"SPIRITUAL DECEPTION IN THE HIGHEST"
An In Depth Study Of:
The Authorized King James Bible
All Other 'Modern Versions'
by Jeff Johnson
T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S
Chapter 1: Bible Comparison: A Broad Analysis
Chapter 2: Bible Comparison: An Individual Analysis
Chapter 3: How Could This Happen?
Chapter 4: In The Beginning ...
Chapter 5: God's Truth: The Peshitta Bible (150 A.D.)
Chapter 6: God's Truth: The Italic Bible (157 A.D.)
Chapter 7: Satan's Counterfeit: The Origen-Eusebius Bible
Chapter 8: Satan's Counterfeit: Jerome's Latin Bible (380 A.D)
Chapter 9: Satan's Persecution Of The True Church
Chapter 10: The Dark Ages (476 A.D. - 1453 A.D.)
Chapter 11: God's Truth: The Erasmus Bible (1522 A.D.)
Chapter 12: God's Truth: Luther's Bible (1522 A.D.)
Chapter 13: God's Truth: The Tyndale Bible (1525 A.D.)
Chapter 14: The Council Of Trent (1545 A.D.)
Chapter 15: The Roman Catholic Church
Chapter 16: The Jesuits
Chapter 17: Satan's Counterfeit: The Jesuit Bible
Chapter 18: God's Truth: The King James Bible (1611 A.D.)
Chapter 19: Modern Bible 'Claims'
Chapter 20: Satan's Counterfeits: Sinaiticus and Vaticanus
Chapter 21: Satan's Counterfeit: The Westcott and Hort Text
Chapter 22: Westcott and Hort
Chapter 23: Money Changers In The Temple
Chapter 24: God's Preserved Word
Chapter 25: New Age Doctrine
Chapter 26: Lexicons
Chapter 27: The Future?
Chapter 28: Conclusions
Chapter 29: Parting Comments
C H A P T E R 1 6
T H E J E S U I T S
In the previous chapter Satan used both Rome and the Roman Catholic 'Church'.
In this chapter he will use the 'Jesuits'.
"The founder of the Jesuits was a Spaniard, Ignatius Loyola... [S2P232], As to his character, Ignatius "... was known as a youth to be treacherous, brutal, and vindictive" [S1P88]. Later in life, it is said he was "... unruly and conceited ..." [S1P88].
Also, it is this same Ignatius Loyola that: "... the Catholic Church has canonized and made Saint Ignatius" [S2P232].
"Wounded at the siege of Pampeluna (1521 A.D.) so that his military career was over, Ignatius turned his thoughts to spiritual conquests and spiritual glory. Soon afterwards, he wrote a book called: "Spiritual Exercises", which did more than any other document to erect a new papal theocracy and to bring about the establishment of the infallibility of the Pope. In other words, Catholicism since the reformation is a new Catholicism. It is more fanatical and intolerant" [S2P232].
It is said that Ignatius Loyola "... produced an elite force of men, extremely loyal to the Pope, who would set about to undermine Protestantism and 'heresy' throughout the world. Their training would require fourteen years of testing and trials designed to leave them with no will at all. They were to learn to be obedient. Loyola taught that their only desire was to serve the Pope" [S1P88].
"The head of the Jesuits is called the 'Black Pope' and holds the title of General, just as in the military. That they were to be unquestionably loyal to this man and their church is reflected in Loyola's own words, "Let us be convinced that all is well and right when the superior commands it". Also: "... even if God gave you an animal without sense for master, you will not hesitate to obey him, as master and guide, because God ordained it to be so." He further elaborates: "We must see black as white, if the Church says so" [S1P88].
"The Jesuits were to be the Vatican's 'plainclothesmen'. They were founded to be a secret society, a society that was to slide in behind the scenes and capture the positions of leadership" [S1P89].
"Politics are their main field of action, as all the efforts of these 'directors' concentrate on one aim: the SUBMISSION of the world to the papacy, and to attain this the heads must be conquered first" [S1P89].
"The Jesuit priests were not required to dress in the traditional garb of the Roman Catholic priests. In fact their dress was a major part of their disguise" [S1P89].
And "Murder is not above the 'means' which might be necessary to reach the desired 'end'. The General of the Jesuits will forgive any sins which are committed by the members of this Satanic order" [S1P91].
"He [the Jesuit General] also absolves the irregularity issuing, from bigamy, injuries done to others, murder, assassination ... as long as these wicked deeds were not publicly known and this cause a scandal" [S1P91].
"That the Jesuit priests have such liberties as murder is reflected in the following ... quote from Paris' book 'The Secret History Of The Jesuits'" [S1P91].
"Amongst the most criminal jesuitic maxims, there is one which roused public indignation to the highest point and deserves to be examined; it is: ... A monk or priest is allowed to kill those who are ready to slander him or his community ..." [S1P91].
Also, the Jesuits can murder if: "... a Father, yielding to temptation, abuses a woman and she publicizes what has happened, and because of it dishonours him, this same Father can kill her to avoid disgrace!" [S1P91].
These are some of the Jesuits' beliefs. But what about their practice? What have they actually done?
"In 1572, the Jesuits, with the help of Prince Henry III were responsible for the St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre. At this infamous event, which took place on August 15, 1572, the Jesuits murdered the Huguenot (Protestant) leaders gathered in Paris for the wedding of Princess Margaret, a Roman Catholic, and Henry of Navarre, a Huguenot. The murders inspired Roman Catholics to slaughter thousands of Huguenot men, women, and children. Henry of Navarre was not killed but was forced to renounce Protestantism, although his renounciation was insincere, and he remained a Protestant until 1593. The number of victims in this Jesuit conspiracy is estimated to be at least 10,000. In 1589, when Henry III was no longer useful to the Roman Catholic Church, he was assassinated by a monk by the name of Jacques Clement. Clement was called an 'angel' by the Jesuit priest, Camelot. Another Jesuit priest by the name of Guigard, who was eventually hanged, taught his students that Clement did nothing wrong. In fact he voiced regrets that Henry III had not been murdered earlier at the St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre. He instructed them with lessons such as this: ... Jacques Clement has done
a meritorious act inspired by the Holy Spirit. If we can make war against the King then let's do it; if we cannot make war against him, then let's put him to death ... we made a big mistake at the St. Bartholomew; we should have bled the royal vein ..." [S1P91-92].
As bad as that was, "The Jesuit's murderous ways were not yet completed in the history of the French Protestants! When Henry III was murdered, Henry of Navarre a Huguenot [Protestant], came to power. A hope for a Catholic rebellion never materialized, and Henry IV was allowed to reign. In 1592, an attempt was made to assassinate the Protestant king by a man named Barriere. Barriere admitted that he had been INSTRUCTED TO DO SO by a Father Varade, A JESUIT PRIEST. In 1594, another attempt was made by Jean Chatel who had been TAUGHT by Jesuit teachers and had confessed to the Jesuits what he was about to do. It was at that time that Father Guigard, the Jesuit teacher previously mentioned was hanged for his connection with this plot" [S1P92-93].
Six years later, "In 1598, King Henry IV issued the Edict of Nantes, granting religious freedom to the Huguenots [Protestants]. They were allowed full civil rights and the right to hold public worship services in towns where they had congregations" [S1P93].
Well "This was the last straw! Henry the IV had to be eliminated! This time the Jesuits would allow for more careful planning. Edmund Paris details the assassination of King Henry IV:
... On the 16th of May, 1610, on the eve of his campaign against Austria, he was murdered by Ravaillac who confessed having been inspired by the writings of Fathers Mariana and Suarez. These two sanctioned the murders of heretic 'tyrants' or those INSUFFICIENTLY DEVOTED to the Papacy's interests. The duke of Epernon, who made the king read a letter while the assassin was lying in wait, was a notorious friend of the Jesuits, and Michelet proved that they knew of this attempt. In fact, Ravaillac had confessed to the Jesuit Father d'Aubigny just before and,
when the judges interrogated the priest, he merely replied that God had given him the gift to forget immediately what he heard in the confessional" [S1P93].
Reverend Gipp says: "This is the spirit of our enemy! THIS is the truthlessness of the Roman Catholic Church against those who will not bow their knee to Rome! Would God use this church to preserve his word? [S1P93-94]
Do these two doctrines (Protestantism and Catholicism) have anything in common?
Should Protestants form 'pacts' or 'agreements' with Catholics?
I think not.
The Protestant and Catholic beliefs are 180 degrees apart. These two belief systems are diametrically opposed to one another and will always be that way.
C H A P T E R 1 7
T H E J E S U I T B I B L E ( 1582 A.D. )
( The Corrupted Minority Text In English )
The previous chapter explored some of the differences between Catholicism and Protestantism. We concluded the two doctrines are 180 degrees apart. And we learned that Catholic doctrine is trying to infiltrate God's Bible.
At this point in our study of the Bible, God is using: The Greek text of Erasmus (1522 A.D.), the Tyndale English Bible (1525 A.D.), and Luther's German Bible (1525 A.D.).
Satan is using the Roman Catholics and the Jesuits.
In this chapter there will be ANOTHER attack on God's true Word.
T H E S T R U G G L E
"Sixty years elapsed from the close of the Council of Trent (1563) to the landing of Pilgrims in America. During those sixty years, England had been changing from a Catholic nation to a Bible-loving people. Since 1525, when Tyndale's Bible appeared, the Scriptures had obtained a wide circulation. As Tyndale foresaw, the influence of the Divine Word had
weaned the people away from pomp and ceremony in religion. But this result had not been obtained without years of struggle. Spain at that time was not only the greatest nation in the world, but was also fanatically Catholic. All the new world belonged to Spain, she ruled the seas and dominated Europe. The Spanish sovereign and the Papacy united in their efforts to send into England bands of highly trained Jesuits. By these, plot after plot was hatched to place a Catholic ruler on England's throne" [S2P237-8].
"At the same time, the Jesuits were acting to turn the English people from the Bible, back to Romanism. As a means to this end, they brought forth in English a Bible of their own ... If England could be retained in the Catholic column, Spain and England together would see to it that all America, north and south, would be Catholic. In fact, wherever the English-speaking race extended, Catholicism would reign. If this result were to be thwarted, it was necessary to meet the danger brought about by the Jesuit Version" [S2P238].
"So powerful was the swing toward Protestantism during the reign of Queen Elizabeth, and so strong the love for Tyndale's Version, that there was neither place nor Catholic scholarship enough in England to bring forth a Catholic Bible in strength. Priests were in prison for their plotting, and many fled to the Continent. There they founded schools to train English youth and send them back to England as priests. Two of these colleges alone sent over, in a few years, not less than three hundred priests" [S2P238-9].
"The most prominent of these colleges, called seminaries, was at Rheims, France. Here the Jesuits assembled a company of learned scholars. From here they kept the Pope informed of the changes of the situation in England, and from here they directed the movements of Philip II of Spain as he prepared a great fleet to crush England and bring it back to the feet of the Pope" [S2P239].
"The burning desire to give the common people the Holy Word of God was the reason why Tyndale had translated it into English. No such reason impelled the Jesuits at Rheims" [S2P239]. The purpose of the Jesuit New Testament was: "... to do on the inside of England what the great navy of Philip II was to do on the outside. One was to be used as a moral attack, the other as a physical attack - both to reclaim England" [S2P237-9].
We pick up the history of the Bible in 1582:
T H E S P I R I T U A L A T T A C K
"About 1582 ... the Jesuit Bible was launched to destroy Tyndale's English Version" [S2P233]. "The appearance of the Jesuit New Testament of 1582 produced consternation in England. It was understood at once to be a menace against the new English unity" [S2P239]. "Immediately the scholarship of England was astir. Queen Elizabeth sent forth the call ... to ... undertake the task of answering the objectionable matter contained in the Jesuit Version" [S2P239-240]. Thomas Cartwright undertook the task. "With inescapable logic, he marshalled the facts of his vast learning and leveled blow after blow against this latest and most dangerous product of Catholic theology" [S2P240].
Thus, Cartwright defended the English people against the spiritual attack. But, that was only 1/2 the battle ...
T H E P H Y S I C A L A T T A C K
"Meanwhile, 136 great Spanish galleons, some armed with 50 canons, were slowly sailing up the English channel to make England Catholic. England had NO SHIPS. Elizabeth asked Parliament for 15 men-of-war - they voted 30. With these, assisted by harbor tugs under Drake, England sailed forth to meet the GREATEST FLEET the world has ever seen. All England teemed with excitement" [S2P240].
Cartwright sent forth the Word of God against Satan's lies. With Drake, a type of 'David' was sent forth against an attacking Goliath.
Now, which side do you think God was on?
T H E O U T C O M E: G O D P R O T E C T S H I S O W N !
Although England was outgunned by every measurable indication (in the physical), history has forever recorded the results:
"... the Armada was crushed, and England became a great sea power" [S2P240].
Hallelujah! Praise God!
T H E P E R F E C T M A S T E R P I E C E
"Flushed with their glorious victory over the Jesuit Bible of 1582, and over the Spanish Armada of 1588, every energy pulsating with certainty and hope, English Protestantism brought forth a perfect masterpiece" [S2P242].
This perfect masterpiece: "... was not taken from the Latin in either the Old or the New Testament, but from the languages in which God originally wrote His Word, namely, from the Hebrew in the Old Testament and from the Greek in the New Testament" [S2P242].
English Protestantism: "... gave to the world what has been considered by hosts of scholars, the greatest version produced in any language, - The King James Bible, called 'The Miracle of English Prose'" [S2P242].
C H A P T E R 1 8
G O D ' S T R U T H:
T H E K I N G J A M E S B I B L E ( 1611 A.D. )
T H E M I R A C L E O F E N G L I S H P R O S E
( The Traditional Majority Text In English)
T H E B A C K G R O U N D
"Just prior to the translation of the King James Bible, England had broken free of the yoke of Rome. Shortly after the Authorized Version was published, England once again started down the road back to Rome. For a brief 'parenthesis' in English history, England was free of Roman influence just long enough to translate and propagate a perfect Bible" [S1P161].
The King James Bible "... was produced during a brief period following the overthrow of Roman authority and prior to the apostasy of the Church of England. It was translated in the era when the still young English language was at its height of purity" [S1P183].
And God foresaw the widespread use of the English language. Notice
"English is the language of this world. English is taught to Russian
pilots, because it is universal. It is learned by Oriental businessmen,
because it is universal. It was the first language spoken on the moon"
And, God gave us the BEST English:
"The English language in 1611 was in the very best condition ... Each word was broad, simple, and generic. That is to say, words were capable of containing in themselves not only their central thoughts, but also all the different shades of meaning which were attached to that central thought.
Since then, words have lost that living, pliable breadth. Vast additions have been made to the English vocabulary during the past 300 years, so that several words are now necessary to convey the same meaning which formerly was conveyed by one" [S2P246-247].
"The English language has degenerated from what it was in 1611 to what it is today. Those claiming to put the Bible in 'modern English' are actually, though possibly not intentionally, trying to force the pure words of God into a degenerated vocabulary of today!" [S1P41].
And so, "Not only was the English language by 1611 in a more opportune condition than it had ever been before or ever would again, but the Hebrew and the Greek likewise had been brought up with the accumulated treasures of their materials to a splendid working point. The age was not distracted by the rush of mechanical and industrial achievements. Moreover linguistic scholarship was at its peak. Men of giant minds, supported by excellent physical health, had possessed in a splendid state of perfection a knowledge of the languages and literature necessary for the ripest Biblical scholarship" [S2P244-245].
T H E C A L L
"On July 22, 1604, King James of England announced that he had appointed 54 Hebrew and Greek scholars to produce a Bible, which we know today as the King James, or Authorized Version" [S16P7].
And, it was understood that if 54 scholars were not enough:
"... ALL the learned men of the land could be called upon by letter for their judgment" [S2P257].
"The Kings order was carried out with utmost zeal and knowledge in an orderly manner" [S9P1] and "... because of the careful planning the whole project was completed in less than seven years" [S8P64].
T H E M E N O F T H E K I N G J A M E S B I B L E
"Without any question there never has been a greater group of scholars gathered together at one time than the ... translators of the King James Version" [S10P5].
"The most qualified of the entire English speaking world were summoned ..." [S9P1]. "They were all eminent scholars, and they all had great reverence for the Word of God, being wholly committed to its inspiration and infallibility ..." [S13P7].
"No one can study the lives of those men who gave us the King James Bible without being impressed with their profound and varied learning" [S2P258].
"Scholar for scholar, the men on the King James translating committee were far greater men of God than Westcott, Hort, or any other new translator. They were not only educated in a powerful, anti-Roman atmosphere, but they looked at the manuscripts which they handled as the Holy Word of God" [S1P182].
"Let me show you a few of the translators of the Authorized Version. JOHN BOIS was able to read the Bible in Hebrew when five years of age! When 14 he was a proficient Greek scholar and for years he spent from 4 o'clock in the morning til eight at night in the Cambridge library studying manuscripts and languages... LANCELOT ANDREWS was the overallchairman, who was fluent in twenty languages, the greatest linguist of his day. He spent five hours a day in prayer and was so respected by the kings that orders were given, whenever Andrews was in court, there was to be no levity, no joking ... JOHN CHEDDERTON, he knew Greek, Hebrew and Latin as well as you and I know English, and better" [S10P5].
T H E O R G A N I Z E D A P P R O A C H
"Originally 54 scholars were on the list but deaths and withdrawals reduced it finally to 47" [S8P64].
"These men were organized into six groups which were to meet separately. Two groups met at Cambridge, two at Oxford and two at Westminster. Each group was designated a certain portion of Scripture to translate into the English language" [S16P7].
"Each scholar first made his own translation, then passed it on to be reviewed by each other member of his group. When each section had completed a book of the Bible, it was sent to the other five groups for their independent criticism. In this way each book went thru the hands of the entire body of translators. To guard further against possible errors another committee was formed by selecting two from each of the three companies. Then the entire version came before this select group where all differences of opinion were ironed out. It put the finishing touches upon the work, and in 1611 prepared it for the printers" [S4P102-103].
All of the work was done in the open.
T H E M A N U S C R I P T S U S E D B Y T H E
K I N G J A M E S T R A N S L A T O R S
"... it was ... the principle of the numerical majority of the readings which gave us the ... Textus Receptus" [S13P17].
