The King James Bible issue explained (for people who don’t know)


King James BibleIn light of Phil Stringer’s speech to the King James organizations last year (which I finally just listened to!) I thought I’d explain the whole King James issue.

One person who reads my blog wrote on their own blog, “I don’t mind the King James issue, but I hate the people who defend it.” And to a certain extent, I can’t blame them for thinking this way. Presumably that means me as well, but hey… a lot of us do deserve the comments. I’ll explain.

For starters, no one person speaks for the King James only movement. There’s a lot of people who speak for the issue. And there’s several that most of us frankly wish, would shut up.

I don’t own any writings, ebooks or audio recordings by Gail Riplinger. She’s written some things that I’ve seen quoted that I agree with… and she’s written many things that I do not agree with.

She’s said many mean-spirited things… and honestly, some wild-eyed things that make us KJV defenders all look like idiots. I own – and use – a Strong’s concordance. From what I’ve seen quoted in it, the “Toxic” book sounds like, well, lunacy. She’s done a poor job of research, and makes the same mistake a lot of evangelical Christians do as well.

Briefly, if I get a book published by Tyndale, I’d probably be bouncing like an idiot. “I got published! Yes!!!” I’d send my manuscript off, check my proofs carefully, and very possibly, if the editor was feeling generous, I might even get to okay the book cover.

It does not mean I’m having any secret meetings with any of the other Tyndale publishers. Let’s just hypothesize that James White also landed a publishing deal with Tyndale. It doesn’t mean we’re getting together and having coffee. It also doesn’t mean he and I are plotting to edit (HORRORS!) or destroy the King James Bible.

Gail Riplinger does make those kinds of leaps of logic. But so do a lot of evangelical Christians I’ve seen books by. Many of the people who investigate the Illuminati, new world order, etc make those very same leaps of logic. I guess it’s okay for Texe Marrs to do it, but not a King James only person?

Let me briefly distance myself from another King James defender I wish would shut up. Or at least tone it down. Peter Ruckman. The man’s a cult leader. He makes some very strange statements, is very bigoted, and no doubt would dismiss me as a “jackass” and a “kike”. Yes, he does talk like that. My seminary president visited his church once, and testified that yes, Ruckman says the “N” word from the pulpit. Racism really is not helping the cause of the King James Bible any.

Those kind of people really do the King James world a disservice. NO, I don’t stand on street corners with a megaphone shouting, “You’re going to hell! You’re going to Hell!” Peter S. Ruckman’s church does that, from what Marc Monte says.

Okay, there you go. I know I’m rough. I know I speak very strongly. But then again, I’ve read the Bible a lot, and Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Joel, and many others did so as well. I get so absolutely fed up with people – heretics, really – question the bible, deny the Bible, make up their own doctrine, and steer my Christian brethren on a sleepwalking road back to Rome. So, I tend to speak very harshly about such people.

So, let me explain the King James issue. I know you’re not James White. I know you’re not Ron Rhodes. I know you’re not John Ankerberg. These people all speak against the King James issue, and in reality,most of the people who speak against the King James Issue have never studied it.

When you see us slam the opponents of the King James issue, pause and consider this – we’re defending our beliefs. And many of the people that oppose us often have agendas. And many of them hold to secret heresies they won’t admit to. That’s very often the people we’re mentally imagining when we write these articles.

The first thing you should be aware of is… who is on these Bible translating committees? Check these people out. Read about the names of these people. Oh, wow… hey, James White is on the translating committee of some modern translations – that means financially he’s got a stake in attacking the ing James Only movement!

What about Virginia Mollenkot? What are her beliefs about Bible inerrancy, God, the inspiration and preservation of Scripture?

What about Cardinal Carlo Martini? The Jesuit? What agenda does he have?

What about some of these other names? Kurt Aland. Matthew Black, Bruce Metzger, Allen Wikgren? what do these people believe? What are their statements of faith? Should these people be deciding how to translate the Greek texts into English? Some words such as Uranos can mean heaven or sky. Do you want someone who does not believe in heaven translating your Bible?

Let me ask a question – and again, I understand that many of you have simply never been educated in the Bible issue.

1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; 1 Timothy 4:1 (KJV)

Okay, we all understand, agree, and are aware the Bible says that in the last times heretics will arise.

1 But 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 bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. 2 And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. 3 And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not. 2 Peter 2:1-3 (KJV)

Even the most trusting evangelical Christian begins to suspect this may not be a person in the congregation, but also pastors as well.

If Satan was going to weaken Christians and lead them astray, where’s the best places to get his tools? His wolves? In the pulpits.

And translating your Bibles

Are you aware that Kurt Aland, of the Nestle’-Aland Greek Texts, is a heretic? He does not even accept that the 66 books we have in our Bible belong there. And he’s open to other books being put in, and probably even some of ours being taken out. There’s quotes from Aland about that very subject. Read them.

And keep in mind, he’s the man responsible for the Greek texts used by the Bible societies.

Scared yet? You should be.

Because the truth is that all the modern texts come from codex sinaiticus – a Greek text that a known manuscript forger confessed to forging over 100 years ago… – and from a copy of Codex Vaticanus. Not the original, but a copy. Vaticanus is exhibited at the Vatican library, but if it looks like you’re reading it or translating it, it’s yanked away and placed back in the back rooms.

Neither of these books are complete. Sinaiticus has several apocryphal texts and pseudopigraphal texts in it. Does that mean we should be accepting these books as canon?

Sinaiticus is written in the wrong Greek, Attic Greek, not in Koine greek – this places it either in the wrong era (100 BC) or… as a clumsy forgery. And remember, Constantinus Simonides (a known Bible and manuscript forger) had already admitted to forging it early in his career. Even he admitted it was a clumsy forgery!

