ConcernedMembers.com - SPIRITUAL DECEPTION IN THE HIGHEST

When I began to research the Bible my intent was to use the 'version' I found to be most accurate. That effort has taken three years, covered about 3,100 pages of research, and has resulted in this report.

To analyze the various Bibles required detailed 'verse by verse' comparisons. In chapter 1 of this report, we will review 20 of those verses. Those 20 scriptures were selected because they contain vital Christian doctrine.

As we review each comparison, you will see a lot of subtle, doctrinal, ramifications. Those subtleties are easily overlooked when just casually reading through the Bible.

When I was in the middle of this research, and the doctrinal implications surfaced; it became obvious that I needed to document my findings for the benefit of others.

Now that I'm at the end of this project; I am convinced that to be saved is the highest of all priorities. But, right after being saved, the choice of which Bible to use is next in importance. This is especially true for those whom God has called to teach; as Bible teachers will affect a great number of people.

The bottom line is this: I think you will be amazed at what is being taught in some of these 'Bibles'. I truly believe you will find this report to be a real 'eye opener'.

Jeff Johnson

F O O T N O T I N G M E T H O D O L O G Y

During the writing of this report I realized that, in its final form, this information would be converted into ASCII text. ASCII text can be uploaded to the Internet, uploaded to Christian Bulletin Boards, etc. Also, ASCII text can be read by almost any word processor.

Unfortunately, ASCII text cannot handle the typical "superscripts" used in footnoting. Translation into ASCII deletes all superscripts, subscripts, bolding, etc. etc.

Since I wanted to document all my references (so the reader can verify the facts), I have decided to use the following format for all footnotes:

[S#P#]

Where, S# stands for source number and P# stands for page number.

Thus: [S1P1] is source number 1, page number 1; and [S2P4-5] is source number 2, pages 4 thru 5 etc. etc.

A list of the sources, their source numbers, as well as their distributors, can be found in the References at the end of this report.

P R E F A C E

"No greater mischief can happen to a Christian people than to have God's Word taken from them or falsified, so that they no longer have it pure and clear. God grant that we and our descendants be not witnesses of such a calamity. Let us not lose the Bible, but with diligence, in fear and invocation of God, read and preach it".

- Martin Luther

Return to:
Table of Contents | Forum Discussion | ConcernedMembers.com

1
C H A P T E R 1

B I B L E C O M P A R I S O N: A B R O A D A N A L Y S I S

In this chapter we compare the teaching in the Authorized King James Bible to a broad array of 'modern versions'. The purpose is to note the versions' effect on Christian doctrine. 20 verses, many of them familiar to the reader, are used in this comparison.

When I say 'modern versions', I am referring to all other 'versions' except the Authorized King James Bible. 'Modern versions' include: the NIV, the RSV, the NRSV, the NASV, the NKJV, the TEB, the LB, the AMP, etc. etc.

The NIV, RSV, NASV etc. etc. fit the 'broad comparison' profile contained in this chapter.

However, there are at least 3 modern versions which require a specific 'individual' analysis. The 3 I am referring to are: The New King James Version (NKJV), the Living Bible (LB), and the Amplified Bible (AMP).

The 'New King James Version', 'The Living Bible', and the 'Amplified Bible' are compared to the KJV in chapter 2.

To get the most out of this chapter, please compare the verses with me, as you read along. You will need a 'modern version' and the King James Bible.

If you have a NKJV, a LB, or an AMP, please read this chapter before going on to chapter 2.

Now that you're ready, let's begin.

1:2 B I B L E Q U I Z: 2 0 Q U E S T I O N S

1:2.1 Bible Question #1: How many Gods are there?

We know there is only 1 God. "Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord" (De. 6:4).

Now, turn to Daniel 3:25. In this verse, Shadrach, Messach and Abednego have been thrown into the fiery furnace. However, they are not alone. Another one (a fourth) is there to help them.

Look at this verse in a 'modern version'. (Notice: the wording in each 'modern version' will differ from others. But, those small differences, will not materially affect this report).