"Dean Burgon a learned textural critic and collator of Manuscripts, Presbendary Miller, Dr. Scrivener and others, uphold the Textus Receptus because of the immense number of manuscripts which are in agreement with it" [S4P28].
The KJV agrees with the massive amount of witnesses (more than 5,000 Greek manuscripts) and also: "Virtually no [KJV] MSS are known to be copies of any others ..." [S6P57].
Thus, when we say that the majority of the 5,000 witnesses agree with the King James Bible, we are saying that these 5,000 witnesses are 'INDEPENDENT' witnesses.
"We can safely conclude from scholars on both sides of the issue that the vast majority of manuscripts agrees with the readings in the King James Version ... [And] Not only does the KJV have a firmer foundation numerically, but also geographically. It comes from numerous localities ..." [S3P479].
Thus, the testimony to the validity of the King James Bible is deep: 5,000 independent witnesses. And, the testimony is wide: these witnesses come from a variety of locations.
But what about the corrupted minority of Greek texts? Did the King
James translators know about these manuscripts? Did they use them?
History documents that:
"... the translators of 1611 had available ALL of the variant readings of these manuscripts and rejected them" [S2P254].
Thus, the King James translators knew about the corrupted minority of manuscripts and they rejected this corruption.
The KJV translators went on to make a Bible which has been shown to be in agreement with the majority of the Greek texts.
To make the King James Bible, the translators selected and used a representative sample of the majority texts. This was easy to do because the majority texts agree with one another.
"The [KJV] translators drew on the earlier 16th century translations, such as the Bishop's Bible and the Geneva Bible, but especially on Tyndale's translation. His was a very great influence on the Authorised Version - it has been said that some 80% or more of the AV derives from Tyndale. In a sense the AV was the culmination of nearly a century of Bible translation ... it came out of the Reformation which was the greatest revival since the first Christian Pentecost" [S13P8].
As for the Geneva Bible, it: "... was the first English Bible to have verse numbers; the first to use italics for words that were not in the original languages, but necessary for understanding the English; the first to use the Roman type, rather than the Gothic (Old English); and they were small and inexpensive" [S9P2].
The King James Bible followed the example of the Geneva Bible. In other words, in the KJV: "All words which were not found in the Hebrew and Greek Manuscripts, were placed in italics. In this way these men [the KJV translators] made a vast difference between the words given by inspiration of God, and the words originating in the thoughts of men. This is the way it should be" [S4P103].
(Reader note: 'Modern' versions DO NOT separate God's Words from man's words. Instead the two are mixed together ).
"In conclusion, recent scholarship demonstrates that the majority of manuscripts, as seen in the traditional Greek Textus Receptus, and its translation, the King James Version, represent the earliest, broadest (numerically and geographically) and most consistent edition of the New Testament" [S3P503].
T H E R E S U L T S : R A V E R E V I E W S !
What do you get when you start with the true Word of God and then add: the anointing of the Holy Spirit, godly men in excellent health, an optimum work environment, an organized work approach, and a system of quality control though comprehensive peer reviews?
You get the following:
"The KJV reverberates with eternal familiarity" [S6Pvi].
Of the Bible: Queen Victoria said: "... That book accounts for the supremacy of England", George Washington said: "It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and the Bible", Patrick Henry boasted: "The bible is worth all other books which have ever been printed" [S9P3].
"Priests, atheists, skeptics, devotees, agnostics, and evangelists, are generally agreed that the Authorized version of the English Bible is the BEST example of English literature that the world HAS EVER SEEN ..." [S2P260].
Ivy league scholars have selected the King James Bible as: "one of the FINEST samples of writing styles IN EXISTENCE" [S3P212].
"... 250 different versions of the Bible were tried in England between 1611 and now, but they ALL FELL FLAT before the majesty of the King James" [S2P253].
"[The King James Bible] was accepted in common use by the people, without coercion, and has been blessed of God as no other book of any language ..." [S9P1].
The KJV: "... has proven itself for almost 400 years, it is the most beautiful, it bears the most fruit, it produces spiritual revival, it is easiest to memorize, its readers are the most zealous to read it often" [S9P2].
"But upon the whole the version of 1611 ... is probably the best version ever made for public use. It is not simply a translation, but a living reproduction of the original scriptures in idiomatic English, by men as reverent and devout as they were learned. It reads like an original work, such as the prophets and apostles might have written in the seventeenth century for English readers. It reveals an easy mastery of the rich resources of the English language, the most cosmopolitan of all modern languages, and blends with singular felicity Saxon force and Latin melody. Even its prose reads like poetry, and sounds like music. It is the first of English classics, and the greatest modern authors have drawn inspiration from this pure well of English undefiled. Its best recommendation is its universal adoption and use ... Next to Christianity itself, the version of 1611 is the greatest boon which a kind Providence has bestowed upon the English race. It carries with it to the ends of the globe all that is truly valuable in our civilization, and gives strength, beauty, and happiness to our domestic, social, and national life" [S6P96].
"The Majority text, it must be remembered, is relatively uniform in its general character with comparatively low amounts of variation between its major representatives. NO ONE HAS YET EXPLAINED how a long, slow process spread out over many centuries as well as over a wide geographical area, and involving a multitude of copyists, who often knew nothing of the state of the text outside of their own monasteries or scriptoria, could achieve this widespread uniformity out of the diversity presented by the earlier forms of text ... an unguided process achieving relative stability and uniformity in the diversified textual, historical, and cultural circumstances in which the New Testament was copied, imposes IMPOSSIBLE strains on the imagination" [S2P34]
"Herein lies the greatest weakness of contemporary textual criticism. Denying to the Majority text any claim to represent the actual form of the original text, it is nevertheless unable to explain its rise, its comparative uniformity, and its dominance in any satisfactory manner. All of these factors CAN be rationally accounted for, however, IF THE MAJORITY TEXT REPRESENTS SIMPLY THE CONTINUOUS TRANSMISSION OF THE ORIGINAL TEXT FROM THE VERY FIRST" [S2P34].
C H A P T E R 1 9
M O D E R N B I B L E ' C L A I M S '
In the last chapter we learned that:
"... The KJV reverberates with ETERNAL FAMILIARITY ... Priests, atheists, skeptics, devotees, agnostics, and evangelists, are generally agreed that the Authorized version of the English Bible is the BEST EXAMPLE OF ENGLISH LITERATURE that the world HAS EVER SEEN ... Ivy league scholars have selected the King James Bible as ONE OF THE FINEST
SAMPLES OF WRITING STYLES IN EXISTENCE ... The KJV ... has proven itself for almost 400 years, it is the MOST BEAUTIFUL, it BEARS THE MOST FRUIT, it produces SPIRITUAL REVIVAL, it is the EASIEST TO MEMORIZE ... the version of 1611 ... is probably the BEST version EVER MADE ... etc. etc. etc.
Now contrast those quotes with sales pitches for 'modern versions':
... the King James Bible is too hard to understand ... its words are archaic ... people don't understand it ... it has thee's and thou's .... today's Christian needs is a 'more readable' version ... etc. etc.
These two views are diametrically opposed to one another. Only one of them is true. Either the King James Bible IS the ... BEST EXAMPLE of English literature the world HAS EVER SEEN or it ISN'T.
So, should we believe:
A) The 'non-financially' compensated comments of the first view? or:
B) Should we believe 'salesmen' and 'marketing ads' ?
Instead of emotionally (and philosophically) debating this question, let's get the facts.
Sales pitches for new, modern, versions contain several 'claims'. In this chapter, we will test them for truth.
R E A D A B I L I T Y
One persistent advertisement is that new versions are 'easier to read'. If this is true, it is easily verified.
The Flesch-Kincaid research company has a formula which measures the grade level of a book. The higher the grade level the more education is required. And, the lower the grade level, the less education is required.
The Flesch-Kincaid formula is:
Grade level = (.39) times (the average number of words per sentence) + (11.8) times (the average number of syllables per word) minus (15.59)
From this formula; fewer syllables per word lowers the grade level and/or shorter sentences lowers the grade level. Both make sense.
Now, let's compare some 'modern' versions to the King James Bible.
In her excellent book "New Age Bible Versions", on page 196, G.A. Riplinger gives us the Flesch-Kincaid readability results of various 'Bibles'. In her first analysis, she compares the average grade level required to read the first chapter of the first and last books of both the Old and New Testaments. Her chart follows:
Name KJV NASB NKJV TEV NIV
Of Grade Grade Grade Grade Grade
Book Level Level Level Level Level
~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~
Gen. 1 4.4 4.7 5.2 5.1 5.1
Mal. 1 4.6 5.1 4.6 5.4 4.8
Matt. 1 6.7 6.8 10.3 11.8 16.4
Rev. 1 7.5 7.7 7.7 6.4 7.1
Level 5.8 6.1 6.9 7.2 8.4
Analytical data confirms that it's the KING JAMES BIBLE that requires the LEAST amount of education, NOT the 'modern versions'.
Think about it. God is willing than none should perish (2 Peter 3:9). Now; if you were God, and you wanted everyone to be saved, would you make your Bible hard to understand?
Of course not.
You would make the message of salvation so simple anyone (and everyone) could understand it. This is what God has done in the Traditional Majority Text (King James Bible).
Also, notice that the NEW King James Version IS NOT an improvement over the KJV. The NKJV requires an additional grade level INCREASE in education compared to the KJV.
Continuing her analysis, G.A Riplinger says:
"To extend the inquiry, one each of the three book-types (Gospel, Pauline epistle, and General epistle) were surveyed. The resulting data confirms the readability of the KJV" [S3P196].
Name KJV TEV NKJV NIV NASB
Of Grade Grade Grade Grade Grade
Book Level Level Level Level Level
~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~
John 3.6 5.9 3.9 3.6 4.2
Gal. 8.6 6.7 8.9 9.8 10.4
James 5.7 6.0 6.4 6.5 7.0
Level 6.0 6.2 6.4 6.6 7.2
An objective analysis uncovers the truth. 'New versions' are actually HARDER TO READ, not easier. The claim that new versions are easier to read is ANOTHER lie. And who is the father of lies ?
"Why is the KJV easier to read? The KJV uses one or two syllable words while the new versions substitute complex multi-syllable words and phrases" [S3P196]
For instance: The following is a sample of the hard words used in the NASB vs. the easy words used in the KJV. This sample analysis is also courtesy of G.A. Riplinger [S3P197-208].
NASB vs KJV
Verse (NASB) (KJV)
~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Matt. 1:11 deportation carried away
Matt. 2:16 environs coasts
Matt. 9:18 synagogue-official certain ruler
Matt. 11:26 well pleasing good
Matt. 14:24 but the boat was was now in the
already many midst of the sea
Matt. 14:24 battered tossed
Matt. 15:6 invalidated made
Matt. 16:27 recompense reward
Matt. 25:10 make the purchase buy
Matt. 26:59 in order that to
Matt. 27:27 Praetorium common hall
Matt. 27:27 whole Roman cohort band of soldiers
Mark 2:21 unshrunk new
Mark 15:18 acclaim salute
Luke 5:29 reclining at table sat
Luke 6:22 ostracize separate you
from their company
Luke 6:49 collapsed fell
Luke 7:2 highly regarded dear
Luke 7:32 sang a dirge have mourned
Luke 8:31 the abyss the deep
John 10:23 portico porch
John 16:26 on your behalf for you
John 17:4 accomplished finished
John 18:1 ravine brook
John 19:20 inscription title
John 21:7 stripped for work naked
Acts 11:24 considerable much people
Acts 12:21 rostrum throne
Acts 27:18 jettison the cargo lighten the ship
Romans 9:29 posterity seed
2 Cor. 11:32 the ethnarch the governor
Gal. 1:14 contemporaries equals
Phil. 4:9 practice do
1 Thess. 2:17 having been bereft being taken
of you from you
1 Thess. 5:1 epochs seasons
1 Thess. 5:14 admonish warn
1 Tim. 1:15 foremost of all chief
1 Tim. 3:3 uncontentious not a brawler
1 Tim. 5:12 previous pledge first faith
Titus 1:6 dissipation riot
Titus 3:10 factious heretick
Heb. 7:2 apportioned gave
Heb. 12:1 encumbrance weight
Rev. 4:1 standing was
Rev. 11:11 who were beholding saw
Rev. 18:2 prison of every... cage
M E M O R I Z A T I O N O F S C R I P T U R E
"The memorization of scripture, which is the 'sword of the Spirit', is a necessary self-defense against sin. Simple sentence structure and single syllable words certainly simplify this task. Satan strives to stop this safeguard against sin, so new versions keep the 'sword' wrapped in a sheath of words" [S3P204]. For example:
Syllable Comparison: NASB vs KJV
NASB # Of KJV # Of
Verse Wording Syllables Wording Syllables
~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~
Matt. 26:41 Keep watching 6 Watch and pray 3 and praying
Matt. 26:59 in order that they 6 to 1 might
Matt. 28:5 you are looking 5 seek 1 for
Mark 1:34 who he was 3 him 1
Mark 1:41 am willing 3 will 1
Mark 2:7 speak that way? 8 speak blasphemies 4 He is blaspheming
Mark 3:3 Rise and come 5 Stand forth 2 forward
Mark 13:37 Be on the alert 5 Watch 1
Mark 16:8 astonishment had 7 were amazed 3 gripped them
Luke 1:80 continued to grow 5 grew 1
Luke 5:26 seized with 6 amazed 1 astonishment
Luke 6:8 what they were 5 their thoughts 2 thinking
Luke 7:5 it was he who 4 he hath 2
Luke 7:26 one who is more 4 much more 2
Luke 8:45 Who is the one 7 Who touched me? 3 who touched me?
Luke 8:50 Do not be afraid 9 Fear not 2 any longer
Luke 10:9 those in it who are 5 the 1
Luke 16:3 am not strong 6 cannot 2
Luke 18:3 Give me legal 12 avenge 2 protection from my opponent
Luke 20:37 in the passage 7 at 1 about the
John 19:3 And they began to 11 said 1 come up to him and say
John 19:3 to give Him blows 7 they smote him 3 in the face
Eph. 1:4 with a view to 4 until 1
Rev. 7:15 spread his 8 dwell 1 tabernacle over
TOTAL SYLLABLE COUNT : 148 42
======================= === ==
After comparing these two columns; it is no wonder G.A. Riplinger
says: "The sentence structure of the new versions can only be called a
Reader note: The Word is "The Sword of the Spirit". When G.A.
Riplinger says that: "The memorization of scripture is a necessary
self-defense against sin" and that: "simple sentence structure and
single syllable words ... simplify this task"; I believe she has hit on
a very SUBTLE but EXTREMELY important point.
The memorization of scripture REQUIRES repetition. And, it requires
hearing the SAME words again and again. When each 'modern' version,
substitutes different words (so it can 'sell itself' as a 'new'
version), it hinders and confuses the memorization of scripture.
When Jesus was tempted by Satan in the wilderness, I suspect He DID
NOT have scrolls of scripture with him. Nor do I think He fumbled around
with which version to quote back to Satan. The only thing Jesus had was
the Word, memorized !
Think about it.
NKJV vs KJV
"Only a multi-million dollar marketing campaign could capture
unsuspecting customers for the New King James Version camp. An actual
collation of its text proves it MORE DIFFICULT, not 'clearer', as
claimed. Second grade students can define ALL of the following sample
KJV words, but NONE of their NKJV substitutes" [S3P208].
Verse (NKJV) (KJV)
~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~
2 Cor. 5:2 habitation house
Eccl. 2:3 gratify give
Is. 28:1,4 verdant fat
Deut. 28:50 elderly old
Judges 19:29 limb bones
Ps. 43:1 Vindicate Judge
Rom. 14:13 resolve judge
Josh. 22:24 descendants children
Acts 17:22 the Areopagus Mars' Hill
Ez. 31:4 rivulets little rivers
New Test. hades hell
1 Kings 10:28 Keva linen yarn
1 Sam. 13:21 pim file
John 18:28 Praetorium judgement hall
Rom. 13:1 governing higher powers
Gal. 5:4 estranged no effect
Is. 2:16 sloops pictures
Lam. 5:3 waif fatherless
1 Sam. 10:19 clans thousands
Acts 27:17 Syrtis Sands quicksand
2 Cor. 11:5 eminent chiefest
Job 2:10 adversity evil
1 Sam. 16:14 distressing evil
Jer. 19:3 catastrophe evil
2 Kings 22:16 calamity evil
Eccl. 12:1 difficult evil
Eccl. 8:5 harmful evil
Ezek. 5:16 terrible evil
Ezek. 5:17 wild evil
2 Sam. 17:14 disaster evil
1 Kings 17:20 tragedy evil
Prov. 16:4 doom evil
Jer. 44:17 trouble evil
Amos 9:4 harm evil
Job 2:10 adversity evil
Syllable Comparison: NKJV vs. KJV
Not only are the words simpler in the KJV (vs. NKJV) but the syllable
count is less, too. For example:
NKJV # Of KJV # Of
Verse Wording Syllables Wording Syllables
~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~
1 Cor. 3:3 behaving like 6 walk as men 3
2 Cor 11:29 do not burn 8 burn not 2
Ps. 40:9 I have proclaimed 8 I have preached 3
the good news of
1 Cor 11:10 a symbol of 8 power 2
1 Sam 25:12 on their heels 4 their way 2
TOTAL SYLLABLE COUNT : 34 12
======================= === ===
And lastly; let's compare the NIV syllable count to the KJV:
Syllable Comparison: NIV vs. KJV
NIV # Of KJV # Of
Verse Wording Syllables Wording Syllables
~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~
1 Cor. 10:7 indulge in 6 rose up to play 4
Lev. 14:2 regulations for 15 law of leprosy 5
Lev. 11:30 skink 1 snail 1
2 Chron. 2:2 conscripted 3 told 1
Rom. 1:28 think it 4 like 1
Eph. 4:16 supporting 6 joint 1
Luke 10:35 reimburse 3 repay 2
Luke 11:26 final condition 5 last state 2
TOTAL SYLLABLE COUNT: 43 17
======================= === ===
"So the reader will not think 'select' verses are presented, a
thorough comparison of one book, Hebrews follows. The NIV's vocabulary
evades both young and old alike" [S3P209].