Here’s the issue. Vaticanus does not have some books. Sinaiticus does not have some books. They disagree with each other in tens of thousands of places.
If I were to translate the New Testament from these texts, I’d have years of heartache about it, trying to decide which of the texts are correct. Do I choose the verse that is missing half the words, or do I choose the one that has left out some words? One verse is missing in one text the name of God, the other is missing the name of Christ. Almost every reference to fasting is removed from one of the manuscripts.

And both of them disagree GREATLY with over 5200 other Greek Texts, that all the Christian churches had been using since the times of the Apostles.

Now, those 5200 agree. There’s some minor copying errors between them, and a few misspelled words – but aside from that, they all agree. You can go from one to the other of those 5,200 manuscripts and find that they all pretty much say exactly the same thing word for word.

So, which would you choose? The copy of Vaticanus and the possibly forged, incomplete Greek text that disagrees with Vaticanus in 10,000 places? Or the 5,200 other manuscripts?

You and I would find this one a no-brainer. Go with 2 flawed manuscripts, or go with the 5,200 ones that agree? I think we’d all turn to the really big pile. The work would actually go faster. You don’t have to decide which version to go with! You just simply read them, and when you come to a repeated word or a space that looks like a word was misspelled or left out, you consult another. You could do it with three or four manuscripts.

Or, you could use one of the manuscripts that’s already been compiled by men who’ve done just that! The compilation often bears the same name as the same family of texts, the Textus-Receptus.

But what do Nestle and Aland choose? Or Wescott and Hort? What did they ALL choose for the modern translations? Why, the forged manuscript and the copy provided by the Vatican.

Huh. The… very choice you’d expect men who deny the deity of Jesus Christ, the inspiration, preservation and canon of the Bible to make.

It’s the only conclusion I can come to. The protests of James White and John Ankerberg cannot sweep away that fact. They’re choosing texts that are flawed, incomplete, and possibly forged.

By an amazing coincidence, these Greek texts neglect almost every reference to fasting. They omit many references to the Blood of Jesus Christ. There’s a few Charismatics who follow this blog. They’d be shocked to find that out!

And many of the verses deliberately change many of the verses that affirm the deity of Christ. Would you trust the manuscripts that affirm many times that Jesus Christ is God, that ye must be born again, that Christ rose from the dead? Or do you want the ones that omit these references?

this is the King james only issue. This is the issue at hand. And Christians who love the Bible, once they become aware of it and begin looking up the translations of various verses, all become convinced of the issue. And they get fighting mad!

I’m furious we have allowed men like Bruce Metzger who denies openly the deity of Jesus Christ and calls Genesis “a fable” to translate our Bibles. We allow Unitarians to suggest wordings they can live with. After all , the thought of Hell makes Unitarians uncomfortable! If they deny the existence of Hell, and give it names like “tartarus” “gehenna” and “hades”, they can sleep a little easier at night.

Because they deny that Jesus Christ is God. And if you believe that, you are not saved. And if you’re not saved, where will you go when you die?

If you’d like, I can list verse after verse after verse that will scare you and will make you put away your other Bibles. And even get you to the point that you will start calling the Modern Bible Versions… well, you’ll start adding the prefix “per” to “version.”

I’m betting that if you can stay a follower of my often-too blunt blog for more than a week, you must be a committed Christian with a love for Christ and His Bible. And if that’s the case, you need to look into this issue. Because a lot is at stake.

Advertisements

Textual Criticism


“The Bible version issue must be faced BECAUSE IT IS FOUNDATIONAL… The Bible version issue must be faced BECAUSE, GENERALLY SPEAKING, ONLY ONE SIDE OF THIS DEBATE IS GIVEN TODAY.” (David Cloud, Way of Life Encyclopedia, pg. 66)

This article is going to be a little long, but I encourage you to read it, to study this issue, because I will tell you it is the most important doctrinal issue facing Christianity today. Why? If you do not have the right understanding of the Bible, the core element of the Christian life, how will you determine your doctrine? How will you live, not knowing what to believe?

We’ve all seen the standard line in Bible teacher’s statements of faith… “We believe the Bible to be inerrant, and inspired in the original manuscripts.”

The great thing about that statement, is that you can claim Genesis is a myth, that Christ never rose from the dead and was just a good man, and STILL put that in your statement of faith, and be telling the truth.

Why?

Where are the original manuscripts?

Gone. Faded away.

So you can claim they say whatever you like. Who’s going to prove you wrong?

The issue has to do with textual criticism. Textual criticism is a series of statements invented by Wescott and Hort to defend their work against any complaints from Bible Believing Christians.

So, what exactly is Modern Textual Criticism?

“the struggle to REGAIN the original form of the New Testament” (Constantine Tischendorf, quoted in Metzger, The Text of the New Testament, p. 126)

Regain. The implication is that the text was lost.

Let me briefly explain the history of the Greek Text, and someone let me know where it was lost, please?

The original text of the New Testament was written as letters which were circulated to all the churches. It would be copied carefully, and then the original letter sent on. To put it simply and bluntly, THERE WAS NO ORIGINAL TEXT of the Bible, where you opened it up and it was all 29 books of the New Testament.

The VERY FIRST TEXT would have been when the first church finally got Revelation in 95 AD and added its text to their collection. We finally would have had the completed New Testament text. Hold that thought, because every step of the way requires a miracle to think that God would preserve His Bible – which indeed happened.

18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Matthew 5:18 (KJV)

Here’s my first point – If you believe in Modern Textual Criticism, you do not believe the Bible literally, as Jesus Christ states in Matthew 5:18 that the text of the Bible will NEVER pass away while Heaven and Earth exist.

Second point…. If you don’t believe Matthew 5:18, what ELSE do you not believe?