Suffice it to say that, at the end of Daniel 3:25, the 'modern' version has a reading similar to the following:

... and the appearance of the fourth is like a son of the gods...

Look at this same verse in your King James Bible. The Authorized (KJ) Bible says:

... and the form of the fourth is like THE SON OF GOD

It was Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, who was with Shadrach, Messach and Abednego. Jesus protected them from the fiery furnace; and it's Jesus who will protect you and me from the fiery furnace (i.e. hell).

Now, who would think there is more than 1 God? Well, Satan does. Remember what he said to Eve in Genesis 3:5 ?

... ye shall be as gods ...

Satan believes there is more than 1 God as he believes that HE is EQUAL to God.

1:2.2 Bible Question #2: Who was Jesus' father?

The answer, of course, is that God was Jesus' father.

Let's look in a 'modern' version of the Bible, at Luke 2:33.

Starting in Luke 2:27 Simeon has gone into the temple to see the baby Jesus (who is with Joseph and Mary). Again, depending on the particular 'modern' version, in verse 33, it will say something similar to:

... and his FATHER and mother were amazed at the things which were spoken of him

What do you mean "... and his father ..." was amazed at the things which were spoken of him?! Jesus' father was NOT Joseph! Jesus' father was God!

Now, let's look in the Authorized King James Bible. The KJV has the correct reading; in Luke 2:33 it says:

And JOSEPH and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him

For a 'modern' version ( NIV, NASV, RSV etc.) to say Joseph was Jesus' father is blasphemy!

Think about the doctrinal implications: If Jesus had only an earthly father and mother, then he is just any man. If he is just any man, then we are still in our sins. If we are still in our sins, then we are not saved! If we are not saved, then we have a big problem!

1:2.3 Bible Question #3: What was Jesus' purpose in coming to earth?

Turn to Matthew 18:11.

You may have a hard time finding this verse. In many new, 'modern', versions this verse is missing! The verses are numbered 10 then 12, 13, 14! Or you may find verse 11 is in brackets, casting doubt as to whether it is scriptural.

Let's see what the Authorized King James says:

For the Son of man is come TO SAVE THAT WHICH WAS LOST.

This one verse, which summarizes Jesus' entire mission to earth, is either ignored in 'new' versions; or it is put in brackets casting doubt on it! This verse contains a KEY piece of Christian doctrine.

People have to know they are lost, i.e. that they have a problem, to know they need a saviour.

1:2.4 Bible Question #4: Noah was a great man used by God to build the Ark. To be called for such a task required Noah to be approved by the Lord, God. So, how was Noah 'justified' before God? Was Noah's justification by his own works?

For the answer, turn in your Bible to Genesis 6:8.

In a 'modern version' it says something like:

Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord.

Now think what the word favor implies. Favor implies that Noah was 'better' than others. Favor implies Noah was approved by God because of his own 'good works'.

Now compare that to the KJV. It says:

Noah found GRACE in the eyes of the Lord

Even though Noah was used of God, he was also in need of grace (just like all of us). Noah was NOT justified by his good works, but by God's grace.

Look at verse 9: It says Noah walked with God. Notice that Noah's walk with God occurs, in verse 9, AFTER Noah received grace from God, in verse 8. Grace precedes our walk with God. We are NOT justified (NOR saved) by our own works.

Remember, Noah got drunk on occasion (Gen 9:21). He was in need of God's amazing grace. We are, too.

The consistent theme of the Bible is that we are saved by God's grace and NOT by our own works. Grace and favor have two totally, different, meanings.

The Authorized King James Bible is consistent with the Bible's teachings. These 'modern versions' are not.

1:2.5 Bible Question #5: Why did Jesus Christ go to the cross?

Let's look at 2 verses. Turn to 1st Peter 4:1.

... Christ suffered ...

In your Authorized King James Bible the full reading is quoted as:

"... Christ suffered FOR US."

Notice the last two words give the FULL meaning. Leaving out "for us" misses the point entirely! This is confirmed again in 1 Corinthians 5:7b.