Further Syllable Comparison: NIV vs. KJV
NIV # Of KJV # Of
Verse Wording Syllables Wording Syllables
~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~
Heb. 1:2 universe 3 worlds 1
Heb. 1:3 radiance 3 brightness 2
Heb. 1:3 representation 5 image 2
Heb. 1:3 sustaining 3 upholding 3
Heb. 1:3 provided 8 purged 1
Heb. 1:4 superior to 5 better than 3
Heb. 2:3 announced 2 spoken 2
Heb. 2:10 exists 2 are 1
Heb. 4:2 combine 2 mixed 1
Heb. 4:15 sympathize 3 be touched 2
Heb. 5:7 his reverent 7 he feared 2
Heb. 5:10 designated 4 called 1
Heb. 5:13 not acquainted 4 unskillful 3
Heb. 6:6 subjecting him to 5 put him to 3
Heb. 7:16 indestructible 5 endless 2
Heb. 8:13 obsolete 3 old 1
Heb. 10:26 deliberately 5 wilfully 3
Heb. 10:27 expectation 4 looking for 3
Heb. 11:5 experience death 5 see death 2
Heb. 11:22 exodus 3 departing 3
TOTAL SYLLABLE COUNT: 81 41
===================== === ===
F E W E R ' D I F F E R E N T ' W O R D S
Not only does the King James use simpler words, but it also uses a
shorter vocabulary of 'different' words. In his book "The Majority
Text", Theodore Letis points out:
"The AV contains only about six thousand words as compared to
Shakespeare's fifteen to twenty thousand and Milton's thirteen thousand
U N R E C O G N I Z E D W O R D S
What about the King James' words we don't recognize?
G.A. Riplinger responds to this question:
"The ... words in the KJV, which are unfamiliar, at first glance, to
dictionary shy Americans are actually simpler and more accurate than
their new substitutes. A 'stomacher' for example (Isa. 3:24) is NOT a
belt, as new versions indicate, but a chest ornament. (It seems the only
'simpler' words in new versions are incorrect or from a corrupt Greek
text.) New versions not only do not improve the KJV's 'sackbut' (Daniel
3:7), calling it a 'trigon', but in the same sentence change the KJV's
simple 'harp' to a 'zither' [S3P210].
T H E E ' S A N D T H O U ' S
A second claim is that: 'thee', 'thou', 'thy', and 'thine' are out of
date. The 'pitch' is that these words were spoken in 1611, are archaic,
and need to be eliminated.
Let's examine this claim.
In his book 'The King James Version Defended', Edward F. Hills gives
us some interesting insight into these words. On page 218, he says:
"... the English of the King James Version is not the English of the
17th century ... It is Biblical English, which was not used on ordinary
occasions even by the translators who produced the King James Version.
As H. Wheeler Robinson (1940) pointed out, one need only compare the
preface written by the translators with the text of their translation to
feel the difference in style ... The King James Version ... owes its
merit, not to 17th century English - which was very different - but to
its faithful translation of the original. Its style is that of the
Hebrew and the New Testament Greek. Even in their use of thee and thou
the translators were not following 17th century English usage but
biblical usage, for at the time these translators were doing their work
these singular forms had already been replaced by the plural you in
polite conversation" [S12P218].
In his book 'The Old Is Better', Alfred E. Levell also comments on
the need for thee's and thou's. On page 31, he says:
"Why did the AV translators not adopt the up to date English of their
time? For one reason ... accuracy of translation! Whenever the Hebrew
and Greek texts use the singular of the pronoun, so does the AV; and
whenever those texts use the plural, so does the AV ... There is a
distinct loss of accuracy in translation if 'You' is used for singular
as well as the plural: it becomes an ambiguous word ... Thus in Luke
22:31-32 the Lord says to Peter "Satan hath desired to have you, to sift
you as wheat," "you" here referring to Peter and the other disciples;
"But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not," "thee" and "thy"
referring to Peter only. Such shades in meaning are completely lost when
'you' is used throughout" [S13P31].
The words: 'thee', 'thou', 'thy' and 'thine' are clearly needed. The
Holy Spirit picked these words for a reason: It is to distinguish the
'singular you' from the 'plural you' for the purpose of clarity. Praise
Objective, analytical, data shows new versions are NOT EASIER to
read, they are HARDER. Also, new versions are wordier, have more
syllables per word, and use harder words.
The words God chose, for His Traditional Majority Text, are simpler.
And, like the use of 'thee', 'thou', 'thy' and 'thine'; each word was
chosen for a reason. We may or may not understand each word, but it is
there for a purpose; just like you and I are here for a purpose.
Lately; Bible publishers are trying to tell Christians the King James
Bible is 'hard to understand'. Their 'claim' is that we need to buy a
Well, if the King James Bible is 'hard to understand', then this is a
very, very, RECENT phenomenon. Our grandparents were able to read the
And, how would Bible publishers explain this supposed problem with
King James 'readability' when we are actually MORE EDUCATED than our
No; their claim does not make sense. Something else is wrong.
T H E T R U E P R O B L E M
The truth is that the King James Bible is NOT the problem.
"The real gap is one of distance between God and man, not a lapse
between us and Father Time ... The spiritual chasm is so vast that even
those close to Jesus could not understand him. He was NOT speaking
archaic Aramaic to Mary and Joseph yet, "they understood NOT the saying
which he spake unto them". Obsolete words were NOT the obstacle when he
asked Peter, "Are ye also yet WITHOUT understanding?" [S3P635].
Something to think about.
C H A P T E R 2 0
S A T A N ' S C O U N T E R F E I T S :
T H E S I N A I T I C U S A N D V A T I C A N U S T E X T S
( Corrupted Minority Texts In Greek )
"In our day there are reputed to be about 110 so-called translations
of the Bible or New Testament in the English language alone ... Of those
110 versions only the King James Version (Authorized) is translated from
the Received Text (Textus Receptus). All the others, even though no two
of them agree with each other, were translated from another source. That
other source is the Misters Westcott and Hort Text" [S14P3-4].
Jasper James Ray 'echoes' the same report. He says all modern Bibles
since 1611 are: "... for the most part, in agreement with the Greek Text
of Westcott and Hort" [S4P29].
So, where did the Greek Text of Westcott and Hort come from?
"The Greek text of Westcott and Hort is ... from a very limited and
select number of manuscripts" [S4P27]. "The Westcott and Hort Greek New
Testament was primarily based on the Vaticanus (B) and Sinaiticus
(Aleph) manuscripts of the fourth century, both of which originated from
the Alexandrian School" [S1P9].
In this chapter we discuss the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus manuscripts.
The reader should note that 'Vaticanus' is sometimes called 'Codex
Vaticanus'. The word 'Codex' means the manuscript is in 'book' form,
verses a scroll. Vaticanus is also called 'B'.
Sinaiticus is also referred to as 'Codex Sinaiticus'. Again the word
Codex meaning this manuscript is also in 'book' form, verses scroll.
Sometimes Sinaiticus is also called 'Aleph'.
In summary: "The text of Westcott and Hort is practically the text of
Aleph and B" [S2P136]. i.e. Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.
V A T I C A N U S
Vaticanus: " ... was written on fine vellum (tanned animal skins) and
remains in excellent condition. It was found in the Vatican Library in
1481 A.D." [S5P60]
In spite of being in excellent condition:
"This Codex omits portions of Scripture vital to Christian doctrine.
Vaticanus omits Genesis 1:1 - Genesis 46:28, Psalms 106 - 138, Matthew
16:2,3; Romans 16:24; the Pauline Pastorial Epistles; Revelation; and
everything in Hebrews after 9:14" [S1P72]. "These parts were probably
left out on purpose" [S5P60].
"Moreover having been found in the Vatican library, the suspicion was
all the more compounded. We must recall that the Renaissance was lifting
the great curtain hiding medieval superstition and forged documents,
allowing the light to shine in ..." [S6P135].
"According to authorities the date of its writing is placed within
the years 325 A.D. to 350 A.D." [S4P20].
"Vaticanus, though intact physically, is found to be of very poor
literary quality. Dr. Martin declares, 'B' exhibits numerous places
where the scribe has written the same word or phrase twice in
"Besides all that - in the gospels alone it leaves out 237 words, 452
clauses and 748 whole sentences, which hundreds of later copies agree
together as having the SAME words in the SAME places, the SAME clauses
in the SAME places and the SAME sentences in the SAME places" [S5P60].
"It seems suspicious indeed that a MSS possessed by the Roman
Catholic Church omits the portion of the book of Hebrews which exposes
the 'mass' as totally useless. (Please read Hebrews 10:10-12). The
'mass' in conjunction with the false doctrine of purgatory go hand in
hand to form a perpetual money making machine for Rome. Without one or
the other the Roman Catholic Church would go broke!" [S1P72].
G.A Riplinger adds the following about Vaticanus (i.e. 'B'):
"The use of recent technology such as the vidicon camera, which
creates a digital form of faint writing, recording it on magnetic tape
and reproducing it by an electro-optical process, reveals that B has
been altered by at least two hands, one being as late as the twelfth
century ... A few passages ... remain to show the original appearance of
the first hand. The corrector omitted [things] he believed to be
"B agrees with the Textus Receptus only about 50% of the time. It
differs from the Majority Greek in nearly 8,000 places, amounting to
about one change per verse. It omits several thousand key words from the
Gospels, nearly 1,000 complete sentences, and 500 clauses. It adds
approximately 500 words, substitutes or modifies nearly 2,000 and
transposes word order in about 2,000 places. It has nearly 600 readings
THAT DO NOT OCCUR IN ANY OTHER MANUSCRIPT ..." [S3P551].
And: "Linguistic scholars have observed that B is reminiscent of
classical and Platonic Greek, NOT the Koine [common] Greek of the New
Testament ..." [S3P551].
"Protestant theologians question its lack of use by anyone for 1300
years-then its sudden 'discovery' in the Vatican in 1481" [S3P552].
"Its [i.e. Vaticanus'] immediate use to suppress the Reformation and
its subsequent release in 1582 as the Jesuit-Rheims Bible are logical,
considering the manuscripts omission of anti-Catholic sections and books
(ie Hebrews 9:14 and Revelation etc.)" [S3P552].
Also, Vaticanus: "... agrees essentially with Origen's Hexapla,
omitting the deity of Christ frequently ..." [S3P552].
In summary, history records that:
"... Vaticanus was available to the King James translators but they
didn't use it because they knew it was unreliable" [S5P60].
S I N A I T I C U S
"The Sinaiticus is a manuscript that was found in 1844 in a trash
pile in St. Catherine's Monastery near Mt. Sinai, by a man named Mr.
"The date of its writing is placed at around 340 A.D. ..." [S4P20].
"The Sinaiticus is extremely unreliable, proven by examining the
manuscript itself. John Burgon spent years examining every available
manuscript of the New Testament" [S5P61]. He writes about Sinaiticus:
"On many occasions 10, 20, 30, 40 words are dropped through very
carelessness. Letters, words or even whole sentences are frequently
written twice over, or begun and immediately cancelled; while ... a
clause is omitted because it happens to end in the same words as the
clause proceeding, [this] occurs no less than 115 times in the New
"On nearly every page of the manuscript there are corrections and
revisions done by TEN different people" [S5P61].
Dr. Scrivener agrees with John Burgon. Dr. Scrivener says (of Codex
"... it is clear that this document was corrected by ten different
scribes at different periods". He tells of "the occurrence of so many
different styles of handwriting, apparently due to penmen removed from
each other by centuries, which deform by their corrections every page of
this venerable looking document" [S2P307-308].
And Dr. M. Reynolds tells us:
"Tischendorf, the discoverer of the Sinaiticus manuscript noted at
least 12,000 changes which had been made ... by OTHERS than the original
G.A. Riplinger cites some 'advanced' analysis of Sinaiticus:
"[With] more recent detailed scrutiny of the manuscript ... by the use
of [the] ultra-violet lamp, Milne and Skeat discovered that the original
reading in the manuscript was erased ... [in places]" [S3P552].
In Sinaiticus: "There are about 9,000 changes from ... the Majority
... Text, amounting to one difference in every verse. It omits some
4,000 words from the Gospels, adds 1,000, repositions 2,000 and alters
another 1,000. It has approximately 1,500 readings that DO NOT APPEAR IN
ANY OTHER MANUSCRIPT ..." [S3P552-553].
"Philip Mauro was a brilliant lawyer who was admitted to the bar of
the Supreme Court in April 1892. He wrote a book called 'Which Version'
in the early 1900's" [S5P61]. He writes concerning Sinaiticus ...
"From these facts, therefore, we deduce: ... the impurity of the
Codex Sinaiticus, in every part of it, was fully recognized by those who
were best acquainted with it, and ... it was finally cast aside as
WORTHLESS for any practical purpose" [S5P61].
S I N A I T I C U S A N D V A T I C A N U S
Since the Vaticanus originated between 325 A.D. and 350 A.D; and
since the Sinaiticus originated about 340 A.D. :
"Several textural authorities believe that the Sinaitic and Vatican
manuscripts are two extant copies of the 50 Greek manuscripts copied for
Constantine by Eusebius in 331 A.D." [S4P19].
One of those authorities is Dr. Herman C. Hoskier. He says:
"My thesis is then that B (Vaticanus) and Aleph (Sinaiticus) ... are
Egyptian revisions current between A.D. 200-400 and abandoned between
500 and 1881, merely revived in our day ..." [S3P550].
Do you remember in an earlier chapter we talked about Constantine? We
said that, on the surface, he put on the 'robe' of Christianity. But,
behind the scenes, he had Eusebius prepare 50 corrupt Bibles from the
heretical teachings of Origin.
It's possible that we have 2 copies of Satan's corrupted minority
Greek texts resurfacing again from the year 331 A.D. Westcott and Hort
then use these 2 corrupt texts to produce their own corrupt Greek text.
K E Y E V E N T S
Let's summarize some key events in the history of the corrupted
- Satan's lies in the Garden of Eden ( about 4,000 B.C. )
- Origin's 'Hexapla' Bible ( 200 A.D. )
- Eusebius' 50 Bibles for Constantine ( 331 A.D.)
- Jerome's Latin Bible ( 380 A.D. )
- Jesuit Bible ( 1582 A.D. )
and now, add to that:
- Vaticanus ( 1481 A.D. )
- Sinaiticus ( 1844 A.D. )
Now, whether or not Vaticanus and Sinaiticus are actually two of
Eusebius' 50 Bibles is not fully proven (at this time). It is, however,
consistent, with the facts.
Since these two texts are forerunners of 'modern' versions; the key
question is: What is contained in these manuscripts?
A N A N A L Y S I S O F :
S I N A I T I C U S A N D V A T I C A N U S
"The Vaticanus and Sinaiticus both leave out the last 12 verses of
Mark, concerning the resurrection of Christ. But, there is not one other
manuscript ... that leave out this passage" [S5P62].
"Aleph and B differ from one another IN THREE THOUSAND PLACES in the
Gospels alone - not including differences in spelling" [S6P43].
Of Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, John Burgon says: "It is in fact easier
to find two consecutive verses in which these two MSS. differ the one
from the other, than two consecutive verses in which they entirely
G.A. Riplinger points out that:
"Neither Aleph nor B ends with the book of Revelation. Vaticanus (B)
completely eliminates Revelation, thereby disobeying God's command 'not
to take away from the words of this book'. Sinaiticus (Aleph) adds two
books after Revelation ... These two books: The Shepherd of Hermas and
The Epistle of Barnabas, spell out in detail the New Age scenario,
including commands to do the things God specifically forbids, such as:
1) Take 'the name' of the beast
2) Give 'up to the beast'
3) Form a one world government
4) Kill those not receiving his 'name'
5) Worship female virgins
6) Receive 'another spirit'
7) Seek power
8) Believe that God is immanent in his creation, as a
pantheistic, monistic Hindu God
9) Avoid marriage, permit fornication
10) Abstain from fasting
11) Subscribe to the New Age Race Root Theory
12) Be saved by being baptized and keeping the 'twelve'
mandates of the Antichrist [S3P557].
"Long ago Burgon and Miller (1896) pointed out the heretical trait in
Aleph and B, and their observations have never been refuted" [S8P77].
"Burgon's position remains absolutely unshaken ... He maintains that
Aleph and B had been tampered with and revised and proved it in his
"Causes of the Corruption of the Traditional Text"" [S2P141].
"Many scholars today disagree with Westcott and Hort, noting the poor
character of these minority manuscripts. Moody Vice President, Alfred
Martin, calls Aleph and B 'depraved'. Dean John Burgon writes: 'I have
convinced myself by laborious collation that they are the most corrupt
of all. They are depositories of the largest amount of fabricated and
intentional perversions of the truth which are discoverable in any
copies of the word of God. They exhibit a fabricated text...[and are]
shamefully mutilated'" [S3P546].
Of Sinaiticus and Vaticanus we can say that:
"The longer we ponder the evidence ... the more obvious it becomes
that the texts ... were the handiwork of heretics who for some reason
were reluctant to acknowledge Jesus to be the Son of God" [S8P77].
C H A P T E R 2 1
S A T A N ' S C O U N T E R F E I T
T H E W E S T C O T T A N D H O R T T E X T (1881 A.D.)
( The Corrupted Minority Text In Greek )
In the last chapter, we learned 'Codex Vaticanus' and 'Codex
Sinaiticus' are two manuscripts from the corrupted minority of Greek
'Vaticanus' was found in the Vatican library. 'Sinaiticus' was found
in a Mt. Sinai trash can.
We also know these 2 manuscripts form the basis for the Westcott and
Hort Greek text. And, the corrupt Westcott and Hort Greek text forms the
basis for 'modern' versions of the Bible.
In this chapter Westcott and Hort use the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus
manuscripts to make their 'own' Greek text. This they submit to a Bible
translation committee. The result will be the "English Revised Version
of 1881". Later on, other 'modern versions' will follow the W&H text.
We pick up the history of the Bible, in England, in 1870.
T H E B A C K G R O U N D
"In 1870, the Convention of the Church of England commissioned a
revision of the Authorized Version" [S1P162].
A revision committee was assembled.
The Revision Committee was instructed: "... NOT to deal with the
underlying Greek text of the Authorized Version. They were instructed to
do as follows: (1) to introduce AS FEW alterations as possible into the
text of the King James Bible, and (2) to limit ... the expression of any
alterations TO THE LANGUAGE of the Authorized Version" [S1P163].
"Westcott and Hort had other plans. They had edited the corrupt
Vatican and Sinaitic manuscripts ... and produced their own Greek text.
Wisely they had never published it" [S1P163].