This issue of accepting Modern Textual Criticism is a major issue, as it almost literally can be used as a yardstick to identify who is a false teacher and who is not…

ALL of the original First Century churches would have compiled copies of the New Testament. The Christian churches began facing fierce opposition, before the New Testament was even completed, under Domitian and Nero. It is recorded in the Talmud the fierceness with which Rome dealt with Holy Books not of Roman origin. Rabbi Akiva was tied to a stake, doused in oil, then wrapped in a Torah Scroll – then set afire. Akiva cried out as he burnt alive that he could see the glowing red letters of the word of God floating up to heaven before him. The scene so moved the Centurion who set Akiva afire that the Centurion jumped onto the pile of burning wood and wrapped his arms around Akiva, where the two of them burned to death together. The Centurion also shouted out he could see the letters burning and rising into heaven before them.

The New Testament churches copied all the words of the Bible and circulated them, so that every family could own one. Churches began to scatter as affliction and persecution rose. Romans found Bibles nad burned them. THey found Lectionaries (portions of Scripture copied for responsive readings) and destroyed them.

The state church was instituted by Constantine finally, becoming the roman Catholic church… who added to the persecution, burning all Bibles they found. You have to ask a LOT of questions about why would the Roman Catholic church burn all the bibles they find? Facts are, they did burn them.

Finally, as periods of persecution began to finaly die away, men began to collect all the handwritten Bibles, in many different languages, and compared them.

Despite some minor spelling mistakes, 99.99% of them all agreed word for word, letter for letter.

That’s a MIRACLE. If I assigned 30 students to copy a chapter from a book, there’s going to be massive contradictions, missed words, spelling errors, dropped lines where the eye finds the same word in two separate lines, but misses most of one line and begins copying the next line starting from the repeated word. This actually happened very rarely among all the texts.

There’s a man named Will Kinney who has researched this issue in some detail. He’s not the first person to do it – it was done by Scrivener, by Stephanus, by Beza, and even by Dean John Burgon. Will Kinney can literally tell you in many cases, “you can find that in the Chester Beatty Papyrii, in Manuscript number….” If you’re really interested in this issue, contact Mr. Kinney.

Scrivener, Beza, the Elzivier brothers and Stephanus all did this work, comparing the New Testament manuscripts in many different languages. Stephanus spent so much time studying it, that in his writings he began to decry and object to everything his church taught – because he was a Roman Catholic priest, and he began to realize that there were huge inconsistencies between what the Catholic church taught and what the Bible said.

The work of these men compiled the Stephanus’s 4th Edition Greek Manuscript. Beza and the Elzivier brothers compiled their own. Miraculously, they were all almost the same word for word.

This work has become called the Received Text, or Textus Receptus in Latin. It represents the Bible as miraculously preserved by God through over 1600 years. This family of manuscripts, as well as Bibles by the Waldensians, the Catharists, the Donatists, and other ancient Baptists was used to translated all of the early Bibles into English.

The history of the Bible passing to us is a miracle story. It is beyond belief. It proves the divine hand of God in preserving His word, just as written in the Psalms, just as Jesus Christ promised!

11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them. 12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. Revelation 20:11-12 (KJV)

Here’s an important point, point number three…. For there to be a judgment, there must be a preserved, inspired word of God somewhere. Where? In Heaven? There could not be a judgment day, if the word of God cannot be found on Earth. We could protest to God that we had no idea, we had no Pure and Inspired, Preserved word of God on earth by which to judge how to be saved, how to live holy lives, what to believe about whether Christ was God or if the Trinity was Biblical!

6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. 7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever. Psalm 12:6-7 (KJV)

If you believe in Modern Textual Criticism, you cannot believe that the word of God is Inspired, you cannot believe it is Preserved… and you must forever be a little suspicious about “Should this word be in this verse? Should this verse be in the Bible?” You forever become YOUR OWN AUTHORITY over what you believe the word of God is.

18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: 19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. Revelation 22:18-19 (KJV)

1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; 2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; 1 Timothy 4:1-2 (KJV)

Last, if you PARTICIPATE in Modern Textual Criticism, you cannot possibly be saved, and the Bible even says that. Your conscience becomes so seared that you will not respond to the Gospel of Christ, and turn to be saved.

Okay, now let’s turn to the “official history” of the Bible as given by Modern Textual critics.

The word of God supposedly was corrupted and edited by Pious Scribes, who added the same words to the same verses all over the world in manuscripts separated on three continents. These Pious Scribes were somehow very busy, as they supposedly did this in the 4th century, and found time to even go back to manuscripts much older than this, and miraculously add words to lectionaries, codexes, miniscules, majescules, papyrii and scrolls. And somehow left no real sign of adding the words.

If this sounds completely stupid, impossible, and illogical, then you’re right. Print this page out, and add several words to 15 sentences randomly. And make sure you can fit the words in in such a way it doesn’t look like you did it. Oh, and your handwriting has to match the print.

Impossible? Well, you just disproved the first and foremost theory of Textual Criticism, that some pious Scribe added words to all the Greek texts. How many texts would he have to add them to?

Only about 5,280 or so, dating back to the first four centuries. I’m not even counting the ones from after AD 500, just those from the time of the mythical “pious Scribe”.

The theory says he added the words to one text, which served as the master text from which the others were copied. But… the texts that are part of this family are actually found on three different continents. And many date from before the time of the “pious scribe”. So, again, to do this he’d have to travel, and add the words to all the manuscripts.

The utter impossibility of this cannot be emphasized.

There HAS to be a willing desire to corrupt God’s word to want to engage in Textual Criticism.

There’s a recording of a man speaking at a church in the 80’s, who’d been a teacher at Tennessee Temple University. He was called on the carpet for being King James Only (and for teaching Peter Ruckman – this part I won’t excuse, as Ruckman is most definitely a heretic). The teacher asked the chairman of Tennessee Temple, “What gives man the right to edit the word of God?”

The answer was, “Scholarship.”

The teacher asked exactly the same question I would have at that point. “So, you’re telling me, if I took every class possible at Tennessee Temple and became a scholar, I, a sinful man, would have the RIGHT to choose what words belong in the Bible, the word of God?”

