of 31% prophecy! Who can argue the divine nature of the Word of God!!!

Rome fell in 486 A.D. and there has been no world power since. The United States, China and Russia are super powers, but there have been no WORLD powers controlling the entire world since the Roman empire. No one country dominates the world today. This is represented by the mixed toes of clay and iron in Nebuchadnezzar's image, that is, freedom co-existing worldwide with Communist tyranny. North Korea is a total monstrous dictatorship in 2013, but thankfully, most other nations are considered free.

Please note that the 7th empire will NOT be the revived Roman empire. The Bible never says that the Roman empire will be restored. Many theologians reasonably thought in centuries past that the oppressive reign of the Roman Catholic religion identified Catholicism as the coming Beast system of the Antichrist. I would have errantly thought the same thing in view of the murderous atrocities committed by the Roman Church for over a millennium of history. However, we are privileged today to have a much clearer understanding of secret societies, the Illuminati's history and the New World Order in general.

Thousands of secular and religious books have been authored on the subject, most authors obscure and unknown. Consider this very interesting book authored in 1919 by Samuel Z. Batten, titled THE NEW WORLD ORDER (.pdf file). Thus, we understand today in 2013 that “The Great Whore” of Revelation is very likely the Illuminati (the “synagogue of Satan,” Revelation 2:9 and 3:9) who have fornicated with the kings of the earth. Revelation 18:3, “For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies.” Revelation 19:2, “For true and righteous are his judgments: for he hath judged the great whore, which did corrupt the earth with her fornication, and hath avenged the blood of his servants at her hand.” The Catholic Pope in my opinion will be the False Prophet. The Antichrist will be of Jewish origin.

Who Are The Illuminati? What Are The Illuminati? (the mystery of iniquity doth work)

The 7th king will be the New World Order. The 8th king will be the Antichrist (Revelation 17:11). We see this monstrosity forming before our very eyes today. Satan Worship For The Masses: Baal Temple In New York To Be A 'Gesture Of Defiance' Against God (the ultimate “extremist”). There has been much talk in the mainstream newsmedia about the New World Order. Paul Warburg made this telling prediction back in 1950 before the U.S. Senate . . .

"We shall have World Government, whether or not we like it. The only question is whether World Government will be achieved by conquest or consent."

SOURCE: James Paul Warburg, while speaking before the United States Senate, February 17, 1950

Here are the words of Illuminist, David Rockefeller, from 1991 at a Bilderberg meeting . . .

"We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years."

"It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries."

SOURCE: David Rockefeller, Bilderberger Meeting, Baden, Germany, June 1991

The New World Order is upon us. The New World Order is the 7th king. This will be a global government, A Godless Totalitarian Communist Police State, a world power headed by the United Nations and The Council On Foreign Relations.

The 8th king will be a man, the Antichrist, who will be of the 7th world power according to Revelation 17:11, i.e., he will be a part of the New World Order, rising to power from it. Check out the occult imagery in Jimmy Buffet and Toby Keith's latest horrible song, “TOO DRUNK TO KARAOKE.” The image of SANTA (SATAN) looking down upon The Great Pyramid teaches us what the All Seeing Eye truly represents.

I believe that Revelation chapter 18 speaks concerning the total economic destruction of the United States. At present there are 35,000,000 Americans receiving government Food Stamps (the number is 46,600,000 as of September 2012^[1]). The unemployment rate is at 16% nationwide. Tens-of-millions of U.S. citizens have lost their homes.

The Obama administration is calling this a “jobless recovery.” What an insult! The jobs aren't coming back, because there are no jobs to come back... they've all been outsourced to foreign slave labor! Americans are actually being forced to compete with illegal immigrants for what jobs remain, because of the high treason of our officials in Washington D.C. Americans are going to be MUCH poorer in the very near future. Our dollar is on the verge of total collapse. America's economy will collapse in one hour (Revelation 18:10,17,19).

Oh, friend, we are living in the Last Days. I am not setting any dates for the Lord's return, but the New World Order is the Beast System of the Antichrist, and it's forming right before our eyes. Truly, the Lord's return is imminent.

Are you ready to enter into eternity? Do you have Christ's righteousness, which is solely by faith in Jesus? Salvation happens when a person acknowledges their guilt of sin (Romans 3:19), and comes to God on the basis that they are a hell-deserving sinner; believing on Jesus, the Christ, the Son of God, for forgiveness of sins (Acts 10:43). In response to our faith, God the Father imputes (attributes) the righteousness of His dear Son to our record in Heaven (Romans 4:6). When God views us from that moment forward, He sees the righteousness of Christ instead of our sins. Thus, we are made clean by the precious blood of Jesus Christ, which takes our sins away forever (Revelation 1:5). Praise God!

Jesus said that men would not know the exact day nor hour when He would return, but Jesus didn't say that we couldn't know the times. The handwriting is all over the wall. Granted, throughout history people have errantly thought that the end was near; such as in 1844 when Seventh Day Adventism was born out of a failed prophecy for Christ to return. The difference is that I am not setting any dates. I do not know when Christ will return. Yet, only a fool would deny that the world is headed for World Government. This is the 7th kingdom in Revelation 17:10-11. The 8th will be the Antichrist, whom the Bible says will arise from the 7th kingdom. Signs of Satan are everywhere. 666 is everywhere.

One thing is certain, this world is getting ugly. Apostasy is everywhere. Corrupt Bibles are everywhere. Entertainment has replaced singing gospel hymns in our churches. Psychology has replaced Bible-preaching. Women preachers are epidemic, all corrupt in their theology, all rebelling against God just as the feminists and lesbians. God has ordained it to be masculine authority in the home, marriage and church. Anything else is apostasy. Women don't belong in the pulpit, nor any position which usurps authority over a man. Women are to keep silent in the church, having a meek and quite spirit as the Bible commands (1st Peter 3:4).

Perverted gender-equality Bibles, women preachers and the homosexualization of society are paving the way for a Police State. This is because rebellion amongst women has ruined our children and country. Everything rests upon mothers. Eve led Adam into sin. Without godly mothers there will be no godly preachers in the next generation. Women are not to blame more than men for sin, but my point is that when Satan wants to destroy a society, he goes after the woman. If Satan can get the woman, then he has the children and the men will follow. The evil monster-holes behind the New World Order know this, which is why they went after Brother Lester Roloff with everything they had to shut him down. Brother Roloff was turning out a generation of godly mothers, the Devil's biggest fear.

The 8 kings of Revelation are a telling indicator of where we are at in history's time line. So far, 6 kings have fallen, and the 7th is now coming to power, which will give ascendancy to the Antichrist himself. The Bible teaches that the Rapture (i.e., being “caught up” — 1st Thessalonians 4:17) will precede the Tribulation Period, which means that the Church must be removed from the world before the Antichrist appears. So I say to you all... the trumpet is out of the case!

Why KJV?

 2nd Corinthians 2:17, “For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.”

       There is the belief in some circles that the written Word of God has become corrupted because it has been translated from the original languages, and is merely a copy of the original manuscripts, which no longer exist. For those that walk in such doubt, we hope this article will reveal the utter absurdity of such vain imaginations.

Is it really true that only the original manuscripts in the original Hebrew language were inspired by God, and the copies and translations were not? Is it correct to call a translation of the scripture "the inspired Word of God"? These questions will be examined.

In 2 Timothy 3:15-17, our brother Paul refers to the Scriptures that Timothy had and called them inspired. If ones belief that only the original manuscripts were inspired, then one must conclude that "all scripture" in 2 Timothy 3:16 refers to the original manuscripts only. Let's back up one verse. Timothy knew "the scriptures." Did Timothy know the original manuscripts? Did he have them in his possession? Did he see them somewhere and learn them? We know that Timothy did not have the originals; he had only a copy. It is possible that he had the Old Testament in Hebrew, but it is more likely that he had the Greek translation of the Old Testament (the Septuagint), since his father was a Greek and he lived in Derbeand/or Lystra, which were definitely Greek-speaking. Every reference in the New Testament to the "scripture(s)" is rendered from copies of the original manuscripts in Hebrew and the translations in Greek. No one had the original manuscripts at that time.

And at Luke 4:21 "…This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears." Did this synagogue in Nazareth have the original manuscript of Isaiah? And consider John 5:39 as Jesus told the Jews who had challenged Him to "Search the scriptures..." Was He telling these people to search the original manuscripts? How would anyone know if the "scripture" were fulfilled if the original manuscripts had crumbled into dust centuries earlier? Simply because they had copies and translations of the original manuscripts!

And at Acts 8:32, Philip was sent to meet up with the Ethiopian eunuch. When Philip found him, he was reading something called "scripture". How on earth did this fellow from Ethiopia get his hands on the original manuscript of the book of Isaiah? And why did that synagogue in Nazareth ever give it to him? And consider the Bereans at Acts 17:11. Did the Bereans have all the original manuscripts of the Old Testament? If they had them all, what did the eunuch have; or if the eunuch had Isaiah, the Bereans were deprived of Isaiah?

If "scripture(s)" refers to "original manuscripts," then one would have to say that Jesus was playing a cruel hoax on those to whom He spoke. Examine Matthew 21:42; 22:29; Mark 12:10,24; Luke 24:27; John 2:22; 7:38,42; 19:36-37; 20:9. How could these people read or know the scriptures, if they had crumbled into dust centuries earlier? Because, of course, they had copies of the original manuscripts.

Now, when we go to Luke 24:32, we can see things in a new light. Did Jesus have the original manuscripts with Him? In fact, did he have any book with him?? Or did he simply speak? In verse 45, Jesus opened their understanding so they could understand the scriptures. What scriptures? The original manuscripts? And once these Emmaus fellows understood these original manuscripts, did they mail them up to the Bereans? (Relative to Luke 24:32, see also, Job 32:8).