In many 'new' versions it says:

For Christ, our Passover, has been sacrificed.

Again, the full reading is found in the King James Bible. It says:

For even Christ our passover is sacrificed FOR US.

1:2.6 Bible Question #6: How did Jesus' going to the cross bring our redemption?

A 'modern' version will NOT tell you how! (in Colossians 1:14). It says (of Jesus):

in whom we have redemption ...

The full Christian doctrine is only included in the King James reading of the same verse. Properly stated, it says (of Jesus):

In whom we have redemption THROUGH HIS BLOOD ...

Without the shedding of blood there is NO remission of sins. Leaving out "the blood" misses a key point of doctrine (and leaves us in our sins).

1:2.7 Bible Question #7: Who does Jesus "call" and what does he "call" them to do?

The questions are getting harder!

Open a 'modern' version to Matthew 9:13b. It says something like:

For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners

Notice how the end of this verse begs the question: "... call the righteous, but sinners TO WHAT?"

Turn to the same verse in the King James Bible:

... for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners TO REPENTANCE

The last 2 words of this verse are crucial! In the end, Satan gets all the sinners who don't repent. Jesus gets all the sinners who do repent. There is a big difference in those two eternal outcomes. And, there is a big difference in these two translations.

We are all sinners, and we must all repent, to be saved.

1:2.8 Bible Question #8: What happens to those who do not receive the testimony of Jesus Christ, i.e. what happens the those who do not receive the gift of everlasting life?

In many 'modern' versions you won't find out! This is because part of the verse is missing (in Mark 6:11). Let's turn there now.

A 'modern' version reads something like:

... shake the dust off your feet when you leave, as a testimony against them.

However, the King James gives the full teaching:

... shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. VERILY I SAY UNTO YOU, IT SHALL BE MORE TOLERABLE FOR SODOM AND GOMORRHA IN THE DAY OF JUDGMENT, THAN FOR THAT CITY

I think the reader will agree that this verse contains important information we need to know!

1:2.9 Bible Question #9: After we repent, and are born again (come to saving grace), what else does Jesus command us to do?

There are many changes that come in our new birth/in our new nature, but the answer I'm looking for is this: We are to make a public profession of faith. Then we are to be baptized, by immersion, in water.

Let's look in Acts chapter 8, verses 35-37.

In Acts 8:35 Philip, the Apostle, preached Jesus Christ to the eunuch. In verse 36 the eunuch realized his need to be baptized. The eunuch then asks if he can be baptized.

Now, take a look at Acts 8:37 in a 'modern' version of the Bible. Many (but not all) 'modern' versions go from Acts chapter 8 verse 35, to verse 36, then to 38. 38?! Where is verse 37 you ask? And, what did verse 37 say?

This key verse, properly included in the King James Bible, tells us whom should be baptized. It says:

... IF THOU BELIEVEST WITH ALL THINE HEART, THOU MAYEST." And he [the eunuch] answered and said: "... I BELIEVE THAT JESUS CHRIST IS THE SON OF GOD.

Numbering verses 35, 36, and then 38 is NOT the new math!

These 'modern' versions, which leave out verse 37, are omitting the deity of Jesus Christ. Also, they are missing the key point: We must make a PUBLIC profession of faith. We must believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. If we do not know, believe, and confess that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, our baptism only 'gets us wet'. Leaving out verse 37 omits a major portion of Christian doctrine.

Omissions of doctrine and corruptions of doctrine are bad news. In both cases, the reader is NOT getting the correct information he/she needs to know.

1:2.10 Bible Question #10: Can you recite the Lord's prayer?

The Lord's prayer, taught to us by Jesus, and recorded in Luke 11:2-4 of the KJV, is as follows:

... Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth. Give us day by day our daily bread. And forgive us our sins; for we also forgive every one that is indebted to us. And lead us not into temptation; but deliver us from evil.