The chairman answered, “Yes.”

Brothers and sisters, I at this point have to cry foul. I’ve proved the miraculous nature of the preservation of God’s word. I’ve proved the inerrancy of the Bible. Inerrancy demands preservation, as the Bible calls for it. If you believe in an inerrant Bible, you must believe in a preserved Bible.

Here’s the kicker – if you do not believe in preservation, you do not believe in inerrancy. The two go hand in hand. If you do not believe the Bible was preserved, then you do not believe it is inerrant and inspired.

If you do not believe in an inerrant, inspired, preserved word of God, I’m a little worried about your Christian walk.

So, now, let’s analyze the men who engaged in the first textual criticism. Wescott and Hort were men who, judging by their own words, their own writings, did not believe in the inspiration or inerrancy of the Bible. And they were hostile to the received text, the Textus Receptus. Why? It contradicted their favorite teacher, who was a humanist, a modernist. The Textus Receptus advocated that Jesus Christ is God, that there is a Hell for any who reject Christ. It speaks of fasting and prayer. It tells us Jesus Christ was without sin, the perfect sinless lamb of God. That He’s coming again.

This was offensive to Wescott and Hort. It was offensive to Tischendorf, who was given sponsorship to travel the middle east looking for a text, ANY text they could use to replace the Textus Receptus. Why? Because all the modernists were opposed to it.

A week before the sponsorship ran out, Tischendorf found himself at the Monastary of St. Catherine, surrounded by Pious Scribes. he found a manuscript in a trash pile, and dubbed it Codex Sinaiticus. The Manuscript looked unused, and in excellent condition. So good, it looked like it had been written just a few years before.

Tischendorf returned, told his sponsors, who gave him the money to go back and buy it. He bought it and brought it back to Egypt. The Monks had been a little amused he wanted to pay so much money for a useless codex.

Tischendorf announced his “Discovery”, to great publicity and fanfare.

Until a suspected manuscript dealer announced to the press there was a problem. the dealer explained he was a forger, he’d been forging manuscripts for years. And he explained that he’d created Sinaiticus at the beginning of his career, and dismissed it as “Clumsy”.

Tisachendorf waited for the furor to die down… then began touting his discovery again as if nothing ever happened. Nobody ever investigated the claims of Constantinus Simonides, the forger who claimed to have written Sinaiticus.

Sinaiticus was handed over to Wescott and Hort, who busied themselves with trying to translate it. The problem was, it showed many editings, sometimes as many as ten men editing it. And it was incomplete, missing words, verses, chapters, even books of the Bible.

It also was written in the wrong form of Greek, Attic Greek, which dates to the Maccabean period, not to the time of the New Testament, and certainly not afterwards.

Wescott and Hort additionally had an emotional attachment to the copy of Codex Vaticanus they had. Not the original ,but a copy. Both Wescott and Hort wrote that they instinctively felt that Vaticanus was the most accurate manuscript.

Based on a hunch. they decided that if there was a conflict between the two manuscripts, they would side with Vaticanus – a manuscript which also showed many signs of editing! Including a handwritten note saying, “thou fool! Remove not the old reading!”

Now Wescott and Hort had the unenviable task of trying to get readings from the two manuscripts that agreed. Aleph (Sinaiticus) and V (vaticanus, sometimes called B) both disagreed with each other in tens of thousands of spots. Dean John Burgon sarcastically wrote it was easier to find where they disagreed to find where they agreed!

So WEscott and Hort wrote down their new Greek text, mostly relying on Vaitcanus, as Sinaiticus was such a sorry mess. The text was completed in 1886.

Whenever you see a footnote in your modern Bible that says anything about the “oldest and best mss”, they are referring to that manuscript compiled by Wescott and Hort in 1886. This man-made manuscript, based on the guesses of two unsaved modernist men who questioned the Bible, did not believe in the deity of Christ, and scoffed at miracles, is considered to be older than the second century mss. belonging to the Textus Receptus.

It is neither “oldest” or “best” manuscripts – it is a heretical piece of blasphemy, removing any verse that offended Unitarians. No blood, no fasting, no deity of Christ, no sinless nature, no pre-existence, no vicarious atonement except in the most rudimentary form….

…and Christians swallowed it hook, line and sinker. Why, these men are SCHOLARS!

Here’s a list of some (not all) of these “scholars”:

UNITARIANS: ohann Wettstein, Edward Harwood, George Vance Smith, Ezra Abbot, Joseph Thayer, and Caspar Gregory;

RATIONALISTS: Johann Semler, Johann Griesbach, Bernhard Weiss, William Sanday, William Robertson Smith, Samuel Driver, Eberhard Nestle, James Rendel Harris, Hermann von Soden, Frederick Conybeare, Fredric Kenyon, Francis Burkitt, Henry Wheeler Robinson, Kirsopp Lake, Gerhard Kittel, Edgar Goodspeed, James Moffatt, Kenneth Clark, Ernest Colwell, Gunther Zuntz, J.B. Phillips, William Barclay, Theodore Skeat, George Kilpatrick, F.F. Bruce, George Ladd, J.K. Elliott, Eldon Epp, Brevard Childs, Bart Ehrman, C.H. Dodd, Barclay Newman, Arthur Voobus, Eugene Nida, Jan de Waard, Kurt Aland, Barbara Aland, Matthew Black, Allen Wikgren, Bruce Metzger, and Johannes Karavidopoulos;

ROMAN CATHOLICS: Richard Simon, Alexander Geddes, Alberto Ablondi, Johann Hug, and Carlo Martini.