"Westcott and Hort had been working together on their text since
1853; in 1870 they printed a tentative edition for private distribution
only. This they circulated under pledge of secrecy within the company of
New Testament revisers, of which they were members (of which came the
Revised Version of 1881). It soon became evident that the New Testament
committee was NOT going to be content merely to revise the Authorized
Version, but was determined to revise the UNDERLYING Greek text
In November of 1870, Westcott said: "In a few minutes I go with
Lightfoot to Westminster. More will come of these meetings, I think,
than simply a revised version" [S1P162-163].
Hort to Westcott: "This may sound like cowardice-I have a craving
that our text should be cast upon the world before we deal with matters
likely to brand us with suspicion" [S3P407-408]
Westcott to Hort: "... strike blindly ... much evil would result from
a public discussion" [S3P408].
A U N I T A R I A N A T C O M M U N I O N ?
"When the company of New Testament revisers (for the Revised Version)
were ready to begin their work, a communion service was held in
Westminster Abbey. A Unitarian member of the committee partook along
with the others. There was serious criticism of this ... The upper house
of the Convocation of Canterbury passed a resolution that NO person who
denied the deity of Christ should take part in the work" [S2P156].
"Westcott expressed his loyalty to apostasy when he threatened to
quit if the Convocation were successful in ejecting Smith [the
Unitarian] from the Committee. 'I never felt more clear as to my duty.
If the Company accepts the dictation of the Convocation, my work must
end. I see no escape from the conclusion'" [S1P165].
Westcott and Hort found an ally for their plan to abolish the
Traditional Majority Text, when Dr. Vance Smith, a Christ denying,
Unitarian preacher, was seated on the committee.
As to the Unitarian, Dr. Hort said: "It is, I think, difficult to
measure the weight of the acceptance won before the hand for the
Revision by the single fact of our welcoming a Unitarian" [S1P165].
D R. S M I T H
What were some of Dr. Smith's beliefs?
Dr. Smith called the belief in Christ's 2nd coming 'erroneous'. He
"This idea of the Second Coming ought now to be passed by as a merely
TEMPORARY incident of early Christian belief. Like many another ERROR,
it has answered its TRANSITORY PURPOSE in the providential plan, and may
well, at length, be left to rest in peace" [S1P165].
T H E R E V I S E D V E R S I O N C O M M I T T E E
Dr. Vance Smith was NOT the only problem within the translation
committee. The following quote summarizes the members in general:
"The reputations of the committee members were so tainted that Queen
Elizabeth and her chaplain ... refused to give it official sanction ...
Half the Church of England declined involvement, as did the American
branch ..." [S3P435]. Also: "Others ... left after seeing the SINISTER
character of the 'New' Greek text" [S3P435].
When comparing the scholars of his day to those of the King James
committee: Bishop Ellicott, the CHAIRMAN of the Revised Version
"We have certainly NOT YET ACQUIRED sufficient critical judgment for
any Body of Revisors to undertake such a work as this" [S3P435].
(Please note: "Advocates of modern versions assume that they are the
product of scholarship far superior to that of the translators of the
King James Version of 1611, but this assumption is not supported by the
It was said that Bishop Ellicott was the committee chairman.
Actually, the FIRST chairman was Bishop Wilberforce. One meeting, was
enough for him. He wrote to a friend: "What can be done in this most
miserable business?" [S2P291] "Unable to bear the situation, he
absented himself and never took part in the proceedings ... One factor
had disturbed him considerably - the presence of Dr. G. Vance Smith, the
Unitarian ..." [S2P291].
B E H I N D T H E S C E N E S
When the King James Bible was translated from Hebrew/Greek into
English each scholar first made his own translation. His work was passed
on to other scholars within his own section for review. This work was
then passed on to other sections for their review. Lastly, the work went
to a final committee to iron out differences. All the work was done in
The work of Westcott and Hort was VERY different:
"The Old Testament committee met together SECRETLY as one body for
ten years. The New Testament committee also met together SECRETLY for
ten years. All was done in secret" [S4P103-104].
"This arrangement left the committee at the mercy of a determined
triumvirate to lead the weak and to dominate the rest. All reports
indicate that an iron rule of silence was imposed upon these revisers
during all that time. The public was kept in suspense all the long,
weary ten years. And ONLY after elaborate plans had been laid to throw
the Revised Version all at once upon the market to effect a tremendous
sale, did the world know what had gone on" [S2P257-258].
This same tactic, of buying sight unseen, was used to 'sell' the RSV
Bible on September 30th, 1952. We know that: "Pastors had no opportunity
to review the new Bible, yet they were asked to open their churches for
a tremendous advertising campaign" [S4P104].
T H E T R A N S L A T I O N B E G I N S
Once the corrupted Old Testament and corrupted New Testament were
ready, Reverend Gipp tells us how Westcott and Hort manipulated the
"Since the Committee had been instructed not to deal with matters of
the Greek text, and the Westcott and Hort text had not been published,
it was necessary for the two Cambridge Catholics to submit it little by
little to the committee" [S1P163].
Jasper James Ray also confirms the same report:
"The unpublished new Greek Text of Westcott and Hort, upon which they
had been working for 20 years was, portion by portion, secretly
committed into the hands of the Revision Committee" [S4P104].
"Had it been published earlier, it [the Westcott and Hort text]
assuredly would have been exposed as corrupt and unfit for translation
into English" [S1P163].
Once the corrupted text was submitted ...
"The Revisers of 1881 followed the guidance of ... Westcott and Hort
who were CONSTANTLY at their elbows ..." [S4P25]. "The committee of the
Revised Version was dominated and practically controlled by Westcott and
Hort ..." [S2P106].
There were; however, some committee members who actually OPPOSED
Westcott and Hort. We learn that:
"The MINORITY in the committee was represented principally by Dr.
Scrivener, probably the FOREMOST scholar of the day in manuscripts of
the Greek New Testament and the history of the Text. If we may believe
the words of Chairman Ellicott, the countless divisions in the committee
over the Greek Text 'was often a kind of critical DUEL between Dr. Hort
and Dr. Scrivener'" [S2P291].
But, most committee members were 'duped' by Westcott and Hort ...
"Westcott and Hort were so successful at their secret task of subtly
guiding the decision of the Revision Committee that many Committee
members did not suspect they had been used by the Cambridge duo ..."
T H E R E S U L T S O F W E S T C O T T A N D H O R T
Estimates differ as to the EXACT number of changes which were made to
the underlying Greek New Testament. For instance:
"Scrivener counted the number of changes in the underlying Greek text
of the Revised Version as 5,788" [S2P154].
Jasper James Ray says "... the Greek text of Westcott and Hort
contains 5,337 changes from the Greek Textus Receptus" [S4P27].
David Otis Fuller believes that: "The Revisers ... made 36,000
changes in the English ... and nearly 6,000 changes in the Greek Text'
Whether or not the underlying Greek text was changed in '5,337' or
'5,788' or 'nearly 6,000' places, the text is SIGNIFICANTLY different.
So different in fact that J.J. Ray points out:
"The Revision of 1881, the American Standard Version of 1901 and the
Revised Standard Version Bibles are IN NO TRUE SENSE a revision of the
King James of 1611. If they were they would follow the same Greek text
Of his text Westcott himself said: "The value of the revision is most
clearly seen when the student considers together a considerable group of
passages, which bear upon some article of faith. The ACCUMULATION OF
SMALL DETAILS then produces the FULL EFFECT" [S4P26].
"Dr. Ellicott ... declared that they had made between eight and nine
changes in every five verses, and in about every ten verses three of
these were made for critical purposes" [S4P26].
Lest anyone think the changes to the Greek text are minor; Hort
"It is quite impossible to judge the value of what appears to be
trifling alterations merely by reading them one after another. Taken
together, they have often IMPORTANT bearings which FEW would think of at
first ..." [S3P432].
Dr. Vance, the Unitarian on the committee, said of the W&H text:
"It has been ... said that the changes of translation ... are of
little importance from a doctrinal point of view ... Any such statement
is CONTRARY to the facts" [S3P432].
Scholars reviewed the W&H text and concluded that:
"... they have given us a DIFFERENT Bible constructed upon a
DIFFERENT foundation" [S4P30].
E.W Colwell, a preeminent textual scholar said of the W&H text: "The
text ... is not reconstructed it is constructed; it is an ARTIFICIAL
entity that NEVER EXISTED" [S3P433].
The Westcott and Hort text: "... deviated the FURTHEST possible from
the Received Text", "a VIOLENT RECOIL from the Traditional Greek Text",
"the most vicious Recension of the original Greek IN EXISTENCE",
"seriously mutilated and otherwise grossly depraved ...", and "the
passages in dispute are of GREAT IMPORTANCE" [S3P432].
John Burgon said of the W&H text:
"... the Greek Text which they have INVENTED proves to be hopelessly
depraved ... The underlying Greek is a MANUFACTURED article throughout
... The New Greek Text was FULL OF ERRORS from beginning to end ... "
John Burgon said to Westcott and Hort:
"It was no part of your instructions to INVENT a new Greek Text, or
indeed to MEDDLE with the original Greek at all ... By your OWN
confession - you and your colleges knew yourselves to be INCOMPETENT.
Shame on [those] most incompetent men who ... occupied themselves ...
with FALSIFYING the inspired Greek Text ... Who will venture to predict
the amount of MISCHIEF which must follow if the 'New' Greek Text ...
should become used" [S3P433].
Immortal words indeed:
"... Who will venture to predict the amount of mischief which must
follow if the 'New' Greek Text ... should become used".
The W&H corrupted Greek Text is now in more than 110+ 'modern'
"... all Greek texts produced since 1611, which are in agreement with
Westcott and Hort are founded upon the same quicksands ... Since
Westcott and Hort's text is corrupt, all in agreement with it are
corrupt also" [S4P29].
T H E P U B L I C R E S P O N S E
When the 'New' Greek Text was finally brought into the open and
published, there was a public outcry from conservative and moderate
In Hort's own words:
"... the abuse we are receiving ... The crisis is a very grave one
and we ought ... to resist the Moderates in their attempts to carry out
the demands of a noisy public opinion" [S3P436].
M A S S D E C E P T I O N
And so the foundation for a 'mass deception' had been laid by Satan
through his use of Westcott and Hort.
In summary; we can trace 'modern corruptions' back to the 1881
English Revised Version Of Westcott and Hort:
"All modern translations, such as the New American Standard Version,
are linked to the Revised Standard Version of 1952, which is a revision
of the American Standard Version of 1901, which was originally marketed
as the American Revised Version -- an American creation growing from the
English Revised Version of 1881" [S1P197].
C H A P T E R 2 2
W E S T C O T T A N D H O R T
We have studied the work of Westcott and Hort. It's time to look at
these men, personally.
H O R T
Our study of Hort starts with his mother.
As to his mother, Hort said in his biography:
"Her religious feelings were deep and warm ... [H]is mother was ...
an adherent of the Evangelical school and she was to a certain degree
hampered by it ... She was unable to enter into his theological views
which to her generation seemed a desertion of the ancient way; thus
pathetically enough, there came to be a barrier between mother and son
... [Concerning] her point of view, ... he ... had to recognize that the
point of view was different. SHE STUDIED AND KNEW HER BIBLE WELL"
Hort's mother also tried to 'evangelize' him. For instance, his
mother wrote to him pleading that Hort would not miss:
"... the many mansions of our Heavenly Father's House ..." [S3P627].
She went on to say to him: "... and my darling, Now happy it will be if
we all meet there; no one missing of all our household" [S3P627].
Through Hort's own biography we see that his mother was an
Evangelical and she 'evangelized' her son.
So, if Hort was saved, why did his mother try to save him? Or, put
another way; if Hort was a Christian, why would he need saving?
The answer to this question is also in Hort's biography. In it he
states he: "outgrew the Evangelical teaching which he came to regard as
sectarian ... fanaticism ... perverted" [S3P627].
Apparently, Hort was not saved.
As to his views about secular topics, we know that:
Hort did not think much of Abraham Lincoln. Of Lincoln, Hort said: "I
cannot see that he has shown any special virtues or statesmanlike
Hort said he had: "... a deep HATRED of democracy in all forms"
Hort WAS interested in communism. He said: "I have pretty much made
up my mind to devote my three or four years up here to the study of this
subject of Communism" [S1P129].
Hort did not like America. To him America was: "a STANDING MENACE to
the whole civilization" [S3P418].
As to Hort's views on 'spiritual' topics, we know that:
Hort did not believe in the authority of the Bible. While mocking an
Evangelical, Hort is quoted as saying: "[There are] SERIOUS differences
between us on the subject of authority, and ESPECIALLY on the AUTHORITY
of the bible" [S3P627-8].
Hort called God's Traditional Majority Text that: "... vile Textus
Receptus ..." [S10P7].
According to Hort, Hell is not a place. Hort said Hell was:
Hort did not believe in Eden. His quote follows: "I am inclined to
think NO SUCH STATE as 'Eden' ... EVER EXISTED ..." [S2P280].
Hort did not believe in Christ's atonement for sins: "Certainly
NOTHING can be more unscriptural than ... Christ's bearing our sins to
His death; ... that is ... an almost UNIVERSAL HERESY" [S10P7].
Hort did not believe that people were saved by being 'born again'.
Hort believed people were saved by water baptism; he stated: "Baptism
assures us that we are children of God, members of Christ and His body,
and heirs of the heavenly kingdom" [S1P126].
Unfortunately, this belief may have cost his own son's soul. In the
following quote, Hort is talking to his son and assuring him that he was
saved by water baptism as a baby. Hort tells his son: "You were ... born
of Christian parents ... While yet as an infant you were claimed for God
by being made in Baptism an UNCONSCIOUS member of His Church ..."
Hort was not Protestant, but was in reality, Catholic. He says: "...
the pure Romish view seems to me nearer ... the truth than the
Hort believed his salvation was at least partially dependent on 'the
sacraments'. Hort: "We dare not forsake the sacraments or God will
forsake us" [S2P280].
Hort was involved in Mariolotry (worshipping Mary). Hort said: "I
have been persuaded for years that Mary-worship and Jesus-worship have
very much in common ..." [S10P7].
Hort was NOT competent in Greek. He said: "I had no idea ... of the
importance of texts having read SO LITTLE GREEK ..." [S10P7].
Hort also began looking into the occult. In his words: "Westcott,
Gorham, C. B. Scott, Benson, Bradshaw, Luard and I have started a
society for the investigation of ghosts, and all supernatural
appearances, ... being all disposed to believe that such things really
exist ... Our own temporary name is the Ghostly Guild" [S10P7].
And, although Hort did not like evangelistic Christians, calling them
'unsound' and 'perverted'; Hort was evangelistic when it came to
recruiting for his Ghostly Guild club. Hort said to a friend: "I sent
you two ghostly papers; you can have more if you want them; but I find
they go very fast and the 750 copies which we printed go by no means far
And lastly, Hort was deceived by Darwin. He said: "Have you read
Darwin? ... in spite of difficulties, I am inclined to think it
unanswerable ..." [S10P7].
W E S T C O T T
As to Westcott, we know that:
Westcott rejected the Bible as infallible: "... I too must DISCLAIM
... infallibility ... the more I learn, the more ... fresh doubts come
... I REJECT the word infallibility ..."[S1P139].
Westcott did not believe the first 3 chapters of Genesis. He said:
"NO ONE now, I suppose, holds that the first three chapters of Genesis
... give a LITERAL history ..." [S2P280].
Westcott was NOT concerned about Hell. Westcott said Hell is: "not
the place of punishment of the guilty" [S3P296].
Westcott did not believe in Jesus' miracles; of them, he said: "I
never read an account of a miracle, but I seem instinctively to feel its
IMPROBABILITY ..." [S1P132].
Westcott believed that Jesus' second coming was spiritual and not
physical; he said: "I hold very strongly that the Fall of Jerusalem was
the coming which ... fulfilled the Lord's words ..." [S1P132].
Of heaven, Westcott said: "... heaven is a state, not a place ..."
"As a Cambridge undergraduate, Westcott organized a club and chose
for its name 'Hermes'. The designation is derived from 'the god of magic
... and occult wisdom, the conductor of Souls to Hades, ... Lord of
Death ... cunning and trickery". [S3P400].
Who does 'Hermes' refer to?
Luciferian H.P. Blavatsky identifies Hermes as Satan: "Satan or
Hermes are all one ... He is called the dragon ... the serpent ..."
We also know that Westcott took part in "... prayers for the dead"
And Westcott's son Arthur recalls his father's: "tradition of reading
Goblin stories at Christmas" [S3P424].
(Reader note: Webster defines Goblin as "an ugly, grotesque, evil,
malignant being or spirit" [S3P424]).
And lastly; it was Westcott who was selected to write the section on
Origen in the "Dictionary of 'Christian' Biography" [S3P528].
W E S T C O T T A N D H O R T
It's interesting to note that:
"All corrupt Bible scholars, from Augustine to Hort, believed in
religious evolution ... [But] To teach that the new 'bibles' are
progressive improvement is to slander God, for it implies that the Holy
Spirit ... has better material to work with in the twentieth century
than He had in the seventeenth, eighteenth, and nineteenth centuries"
"... its time to turn away from the teaching that Westcott and Hort
were two born again, Bible believing scholars. They were not" [S1P220].
Dr. Ralph I. Yarnell says: "As far as I have been able to discover,
both men [Westcott and Hort] were liberals and by no means
Fundamentalists, IF they were saved AT ALL ..." [S14P3]
It is obvious that Westcott and Hort did not believe the Bible. And,
as Jakob Van Bruggen points out, this is a big problem:
"Whether one believes the Bible or not will affect the way a person
translates some passages" [S6P105].
David Otis Fuller states the same point in different words: Westcott
and Hort's conclusions "... must always be open to suspicion if ...
[they do not] ... accept the Bible as the very Word of God" [S2P157].
Or put another way: "A Bible believing Christian can NEVER be content
to follow the leadership of those who do not recognize the Bible as the
verbally inspired Word of God" [S2P172].
And, to Westcott and Hort's use of a minority of CORRUPT manuscripts
as the FOUNDATION for their Greek New Testament, Burgon said:
"They ... invent ... theories because ... a few against the many
requires ingenuity ... for its support" [S2P91].