Now turn to Luke 11:2-4 in a 'modern' version and re-read the Lord's prayer. The wording will be similar to:

... Father, hallowed be Thy name. Thy Kingdom come. Give us each day our daily bread. And forgive us our sins, for we ourselves also forgive everyone who is indebted to us. And lead us not into temptation

Note this modern version states "Father" but then leaves out "... WHICH ART IN HEAVEN ...". You don't know who you are praying to, your Father in heaven, or to Satan!

It also leaves out "our" as in OUR father. We were created by God who is "OUR" father. Satan is a father, but he is not "OUR" father. Satan is the "father" of lies.

And this 'modern' version leaves out "THY WILL BE DONE, AS IN HEAVEN, SO IN EARTH". By leaving out the fact that we are praying to our Father WHOSE WILL IS DONE IN HEAVEN, this 'modern' version is re-directing your prayer away from God and toward someone or something else (in another place).

Lastly, there is a major omission in the last half of verse 4. Verse 4 states: "And lead us not into temptation". But this verse then leaves out: "... BUT DELIVER US FROM EVIL ..."

Personally, I want to be delivered from evil! How about you?

I think the reader will agree: This 'modern version' is NOT the "Lord's Prayer" you want to be praying!

Think about it.

1:2.11 Bible Question #11: After our new birth, how are we supposed to relate to God?

Once we are born again we have a new standard for our lives; it is Jesus Christ. The Bible tells us how we are to relate to him. Please turn to Ephesians 5:1 . In a 'new' version it says:

... be imitators of God ...

Compare this to the Authorized King James:

Be ye therefore FOLLOWERS of God ...

Even though we are born again; can we possibly imitate God? Can we be the judge of the Universe? Can we be at all places at the same time? No way. We have a new nature, sure; but we are still only men.

Think about it: only Satan tries to imitate God!

Ever since the garden of Eden, Satan has tried to direct worship toward HIMSELF. We, as men, could NEVER imitate God. We are only men. We can only FOLLOW God!

Publishers of 'new', 'more up to date' versions are encouraging us to be like Satan! (i.e. to think of ourselves as God).

1:2.12 Bible Question #12: While we're talking about Satan, now is a good time to ask Bible question #12. What does the Bible say is the test for the antichrist?

Let's turn to 1st John 4:3 . A 'modern' version says:

and every spirit which does not confess Jesus is not of God. This is the spirit of antichrist, of which you heard that it was coming, and now it is in the world already.

Again, in 'modern' versions, key pieces of scripture are left out. Compare this same verse with the FULL reading in the King James. In the KJV it says:

And every spirit that confesseth not that JESUS CHRIST IS COME IN THE FLESH is not of God: and this is that [spirit] of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world

Remember, evil spirits did confess Jesus. In Luke 4:34 (and in Mark 1:24) a man having a "spirit of an unclean devil" said to Jesus:

... Let [us] alone; what have we to do with thee, [thou] JESUS of Nazareth? art thou come to destroy us? I know thee who thou art; the Holy One of God.

Contrary to what 'modern' versions would tell you, the antichrist DOES KNOW who Jesus is. But, what the antichrist CAN NOT say, is that:

"JESUS CHRIST IS COME IN THE FLESH".

Modern versions not only need to get their gospel straight; they also need to correctly quote the true test for the antichrist.

Also, take a look at this: Compare 1st John 4:3 again between a 'modern' version and the King James Bible. Look one more time at what the 'new' version says:

... which does not confess Jesus is ...

But, in the King James it says:

... that confesseth not that Jesus CHRIST is ...

Besides the doctrinal error, these 'modern' versions continually assault the Lordship and Deity of Jesus Christ. If the King James says: "Jesus Christ", many times the modern versions will only say: "Jesus". If the King James says: "Lord Jesus Christ", many times the 'modern' versions will only say: "Lord" or will only say: "Jesus".

1:2.13 Bible Question #13: In the wilderness, when Satan tempted Jesus to turn a stone into bread for food; what was Jesus' response?