“When the constitution of the British and Foreign Bible Society was first formulated, it was understandably not foreseen that the question of Unitarianism would have much relevance to the society’s work. Before long, however, UNITARIANS GAINED SUBSTANTIAL INFLUENCE UPON THE AFFAIRS OF THE BIBLE SOCIETY, PARTICULARLY IN EUROPE, WHERE SOME AUXILIARY SOCIETIES WERE RUN ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY BY PERSONS OF UNITARIAN BELIEFS” (Brown, The Word of God Among All Nations, p. 12).

The standard line from modernists is that “no doctrine is affected, and the total changes add to less than one page of the Bible.”

the differences affect seven percent of the New Testament. “The fact of the matter is that the Critical Text of Westcott-Hort differs from the TR, mostly by deletions, in 9,970 words out of 140,521, giving a total of 7% difference. In the 480-page edition of the Trinitarian Bible Society Textus Receptus this would amount to almost 34 pages, the equivalent of the final two books of the New Testament, Jude and Revelation” (Thomas Strouse, Review of “From the Mind of God to the Mind of Man,” November 2000).

If you believe that it doesn’t matter what Bible you read… stay tuned. I’m going to discuss this at length soon.

Signs of the Times


Evangelicals have begun to oppose the Bible.

Evangelicals have begun to link arms with the unsaved.

Evangelicals are beginning to reject Fundamentalists, in favor of the unSaved, such as those who sprinkle babies and call it salvation. Such as Mormons. Such as Catholics.

We hear that over a billion people are Christians, and we assume that means people who understant “ye must be born again”.

While in Seminary, my teacher asked the rhetorical question of how many people were saved? He guessed 5%, and everyone in the class was scandalized.

I took the Operation World manual, and took their statistics. It was very simple. I took out all the denominations that assume you are predestined to be saved. Why? Because by the second generation, they are relying on their infant baptism as a sign of their “election”.

I took out all the Protestant denominations that believe that being baptized saves you.

I took out the Mormons.

I took out the Roman Catholics.

It left Charismatics and Baptists. I didn’t take out any of those numbers, because I was estimating a “fudge factor” of, “Some of those Protestants must have gotten saved despite their denominations’ stand”.

I ended up with 1.67%, if I recall correctly.

Right around 85 million people.

I did the statistics in reverse, and ended up with the same number. And now I’m thinking I was optimistic.

With that in mind, let’s look at the problem – Evangelicals prefer the company of all those people the Bible rules out as being saved.

15 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 1 John 2:15 (KJV)

1 Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not. 1 John 3:1 (KJV)

19 If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you. John 15:19 (KJV)

The last verse is the bottom line. If you’re an Evangelical Christian, and you reject Fundamentalist as “pharisees”, and use phrases like “I don’t view the Bible as the fourth member of the Trinity”…

The Bible is saying you many not be saved.

Just saying.

Fundamentalism – Or Heretic


If you read yesterday’s article, let me take some time and deal with something.

I’ve been calling for three years for Christians to leave Evangelicalism and become Fundamentalist.

I’ve been calling for Christians to return to their Bibles, to repent, to make your calling and election sure.

What does that mean, “Sure”?

Secure. Tightened down.

The Bible only offers one specific way – Fundamentalism.

Do you know what happens if you’re a worldly Christian at the Believer’s judgment? It’s going to be a big line. When your works are tried as by fire, what is left?

The crown of salvation. That’s it.

15 If any man’s work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire. 1 Corinthians 3:15 (KJV)

You have eternal life. And that’s it.

Many of you will be poverty stricken throughout the Millennium.

Rule 1 – Stop with the “what does this verse say to you?”

Stop that. From this second on, the question to ask is, “What does this verse mean?” Never ask that question again. You’ve programmed yourselves into thinking that Scripture is relative. It’s not. The Bible has fixed meaning. If it says the whale swallowed Jonah, it means the whale swallowed Jonah. And if it said Jonah swallowed the whale, you better believe Jonah swallolwed the whale!

Rule 2: The Bible means what it says

The Bible means what it says. The Bible means what it says. The Bible means what it says. And the Bible says what it means.

Rule 3: The Bible is our sole authority for faith and practice.

There’s no room for anything else. If God wanted us to know anything else, then he’d have told us… in the Bible.

Rule 4: Stop following your heart, stop trusting your feelings.

ANYONE who says, like in Yesterday’s article, that “they need a relationship with God and not the Bible” reveals such a woeful lack of spiritual discernment I despair of them being saved. Your feelings told you so-and-so was the one, right? You were going to marry that person and be happy forever! Remember the pain when they didn’t respond? Or worse, remember the disappointment when they turned out not to be the person you thought they were?

So… why rely on those same feelings to guide you in the matter of salvation?

17 But if thine heart turn away, so that thou wilt not hear, but shalt be drawn away, and worship other gods, and serve them; Deuteronomy 30:17 (KJV)

2 A fool hath no delight in understanding, but that his heart may discover itself. Proverbs 18:2 (KJV)

12 Before destruction the heart of man is haughty, and before honour is humility. Proverbs 18:12 (KJV)

17 At that time they shall call Jerusalem the throne of the LORD; and all the nations shall be gathered unto it, to the name of the LORD, to Jerusalem: neither shall they walk any more after the imagination of their evil heart. Jeremiah 3:17 (KJV)

23 But this people hath a revolting and a rebellious heart; they are revolted and gone. Jeremiah 5:23 (KJV) 9 The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it? Jeremiah 17:9 (KJV)

Trust me – the Bible says that the heart will decieve you, lead you astray, conspire against God.

Rule 5: Commit your ways unto the LORD, and hold back nothing

5 Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. 6 In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths. Proverbs 3:5-6 (KJV)

104 Through thy precepts I get understanding: therefore I hate every false way. Psalm 119:104 (KJV)

130 The entrance of thy words giveth light; it giveth understanding unto the simple. Psalm 119:130 (KJV)

144 The righteousness of thy testimonies is everlasting: give me understanding, and I shall live. Psalm 119:144 (KJV)

6 Forsake the foolish, and live; and go in the way of understanding. Proverbs 9:6 (KJV)

10 The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding. Proverbs 9:10 (KJV)

Rule 6: Lean on, Depend on, Rely upon – the Bible.