Knowing what we now know about Westcott and Hort, we must ask: Was
their 'new' Greek Text an effort to establish a 'new' text? Or, was it
actually an effort to abolish an old one? Were their efforts REALLY for
'greater accuracy'? Or, was this an excuse to replace the Textus
C H A P T E R 2 3
M O N E Y C H A N G E R S I N T H E T E M P L E
In this chapter we discuss the 'marketing' of new versions.
Our first topic: The characteristics of a 'false prophet'.
T H E F A L S E P R O P H E T
"... all the versions ... in the last one hundred years immediately
compared themselves to one version; a version written three hundred
years ago ..." [S11P126].
"... every new Bible is introduced as being 'better' than the
Authorized Version. It may also be noted that every false prophet is
introduced as better than Jesus Christ. Mohammed had supposedly come to
finish the work which Christ began. Charles Manson claimed that he was
Jesus Christ. Sun Nyung Moon claims to have to finished the job which
Jesus Christ failed to finish. Jim Jones claimed to be Jesus Christ. The
Beatles claimed to be more popular than Jesus Christ" [S1P173].
"Notice that Jim Jones did not claim to be Mohammed. Notice that Moon
did not claim to be the replacement for Buddha. All the false prophets
attack Jesus Christ. Notice the Good News for Modern Man does not claim
to be better than the American Standard Version, but it does claim to be
better than the Authorized Version. Notice also that the New
International Version does not claim to be better than the American
Standard Version; it claims to be better than the Authorized Version. A
false prophet can always be recognized, because he attacks the true
Our next topic, in the marketing of new versions, is 'marketing
M A R K E T I N G F A N F A R E
All the 'new versions' are promoted with great fanfare and expensive
advertising budgets. Whereas: "... the Authorized Version is the only
Bible ever released WITHOUT fanfare" [S1P215].
Why are expensive advertising budgets justified? Because new
versions are financially copyrighted !
F I N A N C I A L C O P Y R I G H T S
'Modern' versions are financially copyrighted. Why is this?
"God has only one Bible. All the other versions ... are not Bibles,
but books of men" [S7P13].
'Modern versions' are copyrighted because they are the product of
men's efforts, not God's.
Contrast this to the text of the King James Bible. The KJV text can
be copied, reproduced, quoted etc. etc. without any intervention by man.
Peter Ruckman points out:
"The AV has no financial copyright. It has the Crown Copyright, which
only applies to Bible publishers in the United Kingdom, and this
copyright DOES NOT demand money from anyone who wishes to quote, cite,
reproduce, or print any passage from it" [S11P20].
Barry Burton says the: "Thomas Nelson Co. has a copyright notice in
the front of ... King James Bibles that they print. It makes it APPEAR
that they have the copyright to the King James Bible. HOWEVER ... if you
call the Thomas Nelson Company, they will tell you that they do not have
a copyright on the King James text (the Bible itself). What they have
copyrighted are the notes and the layout" [S5P80].
P R O P H E S Y F U L F I L L E D
Publishers of 'modern Bibles' are the fulfillment of the prophecy of
the Apostle Paul. Remember how Paul said: "We are not the MANY which
corrupt the word of God ..." (2 Co. 2:17). Paul also said: "Professing
themselves to be WISE, they became FOOLS" (Romans 1:22) ... "Who CHANGED
the TRUTH of God into a LIE ..." (Romans 1:25).
"When men change the Word of God, they invariably are WORSHIPPING
THEMSELVES ... no matter how sincere they may be, they are setting
themselves up as knowing better than God and able to correct God"
And the Apostle Paul was concerned for those being misled. To the
Galatians he said: "I marvel that ye are SO SOON REMOVED from him that
called you into the grace of Christ unto another Gospel: Which is NOT
ANOTHER; but there be SOME that trouble you, and would PERVERT the
gospel of Christ" (Galatians 1:6-7).
Therefore we are told: "... [henceforth] be no more children, tossed
to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the
sleight of men, [and] cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to
deceive;" (Ephesians 4:14).
In 2nd Peter 2:1-2 we are told: "... there were false prophets also
among the people, even as there shall be FALSE TEACHERS among you, who
privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that
brought them, and bring upon themselves SWIFT destruction. And MANY
shall follow their pernicious ways ...".
"How sad it is that while the Bible warns us of false teachers, so
few present-day preachers and evangelists give any warning to our
T H E M A N Y W H I C H C O R R U P T
Who are the "... MANY which corrupt the word of God ..."?
Who are the people on 'new version' translating committees?
Reverend Gipp researched the committee membership of the Revised
Standard Version. The following are his findings about some of the RSV
members and their beliefs:
R S V C O M M I T T E E M E M B E R S H I P
Edgar Goodspeed: "Goodspeed called Genesis the product of an
'Oriental' story teller at his best" [S1P198]. "Goodspeed did not
believe in the deity of Jesus Christ" [S1P197]. "Goodspeed said Jesus'
youth was probably one of the dawning and increasing dissatisfaction
with the prevalent form of the Jewish religion in Nazareth and in his
own home. HE DID NOT IN THOSE EARLY YEARS SEE WHAT HE COULD DO ABOUT IT
Julius Brewer: Julius Brewer, said: "The dates and figures found in
the first five books of the Bible turn out to be altogether unreliable"
Henry Cadbury: Henry Cadbury believed Jesus Christ was a man who TOLD
STORIES: "He was given to OVERSTATEMENTS, in his case, not a personal
idiosyncrasy, but a characteristic of the Oriental world" [S1P199].
Walter Bowie: Walter Bowie believed the Old Testament was LEGEND, not
fact. He says in reference to Abraham: "The story of Abraham comes down
from the ancient times; and how much of it is FACT and how much of it is
LEGEND, NO ONE can positively tell" [S1P199].
Of Jacob wrestling with the Angel, Bowie says: "The man of whom
these words were written (Genesis 32:31) belongs to a time so long ago
that it is UNCERTAIN whether it records HISTORY or LEGEND" [S1P199].
Walter Bowie did not believe in the miracle of the burning bush: "One
day he (Moses) had a vision. In the shimmering heat of the desert,
beneath the blaze of that Eastern sun, he saw a bush that SEEMED to be
on fire, and the bush was not consumed" [S1P199].
Clarence Craig: Clarence Craig denied the bodily resurrection of
Jesus Christ: "It is to be remembered that there were no eyewitnesses of
the resurrection of Jesus. No canonical gospel PRESUMED to describe
Jesus emerging from the tomb. The mere fact that the tomb was found
empty was CAPABLE OF MANY EXPLANATIONS. THE VERY LAST ONE THAT WOULD BE
CREDIBLE TO A MODERN MAN WOULD BE THE EXPLANATION OF A PHYSICAL
RESURRECTION OF THE BODY" [S1P200].
Craig also believed that Christ's second coming was spiritual, not
physical: "In other words, the coming of Christ is TO THE HEARTS of
those who love him. IT IS NOT HOPE FOR SOME FUTURE TIME, but a present
reality of faith" [S1P200].
Craig said God is NOT able to preserve His Word. "If God wrote His
revelation in an inerrant book, He certainly FAILED to provide any means
by which this could be passed on without contamination ..." [S1P200].
Frederick Grant: Against scripture, Frederick Grant (like Westcott
and Hort) prayed for the dead: "... CEASE NOT TO PRAY, for they are
living still, in this world or the other, and still have need of
Willard Sperry: Willard Sperry disliked the Gospel of John: "SOME of
these sayings, it is true, come from the fourth Gospel (John), AND WE DO
NOT PRESS THAT GOSPEL FOR TOO GREAT VERBAL ACCURACY IN ITS RECORD OF THE
SAYINGS OF JESUS" [S1P201].
William Irwin: William Irwin thought Jewish prophets inflated the God
of the Bible: "The prophets were forced by the disasters that befell to
do some hard painful thinking. THEY WERE FORCED BY THE HISTORY OF THEIR
OWN TIMES TO REVISE THEIR MESSAGES AGAIN AND AGAIN IN ORDER TO KEEP UP
WITH THE PROGRESS OF THE AGE. THE ASSYRIANS AND THE BABYLONIANS FORCED
THEM TO REVISE THEIR CONCEPTION OF YAHWEH FROM TIME TO TIME UNTIL THEY
FINALLY MADE HIM GOD OF THE UNIVERSE" [S1P201].
Fleming James: Fleming James said of Moses' writing the first five
books of the Bible: "The idea has been shown by scholars to be
UNTENABLE on many grounds" [S1P201].
Fleming also doubted the miracle of the Red Sea crossing: "What
really happened at the Red Sea WE CAN NO LONGER REALLY KNOW ... THE SAME
MAY BE SAID OF THE PLAGUES" [S1P202].
Concerning Elijah in 2 Kings 1:10, Fleming said: "The narrative of
calling down fire from heaven upon soldiers sent to arrest him is
PLAINLY LEGENDARY" [S1P202].
Millar Burrows: Millar Burrows summarized the true convictions of the
RSV revisors in his quote: "We CANNOT take the Bible as a whole and in
every part as stating with divine authority what we must believe and do"
O T H E R R E V I S I O N C O M M I T T E E S
But, what about other 'new' versions and their revision committee
memberships. Reverend Gipp researched this and found:
"... secrecy surrounding translations such as the New American
Standard Version and the New International Version. The Lockman
Foundation has elected to remain anonymous" [S1P196].
Reverend Gipp goes on to say: "This is, of course, the safest
method, as it prevents investigative eyes from uncovering truths ..."
G.A Riplinger also researched new version translating committees. She
says: "The NASB committee list remained a closely guarded secret for
over 30 years, lest conservative Christians catch a glimpse of the
liberal membership" [S3P491].
Of one NASB committee member G.A. Riplinger adds that: "Dr. Frank
Logsdon has renounced his participation. At numerous speaking
engagements he denounced his part in what he now perceives to be a
heretical version" [S3P491]. "I may be in trouble with God" because of
it, he confesses [S3P491].
As to the NIV committee, Reverend Gipp says: "The translating
committee of the New International Version is ... nameless" [S1P196].
Of this 'nameless' NIV committee, Reverend Gipp concludes:
"We are assured of their 'scholarship' although words without proof,
ring of a snake oil salesman in the days of the Old West" [S1P196].
Q U O T E S F R O M N E W V E R S I O N
E D I T O R S A N D / O R D I R E C T O R S
Although groups (like the Lockman Foundation) try to keep their
translating committee memberships a secret; information eventually leaks
For instance; some 'new version' editors have written books and/or
articles about their work. This, of course, exposes their participation.
From these published works we can gain insight into their beliefs.
In this short section we will document the beliefs of some new
version editors and/or directors.
Quotes from: Professor C.H. Dodd
Director of Translation For the New English Bible:
"The old dogmatic view of the Bible therefore, is not only open to
attack from the standpoint of science and historical criticism, BUT IF
TAKEN SERIOUSLY it BECOMES A DANGER to religion and public morals." (The
Bible is a danger?) [S5P68].
"God is the author, NOT of the Bible BUT of the life in which the
authors of the Bible partake, and of which they tell in such IMPERFECT
HUMAN WORDS as they could command." (God did not write the Bible?)
"The most downright claims to infallibility are made by the
apocalypist, as for example in the New Testament Revelation (see 22:6,
16, 18-19) a book which some of the wisest thinkers of the early Church
wished to exclude from the canon, and which as a whole, is SUB-CHRISTIAN
in tone and outlook." (Revelation is sub-Christian?) [S5P69].
"God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son - The
expression evidently ANTHROPOMORPHIC. It is a MYTHOLOGICAL way of saying
that in Christ God gives of His own Being ..." (John 3:16 is a myth?)
"MOSES HAS LEFT US NO WRITINGS, and we know little of him with
certainty." [S5P69] ( Reader note: Professor Dodd really missed this
one. Apparently he has not STUDIED the Bible. Up to the time of the
writing of the 2nd book of the Bible [Exodus], in Exodus 24:4 it says:
"Moses wrote ALL the words of the LORD ...". Many scholars believe
Moses then went on to write, not only the first two books, but the FIRST
5 BOOKS of the Bible ).
"For indeed the bare idea of vicarious expiation (substitutionary
atonement) is NOT WHOLLY RATIONAL ..." [S5P69]. ( Jesus' dying for our
sins is not rational? )
Quotes from: Edwin Palmer
Coordinator Of: 'All The Work On The NIV Bible'
"[T]his [his NIV Bible] shows the GREAT ERROR that is so prevalent
today in some orthodox Protestant circles, namely that regeneration
depends upon faith ... and that in order to be born again a man must
first accept Jesus as his Savior ..." [S3P231].
"... that Christ loved the whole world equally and gave himself up
for the world is WRONG" [S3P231].
"[There are] few clear and decisive texts that declare Jesus is God"
"The committee DID NOT FEEL BOUND TO THE HEBREW TEXT ..." [S3P292].
A P O S T A S Y A N D S I N
Peter Ruckman has noticed a couple of common threads in 'new
versions' and in their translating committees. He says:
"You cannot uncover an apostasy without discussing SIN. You cannot
fix the blame for apostasy without talking about SIN, and the surest
proof of this is the fact that the word [sin] is never mentioned in one
single preface by any revision committee since 1611. The AV translators
used the word [sin] in their dedicatory ..." [S11P123].
Peter Ruckman also noticed another common thread. He says:
"There hasn't been ONE man on any revision committee since 1880 who
was a strong evangelistic preacher against SIN: not one man" [S11P123].
T H E C H O I C E O F B I B L E
The "... Christian makes perhaps no more crucial decision than
choosing a Bible" [S6Pv].
Yet: "The average Christian is not aware of what is taking place.
History contrasts the sacrificial lives of the early English translators
to the cavalier life styles: the zeal of the martyrs for the glory of
God, against the modern popularity and profit motivated efforts to
replace the Word of God in English" [S9P13].
Even Christian ministers are NOT aware of what is taking place:
"The mass of Christian ministers today ... don't know what they have
in their hand, and if they have an AV ... they strongly doubt that they
have anything more than a 'poor' translation of the 'original' ..."
"The Church ... has abdicated her role as guardian of the Bible and
has turned such responsibility over to HIRELINGS who market various,
conflicting translations to the confusion and dis-array of the Church"
[S6Pii]. Therefore, "... the Bible publishing industry ... now
determine[s] the texts of scripture" [S6Pii].
But: "If you have two books that both claim to be the Word of God and
they contradict each other you must draw one of two conclusions. Either
one of them is the word of God and the other is not, or, neither of them
is the Word of God" [S14P7].
Therefore we find "... sincere believers are in a state of
bewildering confusion today, because of the multiplicity of Bible
versions ... They CANNOT ALL be the Word of God" [S4P92].
The truth is that "Satan has from the beginning ... done everything
... to destroy, belittle, and malign the Word of God. Today he is using
a new tactic, that of ... multiplicity of Bible versions 'so called'
Thus, the Church's worst threat is not external, it is internal: "...
the plunder of God's people will be an INSIDE JOB as 'thieves enter in
among you' (Acts 20:30) [S3P393].
As Christians, let us REJECT these 'new' versions which "... ignore
the over 5000 Greek MSS ..." [S3P475].
T H E F A T E O F S O M E
' N E W V E R S I O N ' E D I T O R S
God says: "Therefore, behold, I am against the prophets, saith the
Lord, that steal my words ..." (Jeremiah 23:30). And God also says:
"... If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the
plagues that are written in this book: (Revelation 22:18b) "And if any
man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God
shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy
city, and from the things which are written in this book" (Revelation
So, what happened to those who have changed God's words?
"A surprising number of new version editors have permanently lost
their ability to speak ..." [S3P2]. For instance:
The Living Bible; Ken Taylor editor:
In July 1972, Time magazine recorded that: "Mysteriously half way
through the paraphrase Taylor lost his voice and still speaks in a
hoarse whisper" [S3P447]
(Please note: The introduction to the Catholic Edition of Taylor's
Bible warns: "[T]his translation CANNOT BE USED AS A BASIS for
Doctrinal or traditional disputes ... People from various Doctrinal
traditions may ... be CHAGRINED at the particular translations found
within this volume" [S3P447] ).
American Standard Version; Philip Schaff:
Early warnings came to Schaff in 1854: "... his voice so affected
that he could not speak in public so as to be heard". Then in 1892:
"... the power of articulate speech GONE" [S3P447].
'New Greek Text'; Tregelles:
S.P. Tragelles was the author of a 'New Greek Text'. This text
influenced Westcott and Hort. Of Tragelles, it was written that he was:
"scarcely able to speak audibly" [S3P448].
Westcott and Hort Greek Text; Westcott:
Westcott's own biographer stated, in 1858, that Westcott: "... was
quite inaudible". Then by 1870: "His voice reached few and was
understood by fewer" [S3P448].
The New Testament in Modern English; J.B. Phillips
J.B. Phillips says (in his own autobiography): "I was still doing a
fair measure of speaking in schools and churches until the late summer
of 1961. And then quite suddenly my speaking, writing and communication
powers stopped. I was not in panic but I was certainly ALARMED, and when
a few weeks rest brought no improvement I cancelled all speaking
engagements for the rest of the year" [S3P448].
Lastly; "Insanity marked another prominent new version editor whose
commitments to mental institutions served as bookends to a life fraught
with derangement and hallucinosis" [S3P2].
In summary: "Modern translators of the Bible are true successors of
Jehoikim, the King of Jerusalem, whose mutilation of Scripture is given
in Jeremiah 36:22-23" [S7P2]. (Note how Jehoikim died. It is found in
W H A T A R E T H E R E S U L T S ?
"What have all these versions done for our Lord and for His Church?
Are more people reading and practicing the Bible? Are more souls being
saved? Is there less confusion regarding the inspiration of the
Scriptures since they appeared on the scene? You know as well as I do
that modern versions have brought confusion and compromise ..." [S7P10].
These 'corrupted versions', which dis-agree among themselves, have
made it virtually impossible for the congregation to follow along with
their pastor during the reading of scripture.
And 'new versions' do not contain the same words in our traditional
gospel songs. Thus, hymnals and 'new versions' do not agree, either!
A R E M O R E C O M I N G ?
At this juncture, a good question would be:
Is the latest 'version', that is on the market today, the last one
which will be sold to the Christian public?
The NIV translators give us the answer:
"[T]he work of translation is NEVER wholly finished" [S3P583].
Therefore, if we can believe these translators, the Bible industry
PLANS to remain in apostasy. How sad.