Turn to Luke 4:4 . In a 'modern' version it reads: "... man shall not live by bread alone".

Well, that's true and that's part of it. But, what about the rest of the verse? Notice: words have been LEFT OUT in these 'modern versions'.

The Authorized (King James) Bible has the correct and full reading. In Luke 4:4 it says:

... man shall not live by bread alone, BUT BY EVERY WORD OF GOD

The fact that we are nourished by bread is true, but that is only part of the story. Our lives are sustained by the Word of God. We need bread to sustain our bodies; but, these 'modern' versions leave out our need for the life sustaining Word of God.

1:2.14 Bible Question #14: Whom does Jesus say has "everlasting life"?

For the answer; open your Bible to John 6:47.

In a 'modern version' it says something like: "... he who believes has eternal life ..."

Notice how this does not make much sense. This verse does not have enough information.

Compare this to the King James. In it, Jesus is quoted as saying:

... He that believeth ON ME hath everlasting life.

Everyone who believes DOES NOT have everlasting life; only those who believe ON JESUS. In John 6:47, the two words "ON ME" are vital.

Jesus Christ is the rock of our salvation. We must believe ON HIM to have everlasting life. Again, key Christian doctrine is missing.

How can missing information be a 'better', 'improved', translation?

1:2.15 Bible Question #15: Who slew Goliath?

This is an easy one!

Now turn to 2nd Samuel 21:19. Depending on the 'modern version' it will say something like:

... Elhanan ... killed Goliath ...

What do you mean Elhanan killed Goliath!? This is wrong you say. Most Sunday school children know that David slew Goliath! Well, you're right. This is clearly in error.

Look at the same passage in your King James Bible. The Authorized King James Bible has the correct reading which is:

... Elhanan ... slew THE BROTHER OF Goliath ...

Spiritually, as Christians, we are the equivalent of David. Spiritually, Satan is the equivalent of Goliath. Just as David slew Goliath (with a rock), we Christians are "more than conquerors" as we have overcome (slew) Satan by the blood of the lamb (Jesus Christ, the rock!) and by the word of our testimony. Not only are 'modern versions' in error; but major doctrinal issues are involved here.

Think about it.

1:2.16 Bible Question #16: Jesus said that our heavenly Father will forgive us of our sins. However, we are told that; likewise, there is something we must do. Do you remember what it is?

Let's turn, in a 'modern version' to Mark 11:26.

Are you not able to find it? Are the verses in Mark chapter 11 numbered 23, 24, 25 and then 27!? Is verse 26 missing? Well, there is nothing wrong with your eyesight! Verse 26 is not there (or it is in brackets, casting doubt on it). It's ANOTHER omission.

Now turn to the same verse in your Authorized (King James) Version. The KJV says:

BUT IF YE DO NOT FORGIVE, NEITHER WILL YOUR FATHER WHICH IS IN HEAVEN FORGIVE YOUR TRESPASSES.

Oh, man! This is important to know!

Leaving out verse 26, leaves out an important piece of Christian doctrine. Verse 26 needs to be there! And, that's why it is properly included in your King James Bible.

1:2.17 Bible Question #17: What did Jesus say about religious hypocrisy?

First, let's take a look in a 'modern' version of the Bible. What does it say in Matthew 23:14?

Actually, it says nothing! ( The verse is missing in many modern versions ).

For the word of God, turn to the same verse in your King James Bible. What does it say?

WOE UNTO YOU SCRIBES AND PHARISEES, HYPOCRITES! FOR YE DEVOUR WIDOWS' HOUSES, AND FOR A PRETENCE MAKE LONG PRAYER: THEREFORE YE SHALL RECEIVE THE GREATER DAMNATION

Jesus does not like hypocrisy. Notice how God knows our heart!

1:2.18 Bible Question #18: What did Jesus say we are to do relative to each other?

For the answer see: James 5:16

Many 'modern' versions say something similar to:

... confess your sins to one another ...

( Notice this could lead to gossip and further sinning ).

But the King James says:

... confess your FAULTS one to another ...