Evangelicals pay lip service to Sola Scriptura. I mean, all Christians have to, or be called heretics. But the bottom line is, most Christians will not heed the Bible. Point in fact – the Bible says to separate from heretic, false teachers, unstable men, divisive men, anyone whose doctrine is in question, and not even to bid them god speed.

yet Christians ignore that advice, and proudly build “all church organizations”, and extend the hand of friendship to those who sprinkle water on babies and think that constitutes salvation.

Christians listen to questionable music by questionable men and women, not stopping to check their statements of faith. “It’s on Christian radio, so it must be okay.” And when Fundamentalists warn that every Christian who listens to it, their doctrinal stand weakens, when that music comes into the sanctuary, that church stumbles and falls… they turn the volume up to drown out the protests.

The bottom line today – if you are not a Fundamentalist – one of those “narrow minded pharisees” – you are in opposition to the Bible. I’ve tried to say this gently in the last three years, but here’s the point…

…you may well be questioned on why you did not obey the word of God. And the questioner may well be the Word of God, the lamb who taketh away the sins of the world.

“Why did you not heed my Bible? Scripture cannot be broken. Can you explain why I said not to do that, and you did anyway?”

I’m trying to spare you all that.

Apostasy Pt. 3


Hopefully, I’ve scared everyone yesterday. I’m sure I lost a couple of readers. UPDATE: To my immense surprise and gratification, I lost only two. My faith in my fellow Christians is restored. Praise God!

This brings us to Separationism. It’s one of the least taught doctrines in Christianity, yet it’s mentioned in almost every book of the Bible.

Without meaning to allegorize, what did the Lord tell my ancestors when they killed off the Hivites the Jebusites, the Canaanites and the other nations living in the land of Israel?

28 Observe and hear all these words which I command thee, that it may go well with thee, and with thy children after thee for ever, when thou doest that which is good and right in the sight of the LORD thy God. 29 When the LORD thy God shall cut off the nations from before thee, whither thou goest to possess them, and thou succeedest them, and dwellest in their land; 30 Take heed to thyself that thou be not snared by following them, after that they be destroyed from before thee; and that thou enquire not after their gods, saying, How did these nations serve their gods? even so will I do likewise. 31 Thou shalt not do so unto the LORD thy God: for every abomination to the LORD, which he hateth, have they done unto their gods; for even their sons and their daughters they have burnt in the fire to their gods. 32 What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it. Deuteronomy 12:28-32 (KJV)

This teaching would be repeated over and over again. DO NOT DO AS THEY DID. Separate from them. Touch not the accursed thing.

As a matter of fact, it was to be taken so seriously, that if anyone living in Israel did it, the rest of Israel was to kill him immediately, lest it corrupt them.

They did not, and it did. Hence the book of Jeremiah. Hence the captivity in Babylon.

If you study your Bible, the thing that should be jumping out at you is this concept – Do not do as they do. And separate from those who do.

There used to be a phrase when I was growing up, where they said “I don’t drink smoke or chew, or run with those who do.” Why? If they do it, you will too.

There was a pastor who warned “That which we tolerate, eventually we capitulate, then we emulate.”

If you accept as Christian those who light candles to idols, eventually – you will too.

If you accept as Christian those who were sprinkled as a baby, then eventually their doctrines will affect you as well.

If you accept those as Christians those who think they can become gods, then guess what? their doctrines will affect you too. It’s inevitable.

That which we tolerate, we eventually emulate.

I have in the past listed many, many verses teaching separation. Is it harsh? Yes. Is it judgmental? No. I’m doing it for my own sake. And that’s why God warned Israel not to do it. It’s why He’s warned Christianity not to do it. That which we tolerate, we eventually emulate.

Do not listen to those who teach apostasy. That includes Warrren Wiersbe. James Dobson. Billy Graham. Franklin Graham. Joel Osteen. Almost every preacher on TV.

And nowadays, we’re getting to a point where almost every pulpit is occupied by apostates.

You have to jealously guard your doctrinal stances. The Bible says to do so. “Keep your doctrine without spot.” A spot’s a little thing. A single ink spot, no matter how small, will ruin a white necktie. A single compromise, no matter how small, will compromise your Christian walk.

Here’s the question to consider – would the Apostle Paul accept the Evangelical leaders of today, or rebuke them?

I can honestly tell you, they would not have been accepted into the churches at that time. Or they would have been placed under discipline, and “delivered unto Satan” until they repented. I guarantee that. I’ve read the bible enough, STUDIED it enough to guarantee that. Today’s great Christian teachers would mostly be rejected by the apostles!

Bottom line, you CANNOT rely upon any Bible teacher to teach you the word of God. You need to read the Bible for yourself, and understand. I will teach you how to do it, but you have to do it for yourself.

Because if every Christian has to give an account for themselves, what will you say when the Lord asks you why you believed such?

Apostasy Pt. 2


What makes one apostate?

That’s a complicate question. I don’t know why they do it.

Oh, what makes ME say someone’s apostate? Anyone who has moved away from Fundamentalism – whether they were ever a Fundamentalist or not – is apostate. Remember the definition I gave of Apostate yesterday – To stand away from a previously held position.

Technically, anyone who is not King James Only would be apostate. But I know that’s going to seem incredibly harsh. Okay, let me COMPROMISE then, and give you a more relaxed definition, so that nobody’s angry with me – because I have some readers who are not King James Only, have not settled that issue in themselves yet, and read the New King James and other “translations”.

Anyone who has compromised, and accepts heretical teachers, and anyone who claims to be Christian and is not. Technically, Evangelical Christianity defines an apostate as anyone who denies Christ. So, we have, if we accept both definitions, the bizarre condition in which Christians can teach and be in apostasy while not yet being apostate.