At John 10:35, we learn that the scripture cannot be broken. But if "scripture(s)" refers to original manuscripts, Jesus was mistaken (but we know He was not). For every original manuscript that was ever written has been broken into dust. Do you see the problem we have here? If 2 Timothy 3:16 says only the original manuscripts were inspired, then how do you explain all the other places where that word "scripture(s)" appears, when they cannot possibly refer to the original manuscripts??

Hebrew 1:8 and 10:5 quote from the Greek translation of the Old Testament scriptures (the Septuagint) authoritatively. Hebrews 3:7 states, "the Holy Ghost said ..." and it was in Greek, not in Hebrew. Why did he not insert Hebrew words at that point? Obviously, because a translation may be correctly called the Word of God! 

If only the original manuscripts were inspired, then about 40 verses in the New Testament are not inspired, since they, even in the original manuscripts, were Greek translations of the Hebrew Old Testament.

Is Exodus 5-11 inspired? All those conversations that took place between Moses and Pharaoh were in Egyptian. Yet, when Moses wrote the book of Exodus, all those conversations appeared in Hebrew. They were all "translations." Or we could go back to Joseph in Egypt. He spoke Egyptian to hide his identity from his brothers. Yet, when Moses wrote it down, he wrote it in Hebrew, another "translation". Not inspired?

What about the decrees of Artaxerxes and Darius and Nebuchadnezzar? Those men didn't speak Hebrew, yet what they said appears in Hebrew in Daniel and Esther. Another "translation". Not inspired?

All of the "speaking in tongues" in Acts 2 were translations, for each man heard what Peter was saying in his own language. Not inspired? What about the sign that was nailed on the cross? That consisted of Latin, Greek, and Hebrew. At least 2 of those had to be translations. Not inspired? Or how about Matthew 27:46 and Mark 15:34? Jesus cried out in Aramaic, and in the very same verse, even in the original manuscripts, there was given the Greek translation. Can you honestly say "Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani" is inspired, but "Theemou, Theemou, inati me egkatelipes" is not, being a translation?

If only the original manuscripts are inspired, no one has the inspired scripture. Thus, no one could obey Matthew 4:4, "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." Did God intend for only those who had the original manuscripts to obey his Word? Did He intend for only those who could read Hebrew and Greek to obey his Word? The answer must be obvious to any child of God. When He spoke this truth, and when Christ reaffirmed it, did He not know that the scripture would be copied and translated many times? Again, if only the original manuscripts are inspired, we cannot obey 2 Timothy 4:2 ("Preach the word"); nor can we obey Revelation 22:18-19 (warnings about adding to and taking away from Scripture). Neither could we have the benefit of 2 Timothy 3:16-17, being instructed and "thoroughly furnished unto all good works."

1 Peter 1:23-25 teaches that "this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you." Note: This is the word ... that which they had heard. They had not heard the original manuscripts, but copies and translations. Yet he stated that they were born again by the incorruptible word of God.

And let's consider this question. Would our Father tell us His Word is the final authority and leave us without His Word? Would He call a man to preach His Word and not give it to him? God calls a man and says, "I'm calling you. Spend your life preaching the truth. Preach the Word!" So, wouldn't He give him a copy of His Word? Would God tell His people to live by the Word and not give it to them?

It is a very sad commentary when people say, "We believe that the scripture, in the original manuscripts, is the Word of God. But the scripture we have today is not the Word of God," If that's true, we have no scripture. Do you understand the implications of that? We have no scripture. Why? Because if God is not the final authority, then man is the final authority. If we have no final authority in God's Word, then man will arbitrarily discern what God says. If man discerns what God says in this way, then man becomes the final authority instead of God.

"Well, in the original manuscript..." sounds scholarly; but nobody in our generation has seen them! If we don't have a scripture that's the Word of God, we've got to go to human reasoning. Those of little faith have to either admit that the written Word of God existing today is inspired by Him, or they have to flee to the Church, or to human reasoning or human experience as being the final authority. If there is no dependable Word of God for them today, they have no other recourse. If God has not given them His Word, then they have to decide what is God's Word. If you decide what is God's Word, and you decide what is good and evil, then "...ye shall be as gods" (Genesis 3:5). That's human reasoning.

By the way, basing a doctrine on human reasoning is idolatry. Basing a doctrine on human experience is idolatry. Basing a doctrine on some Church being the final authority is idolatry. The Church is then the idol, because making the Church the final authority is done so by human reasoning. Letting the Pope or a preacher speak ex cathedra and saying that it is God who is speaking is idolatry. You're making him as God. Following your own heart and saying that it is God who is speaking is idolatry.  You're making yourself as God.

So the truth is, you've got one choice of two. Either the written Word handed down to us is the uncorrupted Word of God or we have no other place to turn but to idolatry.  
 

Answers to Questions

1. "Are the italicized words in bibles inspired?"

Answer: When translating from one language to another, it is impossible to give a word-for-word rendering. Inserted words (usually italicized) are necessary. The Greek language omits the verb sometimes and is perfectly correct, according to the rules of Greek grammar. However, in English, this would make an awkward sentence to say the least, and in some cases, would greatly hinder one's understanding of it.

An example is in 2 Timothy 3:16, where the word "is" is in italics, since there is no Greek equivalent for it.

2 Timothy 3:16, "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:"

In addition, it is necessary to re-arrange the order in which some words appear. For example, if we translated John 3:16 in a word-for-word literal rendering, it would read as follows:

John 3:16, "So for loved the God the world that the Son of him the only-begotten he gave, that all the ones believing into him not may perish, but may have life eternal."

There is nothing wrong with the insertion of words, if they be correct. They are necessary for our understanding.

2. "The translators were not consistent; they were wrong to translate one Greek word by several English words."

Answer: We must distinguish between a translator's choice and a translator's error. For example, in Roman 7:7-8 the Greek noun epithumia and its corresponding verb epithumeo are translated by three English words: lust, covet, and concupiscence. We cannot charge them with error here. In their day, the three words meant essentially the same. The same is true of the translation of the definite article from Greek to English. Not all translators agree when it should or should not be done, however, it is not a matter of error, but of personal judgment, as every translator knows. We may disagree with a translator's choice of words, but cannot necessarily call that an error. The English words story, fast, tie, post and watch all have at least two different meanings; sometimes three. This situation exists in any language.

Synonyms may mean the same in one situation, and have different shades of meaning in another. For instance, car and automobile may be referring to the same thing, or differentiating between a railroad car and an automobile. The context must determine.
 

3. "If the translation is inspired, it would be wrong to have a marginal reading or to suggest another possible word."

Answer: When suggesting another translation of a word or phrase, there is no thought of correcting the translators or the scripture. Such suggestions are given because of the changes in the English language in the past 300 plus years. Also, various false doctrines which are popular today, but were unknown at the time the translation was written, have confused the understanding of many people. Hence, it is often necessary to resort to Greek and Hebrew to clear up such misunderstandings.

New Testament writers sometimes paraphrase Old Testament scripture. Examples: Matthew 12:17-21 (from Isaiah 42:1-3); Romans 3:10-18 (from Psalm 14:1-3; Psalm 5:9; Psalm 140:3; Psalm 10:7; Psalm 59:7-8; Psalm 36:1).

Therefore, different words may be used when teaching the same truth. Hence, an honest translation in English from uncorrupted texts would be equally inspired as an honest translation in Spanish from the same texts. Also, two English translations that say the same truths, though using different words to do so, would be equally inspired in the scriptures which agree. It is in the places where there is a different teaching, or an omission, that we must choose.

If God was not involved in the making of copies or translations, then how does one advancing the theory that "only the original manuscripts were inspired and man took it from there," avoid the charge of anthropolatry? They are saying that man is more powerful than God, and God is not powerful enough to keep his promises to preserve his Word.
 

4. "Only the original writings were inspired of God; therefore, only the original writings were inerrant, or without error."

Answer: To answer honestly, a question must first be asked: which copy of the originals? For instance, in Jeremiah 36:2 an "original" is made, and in verse 23 it is burnt. Then in verse 32 Jeremiah makes another "original" and in this one he adds some words to it (at the direction of God). Then this second copy is tossed into the Euphrates river in at 51:63! Which one was the original? Was the first one, or the second one the correct copy? If it was the first, then why didn't God save it from the fire? If it was the second, then God must not think much of the originals, for He had them thrown into the river!
 

Conclusion

This is a life and death matter, for if we do not have an infallible, pure, inerrant Holy Word of God now, (not in the originals which have been lost forever, centuries ago) to rest our weary souls upon for time and eternity, then we have but one alternative or option: Let's eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die and go to hell. For the child and servant of Almighty God, that is not an option.

Let us look at some undisputed facts about the originals.

• First: there never was a book of 66 originals of the scripture.

• Second: there never was a book of the 39 originals of the Old Testament.

• Third: there never was a book of the 27 originals of the New Testament.

• Fourth: no one living or dead ever saw the 66, 39 or 27 originals.

• Fifth: each of the originals was lost, worn out, destroyed or gone within 100 to 150 years of their writing.

• Sixth: the originals were written over a period of about 1600 years from the first book of Job to the last one Revelation.

• Seventh: the originals (from the Old to the New Testament) were written from as much as 2000 miles apart from each other.

• Eighth: the originals were written in at least three different languages.

• Ninth: the originals were written on any number of kinds of materials, with any number of kinds of writing fluid.

• Tenth: the originals under God's will and guidance incorporate many kinds of culture and background.

• Eleventh: no version in existence today was or is translated from any original.

• Twelfth: no one living today would know or recognize any one of the 66 originals if they saw one.