R O A D T O R I C H E S
"... it is fair to say that the entire American Bible publishing
industry is travelling this road to riches [through the] use of
CONTINUOUS revisionism of their various COPYRIGHTED editions of the
Word" [S6P19]. "In short, the road to profits in the free enterprise
system is CHANGE. While this law is valid for business in general it is
absolutely INIMICAL to the timeless ... Christian faith" [S6P21].
Since the English Revised Version of 1881 "... the flood gates have
been opened and we are now deluged with many different ... Greek New
Testaments ... mutilated in bewildering confusion" [S2P178].
T H E G R E A T B A T T L E
"When we receive the Traditional New Testament as the true text, then
we see the history of the New Testament text as a GREAT BATTLE between
Christ and Satan. Always Satan has been corrupting and mutilating the
true text. Always Christ has been preserving it through the guidance of
His all-governing providence. And this battle is going on right now. As
Bible-believing Christians therefore we follow every detail of this long
conflict with intense interest and gladly volunteer to fight this good
fight of faith with all our might in our own day and age" [S8P53].
C H A P T E R 2 4
G O D ' S P R E S E R V E D W O R D
The foreword to the NASB Bible says that ONLY the originals were
inspired. It says: "The New American Standard Bible has been produced
with the conviction that the words of scripture AS ORIGINALLY PENNED in
the Hebrew and Greek were inspired by God" [S5P76].
Today it is taught that: "... God wrote the originals perfectly, but
that there is NO perfect translation. Yet, there is NO scripture that
teaches any such thing! [S1P170].
We are told that God CAN NOT use Holy men to translate His Word (from
the Traditional Majority Text) into the various world languages.
Yet, if God used Holy men to write His originals, why can't He use
Holy men to translate his Word?
Something is wrong, here. The logic, in what we're being told, does
not make sense.
So, in this chapter, let's examine what God said about His Word.
W H A T G O D S A I D A B O U T H I S W O R D
"FOREVER, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven." (Psalm 119:89)
" ... thou hast magnified thy word above ALL thy name." (Psalm 138:2)
"The words of the Lord [are] pure words: [as] silver tried in a
furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt KEEP THEM, O Lord,
thou shalt PRESERVE them from this generation for ever." (Psalm 12:6-7)
"Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words SHALL NOT pass away."
"The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God
SHALL STAND FOR EVER." (Isaiah 40:8)
" ... the scripture CANNOT be broken;" (John 10:35)
And, lest any of us think that God cannot accomplish His promises;
God has already anticipated our doubts. He says:
"Behold, I [am] the LORD, the God of all flesh: is there any thing
too hard for me? (Jeremiah 32:27).
I N S P I R E D A N D P R E S E R V E D
Contrary to what we're being told, God says that his word is WITH us
and is PRESERVED forever.
Reverend Gipp agrees and points out:
" ... the Bible is a spiritual book which God exerted supernatural
force to conceive, and it is reasonable to assume that He could exert
the same supernatural force to PRESERVE it" [S1P49].
Edward Hills comments:
"... why would God infallibly inspire these original manuscripts if
He did not intend to PRESERVE their texts by His special providence down
through the ages?" [S8P55].
"... if the providential PRESERVATION of the Scriptures is not
important, why is the infallible INSPIRATION of the original Scriptures
"Every argument for inerrant, infallible INSPIRATION applies also for
inerrant, infallible PRESERVATION. It is the same God!" [S1P170].
"If the doctrine of the Divine inspiration of the Old and New
Testament scriptures is true doctrine, the doctrine of the providential
preservation of the scriptures MUST also be a true doctrine. It must be
that down through the centuries God has exercised a special providential
control over the copying of the scriptures ... so that trustworthy
representatives of the original text have been available to God's people
in every age" [S6P192-3].
"There exists NO reason for supposing that the divine agent who ...
gave to mankind the scriptures ... straightway abdicated his office,
took no further care of his work, [and] abandoned these precious
writings to their fate" [S2P124].
Or put another way:
"Are we to simply believe that, for a millenium and a half, the New
Testament languished textually until it was providentially rescued in
the last century by two random discoveries: in a Vatican archive and in
a Mount Sinai wastebasket ...? [S6Pvii].
" ... if God has not preserved His words ... then he has done
something which He has never done before. He has wasted His time!"
No dear reader, God has not wasted His time. He has, in fact,
preserved his Words. For instance:
"A.W. Pink ... wrote that the indestructibility of the Bible is proof
that the Author is Divine... A very small percentage of books survive
more than twenty years, a yet smaller percent last a hundred years, and
only an INSIGNIFICANT fraction ... have lived a thousand years" [S7P1].
"As Dean Burgon (1883) pointed out, the history of the New Testament
text is the history of a conflict between God and Satan. Soon after the
New Testament books were written Satan corrupted their texts by means of
heretics and misguided critics whom he had raised up. These assaults,
however, on the integrity of the Word were repulsed by the providence of
God, who guided true believers to reject these false teachings and to
preserve the True Text in the majority of the Greek New Testament
So, we know God HAS preserved His Word.
W H I C H B I B L E ?
Therefore, the question before us today is this:
Which of the two Bible 'types' is the true Word of God ?
"The fact that there is ONE God plainly tells us that there can only
be ONE correct reading concerning any discrepancy between these two
"... the whole controversy may be reduced to the following narrow
issue: Does ... Scripture dwell with the VAST multitude of copies ...
concerning which nothing is more remarkable than the MARVELOUS AGREEMENT
which subsists between them? Or is it ... with a very LITTLE handful of
manuscripts, which at once differ from the great bulk of witnesses, and
... also amongst themselves" [S2P124-5].
"It is certainly much more reasonable to believe ... that the true
New Testament text has been preserved in the vast majority of the New
Testament manuscripts than to suppose with Westcott and Hort that the
true text is ... found in ... codex B, now securely locked up in the
library of the Pope ..." [S2P103].
"Number is the most ordinary ingredient of weight. If ten witnesses
are called into court and nine give the same account while one
contradicts the other nine, which will be accepted? [S2P125].
And if 10 witnesses are good, how much more valuable is the testimony
C H A P T E R 2 5
N E W A G E D O C T R I N E
In the Word, it says: "... we are not the MANY which corrupt the Word
The Bible tells us that MANY people are trying to corrupt the Word of
In previous chapters we have seen SOME of the heresy which has crept
into these 'modern' versions of the Bible. We have seen the denial of
the deity of Jesus, the removal of Jesus' blood as the atonement for our
sins, we have seen Catholic doctrine, etc. etc.
In this chapter we will look at another category of corruption
included in 'modern' versions: It is 'New Age Doctrine'.
Q U E S T I O N S F O R N E W A G E R S
In this section we will pose several questions to 'New Agers'. We
will then analyze their response(s) and check for the presence of 'New
Age' doctrine in 'new versions' of the Bible.
Question #1 For New Agers: Who is God?
"WE ARE ALL 100% divine" - Maharishi [S3P184].
"ALL MEN are innate divinity" - Annie Besant [S3P184].
"The knowingness of OUR divinity is the highest intelligence ... YOU
are divine. But YOU must continually remember YOUR Divinity ... we had
all forgotten we were EACH Divine" - Shirley MacLaine [S3P184].
"We need a World Religion ... based on DIVINE ESSENCE IN EACH PERSON.
Peace can only come when we recognize THE DIVINITY IN EACH PERSON" -
Lola Davis [S3P184].
The first 'New Age' belief is that MAN is divine, i.e. God.
Now let's see if that corrupt doctrine is in 'new versions'.
Scripture Scripture Reading Scripture Reading
Verse ( NASB ) KJV
~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Psalm 8:5 Yet Thou hast made him For thou hast made him
a little lower than GOD a little lower than
"New versions fall back into ... a belief in the divinity of man"
Not only do some 'new versions' place man up with God, but these 'new
versions' also change God from the personage of the Trinity to a
'nature' or 'divine nature'. In other words, 'new versions' lower God.
Scripture Scripture Reading Scripture Reading
Verse ( NASB, NIV ) KJV
~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Romans 1:20 divine nature Godhead
Question #2 For New Agers: Are devils real?
"[T]he Church is wrong with calling them Devils ... [T]he word demon
however, as in the case of Socrates, and in the spirit of the meaning
given to it by the whole of antiquity, stand[s] for the Guardian Spirit
or Angel not a Devil of Satanic descent as Theology would have it ...
Demons is a very loose word to use as it applies to ... minor Gods; ...
there are no devils" - Luciferian, Mme. Blavatsky [S3P218-9].
A second 'New Age' belief is that there are no such things as
Let's look at some 'new versions' to check for this error.
Scripture Scripture Reading Scripture Reading
Verse ( NASB, NIV, RSV, NKJV ) KJV
~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Deut. 32:17 demons devils
Psalm 106:37 demons devils
Matt. 8:16 demons devils
Matt. 8:31 demons devils
Matt. 9:34 demons devils
Matt. 10:8 demons devils
Matt. 12:24 demons devils
Indeed, new versions ignore the existence of devils. New versions
change 'devils' to 'demons'.
Question #3 For New Agers: Are Christians Slaves or Servants of Christ
First off; let's define those terms. Per Webster's dictionary:
Servant: "... one who exerts himself for the benefit of another
master ... as a public servant, an official of the
Slave: "... a person HELD in bondage, a thrall. One who has LOST
CONTROL of himself, freedom of action. A drudge."
Per Webster, there is a big difference between servants and slaves.
Servants work because they WANT TO. Servants have RETAINED their
freedom. Slaves work because they HAVE TO. Slaves have LOST their
So how do New Agers see Christians?
"The New Agers see ... Christ's Church as:
'... bigoted and cruel to all who do not choose to be it's SLAVES'"
"New Age leaders say Adam was a 'SLAVE' before he ate from the Tree
of Life. He was then 'emancipated' just like Lucifer, who '... preferred
free will to passive slavery'.
Another New Age author writes:
'[D]ogmas have made weaklings and SLAVES of men ... Justification by
faith and vicarious atonement were taught as Gospel truth and man became
a greater SLAVE than before'" [S3P223].
Thus, New Agers see Christians as 'slaves' of Christ.
Now, let's see if this 'New Age' belief is in some 'modern' versions.
(The following table is from [S3P224-225]).
Scripture Scripture Reading Scripture Reading
Verse ( NASB, NIV, RSV, NKJV ) KJV
~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mark 10:44 slave servant
1 Co. 7:21 slave servant
1 Co. 7:22 slave servant
Eph. 6:8 slaves servants
Sure enough, 'New Age Doctrine' can be added to our list of errors
contained in 'new versions'.
Question #4 For New Agers: Who does 'Christ' refer to?
Roy Livesey: author and publisher of the New Age Bulletin, in
"Christ, however doesn't refer to the Lord Jesus Christ but to the
World Teacher" [S3P322].
Thus, New Agers change Jesus Christ (the Master) to just a "teacher".
Let's see if 'new versions' do the same. ( The following table is from
Scripture Scripture Reading Scripture Reading
Verse ( NASB, NIV, etc. etc.) KJV
~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Matt. 8:19 Teacher Master
Matt. 17:24 teacher master
Matt. 23:8 Teacher Master
Mark 4:38 Teacher Master
Mark 5:35 Teacher Master
Mark 13:1 Teacher Master
Mark 14:14 Teacher Master
Luke 3:12 Teacher Master
Luke 8:49 Teacher Master
Luke 11:45 Teacher Master
Luke 12:13 Teacher Master
Luke 18:18 Teacher Master
Luke 19:39 Teacher Master
Luke 20:21 Teacher Master
Luke 20:39 Teacher Master
Luke 21:7 Teacher Master
Luke 22:11 Teacher Master
John 4:31 Rabbi Master
John 11:8 Rabbi Master
John 11:28 Rabbi Master
John 20:16 Rabbi Master
Question #5 For New Agers: Is doctrine important?
Edwin Luzer: "Doctrine is NOT IMPORTANT [in the New Age]. What is
important is religious experience" [S3P328].
Once Jesus is no longer 'Master', notice what happens to Christian
doctrine: doctrine is then no longer important! In new versions,
doctrine is 'watered down' to the generic term: 'teaching'. For
example: ( The following table is from [S3P326-327] ).
Scripture Scripture Reading Scripture Reading
Verse ( NASB, NIV, etc. etc. ) KJV
~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Matt. 7:28 teaching doctrine
Matt. 16:12 teaching doctrine
Matt. 22:33 teaching doctrine
Mark 1:22 teaching doctrine
Mark 1:27 teaching doctrine
Mark 4:2 teaching doctrine
Mark 11:18 teaching doctrine
Mark 12:38 teaching doctrine
Luke 4:32 teaching doctrine
John 7:16 teaching doctrine
John 7:17 teaching doctrine
John 18:19 teaching doctrine
Acts 2:42 teaching doctrine
Acts 13:12 teaching doctrine
Acts 17:19 teaching doctrine
Romans 6:17 teaching doctrine
Romans 16:17 teaching doctrine
1 Co. 14:6 teaching doctrine
1 Co. 14:26 teaching doctrine
1 Tim. 1:10 teaching doctrine
1 Tim.4:13 teaching doctrine
1 Tim.4:16 teaching doctrine
1 Tim.5:17 teaching doctrine
2 Tim.3:10 teaching doctrine
2 Tim.3:16 teaching doctrine
2 John 1:9 teaching doctrine
Rev. 2:14, 15, 24 teaching doctrine
Does this remind you of 2nd Timothy 4:3 ? i.e.:
"For the time will come when they will NOT ENDURE SOUND DOCTRINE; but
after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves TEACHERS ..."
As Christians we KNOW doctrine is important! Religious historian
David L. Johnson says:
"Doctrine specifically states that which is of ULTIMATE CONCERN"
Or put another way:
"Our plan of action REQUIRES ... sound doctrine. [I]t is the formal
BASIS of our opinions and beliefs. If we do not maintain good doctrine
then all manner of BAD TEACHING can creep into the Church" [S3P327].
( And isn't this happening in these 'new versions' ? )
Question #6 For New Agers: Is God going to judge the world?
Ramtha: "God ... will allow you to be and do ANYTHING you wish and
hold you JUDGELESS. God HAS NEVER judged anyone." [S3P287].
Comment: "Since the destruction of the earth is a result of God's
judgment, those verses describing the severity of that judgment are
'softened up' or omitted. (The following table is from [S3P286-287]).
Scripture Scripture Reading Scripture Reading
Verse ( NASB, NIV, etc. ) KJV
~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mark 6:11 omitted the day of judgement
Mark 9:44 omitted Where their worm
dieth not, and the
fire is not quenched
Mark 9:46 omitted Where their worm
dieth not, and the
fire is not quenched
Luke 17:36 omitted Two men shall be
in the field;
the one shall be
taken, and the other
Question #7 For New Agers: Where do sinners go when they die?
H.P. Blavatsky: " ... Hell and its sovereign are both INVENTIONS of
Let's see what this 'New Age' belief has done to 'modern' versions:
( The following table is from [S3P292] ).
Scripture Scripture Reading Scripture Reading
Verse ( NIV ) KJV
~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Deut. 32:22 death hell
Job 26:6 death hell
Prov. 23:14 death hell
Prov. 27:20 death hell
Isa. 28:18 death hell
Notice that Hell, a place of eternal torment and punishment, has been
changed to the generic term: 'death'.
Question #8 For New Agers:
In the end times, what will happen to the earth?
First off; let's see what God says in the KJV:
"... the earth also and the works that are therein shall be BURNED
UP." ( II Peter 3:10 ).
"Luciferian H.P. Blavatsky: 'Both Jesus and St. John the Baptist
preached the end of the Age ... So little did the UNINITIATED CHRISTIANS
understand that they accepted the words of Jesus literally and firmly
believed he meant the end of the world'" [S3P283].
New Agers believe that this 'world' will remain. They DO NOT believe
the world will burn up as stated in the Bible. Instead New Agers believe
in a nebulous concept of one age ending and a 'New Age' then beginning.
Now, let's see if this 'New Age' belief has been injected into
'modern' versions. ( The following table is from [S3P285] ).
Scripture Scripture Reading Scripture Reading
Verse ( NASB, NIV, etc. ) KJV
~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dan. 12:13 end of the age end of the days
Matt. 13:39 end of the age end of the world
Matt. 13:40 end of the age end of this world
Matt. 13:49 end of the age at the end of the
Matt. 28:20 I am with you always lo, I am with you
even to the end of alway, even unto
the age the end of the world
The 'New Age' corruption, that the sinful earth will remain, is also
included in 'new versions'.
As G.A. Riplinger points out: "If the world ends the sinner has
nothing to stand on; if the age ends, he merely changes his calendar"
Something to think about.
C H A P T E R 2 6
L E X I C O N S
There is one last way the Word of God is corrupted ...
In her book "New Age Bible Versions" G.A. Riplinger discusses
lexicons. On page 601, she says:
"The Greek and Hebrew Lexicons and dictionaries are written by men,
'most of whom are unbelievers', writes Princeton and Yale scholar Edward
Hills. A few examples will suffice: 1) The New Brown-Driver-Briggs
Hebrew-English Lexicon's editor (Briggs) was defrocked by the 'liberal'
Presbyterian Church for his 'liberalism'. 2) Trench, author of the much
used: "Synonyms of the New Testament", was a member of Westcott's
esoteric clubs, as was Alford, whose Greek reference works are still
used. 3) J. Henry Thayer, author of the "New Thayer's Greek Lexicon",
was a Unitarian who vehemently denied the deity of Christ. (Thayer was
also the dominant member of the ASV committee!) His lexicon contains a
seldom noticed warning by the publisher in its introduction (p. vii). It
cautions readers to watch for adulterations in the work relating to the
deity of Christ and the Trinity. 4) The acclaimed A.T. Robertson's
"Greek Grammar" also sends up a red flag in its preface saying, 'The
text of Westcott and Hort is followed in all its essentials'. 5)
Conclusions drawn by Kurt and Barbara Aland of the "Nestles-Aland Greek
New Testament" elicit the response by Philip Comfort that "the Alands'
designations must be taken with caution". 6) James Strong, author of
"Strong's Concordance" was a member of the corrupt ASV Committee"
Lexicons corrupt the word of God.
In this chapter we will see how that happens.