How can I say Christianity is wallowing in apostasy, as a pig wallows in mud? Need just one example?

I was DUMBFOUNDED 4 years ago when I witnessed supposed Christians apologizing for the sin of “Mormophobia”.

What in the WORLD are you talking about? Fear of Mormons?

Oh, I get it – you are apologizing for fear of… well, no I don’t get it. You’re not afraid of them – you just recognized they were a cult and not Christians. And now, by apologizing, you’re accepting their unBibllical nonsense as “Christian” when it’s not.

That’s Apostasy. They don’t believe in the Jesus of the Bible – their Jesus is half brother to Satan. I guarantee that’s not a Biblical concept. If you’re struggling with that, I can recommend a good book – it’s called the Bible.

Many, many Evangelical leaders have compromised and accepted a cult as Christians because of political expediency. That’s Apostasy.

Next, any Evangelical who accepts as a Christian anyone whose definition of becoming a Christian is being sprinkled as a baby – is apostasy. There’s nothing in the Bible about being sprinkled as a baby equalling salvation. To take such a position is to compromise, to move away from the position of the Bible. It’s Apostasy.

If you’re going to compromise on the issue of salvation – THE most important subject on earth – what else will you compromise on???

We decided we didn’t like the bible’s version of salvation – so we changed it to our version. “1,2,3 repeat after me!” “There are four spiritual laws…” “There’s a cross shaped hole in your heart…” “God has a wonderful plan for your life….”Let me be blunt and say right now – if your testimony includes someone telling you this, and you repeated a prayer they told you to say… um…. step away from your computer, put down your phone, and get on your face before God. You’ve been lied to, and that’s not salvation.

YOU have to pray. YOU have to repent. YOU have to beg God to save you. A simple, “yeah, I don’t think I can do this on my own…” prayer is kind of like saying, “Oh God, if I don’t throw up, I promise I’ll never drink again.” It’s a lie, because you’re right back out there the following Friday night, drinking again.

It may sound like I’m being picky, but how does God see it? There’s no subject more important than Salvation. Ask everyone whose in Hell right now – they’ll agree.

So, then we say, “Huh. They have a little white church building and a steeple… must be Christian!!!” And when we hear them say, “Yes, I’ve been a Cbristian all my life!!!”

um… okay! “Why, of course they’re Christian!”

Let me shout for a second, and wake everyone up – THERE IS NOTHING IN THE BIBLE ABOUT BEING SPRINKLED AS A BABY. IT IS COMPLETELY UNBIBLICAL. AND IT DOES NOT EQUAL SALVATION.

Thanks. So the next question is, if you’re relying on baby sprinkling to save you, where do you end up?

Oh, yes – that’s the next subject people apostate on. I am dumbfounded that there are so many in the Southern Baptist Convention who deny the subject of Hell.

Let me put it this way – if you’ve compromised THAT much that you don’t believe in Hell, I wonder about your salvation. No, really. You’re already calling the Lord Jesus Christ a liar, and I don’t know if anyone born of the spirit really can do such a thing. It’s just HALF A STEP from denying the Lord.

Hell is not “eternal Separation from God.” Hell is fire, and agony, and torment… it’s terrible. It’s horrible. And when you try to pin someone down who uses the “eternak separation from God” line on “Is Hell fire, or no???” you end up with verbal dancing. It’s a yes or no answer – is Hell fire? The answer I got from one person in an adult Sunday School class while we discussed it was… “I’m sure for some people, it might be.”

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO!!!!

READ Luke 16! STOP listening to Billy Graham and Rob Bell! LIfeway tossed out the “Love Wins” book for denying Hell, but continued to sell “Just As I Am” which does the same thing!

Let’s see, we’ve denied the Bible, denied salvation, and denied Hell. What’s next?

Why, denying the Lord, of course.

There are MYRIADS of evangelical Christians who, from what I’m seeing, have rejected the Jesus Christ of the Bible and adopted a false Jesus, something the Bible warns us of.

There’s the rich man, tailored clothes wearing Word Faith “first born again man” Jesus, who encourages us gently to be like him, a name it-claim it faith speaking man. That can’t be Jesus Christ – The Jesus of the Bible is GOD, and not a born again man. To them, I’m saying the same thing, because they consider themselves little gods, but since Jesus was the first one, why – he’s like a CEO! HE’s a big G God!

That’s so unBiblical I’m dumbfounded. And if you read my series on Word Faith, you know that the first church I ever went to was Word Faith. I got saved years later, and my first prayer to the LOrd is, “Lord teach me sound doctrine so that I never get involved in a false church or a cult ever again!” And you know what? THe LOrd answered that!

There’s the Evangelical, judge not, love everybody equally Jesus – that’s not the Jesus of the Bible, because (and I urge you to read the Bible and find out!) the Lord Jesus Christ, who is humble and meek, and lowly in heart – is God almighty. And he really will judge the world. He really will ask your Pastor to give an account for his ministry. And He really will haul everyone out of Hell, and step by step judge their works, for the purposes of determining how terrible their punishment will be. Yes, the Jesus of the bible. The one you prayed to forgive you. That’s the one.

There’s the hippie Jesus that most people know from the movies. You’re just waiting for him to say, “Dude”. Or “Cowabunga”. There was a TV movie of Jesus where the actor actually got fairly close in some scenes to a correct portrayal of Jesus Christ, but half the time he wandered around looking half stoned in the movie. Stop watching Hollywood Jesus and open your Bibles.

There’s the Roman Catholic Jesus, who mutters strange and perplexing parables, but is too holy for us to talk to, so we talk to his human mother instead. That’s not the Jesus of the bible.

Doesn’t seem that bad, what i’m talking about? How does it seem to God?