And on and on and on. Therefore, in the light of the above, to flee to the supposed sanctuary of the originals is unreal, hypocrisy, a fetish, and worse than the proverbial ostrich hiding its head in the sand and thinking it is covered and out of sight.

The first thing we observe is that our Father in Heaven promised to preserve both His word and words.

"The word of God…abideth for ever " (1 Peter 1:23).

"The word of the Lord endureth for ever" (1 Peter 1:25).

"My words shall not pass away" (Luke 21:33).

"Thou shalt preserve them" (Psalms 12:6-7).

"For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven" (Psalms 119:89).

"Concerning thy testimonies…thou hast founded them for ever" (Psalms 119:152).

"Thy word…endureth for ever" (Psalms 119:160).

"The word of our God shall stand for ever" (Isaiah 40:8).

"My words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth…saith the LORD, from henceforth and for ever" (Isaiah 59:21).

Has our Father kept His promises? Yes, He has preserved His Word and it endures even unto today, because His Power, Wisdom, and Spirit transcend the error of men!

Have you been to Jesus for the cleansing power? Are you washed in the blood of the Lamb? Are you fully trusting in His grace this hour? Are you washed in the blood of the Lamb? Not according to the new Bible Per-Versions! Not according to the New International Version (NIV), New American Standard Version (NASV), New Living Bible, New Revised Standard Versions (NRSV), Revised Standard Version (RSV), The Living Bible (TLB), Today's English Version, Contemporary English Version (CEV), International Standard Version: (ISV) and the other Per-Versions! Revelation 1:5 clearly reads in the King James Bible: And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, (KJB) But you are NOT "washed in the blood" in the New Per-Versions . . . American Standard Version (ASV) reads: and from Jesus Christ, [who is] the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loveth us, and loosed us from our sins by his blood; Amplified Bible reads: and from Jesus Christ the faithful and trustworthy Witness, the First-born of the dead [first to be brought back to life] and the Prince (Ruler) of the kings of the earth. To Him Who ever loves us, and has once [for all] loosed and freed us from our sins by His own blood. Contemporary English Version (CEV) reads: May kindness and peace be yours from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness. Jesus was the first to conquer death, and he is the ruler of all earthly kings. Christ loves us, and by his blood he set us free from our sins. Good News for Modern Man reads: and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn Son who was raised from death, who is also the ruler of the kings of the earth. He loves us, and by his death he has freed us from our sins International Standard Version (ISV) reads: and from Jesus Christ, the witness, the faithful one, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler over the kings of the earth. To the one who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood; Living Bible (TLB) reads: and from Jesus Christ who faithfully reveals all truth to us. He was the first to rise from death, to die no more. He is far greater than any king in all the earth. All praise to him who always loves us and who set us free from our sins by pouring out his lifeblood for us. New American Standard Version (NASV) reads: and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. To Him who loves us and released us from our sins by His blood New Century Version (NCV) reads: and from Jesus Christ, Jesus is the faithful witness, the first among those raised from the dead. He is the ruler of the kings of the earth. He is the One who loves us, who made us free from our sins with the blood of his death. New International Version (NIV) reads: and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood, New Living Bible reads: and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness to these things, the first to rise from the dead, and the commander of all the rulers of the world. All praise to him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by shedding his blood for us. New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) reads: and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. To him who loves us and freed us from our sins by his blood New Testament in Modern English (J.B. Phillips) reads: and from Jesus Christ the faithful witness, firstborn of the dead, and ruler of kings upon earth. To him who loves us and has set us free from our sins through his own blood Revised Standard Version (RSV) reads: and from Jesus Christ the faithful witness, the first-born of the dead, and the ruler of kings on earth. To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood Today's English Version reads: and from Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the first to be raised from death and who is also the ruler of the kings of the world. He loves us, and by his sacrificial death he has freed us from our sins The shocking FACT is that NOWHERE in the new Per-Versions do they read "you are washed in the blood"! I repeat NOWHERE do the new Per-Versions read "you are washed in the blood"! What can wash away my sins? Nothing but the blood of Jesus. What can wash away my sins? Nothing . . . According to the new Per-Versions Oh Happy day when Jesus washed my sins away! Not according to the NIV, NASV, NCV, CEV, at al! According to the NIV, NASV, NCV, CEV and other Per-Versions Jesus Christ did not wash your sins away! Why don't we "update" our "archaic", "hard to understand" song books? Have you been to Jesus for the loosing power? Are you freed in the blood of the Lamb? Are you fully trusting in His grace this hour? Are you loosed in the blood of the Lamb? What can loose away my sins? Nothing but the blood of Jesus Isn't it irreverent and sacrilegious that these new Per-Version people will "update" the words of God — without "batting an eye" — and yet would not dare even consider "messing with" the song "Are You Washed In the Blood"! Aren't you glad Brother Elisha Hoffman, the author of "Are You Washed in the Blood", still read and believed the "updated" and "archaic" King James Bible? He might have come out with some silly occultic nonsense like Stephen Curtis Chapman's "Lord of the Dance", or Carman's blasphemous "Holy Ghost Hop", et al. Consider the following wonderful, Christ-uplifting hymns that are contrary to the NIV, NASV, NLB, NRSV, RSV ASV, NCV, CEV, and the other "legions" (Mark 5:9) of Per-Versions! Jesus paid it all, All to Him I owe; Sin had left a crimson stain, He washed it white as snow.       — Jesus Paid It All Just as I am, and waiting not To rid my soul of one dark blot, To Thee whose blood can cleanse each spot, O Lamb of God, I come, I come.       — Just As I Am Happy day, happy day, when Jesus washed my sins away! He taught me how to watch and pray, and live rejoicing every day Happy day, happy day, when Jesus washed my sins away.       — O Happy Day Lord Jesus, for this I most humbly entreat, I wait, blessed Lord, at Thy crucified feet. By faith, for my cleansing, I see Thy blood flow, Now wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.       — White Than Snow Blessèd assurance, Jesus is mine! O what a foretaste of glory divine! Heir of salvation, purchase of God, Born of His Spirit, washed in His blood.       — Blessed Assurance There is a blood-washed multitude, a mighty army strong; The Lord of hosts their righteousness, redeeming love their song.       — The Blood Washed Throng There is a fountain filled with blood drawn from Emmanuel's veins;. . . The dying thief rejoiced to see that fountain in his day; And there have I, though vile as he, washed all my sins away. Washed all my sins away, washed all my sins away; And there have I, though vile as he, washed all my sins away.       — There Is A Fountain Filled With Blood I don't know about you — but thank God (and no thanks to the new Per-Versions) — "I'm Washed in the Blood of the Lamb"! The most popular Bible version on the market is the New International Version (NIV), and it is terrible, removing the name above every other name, JESUS, in 38-places. Why would the NIV translators do that? Could it be because multiple NIV translators were homosexuals? Certainly, that is likely the reason why the word “sodomite” has been completely removed from the NIV. The NIV translators butchered Philippians 2:6 so badly that it actually teaches Jesus is not God. For a deeper look at the serious problems with the NIV, please read: Why Would Anyone Use the NIV? Numerous well-known Baptist preachers have publicly stated that a person cannot be saved apart from the King James Bible. 1st Peter 1:23, “Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.” The “Seed” by which we are born-again is the Word of God. Now if that Seed is corrupted, perverted or changed, then it becomes a false gospel, and a person cannot be saved from it. This is what those preachers mean when they say that a person cannot be saved from a corrupt version of the Bible. In the year 1611 A.D., King James I of England was influenced to provide a common Bible for the English speaking world. Hence, he authorized a translation of the Bible into English that came to be known as the Authorized Version or as it is more commonly known, the King James Version. King James selected a committee of Greek and Hebrew scholars from the Church of England. These men were "low church" individuals with ties to the Puritans and later the Pilgrims who emigrated to America. They worked from the text of the Greek and Hebrew testaments that had been received" or accepted by virtually all branches of gospel preaching, Bible believing Christians from the apostolic era to that time. Their product, the King James Version of the Bible, has been, until just recently, the universal standard for Bible believing Christians of the English speaking world.   Enter Textual Criticism Textual criticism is an academic discipline in which scholars study existing Greek and Hebrew biblical manuscripts. Prior to the advent of the moveable type printing press in 1455 by Gutenberg, all copies of the Bible were hand copied by scribes and were called manuscripts. Because they were individually produced by human hands, they were prone to mistakes in manual copying. Textual critics study the various extant (existing) manuscripts and note any discrepancies that may have occurred between different copies. Then, by comparing them, a majority consensus is established. Should a misspelled word be found, or should a word have been accidentally added or omitted from a given manuscript, the textual critic endeavors to by consensus establish the correct reading. A major theory of textual criticism is that some later manuscripts were copied from earlier ones, therefore, the earlier manuscripts are presumed to be a more accurate source of the Scriptures. (The presumption is that scribal errors would accumulate in later copies). Hence, textual critics give much more credence to early manuscripts than to later copies even if the later be greater in number. The problem with this theory is that the early church had great reverence and respect for their "accepted" or "received" manuscripts of the Scriptures. Accordingly, when a given copy of the Scriptures became tattered and worn, it was carefully copied and then burned Hence, there are virtually no copies of me earliest manuscripts used by the churches. However, there is evidence that certain cults and sects within early Christians followed the opposite practice. They preserved their manuscripts regardless of condition. Therefore, the crucial premise of textual criticism - that the oldest manuscripts are always to be preferred to more recent copies is critically flawed.   