U S I N G A L E X I C O N
A 'lexicon' can be used two different ways:
M E T H O D 1
In method 1, the Christian looks up an English word in their King
James Bible. If a 'lexicon' is used, it cross references the Bible's
original English word to the Bible's original Hebrew/Greek word. Then
the Christian is given the lexicon's 'new' English translation of that
original Hebrew/Greek Word.
Notice how the Christian makes a 360 degree circle from the Holy
Spirit's chosen English word, to the Holy Spirit's chosen Hebrew/Greek
word, to "another" English word chosen by MAN!
Since God is perfect, and man is not, this method corrupts God's
Notice also, method #1 approaches the Word of God by 'doubting' him.
i.e. by doubting His choice of the original English words.
That is how some people use a lexicon.
Knowingly or unknowingly Christians are being misled from what God
wants them to know, to what man and/or Satan puts in place of God's
Thus, a Christian may have God's Word (from their King James Bible),
but they can get 'derailed' by reading man's words in place of God's
E X A M P L E O F M E T H O D 1
The following is an example of using method 1. Let's see how God's
Word gets corrupted.
In the King James Bible, in Isaiah 7:14, it says:
"... Behold, a VIRGIN shall conceive, and bear a son ...".
If I look up the original Hebrew word for 'virgin' in a corrupted
(but popular) Strong's lexicon, it says the original Hebrew word is:
To that original word 'al-maw', Strong gives his definitions. That's
right 'plural' definitions! Strong says al-maw is a "young woman" and
could EITHER be A) of marriageable age or B) maid or newly married.
Notice Strong NEVER translates it "virgin"!
Think about it.
The Holy Spirit translated 'al-maw' as "virgin". For a "virgin" to
conceive is an obvious MIRACLE.
But Strong says an 'equivalent translation' is "young woman"!
There are two MAJOR problems with Strong's translation:
1) If a "young woman" gave birth to Jesus, this is NOT a miracle.
Young women give birth all the time! By Strong's definition, Jesus is
just ANY man. If Jesus is just any man, then we are still in our sins.
If we are still in our sins, then we are not saved. If we are not saved,
then we have a big, big, problem.
2) In Strong's definition 'A' he says "of marriageable age". Strong
does not say Mary was married, only that she was of marriageable age. In
Strong's definition 'B' he has 2 translations: 1) maid (i.e. a woman who
is not married) or 2) newly married. Thus, in most of these definitions,
Strong is inferring that Mary is unmarried. Since Mary is pregnant and
Strong is inferring that she is unmarried, Strong is calling Mary a
Folks, this is heresy.
Lexicons are apostate and are ANOTHER way to corrupt the Word of God.
M E T H O D 2
The second method for using a lexicon, is the approach of "faith". In
this approach we say: God I know you picked these original English words
for a reason, I just don't understand why.
Then, you look up the original Holy Spirit chosen Hebrew/Greek word
for the original Holy Spirit chosen English word. You compare the places
where the Holy Spirit translated the original Hebrew/Greek word into the
same (or sometimes) different English words. By using this method #2,
you will gain insight into God's Word.
Method #2 is the ONLY way to use a lexicon, and that's if you use a
lexicon AT ALL.
E X A M P L E O F M E T H O D 2
The following is an example of method 2.
In 1st Corinthians 13:13, in the KJV, its says: "... faith, hope and
charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity"
In new versions it says: "... faith, hope and love, these three; but
the greatest of these is love".
Some people 'like' the new version's translation. However, the 'new
version' does not give the FULL meaning.
If I use Strong's lexicon and look up the original Greek word I find
it is "agape". In the King James Bible, the Holy Spirit translated agape
as 'charity' in 1st Corinthians 13:13 BUT the Holy Spirit translated
agape as 'love' in Matthew 24:12.
Remember, we said earlier there are two ways to approach God's Word:
doubt or faith.
When I first read this, I approached the Word in doubt. I did not
understand why the word 'charity' was used in 1Co 13:13. In my position
of doubt, I went to the Lord to ask him why He said 'charity'. I
received NO insight. I received NOTHING. Total void.
This kept bothering me. Eventually I wearied of getting no response
and I finally took the approach of faith. I said:
"Lord I KNOW you chose the word 'charity' for a REASON. I don't know
why. Lord, you are not the problem, I am the problem. I just don't
understand. As your Word says; please give me wisdom and 'upbraideth me
At that moment of faith; the Lord gave me insight into His Word:
The insight was this: Charity is a form of love. It is consistent
with love. But the word charity contains the FULL meaning. The reason is
this: If I love my wife, my wife can love me back. Therefore 'what
thanks have ye'. If I love my wife and my wife loves me back, I am being
The Bible is very clear about giving: 'GIVE EXPECTING NOTHING in
return', 'it is more blessed to GIVE, than to receive, 'for God so loved
the world that he GAVE his only begotten son ...'
But 'charity', by definition, is giving when you do not expect to be
repaid. When we give our time and money to a charity, we don't get a
check back in the mail !
Thus, charity is a HIGHER form of giving than just love.
When Jesus gave His life for us He was being 'charitable'. He was
giving and getting nothing in return. What He gave to us we can NEVER
FULLY repay. Giving when you expect 'nothing back' is charity.
Thus, the full meaning is in the King James: "... faith, hope,
CHARITY, these three; but the greatest of these is CHARITY".
B E C A R E F U L
Man made definitions in lexicons are corrupt.
If a lexicon is used AT ALL, method 2 is the only way to go. Only
method 2 approaches the Word in a position 'of faith'. Method 2 safely
bypasses the man-made definitions. And, only method 2, gives insight
into God's Word.
B E W A R E O F T H E C O U N T E R F E I T
In effect, the men who write lexicons are saying: "Yea, hath God
said?" And these same men then say: "God did not say the English words
that are in your King James Bible, what God really meant was ....".
Then the 'counterfeit' is given to the Christian.
Lexicons are subtle and devious in their methodology. G.A. Riplinger
believes we should rename them: "Lucifer's Lexicons" [S3P591].
C H A P T E R 2 7
T H E F U T U R E ?
In previous chapters we focused on 'facts' i.e. historical facts,
Bible verse comparisons, Bible readability scores, personal biographies,
etc. etc. In those chapters data was available because we were dealing
with the past and with the present.
In this chapter the topic is 'The Future'.
Since we will be discussing the future, we are limited to
'speculation'. No one knows 'the facts' about the future!
F A C T S S E P A R A T E D F R O M S P E C U L A T I O N
I have purposely separated this chapter on 'The Future' from all
other chapters. This was done so that 'facts' are separated from
D I F F E R E N C E S O F O P I N I O N
This is a 'Future Shock' kind of chapter.
My speculation of the future may differ from yours, the reader. Or,
we may be in TOTAL agreement! Whatever the agreement level, I believe
this chapter presents some logical and possible, maybe even probable,
scenarios of the future.
The purpose of this chapter is to encourage and stimulate thought.
But, let's keep in mind only God knows the future, and; this is a
chapter written by a man.
C H A P T E R T O P I C S
In this chapter we will discuss:
1) Where Bible 'revisionism' may be going and
2) The possible future of the Bible, the Church, and the world.
C O N F U S I O N
The Bible says God IS NOT the author of confusion. (1Co 14:33)
Since 'modern versions' dis-agree among themselves, and since this is
causing confusion in the Church; I believe we can conclude that these
books ( i.e. new versions ) are NOT from God.
And, if they are not from God, they must be from Satan.
T H E B A C K D R O P
"Satan wants to be worshipped" [S1P25].
Also: "Satan's first interest HAS ALWAYS BEEN 'revision' (Gen 3:1-4)
W H E R E I S B I B L E R E V I S I O N I S M G O I N G ?
One way to know where the future is going is to look back at the
past. One way to see where 'new versions' are headed is to go back to
the Garden of Eden.
It was in the Garden of Eden where we saw Satan's methodology. Let's
study Satan's tricks.
S A T A N ' S 3 S T E P P L A N
In the Garden of Eden, God spoke to Adam.
Then, Satan came to Eve and said:
"... Yea, hath God said ..." ( Genesis 3:1 )
Thus, step 1 in Satan's methodology, was to question whether God
spoke AT ALL.
Next Satan said to Eve:
"... Ye shall not surely die:" ( Genesis 3:4 )
Thus, step 2 in Satan's methodology, was to ATTACK what God DID SAY.
Lastly, Satan said to Eve:
"... ye shall be as gods ..." ( Genesis 3:5 )
Thus; step 3 in Satan's methodology, was to SUBSTITUTE his ULTIMATE
W H E R E A R E W E N O W ?
God has already told us the truth. He gave us His Traditional
Majority Text. So where are we in Satan's 3 step methodology?
Satan's 'new versions' deny Jesus' deity, i.e. they deny that 'Jesus
IS God'. In effect, these new versions 'infer' that God has NOT SPOKEN
From the 3 step model, we can say the world HAS PASSED step 1.
Second; some 'new versions', like the RSV, include statements like:
"... the King James Version has grave defects" [S5P76]. This statement,
as well as the fact that 'new versions' change God's Words, are DIRECT
ATTACKS on what God DID SAY.
From the 3 step model, we can conclude the world has PASSED step 2.
In the last step, Satan's substitutes his ULTIMATE LIE: "... ye shall
be as gods ..." ( Genesis 3:5 ). As we have seen 'new versions' contain
the 'New Age' belief that man is divine, i.e. God. Thus, the world may
be 'in', or may be 'entering', step 3.
Jasper James Ray thinks that the world has NOT YET fully entered into
He says: "... [the] conflicting and confusing Bible Versions ...
appear to be part of a 'Brain Washing' process, to PREPARE both clergy
and laity for the reception of the 'EVOLVING BIBLE'" [S4P115].
He goes on to say: "... the Ecumenical Church must replace [The King
James Bible] with a 'MAN-MADE-BIBLE' in which all 'objectional
doctrines' have been removed. A Bible that answers this description is
said to be WELL ON IT'S WAY" [S4P114].
Peter Ruckman gives his forecast for 'new Bible versions'. He says:
"What is shaping up now is A 'MUTUAL' BIBLE that Catholics and
apostate Protestants WILL 'SHARE' ..." [S11P10].
G.A. Riplinger also believes we have NOT YET entered step 3. She
believes that we have not yet seen the ULTIMATE LIE, i.e. the ULTIMATE
SATANIC BIBLE. In her book: "New Age Bible Versions" she says:
"Satan recognizes that a bible is needed to control the masses. The
DEVELOPMENT of a New Age Bible is among his top priorities" [S3P15].
She says: "The devious strategy that seems to be paying off for the
New Age is that of revising or updating the Bible to make it more
'meaningful to modern times'" [S3P16].
She believes that: "The New Age Bible will be the unholy vessel into
which the Antichrist will pour these doctrines of devils. It will
incorporate the major doctrines of the [One World] religion" [S3P16].
Reverend Samuel C. Gipp takes Satan's three step methodology and
summarizes how he thinks God's truth will be changed, by Satan, into
Satan's ULTIMATE LIE and into the ULTIMATE SATANIC BIBLE. Gipp's chart
God's Truth Satan's Counterfeits Satan's ULTIMATE Counterfeit
~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
One God Many "gods" Satan is "god" of this world
One Christ Many "anti-christs" The Antichrist
One Church Many false churches One ultimate church, Rome
One Bible (AV) Many "Bibles" (ASV, One ultimate false "Bible"
NIV, etc. )
In summary, these authors believe we are somewhere between step 2 and
T H E S O F T E N I N G
"Christians today do not realize they 'need a better translation'
until they are TOLD SO by the Bible salesmen ..." [S1P83].
Notice how the public is first 'softened up' to the concept of
receiving a corrupted Bible before the actual sale takes place!
For Satan to 'sell' his ULTIMATE SATANIC BIBLE (step 3), may require
FURTHER 'softening' of the public.
Texe Marrs, a researcher of the 'New Age Movement', discusses how
this 'softening' is occurring today and how it could occur in the
"For centuries Satan has inspired scientists and pseudo scientists to
label Christians as unsophisticated and behind-the-times. Many of these
... secular humanists' arguments will become part of the New Age Bible.
The bible that is developed by the Antichrist will be applauded as fully
keeping with the high-tech age. Furthermore, New Age citizens will be
told that the New Age scriptures CAN BE CHANGED whenever new scientific
discoveries suggest revision is needed" [S3P555-556].
T H E 'F I N A L B I B L E' R E V I S I O N C O M M I T T E E
To develop a 'Final Bible' requires a 'Final Bible Revision
New Age leader, Vera Alder, describes who might be on this committee,
and how it could possibly operate. She says:
"[T]he World Government and its Spiritual Cabinet of 12, headed by
'the Christ' will study all archaeological archives ... From it, the
'Research Panel' would develop the 'New' Bible of a World Religion which
would be the BASIS of future education" [S3P555].
H E A D Q U A R T E R S
Where would the 'Apostate Church' be headquartered and whom would it
G.A. Riplinger quotes Dave Hunt as saying:
"There seems little doubt that this false abominable last-days
religious system called Mystery Babylon (Revelation 17:5) will have its
headquarters AT THE VATICAN" [S3P133].
And "While its headquarters will be at Rome, this false religious
system will represent ALL CHURCHES, denominations, cults and religions
joined into one" [S3P133].
T H E P O P E ?
"The blueprint for the New World Order, by Vera Alder, calls for the
POPE to take his rightful 'position'" [S3P135]
"The Head of the Spiritual Cabinet would therefore have to be the
most spiritually developed MAN in the world ... He would occupy the
position which could have been that of the POPE ALL ALONG" [S3P135-6].
W O R S H I P T H E D R A G O N ?
G.A. Riplinger asks: "Are new versions preparing mankind to receive
the Antichrist and 'worship the dragon'?" [S3P17]
She thinks the answer is yes.
"... Catholics and unwary Protestants, with their Gnostic Vatican
manuscript under their arm, are being steered into the waiting arms of
the one world church of the Antichrist" [S3P498].
"Naive Christians pass over the esoteric terminology and philosophy
in new versions because, as Moody's 'Agony of Deceit' points out:
"[T]hey are unaware that they are repeating the errors of the past.
Because they do not understand Greek philosophy or Oriental mysticism,
or 19th century theosophy [Luciferism], they do not know how seriously
they have been affected by such thinking" [S3P23].
M O V E M E N T T O W A R D ' T H E E N D T I M E S '
"Satan's objective is to unite the world under a man wholly given over
to him ..." [S3P421]. This will occur sometime during the 'End Times'.
As we look around, there are signs that the world is moving toward
the 'End Times' with its 'One World Religion'. For example:
"Efforts to have the United Nations declare 1993: 'The International
Year of Religious Understanding' have been made" [S3P461]. Also, U.N.
Assistant Secretary General Robert Miller has called for a "universal
E V E R Y M A N D I D T H A T W H I C H W A S
R I G H T I N H I S O W N E Y E S
"New Ager Vera Alder says ... 'It is likely that a NEW KIND OF
RELIGION will develop in which EACH MAN will discover and work out his
OWN sermons FOR HIMSELF'" [S3P504].
"J.B. Phillips touts the reader of his forward to the NASB
Interlinear Greek-English New Testament to 'TRY AND MAKE HIS OWN
David Spangler, a Luciferian (one who worships Satan) said:
"The evolution of the race is for every man NOT to learn to OBEY the
law but to BE the law ... We can take all the scriptures ... and have a
JOLLY GOOD BONFIRE ... Once you ARE the truth, you do not need it
EXTERNALLY represented" [S3P507].
Don't these last statements sound a lot like the scripture: "...
every man did [that which was] right in his own eyes" (Judges 17:6) ?
W H E R E I S T H E C H U R C H N O W ?
Sometimes, we can be 'too close' to a problem to see it clearly. As
the saying goes: 'we can't see the forest for the trees'. Since we are
'the Church', and since we are discussing where the Church is headed,
let's see where outsiders believe 'the Church' is headed:
"Starhawk, a self proclaimed witch remarks: 'I am VERY GLAD to
discover such movement within Christian churches that is sympathetic to
the PAGAN SPIRIT'" [S3P23].
T H E U L T I M A T E Q U E S T I O N
In summary, the future is really headed toward ONE question:
"The final conflict will come down to 'Who is God?'" [S3P301].
Is it Jesus Christ, or is it Satan ?
The sheep are going to be separated from the goats; and what we are,
is our choice !
C H A P T E R 2 8
C O N C L U S I O N S
Today: "Biblical Christianity is facing one of its biggest tests as
the twentieth century closes: A return to Papal Rome of the 'separated
brethren'; A continuing stream of 'new' bibles, with NO END in sight; A
decadent morality rivaling that of Noah's day; A revival of witchcraft
and other ancient religions; and OLD heresies with NEW names. [With] The
prospect of a [one] world government forcing conformity in religion;
Christians had better be CERTAIN that they have the RIGHT SWORD, to '...
earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the
saints' (Jude 3) [S9P11-12].
And the 'right sword' is the Traditional Majority Text, the English
translation being the King James Bible.
As we have seen in this report: "The New International Version, New
American Bible, New American Standard, New Jerusalem, New English Bible,
and the New Revised Standard are not so 'NEW', ... but are merely an
encore of the 'New' Age esotericism of Plato, Saccus, Clement and Origen
..." [S3P545]. For instance: "The divinity of man, of all men, was
taught ... from the writings of Origen and Clement. Plato is saturated
with it" [S3P527].
Right now "... we are ... in the middle of a Bible translation
explosion - a veritable flood of 'new' Bible translations, versions,
paraphrases, all claiming to be the 'most accurate', the 'most
readable', and the most 'up to date'" [S17P1].
Publishers of 'modern' Bibles tell us their versions are the 'best'
translation of the Word of God. Then, a year or 2 later, they use the
exact same words AGAIN when they come out with a newer version (i.e.
when they want us to BUY again). There are now more than 120 of these
"BEST TRANSLATIONS" of the Word of God.
That's right 120!
Notice that, at the beginning of this article, there were 110
'versions' of the Bible. At the end of this article there are now 120.
From the time I started writing to the end of this report, 10 new
'versions' have been added!
Would it surprise the reader if I said they were corrupt also?
The publishers of 'new versions' are telling us that, since the last
version, 'new information' has been found that sheds 'new light' on
Think about it, publishers are saying that we do not have God's Word,
today. They are saying we have to keep looking for it!
C O M E , L E T U S R E A S O N T O G E T H E R
Would Jesus Christ leave the world, for the last 2,000 years, WITHOUT
leaving us his true New Testament Word? Would He NEGLECT everyone for
the last 2,000 years?