Here’s some powerful questions to consider. If you can deny the Bible, Deny salvation, deny Hell, and deny Jesus Christ…. are you saved?

I’ll be even more blunt. In the average Southern Baptist church, I’ll tell you right now – most of them are probably not saved. There’s got to be some evidence in your life that you’re saved. If you spend more time talking about football with friends than about God, the Bible, Jesus Christ, the Great Commission… danger zone. And I know I just trampled on sacred cows right there.

“Don’t pick on the NFL, man!” Too late. It’s stupid. We memorize statistics on how Joe Bunknaspitz got 200 yards rushing in his career, and how much better the Jets would do if they just got Joe Namath back as a quarterback!

But we can’t open our bibles, and memorizing Bible verses is WAAAAY too difficult!

My question is… are you Christian?

If I were to arrest you, bring you to court, and try you in Circuit Court of being a Christian – would you be convicted or acquitted? i’m telling you right now, that a vast majority would find themselves being acquitted. Not guilty of being a Christian.

“Your honor, my client may have several Bibles, but their just an avid book collector. After all, they never read it, never pray, only go to church a few times a year…”

“Not guilty.”

Feeling better that you’re a Independent Baptist? Guess what? David Cloud even says most Independent Baptists are not saved. It was right there on the “Essential Bible Student” series that I put up, that only one or two of you even bothered to watch!

Christianity should consume you. If you do not have an “us vs. them” feeling about your Christianity, hint hint… you’re not one of “Us” you’re one of “Them”.

If you cannot tell me the names of six of the apostles, that’s scary. “Well, I’ve only been saved 13 years! But this year my resolution is to read my Bible all the way through for the first time!” That’s really scary. And it’s danger zone. A disciple of Jesus Christ continues in His word. Are you?

Take it to the Lord, get it taken care of. That’s what we heard every week in Seminary. “Take care of it. Get it resolved.” And this was pastoral candidates and missionary candidates hearing this!

Make sure you’re saved. Let’s get that one thing taken care of first.

Apostasy


1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. 2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, 4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; 5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. 6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, 7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. 2 Timothy 3:1-7 (KJV)

Don’t skip over that – this is describing the world of right this very moment.

3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, 4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. 2 Peter 3:3-4 (KJV)

1 But 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 bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. 2 And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. 2 Peter 2:1-2 (KJV)

When I first began writing this blog, we were up to our waists in apostasy.

The water has now closed over our heads.

We’re drowning in it.

I’m really frightened. I cannot fathom the depths of outright contempt that false teachers have for the word of God, and those who stand for it.

Those who stand for the Bible are marked, and ridiculed, slandered, and even called a cult.

Let me speak strong words. If you’re new to my blog, look out – I do this pretty regularly.

If you reject the Bible, you are not a Christian. You are not saved.

If I quote arguments for the Bible, and you argue against me… then my assumption is that you are not saved. Why would a saved person argue against the Bible?

The word Apostasy is from the word “απο” which means “Against” or “away from” and “ιστημι” which means to stand, to be in one place.

To stand away from where you stood. To move in opinion. To change from an established doctrine. These are all the translations of αποστησια Apostasia (I think I spelled that right! Is it η or α? We’ll know by lesson 16!).

The Bible has been the Textus Receptus and the Ben Chayyim texts, and the translations from that family for many years uninterrupted.

Christianity apostasized back in 1881 by adopting a Bible from flawed and possibly forged Greek manuscripts that we have NEVER used, and according to an eclectic manuscript put together by two men who were apostate in their doctrine. The Translating committee was told to use no other Greek or Hebrew text. They ignored that, violated the terms of the translation they were to create, and did it in secret.

Today, almost EVERY Bible is made from these flawed and heretical Greek Manuscripts.

Teachers used to be very rare who downplayed the existence of Hell. Then Billy Graham stands up and states in a solemn baritone that “Hell is eternal separation from God” and people chased after him, eager to deny the existence of Hell themselves. Today, to find someone willing to stand up and teach on Hell themselves is a moment to rejoice. “Yes! There are still Bible teachers today!”

The Apologetics Study Bible downplays Hell as well. I guess the editors of it never read Luke 16. That’s not a parable, by the way. It was a literal story about a literal beggar named Lazaras, and a certain rich man. Why don’t we know the rich man’s name? The Lord avoided it for reasons unsaid. It may be that’s part of the punishment, is that their name passes away… but they continue to burn in unending, unbearable torment… forever.

It used to be rare to find teachers who were bold in their rejection of Jesus Christ. It still is rare to find them openly doing it… but it’s not rare to find them inventing a different Jesus for you to follow. for instance, Joel Osteen tells us of Jesus Christ asleep in a rowboat, and the apostles panicking because it was storming. So Jesus wakes up, and speaks the storm out of existence. You see, Jesus wouldn’t let the storm outside of him become the storm inside of him!

Yeah, that’s not… the Jesus Christ of the Bible. The Jesus of the Bible loved His disciples, and couldn’t bear to see them upset and afraid. So He stands up, orders the storm to stop and…. behodl! It stopped, you see, Jesus Christ did this because He was GOD!!!!

Why don’t you get a bigger vision? …of God.

We hear about the hippie Jesus who smokes, who dances, who does a little drugs every now and then. The hipster Jesus with the rooster hair cut and the goatee. The effeminate Jesus who talks in platitudes and refuses to criticize.

These aren’t the Jesus of the Bible.

We’re drowning in apostasy. It’s like walking out of a room where they sell cigars, and your clothes reek of it afterwards. The smell of apostate teachers so fills your nostrils you can’t even TELL anymore that these men are compromisers, false teachers, deniers of God’s word.

And remember this – if you are in a church where apostasy is preached and taught… you alone will answer for it. You alone wll have to give account why you continued to go there.

I could go on and on about how bad the apostasy is. It used to be you could print a list of bad teachers. Now we’re scrambling to put together lists of GOOD teachers!