Manuscripts Aleph and B ln the latter half of the 19th century when textual criticism perhaps was at its zenith, two ancient manuscripts were found in the Mediterranean world that would come to revolutionize the work of the textual critics. A manuscript was "found" in a Roman Catholic monastery at the foot of Mt. Sinai in the Sinai desert. It came to be known as Manuscript Aleph and it also was known as Codex Sinaticus ("codex" being a Latin word for a bound volume). About the same time another ancient manuscript was "found" in the library of the Vatican. It became known as Manuscript B or Codex Vaticanus. Both of these manuscripts were determined to have come from the 4th century A.D. and are considered the oldest basically complete copies of the New Testament to exist. Hence, they were considered by the textual critics to be the mother lode of ancient Bible manuscripts. It is noteworthy that both of these manuscripts were "found" in Roman Catholic libraries. (The Roman Catholic Church historically has never given great credence to the Scripture or its teachings). Moreover, the Codex Sinaticus had been produced by scribes of the Alexandrian sect in early church history. The Alexandrians were a heretical cult similar to the modern Jehovah Witnesses. They held major doctrinal deviations pertaining to the person of Jesus Christ. Notwithstanding the questionable source of Codex Sinaticus, it became the premiere source for future textual criticism.   Drs. Westcott and Hort Two British textual critics championed these newly found manuscripts. Their names were Dr. B. F. Westcott and Dr. F. J. A. Hort. They represented a branch of the Church of England which was enamored with the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church. Westcott and Hort in their writings showed a keen friendliness to Roman Catholic theology, occult spiritism and German Rationalism otherwise known as modernism. They, by no stretch of the imagination, could he considered fundamentalists s the term was later coined and used. Rather, if they lived today, their theology and philosophy (as evidenced by their writings) would be called liberal, humanistic, sacramental and even have occult overtones. Drs. Hort and Westcott together collated and Text o f the New Testament. The "new" Greek text was in contrast with and in distinction to the text mat had been received by virtually all Bible believing . churches for the preceding 19 centuries. In the last 100 years it has been re-edited by Nestle, Aland and others, and today is generally referred in as the critical text. 11 represents less than 1% of existing manuscripts. From this critical text and its direct predecessor, the Westcott and Hort Text, virtually all modern translations and versions of the Bible have been translated into English. WE BELIEVE THAT THE CRITICAL TEXT IS CORRUPT! Not only are its origins and associations suspect, the actual text itself is full of deletions and dilutions of the time honored Scripture received by translations based upon the critical text have diluted reference to the blood of Jesus Christ (e.g. Romans 3:25, Colossians 1:14, Revelation 1:11, Luke 22:20 et al), the Deity of Christ (e g Jude 4, Revelation 1:11). the inspiration of the Scriptures (e.g. 11 Timothy 3:16), and salvation by faith (e.g. John 3:36) to mention a few. Space does not allow us to list the numerous instances of serious dilution or deletions of major doctrinal truth in modern versions, but it is lengthy. There are thousands of textual changes If a survey benchmark has been moved or altered, all surveying after that point will be distorted. And because the critical text is in our view corrupt. any version of the Bible translated from it is suspect.   Modern Versions The venerable King James Version of the Bible is not copyrighted. It is considered a public domain publication of the Word of God. However, virtually all modern versions are copyrighted. As any author or publisher knows, a copyright is for protection of commercial rights. It means that no one else may market their Bible without paying the publisher or at the least receiving written permission to do so. Does not the Apostle Peter refer to some in the last days "making merchandise of you" regarding the things of God (II Peter 2:3)? Moreover, a number of the modem versions (based upon the critical text) have used less than precise methods for translation. Some have used a literary device known as "dynamic equivalence". This is a fancy term that essentially means some translators have taken the liberty to come up with what they think are modern equivalents for specific words in the manuscript text rather than precisely translating the specific words of the text. In effect, this is a running commentary on the part of the translators, injecting into the translation what they think a given passage means, rather than rendering a precise translation of what the scriptural writers actually wrote. There is nothing wrong with Bible commentaries. However, to insert personal bias under the guise of translation is not only Iess than a faithful rendering of the text, it is deceptive. In at least one case, a popular version bas bad the honesty to indicate m its subtitle mat it is a paraphrase. Unfortunately, unwary minds often look at such a Bible paraphrase as the Bible nevertheless. Some versions have used vulgar and crude terms m their translations They have seemed oblivious to the unique purity of purpose of the Scripture. As mentioned above, cardinal New Testament doctrine such as the shed blood of Jesus Christ, the Deity of Christ and the inspiration of Scripture is routinely diluted m recent translations based upon -me critical text. That should give pause for concern!   The Godly Heritage of the KJV     In viewing the distortions, deletions, corruptions, dilutions, changes and questionable associations of the critical text and its resultant modernist translations, we will stick to the venerable King lames Version of the Bible that our forebearers so faithfully used. It is an ancient landmark Down through the centuries, it has been the Bible used for every major revival to sweep across portions of the English speaking world. It was the Bible of tbe Pilgrim forefathers of this nation. And. it has been God blessed wherever it bas been used. It is based upon the ancient text which bas been, until just recently, the universally accepted text of the Scriptures from the time of the apostles. Modern versions bave been marketed extensively as being easier to read than the archaic, old fashioned KJV Bible. However, recent computerized document analysis programs have objectively revealed that the King James Version of the Bible is in far easier to read than the NIV or the NASB. The Fleisch-Kincaid research firm has, through computerized analysis, sbown that the KJV vocabulary has fewer syllables per word than the NIV or the NASB. Furthertmore, the KJV has less complex sentences than the NIV or NASB. In reality, the KJV is easier to read than its modern counterparts in the manner of vocabulary and syntax. There is undisputed eloquence and beauty in the King James Version. Moreover, the English language was at its zenith in the early 17th century for poetic beauty and eloquence. Interestingly, one of the major criticisms of the King James Version is actually a strength. People unacquainted with proper English complain about the use of "thee" and "thou" etc. in the King James text. However, as anyone who knows linguistics will attest, many languages have at one time had a common level which was spoken on the street and a higher or formal level that was used in reference to royalty and God. The usage of "thee" and "thou" etc. in old English is a form of higher English that no longer is commonly used. It originally was used in formal situations where deference and respect to nobility, royalty and Deity were appropriate. Unfortunately, our contemporary American English usage of "you" and "yours" etc. makes no allowance for such deference and brings all of our Ianguage back to the lower level. The King James Version respectfully and appropriately refers to God and other notables as "tbee" or "thou" in accordance with their due respect. Most modern language translations have diluted that deference.   Dr.Frank Logsdon Dr. Frank Logsdon was the Co-founder of the New American Standard Bible (NASB). He since has renounced any connection to it.   "I must under God renounce every attachment to the New American Standard Version. I'm afraid I'm in trouble with the Lord . . . We laid the groundwork; I wrote the format; I helped interview some of the translators; I sat with the translator; I wrote the preface . . . I'm in trouble; I can't refute these arguments; it's wrong, terribly wrong . . . The deletions are absolutely frightening . . . there are so many . . . Are we so naive that we do not suspect Satanic deception in all of this? Upon investigation, I wrote my dear friend, Mr. Lockman, (editor's note: Mr. Lockman was the benefactor through which the NASB was published) explaining that I was forced to renounce all attachment to the NASV (editor's note: this is the same as the NASB). You can say that the Authorized Version (KJV) is absolutely correct. How correct? 100% correct . . ." Dr. Frank Logsdon Modern Bibles are Producing a Corrupt Generation of Churchgoers I want you to notice something important about the NIV, which was first published in 1973. The first generation of preachers and Christians who adopted the NIV had been raised up on the trustworthy King James Bible, so they were doctrinally sound BEFORE they began using the NIV. They weren't fooled. However, it's a different story today. Preachers and churchgoers today have been raised up on the NIV and are doctrinally corrupt. A Christian who read Philippians 2:6 from the NIV in 1973 knew that Jesus was God, because they had learned that truth from the King James Bible. However, Bible students and churchgoers today who read Philippians 2:6 from the NIV sincerely believe that Jesus is not God. KJV — “Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God.” NIV — “Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped.” Do you see how the NIV misleads people? Any thinking person would conclude that Jesus is NOT God after reading Philippians 2:6 from the NIV? The translators of the NIV have horribly perverted the Words of God. I've actually had web visitors write to me, trying to prove that Jesus is not God by quoting Philippians 2:6 from the NIV. The preachers who say that we shouldn't be fighting over which version of the Bible, were taught in seminary that Jesus is God or by a doctrinally sound Christian. Unfortunately, most people who read the NIV don't have such privileges and are led to believe that Jesus is not God. This is one reason why we should fight over which version of the Bible. Another horrible problem with the NIV is it's perversion of Romans 10:9... KJV — "That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved."  NIV — "That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved." Satan has infiltrated many of America's Bible colleges, churches and religious institutions with the damnable heresy of Lordship Salvation, i.e., the teaching that a lost sinner MUST surrender his or her life to Christ to be saved, committing to live a life of obedience and to forsake sinful habits. Moody Bible Institute now teaches this hellish heresy. This false doctrine is taught in the NIV. Romans 10:9 in the NIV says that to be saved, a person must confess, “Jesus is Lord.” That's not Biblical. The King James Bible simply says to confess the Lord Jesus Christ. Confess what? We find the answer in Matthew 16:16, “And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” A lost sinner need only confess that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and believe on Him from the heart. The teaching that a person must make Christ the Lord of their life to be saved, committing to live a transformed life for God, is a doctrine of devils. Moody Bible Institute requires sinners to make a commitment to Christ to be saved. That is heresy! This is another clear reason why we ought to fight over which version of the Bible to use.   