Notice the 2 different words.

The Bible says that ONLY God can forgive sins. We are supposed to confess our SINS to Him. We should confess our FAULTS to one another, but SINS are confessed to God.

Faults and sins are entirely different.

Can you see how 'modern' versions have led Catholics astray? And, if it has led Catholics astray; couldn't the same thing happen to us if we, our spouse, our children, or our pastor, uses a 'modern' version?

1:2.19 Bible Question #19: Do modern 'versions' of the Bible have any other problems?

Unfortunately, the answer is yes.

In the Bible, the New Testament sometimes re-quotes the Old Testament. An example of this is in Mark 1:2

Compare the two Bibles again. In a 'new version' it says:

As it is written in Isaiah the prophet, ...

Compare this to the King James, it says:

As it is written IN THE PROPHETS, ...

Comment: The scripture quoted in Mark 1:2 DID NOT come from Isaiah as stated in these 'modern' versions of the Bible. The scripture quoted is from Malachi 3:1 ! Check it out.

Not only do 'modern' versions misquote God; they even misquote themselves!

The KJV reading of: "As it is written IN THE PROPHETS, ... " is correct, because the verse is from Malachi 3:1, and Malachi was a prophet!

So far we have seen all kinds of problems in these 'new', 'modern', 'more easily readable', 'more up to date', etc. etc. versions of the Bible. This leads to the last Bible question:

1:2.20 Bible Question #20: Why is it important to have the true Word of God (vs. a corruption).

The answer, to our question, is found in 1 Peter 2:2. Please turn there now.

In a 'modern version' it says:

... long for the pure spiritual milk, that by it you may grow up to salvation;

The King James Bible tells us to:

... desire the SINCERE milk OF THE WORD, that ye may GROW thereby:

My comment is that this verse, in 'new', 'modern,' versions, contains 2 problems:

First: We are to desire the sincere milk OF THE WORD. The purpose is "to grow thereby". Modern versions leave out "OF THE WORD". It's God's word that feeds us. If, like the modern verse, we leave out "the word" how can we grow? Or, if we get a corrupted translation, how can we grow on 'junk food'?

Second: Contrary to 'modern' versions, we DO NOT grow up to salvation. That says salvation is by works! We are saved by grace, and not of works, lest any man should boast. (Ephesians 2:8-9)

Think about it.

In this chapter, we reviewed the doctrine contained in a "broad" array of 'new', 'modern', 'more easily readable', versions of the Bible. We compared 'modern' doctrine to the KJV. And, we have found significant error.

But, all 'modern' versions do not follow this 'broad' profile. So, in the next chapter, we will analyze 3 versions of the Bible which need an individual, case by case, analysis.

Return to:
Table of Contents | Forum Discussion | ConcernedMembers.com

2
C H A P T E R 2

B I B L E C O M P A R I S O N : ( A N I N D I V I D U A L A N A L Y S I S )

In chapter 1, we compared the King James Bible to a broad array of 'new versions'. However, a few 'versions' need a case by case, 'individual', analysis.

In this chapter we will compare the 'New King James Version' (NKJV), the 'Living Bible' (LB), and the 'Amplified Bible' (AMP) to the KJV.

2:2 K J V V S. N K J V

Gen 1:21

And God created great WHALES ...

NKJV: "So God created great sea creatures ..."

COMMENT: There is a difference between sea creatures and whales.

Matt 12:40

NKJV: "For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish ..."

Gen. 2:7

... and man became a living SOUL.

NKJV: "... and man became a living being."

Comment: A MAJOR difference between man and beast is that man is the ONLY creature with a soul. New versions miss this point.

Gen. 2:13

... land of ETHIOPIA.

NKJV: "... land of Cush."

Comment: I know where Ethiopia is, but where is Cush?

Gen. 3:4-5

And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods knowing good and evil.

NKJV: "Then the serpent said to the woman, "You will not surely die. For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God knowing good and evil."

COMMENT: This is major blasphemy! God (with a big G) is not evil! Think about the difference.