The simple truth is this: When Jesus Christ left the earth, he left
MANY witnesses. Those witnesses wrote down what Jesus said and did. In
fact, Jesus left so many witnesses that there are still more than 5,000
Greek New Testament manuscripts which EXIST TODAY. The early church had
those witnesses. We have them, too.
From those 5,000 New Testament witnesses we can take ANY Bible and
test it for accuracy.
The King James Bible has been found to AGREE with those 5,000
witnesses in 90-95% of the cases. That agreement level is why the King
James is called: 'The Majority Text'.
So, we do have God's Word, and we have it, today.
If, on the other hand, we take the Westcott and Hort New Testament
text (which underpins 'modern' versions) and if we compare it to the
5,000 Greek New Testament manuscripts; we find that it DISAGREES with
90-95% of the witnesses. That is why it is called the 'Minority Text'.
The bottom line is this: Jesus said you will know a tree by its
As a Christian, you need to compare the 'fruit' of these Bibles and
decide whether you believe the King James Bible (The Majority Text)
contains the Word of God, or whether the Word of God is in these
'modern' versions (the Minority Text).
Remember that the Bible is not just any book; it is the Word of God,
and is, therefore, subject to spiritual attack.
In fact it is due to SPIRITUAL ATTACK, that there EVEN EXISTS a
MINORITY of the 5,000 Greek New Testament texts which ARE CORRUPTED.
Without that spiritual attack, the King James Bible would have agreed
with 100% of the 5,000 Greek New Testament witnesses.
Remember also: Jesus has the name above all names (Philip. 2:9). And
the Bible goes on to say that: God has MAGNIFIED HIS WORD ABOVE ALL HIS
NAME (Psalms 138:2).
Wow! That is getting up there!
Thus, when we are talking about the Word of God, we are discussing a
VERY, VERY, important topic.
This report was written for the Glory of God and to point everyone
toward His True Word.
- THY WORD have I hid in my heart that I might not sin against thee.
( Ps 119:11 )
- I will delight myself in thy statutes: I will not forget THY WORD.
( Ps 119:16 )
- For ever, O Lord, THY WORD is settled in heaven. (Ps 119:89)
- I have refrained my feet from every evil way, that I might keep THY
WORD. ( Ps 119:101 )
- THY WORD [is] a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path. ( Ps
- Thou [art] my hiding place and my shield: I hope in THY WORD. ( Ps
- THY WORD [is] true [from] the beginning: and every one of thy
righteous judgments [endureth] for ever. ( Ps 119:160 )
A R E T H E S E R E V I S I O N S ?
A R E T H E S E V E R S I O N S ?
A R E T H E S E B I B L E S ?
Throughout this report I have called the NIV, the NASB, the AMP, the
RSV, the LB, the NRSV etc. etc. 'new versions'. I have also called them
'new Bibles'. And add to that the fact they are also sometimes called
1) Are these 'corruptions' REALLY 'Bibles'?
2) Are these 'corruptions' REALLY new 'versions'?
3) Are these 'corruptions' REALLY 'revisions'?
I called them 'Bibles' and 'versions', to establish 'a common
dialogue' between myself and the reader. But, let's analyze this issue.
Q U E S T I O N # 1
To the question: Are these 'corruptions' REALLY 'revisions'? David
Otis Fuller responds:
"The Revision of 1881, the American Standard Version of 1901, and the
Revised Standard Version ... are IN NO TRUE SENSE a revision of the King
James of 1611. If they were they would have followed the SAME Greek
text, the Textus Receptus, and thus would contain the SAME verses"
'New corruptions' DO NOT follow the same texts. Therefore, they ARE
Q U E S T I O N # 2
To the question: Are these 'corruptions' REALLY 'new versions'?
David Otis Fuller responds again:
"A VERSION is that which is TRANSLATED, or rendered FROM ONE
LANGUAGE to ANOTHER. The Textus Receptus IS NOT a version. It is
composed of the basic manuscript copies from which the King James
[English] VERSION was made" [S16P5].
Since all of these 'new corruptions' are in the SAME language, they
ARE NOT 'new versions'. Martin Luther's German Bible IS a 'new version'.
It is translated, from the same Traditional Majority Text, into a
different language, i.e. German.
Q U E S T I O N # 3
To the last question: Are these 'corruptions' REALLY 'Bibles'?
A 'Bible' is a book written by God. Since there is only 1 God, ALL
OF THE BOOKS WHICH ARE REALLY BIBLES WOULD AGREE WITH EACH OTHER. This
is because God is CONSISTENT and faithful. Also, the true Bible written
by God, would be FREELY available to all His people; as, God is willing
that ALL should be saved. It would NOT be financially copyrighted by
men. Men CANNOT take credit for God's labor.
"God has only one Bible. All the others ... are NOT Bibles BUT BOOKS
OF MEN" [S7P13]. 'Modern corruptions' are financially copyrighted
because they are the product of MEN'S efforts, not God's.
Thus, these modern 'books' ARE NOT Bibles.
W H A T A R E W E D E A L I N G W I T H ?
So what are we really dealing with when we are discussing these
'books of men'.
First off, I believe they are NOT 'revisions', they are NOT
'versions', and they are NOT 'Bibles'. That is what THEY ARE NOT. So
what are they?
There are at least two words, that I can think of, which accurately
describe these 'books of men'. Those words are: 'Forgeries' and
A forgery and/or a counterfeit is something that tries to LOOK like
the original, but isn't. A forgery and/or a counterfeit tries to pass
itself off as the original, but never makes it OBVIOUS that it is a
fake. A forgery/counterfeit always takes a SUBTLE approach.
W H Y C O U N T E R F E I T ?
WHY is there an effort to counterfeit the Word of God?
This question is easily answered.
We have all seen the TV ads for 'counterfeit diamonds'. Counterfeit
diamonds are called Cubic Zirconias.
But, we have NEVER seen a TV ad for a 'counterfeit Cubic Zirconia'.
Why is that?
The reason is that diamonds are VALUABLE. A Cubic Zirconia is only of
'nominal' value. Items which are counterfeited are those of HIGH VALUE.
Diamonds are counterfeited, the US dollar is counterfeited, etc. etc.
But, there is no reason to counterfeit a Cubic Zirconia.
Thus the TRUE, original Word of God MUST BE EXTREMELY VALUABLE. The
actual Word of God MUST BE ABSOLUTELY TRUE.
- If God says we MUST be Born Again, then it is TRUE and VALUABLE.
- If God says Jesus saves us from Hell, then it is TRUE and VALUABLE.
- If God says we can be divinely healed, then it is TRUE and VALUABLE.
- If God says we can speak in new tongues, then it is TRUE and VALUABLE.
- If God gives the test for Antichrist, then it is be TRUE and VALUABLE.
And on and on.
C O U N T E R F E I T S O F M E N ?
So are these books 'counterfeits of men'? Is this 6,000 year
historical struggle for the Word of God a 'struggle between men'?
In this report, Protestants seem to be struggling against the
Jesuits, the Catholics, and the "... MANY which ... corrupt the Word of
But the Bible is very clear about our problem: "For we wrestle NOT
against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers,
against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual
wickedness in high [places]" ( Ephesians 6:12 ).
Thus, these 'counterfeits' are not from men, but from Satan himself.
Yes, Satan is 'using' these men. And yes, we need to be 'aware' of the
men Satan is using.
But, in reality it is a spiritual struggle. We are really struggling
against the 'father of lies'.
Thus, it was Satan who used Rudolph Kittel to make the corrupted Old
Testament manuscript. It was Satan who used Westcott and Hort to make
the corrupted New Testament manuscript. And these corrupt manuscripts
form the foundation for 120 modern 'counterfeits'.
Because this is a struggle against 'wickedness in high places' we are
NOT talking about an earthly 'flesh to flesh' deception. Instead, we are
talking about "Spiritual Deception In the Highest".
I F Y O U L I K E T H I S R E P O R T
If you like this report, you are welcome to copy it and pass it on to
In conclusion, I think the following quote really 'sums things up'!
D O W E N E E D A N E W V E R S I O N ?
Dr. Martyn Lloyd Jones, a highly respected theologian of this century
commented on these 'new versions'. He said:
"... the most popular of all the proposals at the present moment is
to have a new translation of the Bible ... The argument is that people
are not reading the Bible any longer because they do not understand the
its language ... What does your modern man ... know about justification,
sanctification, and all the biblical terms?
... we are told the thing that is necessary is to have a translation
that Tom, Dick, and Harry will understand, and I began to feel ... that
we had almost reached the stage in which the Authorized Version was
being dismissed, to be thrown into the limbo of things forgotten, no
longer of any value. Need I apologise for saying a word in favor of the
Authorized Version ...
It is a basic proposition laid down by the Protestant Reformers, that
we must have a Bible 'understanded of the people'. That is common sense
... we must never be obscurantists. We must never approach the Bible in
a mere antiquarian spirit ... but it does seem to me that there is a
very grave danger incipient in so much of the argument that is being
presented today for these new translations. There is a danger, I say, of
surrendering something that is vital and essential ...
Take the argument that the modern man does not understand such terms
as justification, sanctification and so on. I want to ask a question.
When did the ordinary man ever understand those terms? ... Did the
colliers to whom John Wesley and George Whitfield preached in the 18th
century understand? They had not even been to a day school ... they
could not read, they could not write. Yet these were the terms that were
used. This was the version that was used - the Authorized Version. The
common people have never understood these terms ... we are concerned
here about something spiritual; something which does not belong to this
world at all; which, as the apostle Paul reminds us, the princes of this
world do not know. Human wisdom is of no value here - it is a spiritual
truth. This is the truth about God primarily, and because of that it is
a mystery ...
Yet we are told - it must be in such simple terms and language that
anybody taking it up and reading it is going to understand all about it.
My friends this is sheer nonsense. What we must do is educate the masses
of the people up to the Bible, not bring the Bible down to their level.
One of the greatest troubles today is that everything is being brought
down to the same level; everything is cheapened. The common man is the
standard of authority; he decides everything, and everything has to be
brought down to him ...
Are we to do that with the Word of God? I say no! What has happened
in the past has been this. Ignorant, illiterate people, in this country
and in foreign countries, coming into salvation have been educated up to
the book and have begun to understand it, to glory in it, and to praise
God for it, and I say that we need to do the same at this present time.
What we need is therefore, not to replace the Authorized Version ... We
need rather to reach and train people up to the standard and language,
the dignity and the glory of the old Authorized Version" [S6P103-4].
C H A P T E R 2 9
P A R T I N G C O M M E N T S
I hope this report has been useful to you.
When I began researching the Bible, I did not fully comprehend the
depth and breadth of the spiritual battle which has, is, and will
continue to take place.
This research has been a real 'eye opener' for me.
With the exception of one chapter devoted to 'speculating' about the
future, this article has been based on 'factual data'. Factual data
included Bible verse comparisons, historical facts, personal
biographies, etc. etc.
Those facts were documented by approximately 500 footnotes.
Therefore, the reader can trace all of the information.
The early Church verified everything the Apostle Paul told them. You
should verify everything Jeff Johnson tells you. You should review this
information and decide if; I have said the truth.
Jesus said that you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you
free. You need to decide what you believe to be true.
C H R I S T I A N B U L L E T I N B O A R D S
If you are interested in obtaining other Christian literature,
articles, clean games for your children etc. etc; you can also modem to
various Christian BBS's. There are many of them out there.
The following is a partial list of the Christian BBS's that I have
"Bob's Fellowship" (310) 696-5459
"Bread Board BBS" (972) 617-8259
"Christ's Corner" (213) 938-6579
"Christian Retreat" (972) 221-7198
"Digital Chapel" (714) 870-9228
"Haven of Rest" (904) 474-0992
"Inspiration BBS" (512) 452-6350
"New Joy BBS" (310) 634-0146
"Shiloh BBS" (818) 280-4220
"The Call BBS" (818) 352-1678
"T.R.A.I.N BBS" (972) 878-9818
A N O T H E R E Y E O P E N E R
This article discussed some 'eye opening' facts about the Bible. We
saw how God's truth has (and is) being corrupted. False teaching
On the same topic of Truth and the Bible:
Did you know that ACTUAL archaeological and geological data agrees
with the Biblical account of the creation, the fall, and the flood?
That's right! Contrary to what we've been told, God's Word AGREES
with the facts. The truth is this: the earth, moon, sun, and the
universe are actually very young; just like the Bible says. Engineering
data and scientific data agrees with God's Word. You CAN be an engineer
and/or a scientist and NOT compromise your Christian beliefs. The two
are actually consistent.
If you want to find out more about how God's Bible agrees with
scientific data, I would refer you to:
The Institute For Creation Research
P.O. Box 2667
El Cajon, California 92021
Phone: (619) 448-0900
The staff at ICR include a significant number of PHD's. These people
are intelligent Christians. They publish a newsletter called: "Acts and
Facts". They also have a lot of information and materials on the topic
of Science and the Bible.
Their information is ANOTHER eye opener!
Again, I hope this article has been useful to you.
D E D I C A T O R Y
This article is dedicated to the King of Kings, and the Lord of
Lords: Jesus Christ; the "Word made flesh".
Since there is only 1 God; there is only 1 Bible.
Now, to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, to the only wise God;
to God be the glory, now and for ever more. AMEN.
R E F E R E N C E S
More information is available on this important subject.
For those of you who wish to go further in this study, the following
are my references.
As you know from the section on "Footnoting Methodology"; the
following format was used for the footnotes:
Where: S# is the source number and P# is the page number.
Thus: [S1P1] is source number 1, page number 1; and [S2P4-5] is
source number 2, pages 4 through 5 etc. etc.
Each source number, source material and distributor of the material
is listed below.
Also, if it was available, I included the phone number, fax number,
and web site for the 'distributors' of this material.
As you know, phone numbers (especially area codes) can change.
Addresses are more stable.
Source Source Distributor
Number Material Of The Material
~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1 "An Understandable History Bible Believers Baptist
Of The Bible" Bookstore
by: Rev. Samuel C. Gipp 1252 East Aurora Road
( Book, 242 pages ) Macedonia, Ohio 44506
Phone: (216) 467-1611
2 "Which Bible" Eye Opener Publishers
by: David Otis Fuller P. O. Box 7944
ISBN 0-944355-24-2 Eugene, Oregon 97401
( Book, 350 pages )
3 "New Age Bible Versions" Chick Publications
by: G.A. Riplinger P. O. Box 662
ISBN: 0-9635845-0-2 Chino, Calif. 91708-0662
( Book, 690 pages )
Phone: (909) 987-0771
Fax: (909) 941-8128
4 "God Wrote Only One Bible" Eye Opener Publishers
by: Jasper James Ray P. O. Box 7944
( Book, 122 pages ) Eugene, Oregon 97401
5 "Let's Weigh The Evidence" Chick Publications
by: Larry Burton P. O. Box 662
ISBN: 0-937958-17-4 Chino, Calif. 91708-0662
( Book, 95 pages )
Phone: (909) 987-0771
Fax: (909) 941-8128
6 "The Majority Text: Essays Institute For Biblical
And Reviews In The Textual Studies
Continuing Debate" 2233 Michigan Street N.E.
by: Theodore P. Letis Grand Rapids, MI. 49503
( Book, 210 pages ) Phone: (616) 456-8190
Fax: (616) 949-7540
7 "God's Inspired Preserved Bible" Bible Baptist Bookstore
Publ. by: The Peoples Gospel Hr. P.O. Box 7135
( Book, 67 pages ) Pensacola, Florida 32514
8 "Believing Bible Study" Eye Opener Publishers
by: Edward F. Hills P. O. Box 7944
ISBN 0-915923-01-7 Eugene, Oregon 97401
( Book, 258 pages )
9 "The Legacy Of Our Institute For Biblical
English Bible" Textual Studies
by: John Wesley Sawyer 2233 Michigan Street N.E.
( Booklet, 15 pages ) Grand Rapids, MI. 49503
Phone: (616) 456-8190
Fax: (616) 949-7540
10 "A Position Paper On The Institute For Biblical
Versions Of The Bible" Textual Studies
by: David Otis Fuller 2233 Michigan Street N.E.
( Booklet, 8 pages ) Grand Rapids, MI. 49503
Phone: (616) 456-8190
Fax: (616) 949-7540
11 "The Bible Bable" Bible Baptist Bookstore
by: Peter S. Ruckman P.O. Box 7135
( Book 129 pages ) Pensacola, Florida 32514
12 "The King James Version Defended" Eye Opener Publishers
by: Edward F. Hills P. O. Box 7944
ISBN 0-915923-00-9 Eugene, Oregon 97401
( Book, 280 pages )
13 "The Old Is Better" Eye Opener Publishers
by: Alfred Levell P. O. Box 7944
ISBN 0-903556-87-1 Eugene, Oregon 97401
( Book, 61 pages )
14 "A Fresh Look At The Institute For Biblical
King James Bible" Textual Studies
by: Dr. Ralph I. Yarnell 2233 Michigan Street N.E.
( Booklet, 35 pages ) Grand Rapids, MI. 49503
Phone: (616) 456-8190
Fax: (616) 949-7540
15 "New International Version: What Trinitarian Bible Society
Today's Christian Needs To Know 1710 Richmond Street N.W.
About The NIV" Grand Rapids, MI. 49504
by: G.W. Anderson and
D.E. Anderson Phone: (616) 453-2892
( Booklet, 33 pages )
16 "God Wrote Only One Bible" Eye Opener Publishers
by: Jasper James Ray P. O. Box 7944
( Pamphlet, 8 pages ) Eugene, Oregon 97401
17 "Modern Versions Are Institute For Biblical
Dangerous" Textual Studies
by: Dr. M. H. Reynolds 2233 Michigan Street N.E.
( Pamphlet, 8 pages ) Grand Rapids, MI. 49503
Phone: (616) 456-8190
Fax: (616) 949-7540
18 "The Origin Of The Bible" Joshua's Christian Bookstores
by: Philip Comfort
( Book, 308 pages )
19 "A Creationist's Defense Of The Institute For Creation
King James Bible" Research
by: Dr. Henry M. Morris P.O. Box 2667
( Pamphlet, 18 pages ) El Cajon, California 92021
************************ THE END ! ***************************
Ye Must Be Born Again! | You Need HIS Righteousness! | Believe The Gospel