The Fight Over the Bible is Really a Fight Over Doctrines The NIV changes or removes over 64,000 words from the King James Bible. Thus, there are thousands of doctrinal differences. When we fight over which Bible, we are really fighting over which doctrines? I've just addressed the NIV, but there are HUNDREDS of false bibles on the market and circulating throughout the world's churches today. Many false prophets like to point out that the word “Trinity” is not found in the Bible, and they are correct; however, the word “Godhead” is found in the King James Bible in 3-places. Tragically, the NIV translators have completely removed the word Godhead. Why would they pervert the Scriptures and attack the Godhead? The answer is that Satan is the god of this world and uses the love of money to control carnally-minded people. For men, it's all about making money. For Satan, it's all about blinding the minds of unbelievers to prevent them from being saved (2nd Corinthians 4:4). The apostate Arkansas pastor that I mentioned at the beginning of this article is horribly wrong. He reasons that faith in Christ is all that matters and so there is no need to fight over which Bible. But the NIV and other modern perversions of the Scriptures require sinners to do more than simply trust Christ, they also require a submission to Christ's Lordship. Modern apostates teach that sinners who are unwilling to stop living in sin cannot be saved. This goes 100% contrary to the plainest teachings of the Word of God. Romans 4:6 wonderfully states, “Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works.” Salvation is of the Lord, a gift from God, which does NOT require any self-righteous works on our part. We are saved by HIS RIGHTEOUSNESS! Pastors and Christians who say that we ought not fight over which version of the Bible to use, are in effect also saying that we ought not contend for the Christian faith. The doctrines of the NIV are very different from the doctrines of the King James Bible. I don't like to call the King James a “version,” I call it the Bible.   Something's Missing! The word “Calvary” is mentioned once in the King James Bible, and yet it is so much a part of many old hymns (such as AT CALVARY) and the writings of mighty Christian authors. The NIV removes the word entirely. Thus, contemporary religious literature which is based upon the NIV is horribly lacking in Biblical character and richness. Hundreds of important Biblical words have been removed from the NIV: Regeneration, mercyseat, Calvary, remission, Jehovah, immutable, omnipotent, Comforter, Holy Ghost, Messiah, sodomite, quickened, infallible, fornication, trucebreakers, winebibbers, carnal, slothful, unthankful, effeminate, backbiting, vanity, lasciviousness, whoredom, devils, Lucifer, damnation, brimstone, and the bottomless pit. Need I go on? The differences between the King James Bible and the New International Version are staggering—the difference between day and night, white and black, salvation and damnation. In every place where the precious King James Bible says that people came and “worshipped” Jesus, the NIV changes the word “worship” to “knelt.” You can kneel before a king without worshipping him. The King James Bible teaches that those people all came to WORSHIP the precious Lord Jesus Christ. How dare the NIV translators pervert the true meaning of the Scriptures and diminish the deity of Jesus Christ. Do you see how malicious those translators were? What do you expect from homosexuals? They hate the Bible! They hate Jesus Christ! I could go on-and-on. I have given you just a handful, amongst hundreds of doctrinal conflicts between the different Bible versions, of WHY we ought to fight over which Bible to use. I hope and pray earnestly that you will only use the proven and trustworthy King James Bible, which has been used by mighty men of God and soulwinners for the past four centuries to win lost sinners to the Lord Jesus Christ. Amen and amen! "Be on guard against any tampering with the Word, whether disguised as a search for truth, or a scholarly attempt at apparently hidden meanings; and beware of the confusion created by the senseless rash of new versions, translations, editions, and improvements upon the tried and tested Bible of our fathers and grandfathers." "The true Church preaches REGENERATION; not reformation, not education, not legislation, but regeneration." SOURCE: Dr. M.R. DeHaan, from the excellent book, THE TABERNACLE, p.. 101 EARLY HERESIES STILL WITH US TODAY The Bible warns that there would be those who would corrupt the word of God (2nd Corinthians 2:17) and handle it deceitfully (2nd Corinthians 4:2). There would arise false gospels with false epistles (2nd Thessalonians 2:2), along with false prophets and teachers who would not only bring in damnable heresies but would seek to make merchandise of the true believer through their own feigned words (2nd Peter 2:1-3). It did not take long for this to occur. In the days of the Apostles, and shortly afterwards, several doctrinal heresies arose. Their early beginnings are referred to in the New Testament in such places as Galatians 1:6-8; 1st John 4:3; 2nd John 1:7; and Jude 1:3-4. They not only plagued the early Church, but are still with us today, in modern form, in many contemporary Christian cults. These false doctrines influenced the transmission of scripture and account for some of the differences in the line of manuscripts. WESTCOTT AND HORT Brooke Foss Westcott (1825-1901) and Fenton John Anthony Hort (1828-1892) produced a Greek New Testament in 1881 based on the findings of Tischendorf. This Greek NT was the basis for the Revised Version of that same year. They also developed a theory of textual criticism which underlay their Greek NT and several other Greek NT since (such as the Nestle's text and the United Bible Society's text). Greek New Testaments such as these produced the modern English translations of the Bible we have today. So it is important for us to know the theory of Westcott and Hort as well as something of the two men who have so greatly influenced modern textual criticism. In short, the Westcott and Hort theory states that the Bible is to be treated as any other book would be. Westcott and Hort believed the Greek text which underlies the KJV was perverse and corrupt. Hort called the Textus Receptus vile and villainous (Life and Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, Vol. I, p.211). If Westcott and Hort are the fathers of modern textual criticism and the restorers of the true text, should we not know something of their beliefs to see if they are consistent with Scripture? This would be harmonious with the teaching found in Matthew 7:17. Here's what Westcott and Hort said about... The Scriptures: "I reject the word infallibility of Holy Scriptures overwhelmingly." (Westcott, The Life and Letters of Brook Foss Westcott, Vol. I, p.207). "Our Bible as well as our Faith is a mere compromise." (Westcott, On the Canon of the New Testament, p. vii). "Evangelicals seem to me perverted. . .There are, I fear, still more serious differences between us on the subject of authority, especially the authority of the Bible." (Hort, The Life and Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, Vol. I, p.400) "Dr. Wilbur Pickering writes that, Hort did not hold to a high view of inspiration." (The Identity of the New Testament Text, p.212) Perhaps this is why both the RV (which Westcott and Hort helped to translate) and the American edition of it, the ASV, translated 2nd Timothy 3:16 as, "Every scripture inspired of God" instead of "All scripture is given by inspiration of God" (KJV). The Deity of Christ: "He never speaks of Himself directly as God, but the aim of His revelation was to lead men to see God in Him." (Westcott, The Gospel According to St. John, p. 297). "(John) does not expressly affirm the identification of the Word with Jesus Christ." (Westcott, Ibid., p. 16). "(Rev. 3:15) might no doubt bear the Arian meaning, the first thing created." (Hort, Revelation, p.36). Perhaps this is why their Greek text makes Jesus a created god (John 1:18) and their American translation had a footnote concerning John 9:38, "And he said, Lord I believe and he worshipped him," which said, "The Greek word denotes an act of reverence, whether paid to a creature, as here, or to the Creator" (thus calling Christ a creature). Salvation: "The thought (of John 10:29) is here traced back to its most absolute form as resting on the essential power of God in His relation of Universal Fatherhood." (Westcott, St. John, p. 159). "I confess I have no repugnance to the primitive doctrine of a ransom paid to Satan. I can see no other possible form in which the doctrine of a ransom is at all tenable; anything is better than the doctrine of a ransom to the father." (Hort, The First Epistle of St. Peter 1:1-2:17, p. 77). Perhaps this is why their Greek text adds to salvation in 1st Peter 2:2. And why their English version teaches universal salvation in Titus 2:11, "For the grace of God hath appeared, bringing salvation to all men" (ASV). Hell: "(Hell is) not the place of punishment of the guilty, (it is) the common abode of departed spirits." (Westcott, Historic Faith, pp.77-78). "We have no sure knowledge of future punishment, and the word eternal has a far higher meaning." (Hort, Life and Letters, Vol. I, p.149). Perhaps this is why their Greek text does not have Mark 9:44, and their English translation replaces "everlasting fire" [Matthew 18:8] with "eternal fire" and change the meaning of eternal as cited by Hort in the above quote. Creation: "No one now, I suppose, holds that the first three chapters of Genesis, for example, give a literal history. I could never understand how anyone reading them with open eyes could think they did." (Westcott, cited from Which Bible?, p. 191). "But the book which has most engaged me is Darwin. Whatever may be thought of it, it is a book that one is proud to be contemporary with..... My feeling is strong that the theory is unanswerable." (Hort, cited from Which Bible?, p. 189) Romanism: "I wish I could see to what forgotten truth Mariolatry (the worship of the Virgin Mary) bears witness." (Westcott, Ibid. ) "The pure Romanish view seems to be nearer, and more likely to lead to the truth than the Evangelical." (Hort, Life and Letters, Vol. I, p. 77) It is one thing to have doctrinal differences on baby-sprinkling and perhaps a few other interpretations. It is another to be a Darwin-believing theologian who rejects the authority of scriptures, Biblical salvation, the reality of hell, and makes Christ a created being to be worshipped with Mary his mother. Yet, these were the views of both Westcott and Hort. No less significant is the fact that both men were members of spiritist societies (the Hermes Club and the Ghostly Guild). Westcott and Hort talked to Spirits of the dead. I call it Satanism. Westcott and Hort Brooke Foss Westcott (1825-1903) and Fenton John Anthony Hort (1828-1892) have been highly controversial figures in biblical history. On one side, their supporters have heralded them as great men of God, having greatly advanced the search for the original Greek text. On the other side, their opponents have leveled charges of heresy, infidelity, apostasy, and many others, claiming that they are guilty of wreaking great damage on the true text of Scripture. I have no desire to sling mud nor a desire to hide facts. I believe it is essential at this time that we examine what we know about these men and their theories concerning the text of the Bible. I long sought for copies of the books about their lives. These are The Life and Letters of Brooke Foss Westcott, by his son, Arthur, and The Life and Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, written by his son. After literally months of trying, I was able to acquire copies of them both for study.  Most of the material in this section will be directly from these sources so as to prevent it from being secondhand. We cannot blindly accept the finding of any scholar without investigating what his beliefs are concerning the Bible and its doctrines. Scholarship alone makes for an inadequate and dangerous authority, therefore we are forced to scrutinize these men's lives. A Monumental Switch Westcott and Hort were responsible for the greatest feat in textual criticism. They were responsible for replacing the Universal Text of the Authorized Version with the Local Text of Egypt and the Roman Catholic Church. Both Westcott and Hort were known to have resented the pre-eminence given to the Authorized Version and its underlying Greek Text. They had been deceived into believing that the Roman Catholic manuscripts, Vaticanus and Aleph, were better because they were older. This they believed, even though Hort admitted that the Antiochian or Universal Text was equal in antiquity. Hort said: "The fundamental Text of late extant Greek MSS generally is beyond all question identical with the dominant Antiochian or Graeco-Syrian Text of the second half of the 4th century." (Hort, The Factor of Genealogy, pg 92—as cited by Burgon, Revision Revised, pg 257). Vicious Prejudice In spite of the fact that the readings of the Universal Text were found to be as old, or older, Westcott and Hort still sought to dislodge it from its place of high standing in biblical history. Hort occasionally let his emotions show... Hort said: “I had no idea till the last few weeks of the importance of texts, having read so little Greek Testament, and dragged on with the villainous Textus Receptus leaning entirely on late MSS.; it is a blessing there are such early ones.” (Life, Vol. I, p. 211). Westcott and Hort built their own Greek text based primarily on a few uncial MSS of the Local Text. It has been stated earlier that these perverted MSS do not even agree among themselves. The ironic thing is that Westcott and Hort knew this when they formed their text! Burgon exposed Dr. Hort's confession. Even Hort had occasion to notice an instance of the Concordia discourse. Commenting on the four places in Mark's Gospel (14:30, 68, 72, a, b) where the cocks crowing is mentioned said: "The confusion of attestation introduced by these several cross currents of change is so great that of the seven principal MSS, Aleph, A, B, C, D, L, no two have the same text in all four places." 87 A Shocking Revelation That these men should lend their influence to a family of MSS which have a history of attacking and diluting the major doctrines of the Bible, should not come as a surprise. Oddly enough, neither man believed that the Bible should be treated any differently than the writings of the lost historians and philosophers! Hort wrote, quote: For ourselves, we dare not introduce considerations which could not reasonably be applied to other ancient texts, supposing them to have documentary attestation of equal amount, variety and antiquity. 88 He also states, Quote: In the New Testament, as in almost all prose writings which have been much copied, corruptions by interpolation are many times more numerous than corruptions by omission. (Emphasis mine.) 89 We must consider these things for a moment. How can God use men who do not believe that His Book is any different than Shakespeare, Plato, or Dickens? It is a fundamental belief that the Bible is different from all other writings. Why did these men not believe so? Blatant Disbelief Their skepticism does, in fact, go even deeper. They have both become famous for being able to deny scriptural truth and still be upheld by fundamental Christianity as biblical authorities! Both Westcott and Hort failed to accept the basic Bible doctrines which we hold so dear and vital to our fundamental faith. Hort denies the reality of Eden: I am inclined to think that no such state as Eden (I mean the popular notion) ever existed, and that Adams fall in no degree differed from the fall of each of his descendants, as Coleridge justly argues. 90 Furthermore, he took sides with the apostate authors of Essays and Reviews. Hort writes to Rev. Rowland Williams, October 21, 1858, "Further I agree with them [Authors of Essays and Reviews] in condemning many leading specific doctrines of the popular theology ... Evangelicals seem to me perverted rather than untrue. There are, I fear, still more serious differences between us on the subject of authority, and especially the authority of the Bible." 91 We must also confront Hort's disbelief that the Bible was infallible: "If you make a decided conviction of the absolute infallibility of the N.T. practically a sine qua non for co-operation, I fear I could not join you." He also stated: "As I was writing the last words a note came from Westcott. He too mentions having had fears, which he now pronounces groundless, on the strength of our last conversation, in which he discovered that I did recognize Providente in biblical writings. Most strongly I recognize it; but I am not prepared to say that it necessarily involves absolute infallibility. So I still await judgment." And further commented to a colleague: "But I am not able to go as far as you in asserting the absolute infallibility of a canonical writing." 92 Strange Bedfellows Though unimpressed with the evangelicals of his day, Hort had great admiration for Charles Darwin! To his colleague, B.F. Westcott, he wrote excitedly: "...Have you read Darwin? How I should like to talk with you about it! In spite of difficulties, I am inclined to think it unanswerable. In any case it is a treat to read such a book." And to John Ellerton he writes: "But the book which has most engaged me is Darwin. Whatever may be thought of it, it is a book that one is proud to be contemporary with ... My feeling is strong that the theory is unanswerable. If so, it opens up a new period." 93 Dr. Hort was also an adherent to the teaching of Samuel Taylor Coleridge. His son writes: "In undergraduate days, if not before, he came under the spell of Coleridge." 94 "Coleridge was the college drop-out whose drug addiction is an historical fact. The opium habit, begun earlier to deaden the pain of rheumatism, grew stronger. After vainly trying in Malta and Italy to break away from opium, Coleridge came back to England in 1806." 95 "One of Coleridge's famous works is Aids to Reflection. Its chief aim is to harmonize formal Christianity with Coleridge's variety of transcendental philosophy. He also did much to introduce Immanual Kant and other German philosophers to English readers." 96 This man, Coleridge, had a great influence on the two scholars from Cambridge. Forsaking Colossians 2:8, Hort was also a lover of Greek philosophy. In writing to Mr. A. MacMillian, he stated: "You seem to make (Greek) philosophy worthless for those who have received the Christian revelation. To me, though in a hazy way, it seems full of precious truth of which I find nothing, and should be very much astonished and perplexed to find anything in revelation." 97 Lost in the Forest In some cases Hort seemed to wander in the woods. In others he can only be described as utterly lost in the forest. Take, for example, his views on fundamental Bible truths... Hort's Devil Concerning existence of a personal devil he wrote: "The discussion which immediately precedes these four lines naturally leads to another enigma most intimately connected with that of everlasting penalties, namely that of the personality of the devil. It was Coleridge who some three years ago first raised any doubts in my mind on the subject - doubts which have never yet been at all set at rest, one way or the other. You yourself are very cautious in your language." "Now if there be a devil, he cannot merely bear a corrupted and marred image of God; he must be wholly evil, his name evil, his every energy and act evil. Would it not be a violation of the divine attributes for the Word to be actively the support of such a nature as that?" 98 Hort's  Hell Hort also shrunk from the belief in a literal, eternal hell. "I think Maurice's letter to me sufficiently showed that we have no sure knowledge respecting the duration of future punishment, and that the word eternal has a far higher meaning than the merely material one of excessively long duration; extinction always grates against my mind as something impossible. 99 Certainly in my case it proceeds from no personal dread; when I have been living most godlessly, I have never been able to frighten myself with visions of a distant future, even while I held the doctrine. 100 Hort's Purgatory Although the idea of a literal devil and a literal hell found no place in Hort's educated mind, he was a very real believer in the factious Roman Catholic doctrine of purgatory. To Rev. John Ellerton he wrote in 1854: I agree with you in thinking it a pity that Maurice verbally repudiates purgatory, but I fully and unwaveringly agree with him in the three cardinal points of the controversy: (1) that eternity is independent of duration; (2) that the power of repentance is not limited to this life; (3) that it is not revealed whether or not all will ultimately repent. The modern denial of the second has, I suppose, had more to do with the despiritualizing of theology then almost anything that could be named. 101 Also while advising a young student he wrote: The idea of purgation, of cleansing as by fire, seems to me inseparable from what the Bible teaches us of the Divine chastisements; and, though little is directly said respecting the future state, it seems to me incredible that the Divine chastisements should in this respect change their character when this visible life is ended. I do not hold it contradictory to the Article to think that the condemned doctrine has not been wholly injurious, inasmuch as it has kept alive some sort of belief in a great and important truth. 102 Thus we see that Dr. Hort's opinions were certainly not inhibited by orthodoxy. Yet his wayward ways do not end here. For, as his own writings display, Dr. Hort fell short in several other fundamental areas. Hort's Atonement There was also his rejection of Christ's atoning death for the sins of all mankind. "The fact is, I do not see how Gods justice can be satisfied without every man's suffering in his own person the full penalty for his sins." 103 In fact, Hort considered the teachings of Christs atonement as heresy! "Certainly nothing can be more unscriptural than the modern limiting of Christs bearing our sins and sufferings to His death; but indeed that is only one aspect of an almost universal heresy." 104 The fact is, that Hort believed Satan more worthy of accepting Christs payment for sins than God. "I confess I have no repugnance to the primitive doctrine of a ransom paid to Satan, though neither am I prepared to give full assent to it. But I can see no other possible form in which the doctrine of a ransom is at all tenable; anything is better than the notion of a ransom paid to the Father." 105 Hort's Baptism Dr. Hort also believed that the Roman Catholic teaching of baptismal regeneration was more correct than the evangelical teaching. ...at the same time in language stating that we maintain Baptismal Regeneration as the most important of doctrines ... the pure Romish view seems to me nearer, and more likely to lead to, the truth than the Evangelical. 106 He also states that, Baptism assures us that we are children of God, members of Christ and His body, and heirs of the heavenly kingdom. 107 In fact, Hort's heretical view of baptism probably cost his own son his eternal soul, as we find Hort assuring his eldest son, Arthur, that his infant baptism was his salvation: You were not only born into the world of men. You were also born of Christian parents in a Christian land. While yet an infant you were claimed for God by being made in Baptism an unconscious member of His Church, the great Divine Society which has lived on unceasingly from the Apostles time till now. You have been surrounded by Christian influences; taught to lift up your eyes to the Father in heaven as your own Father; to feel yourself in a wonderful sense a member or part of Christ, united to Him by strange invisible bonds; to know that you have as your birthright a share in the kingdom of heaven. 108 Hort's Twisted Belief Along with Hort's unregenerated misconceptions of basic Bible truths, there were his quirkish and sometimes quackish personal beliefs. One such example is his hatred for democracy, as he asserts in a letter to Rev. Westcott dated April 28, 1865: "...I dare not prophesy about America, but I cannot say that I see much as yet to soften my deep hatred of democracy in all its forms." 109 It is not an amazing thing that any one man could hold to so many unscriptural and ungodly beliefs. It is amazing that such a man could be exalted by Bible believing preachers and professors to a point of authority higher than the King James Bible! Dr. Hort was a truly great Greek scholar, yet a great intellect does not make one an authority over the Bible when they themselves do not even claim to believe it! Albert Einstein was a man of great intellect, but he rejected Scripture, and so where he speaks on the subject of Scripture he is not to be accepted as authoritative. Possessing a great mind or great ability does not guarantee being a great spiritual leader. Dr. Hort was a scholar, but his scholarship alone is no reason to accept his theories concerning Bible truth. If fundamental pastors of today enlisted the services of an evangelist and found that this evangelist had beliefs paralleling those of Fenton John Anthony Hort, I believe that the pastor would cancel the meeting. Strangely through, when a pastor discovers such to be true about Dr. Hort, he excuses him as a great Greek scholar and presents his Authorized Version to him to be maliciously dissected and then discarded as Dr. Hort sets himself down in the seat of authority which the Bible once held. Here again I must assert that most often this is done with childlike faith on the part of the pastor, due to the education he received while in seminary. The seminary is not really guilty either, for they have simply and unsuspectingly accepted the authority of two men raised under the influence of a campaign by the Jesuits to re-Romanize England. Wilkenson reports that Hort had been influenced by these Roman Catholic forces: Dr. Hort tell us that the writings of Simon had a large share in the movement to discredit the Textus Receptus class of MSS and Bibles. 119 Problems with Westcott Unfortunately for the new Bible supporters, Dr. Westcott's credentials are even more anti-biblical. Westcott did not believe that Genesis 1-3 should be taken literally. He also thought that Moses and David were poetic characters whom Jesus Christ referred to by name only because the common people accepted them as authentic. Westcott states: "No one now, I suppose, holds that the first three chapters of Genesis, for example, give a literal history - I could never understand how anyone reading them with open eyes could think they did - yet they disclose to us a Gospel. So it is probably elsewhere. Are we not going through a trial in regard to the use of popular language on literary subjects like that through which we went, not without sad losses in regard to the use of popular language on physical subjects? If you feel now that it was, to speak humanly, necessary that the Lord should speak of the sun rising, it was no less necessary that he would use the names Moses and David as His contemporaries used them... There was no critical question at issue. (Poetry is, I think, a thousand times more true than History; this is a private parenthesis for myself alone.) 120 He also said David is not a chronological but a spiritual person. 121 That the first three chapter of Genesis are all allegory has been believed by liberals and modernists for years. Do today's fundamentalists realize that those modernists beliefs were nurtures in the heart of this Bible critic? Westcott was also a doubter of the Biblical account of miracles: I never read an account of a miracle but I seem instinctively to feel its improbability, and discover somewhat of evidence in the account of it. 122 If a great fundamental preacher of our day were to make this statement, he would be called apostate, but what then of Westcott? Westcott believed that the second coming of Jesus Christ was not a physical coming but a spiritual coming: "As far as I can remember, I said very shortly what I hold to be the Lord's coming in my little book on the Historic Faith. I hold very strongly that the Fall of Jerusalem was the coming which first fulfilled the Lords words; and, as there have been other comings, I cannot doubt that He is coming' to us now. 123 Westcott's Heaven Wait! This fundamental doctrine is not the last one to be denied by Bishop Westcott, for he believed Heaven to be a state and not a literal place. Note the following quotations from Bishop Westcott: No doubt the language of the Rubric is unguarded, but it saves us from the error of connecting the Presence of Christ's glorified humanity with place; heaven is a state and not a place. 124 Yet the unseen is the largest part of life. Heaven lies about us now in infancy alone; and by swift, silent pauses for thought, for recollection, for aspiration, we cannot only keep fresh the influence of that diviner atmosphere, but breathe it more habitually. 125 We may reasonably hope, by patient, resolute, faithful, united endeavor to find heaven about us here, the glory of our earthly life. 126 Westcott's Newmanism Dr. Westcott was also deeply devoted to John Newman, the Roman Catholic defector who took 150 Church of England clergymen with him when he made the change. Those of his disciples who did not make the physical change to Rome, made the spiritual change to Romanism, though many, like Westcott, never admitted it. These are the convictions of a man greatly responsible for the destruction of Christian faith in the Greek Text of the Authorized Version. Place Mr. Westcott next to any present fundamental preacher or educator, and he would be judged a modernist, liberal and heretic. In spite of his outstanding ability in Greek, a man of his convictions would not be welcome on the campus of any truly Christian college in America. This is not an overstatement, nor is it malicious. The Christian colleges of today hold very high standards and simply would not settle for a man of such apostate conviction, no matter how great his ability to teach a given subject. END Footnotes:      87 Fuller, David, True or False, (Grand Rapids International Publications, Grand Rapids, 1973), p. 261.      88 Hills, Edward, Believing Bible Study, (The Christian Research Press, Des Moines, 1967), p. 122.      89 Fuller, David, True or False, (Grand Rapids International Publications, Grand Rapids, 1973), p. 240.      90 Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York, 1896), Volume I, p. 78.      91 Ibid., p. 400.      92 Ibid., pp. 420-422.      93 Ibid., pp. 414-416.      94 Ibid., p. 42.      95 New Standard Encyclopedia, (Standard Educational Corporation, 1977), p. 450.      96 Ibid., pp. c450-451.      97 Hort, Arthur Fenton, Life and Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, (New York, 1896), Volume I, p. 449.      98 Ibid., p. 121.      99 Ibid., p. 149.      100 Ibid., p. 122.      101 Ibid., p. 275.      102 Ibid., Volume II, pp. 336,337.      103 Ibid., Volume I, p. 120.      104 Ibid., p. 430.      105 Ibid., p. 428.      106 Ibid., p. 76.      107 Ibid., Volume II, p. 81.      108 Ibid., p. 273.      109 Ibid., p. 34.      110 Ibid., Volume I, pp. 458,459.      111 Ibid., p. 458.      112 Ibid., Volume II, p. 207.      113 Ibid., Volume I, p. 130.      114 Ibid., p. 138.      115 Ibid., p. 140.      116 Ibid., p. 139.      117 Ibid., p. 211.      118 Ibid., p. 377.      119 Wilkenson, Benjamin, Our Authorized Bible Vindicated, (Takoma Park, 1930), p. 104.      120 Westcott, Arthur, Life and Letters of Brooke Foss Westcott. (New York, 1903), Volume II, p. 69.      121 Ibid., p. 147      122 Ibid., Volume I, p. 52.      123 Ibid., Volume II, p. 308.      124 Ibid., p. 49.      125 Ibid., p. 253.      126 Ibid., p. 394.  As any student of English Bible history knows, the Authorized Version of 1611 was not the first Bible to be translated into English. But even though hundreds of complete Bibles, New Testaments, and Scripture portions have been translated into English since 1611, it is obvious that the Authorized Version is the last English Bible; that is, the last English Bible that God "authorized." Because the Authorized Version is the "last" English Bible, and because its defenders believe it to contain the very words of God, various schemes have been contrived to make the English Bibles up to and including the Authorized Version fit the description in Psalm 12:6 of the words of the Lord being "purified seven times." The problem is that the Authorized Version is not the seventh English Bible -- it is the tenth one. Although there were some attempts during the Old and Middle English period to translate portions of the Bible into English, the first complete Bible or New Testament in English did not appear until the fourteenth century. John Wycliffe (c.1320-1384) is credited with being the first to translate the entire Bible into English. It is to be remembered that no Greek or Hebrew texts, versions, or editions were yet fabricated. Wycliffe did his translating primarily from the only Bible then in use: the Latin Vulgate. He is often called the "Morning Star of the Reformation" for his opposition to ecclesiastical abuses and the Papacy. Wycliffe's New Testament translation was completed in 1380, and the entire Bible in 1382. William Tyndale (c. 1494-1536) has the distinction of being the first to translate the New Testament from Greek into English. He early distinguished himself as a scholar both at Cambridge and Oxford, and was fluent in several languages. Tyndale soon advanced both his desire and his demise, as seen in his reply to a critic: "I defy the pope and all his laws; if God spare my life, ere many years I will cause the boy that driveth the plough in England to know more of the Scriptures than thou doest." The Bible was still forbidden in the vernacular, so after settling in London for several months while attempting to gain approval for his translation efforts, Tyndale concluded: "Not only that there was no room in my lord of Londons palace to translate the New Testament, but also that there was no place to do it in all England, as experience doth now openly declare." Accordingly, Tyndale left England in 1524 and completed his translation of the New Testament in Germany. The moving factor in his translation of the New Testament was that he "perceived by experience, how that it was impossible to establish the lay people in any truth, except the scripture were plainly laid before their eyes in their mother tongue, that they might see the process, order and meaning of the text." The printing of his New Testament was completed in Worms and smuggled into England, where it was an instant success. Tyndale then turned his attention to the Old Testament. He never finished it, however, for on May 21, 1535, Tyndale was treacherously kidnaped and imprisoned in Belgium. On October 6, 1536, he was tried as a heretic and condemned to death. He was strangled and burned, but not before he uttered the immortal prayer of "Lord, open the King of England's eyes." Although Tyndale's English Bible was the first to be translated directly from the original languages, it was just the New Testament. It was Myles Coverdale (1488-1569) who was the first to publish a complete English Bible. In 1533, King Henry VIII established the Church of England, and, in 1534, the Upper House of Convocation of Canterbury petitioned King Henry to decree "that the holy scripture should be translated into the vulgar English tongue by certain good learned men, to be nominated by His Majesty, and should be delivered to the people for their instruction." Thomas Cromwell (1485-1540) and Archbishop Cranmer (1489-1556) were likewise convinced of the desirability of having the Bible translated into English. Coverdale's Bible was printed in October of 1535. He based his work on the Zurich Bible of Zwingli, the Vulgate, the Latin text of Paginius, Luther's Bible, and the previous work of William Tyndale, especially in the New Testament. Although Coverdale's second edition of 1537 contained the license of the king, the first Bible to obtain such license was published earlier the same year. The Matthew Bible was more of a revision than a translation. Thomas Matthew was just a pseudonym for John Rogers (c. 1500-1555), a friend of Tyndale, to whom he had turned over his unpublished manuscripts on the translation of the Old Testament. Rogers used Tyndale's New Testament and the completed parts of his Old Testament. For the rest of the Bible, he relied on Coverdale. The whole of this material was slightly revised and accompanied by introductions and chapter summaries. Cranmer commented in a letter to Cromwell that he liked it "better than any other translation heretofore made." And so it happened that Tyndale's translation, which was proscribed just a few years earlier, was circulating with the King's permission and authority both in the Coverdale and Matthew Bibles. Although the Coverdale and Matthew Bibles were "set forth with the King's most gracious license," the Great Bible was the first "authorized" Bible. Cromwell delegated to Myles Coverdale the work of revising the Matthew Bible and its controversial notes. In 1538, an injunction by Cromwell directed the clergy to provide "one book of the bible of the largest volume in English, and the same set up in some convenient place within the said church that ye have care of, whereas your parishioners may most commodiously resort to the same and read it." The completed Bible appeared in April of 1539. Although called the Great Bible because of its large size, it was referred to by several other designations as well. It was called the Cromwell Bible, since he did the most to prepare for its publication. It was also termed the Cranmer Bible, after the often reprinted preface by Cranmer beginning with the 1540 second edition. Several editions were printed by Whitechurch, and hence it was also labeled the Whitechurch Bible. In accordance with Cromwell's injunction, copies of the Great Bible were placed in every church. This led to it being called the Chained Bible, since it was chained in "some convenient place within the said church." At the same time as Coverdale was preparing the Great Bible, Richard Taverner (1505-1577) undertook an independent revision of Matthew's Bible. It appeared under the title of: "The Most Sacred Bible whiche is the holy scripture, conteyning the old and new testament, translated into English, and newly recognized with great diligence after most faythful exemplars by Rychard Taverner." He was a competent Greek scholar and made some slight changes in the text and notes of the Matthew Bible. His work was eclipsed by the Great Bible and had but minor influence on later translations. During the reign of the Catholic queen, Mary Tudor (1553-1558), many English Reformers, among them Myles Coverdale, fled to Geneva. It was here in 1557 that William Whittingham (1524-1579), the brother-in-law of John Calvin, and successor of John Knox at the English church in Geneva, translated the New Testament in what was to become the Geneva Bible. When Elizabeth, the sister of Mary, assumed the throne in 1558, many exiles returned to England. But Whittingham and some others remained in Geneva and continued to work on a more comprehensive and complete revision of the entire Bible that superseded the 1557 New Testament -- the Geneva Bible of 1560. The superiority of the Geneva Bible over the Great Bible was readily apparent. It was the notes, however, that made it unacceptable for official use in England. Archbishop Matthew Parker soon took steps to make a revision of the Great Bible that would replace both it and the Geneva Bible. The Bible was divided into parts and distributed to scholars for revision. Parker served as the editor and most of his revisors were bishops, hence the Bishops' Bible. The first Bible to be translated by a committee, it was published in 1568. The Douay-Rheims Bible was the first Roman Catholic translation of the Bible in English. When English Romanists fled England for the Continent under the reign of Elizabeth, many settled in France. In 1568, an English college was established by William Allen (1532-1594) at Douay. The college moved for a time to Rheims in 1578 under Richard Bristow (1538-1581). It was here that Gregory Martin (d. 1582) began translating the Bible into English from the Latin Vulgate. This was precipitated by Allen's recognition that Catholics had an unfair disadvantage compared with Bible-reading Protestants because of their use of Latin and the fact that "all the English versions are most corrupt." The Catholic New Testament was finished in 1582, but the complete Old Testament did not appear until 1610. After the death of Elizabeth in 1603, James I, who was at that time James VI of Scotland, became the king of England. One of the first things done by the new king was the calling of the Hampton Court Conference in January of 1604 "for the hearing, and for the determining, things pretended to be amiss in the church." Here were assembled bishops, clergyman, and professors, along with four Puritan divines, to consider the complaints of the Puritans. Although Bible revision was not on the agenda, the Puritan president of Corpus Christi College, John Reynolds, "moved his Majesty, that there might be a new translation of the Bible, because those which were allowed in the reigns of Henry the eighth, and Edward the sixth, were corrupt and not answerable to the truth of the Original." The next step was the actual selection of the men who were to perform the work. In July of 1604, James wrote to Bishop Bancroft that he had "appointed certain learned men, to the number of four and fifty, for the translating of the Bible." Although fifty-four men were nominated, only forty-seven were known to have taken part in the work of translation. The completed Bible, known as the King James Version or the Authorized Version, was issued in 1611, and remains the Bible read, preached, believed, and acknowledged as the authority by all Bible believers today. Wycliffe, Tyndale, Coverdale, Matthew, Great, Taverner, Geneva, Bishops', Douay-Rheims, and King James -- ten English Bibles. As mentioned previously, various schemes have been contrived to make the English Bibles up to and including the Authorized Version fit the description in Psalm 12:6 of the words of the Lord being "purified seven times." The problem with this noble goal is that it entails the elimination of three versions. But which three? Wycliffe's Bible is sometimes omitted because it was translated from the Latin instead of the original Hebrew and Greek. Tyndale's Bible is sometimes omitted because it was not a complete Bible -- just a New Testament and portions of the Old Testament. Coverdale's and Matthew's Bibles could conceivably be omitted because they rely so much on Tyndale. Taverner's Bible is sometimes omitted because it was a revision of Matthew's Bible and had little influence on later English versions. The Geneva Bible could conceivably be omitted because King James considered it to be the worst of the English versions. The Douay-Rheims, because it is a Roman Catholic version, is always omitted from the list. This leaves the Great Bible, the Bishops' Bible, and the King James Bible -- three out of the ten. It appears that Bible believers have manipulated the history of the English Bible to prove a bogus theory. Or have they? The answer is yes and no. As will presently be proved, the theory is not bogus at all -- even if some zealous brethren have been careless in the way they went about proving it. The definitive list of Bibles that makes the Authorized Version the seventh Bible, thus fitting the description in Psalm 12:6 of the words of the Lord being "purified seven times," is not to be found in the opinions of the many writers on the history of the English Bible. To the contrary, the definitive list is to be found in the often-overlooked details concerning the translating of the Authorized Version. To begin with, the translators of the Authorized Version did acknowledge that they had a multitude of sources from which to draw from: "Neither did we think much to consult the Translators or Commentators, Chaldee, Hebrew, Syrian, Greek, or Latin, no nor the Spanish, French, Italian, or Dutch." The Greek editions of Erasmus, Stephanus, and Beza were all accessible, as were the Complutensian and Antwerp Polyglots, and the Latin translations of Pagninus, Tremellius, and Beza. What we want, however, is a reference to English Bibles. The translators also acknowledged that they had at their disposal all the previous English translations of the sixteenth century: "We are so far off from condemning any of their labors that travailed before us in this kind, either in this land or beyond sea, either in King Henry's time, or King Edward's (if there were any translation, or correction of a translation in his time) or Queen Elizabeth's of everrenowned memory, that we acknowledge them to have been raised up of God, for the building and furnishing of his Church, and that they deserve to be had of us and of posterity in everlasting remembrance." Although this statement of the translators refers to English Bibles, it is not specific as to exactly which versions. The information we need is to be found, not in the translators' "The Epistle Dedicatory" or their "The Translators to the Reader," but in the "Rules to be Observed in the Translation of the Bible." These general rules, fifteen in number, were advanced for the guidance of the translators. The first and fourteenth, because they directly relate to the subject at hand, are here given in full: "1. The ordinary Bible read in the Church, commonly called the Bishops Bible, to be followed, and as little altered as the Truth of the original will permit." "14. These translations to be used when they agree better with the Text than the Bishops Bible: Tindoll's, Matthews, Coverdale's, Whitchurch's, Geneva." And thus we have our answer. The seven English versions that make the English Bibles up to and including the Authorized Version fit the description in Psalm 12:6 of the words of the Lord being "purified seven times" are Tyndale's, Matthew's, Coverdale's, the Great Bible (printed by Whitechurch), the Geneva Bible, the Bishops' Bible, and the King James Bible. The Wycliffe, Taverner, and Douay-Rheims Bibles, whatever merits any of them may have, are not part of the purified line God "authorized," of which the King James Authorized Version is God's last one -- purified seven times.