Gen. 22:8

And Abraham said, My son, God will provide HIMSELF a lamb for a burnt offering ...

NKJV: "And Abraham said, My son, God will provide for Himself the lamb for a burnt offering."

Comment: It is true, as the NKJV says, that God did provide FOR himself a sacrifice. However, that is only part of the story. The NKJV totally misses the deeper, and more amazing truth: GOD WAS the sacrifice! The KJV wording is perfect: "God will provide HIMSELF" (in the form of his son Jesus Christ) as the sacrifice.

1 Ki.10:28

and LINEN yarn: the king's merchants received the LINEN yarn at a price.

NKJV: "and Keveh; the king's merchants bought them in Keveh at the current price."

Comment: I know what linen is, but what is Keveh?

Dan. 3:25

... and the form of the fourth is like THE SON OF GOD.

NKJV: (footnote) "or a son of the gods"

COMMENT: See comments in chapter 1 of this report. There is a big difference between "THE SON OF GOD" and a son of 'plural' gods!

Zech 11:17

Woe to the IDOL shepherd that leaveth the flock!

NKJV: "Woe to the worthless shepherd, who leaves the flock"

Matt. 2:4

... he (King Herod) DEMANDED of them where Christ should be born.

NKJV: "... he inquired of them where Christ was to be born."

COMMENT: King Herod, furious over the arrival of Jesus, (and wanting to do away with Him) did not inquire where Christ should be born, he DEMANDED to know!

Matt 18:11

For the Son of Man IS come to save that which was lost.

NKJV: "For the Son of Man has come to save that which was lost."

Comment: The NJKV says Jesus Christ "has come" to save that which was lost; a PAST TENSE statement. The NKJV implies that ALL who were to be saved, HAVE BEEN saved. Not true. Anyone TODAY can be saved by Jesus. The correct reading is PRESENT TENSE. There are NUMEROUS places where the NKJV changes the verb tense. These types of NKJV corruptions are very subtle.

Matt 20:20

Then came to him the mother of Zebedee's children with her sons, WORSHIPPING him ...

NKJV: "Then the mother of Zebedee's sons came to Him with her sons, kneeling down ..."

COMMENT: Kneeling down is not even close to 'worship'.

John 1:3

All things were made BY Him ...

NKJV: "All things were made through Him ..."

COMMENT: 'BY' and through are totally different. Think about it.

John 4:24

God is A Spirit ...

NKJV: "God is Spirit ..."

COMMENT: For the NKJV to say: "God is spirit" is to infer that ALL spirits are God. Not true. We know there are evil spirits. And we know in God there is NO evil. Thus the KJV is correct: God is 'A' spirit.

Acts 12:4

... after Easter ...

NKJV: "... after Passover"

Acts 4:13

Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were unlearned and IGNORANT men..

NKJV: "Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were uneducated and untrained men ..."

COMMENT: Peter and John had been with Jesus for some time. They WERE NOT untrained. Jesus HAD trained them. They were, however, ignorant.

Acts 17:22

Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are TOO SUPERSTITIOUS.

NKJV: "Then Paul stood in the midst of the Areopagus and said, Men of Athens, I perceive that in all things you are very religious;"

Comment: Come on! Being very religious and TOO SUPERSTITIOUS are entirely different!

2 Cor. 2:17

For we are not as many, which CORRUPT the Word of God ...

NKJV: "For we are not, as so many, peddling the Word of God ..."

COMMENT: Peddling and corrupting are very different. 'Modern' versions try and hide from the truth they are 'corrupting' the Word of God.

Gal. 2:20

I AM crucified with Christ ...

NKJV: "I have been crucified with Christ ..."

COMMENT: The NKJV is saying their crucifixion is over! Not true. The believers crucifixion is an ongoing, PRESENT TENSE, transaction.

Eph. 5:1

Therefore be FOLLOWERS of God ...

NKJV: "Therefore be imitators of God ..."

Comment: See chapter 1 of this report for a full analysis. Only Satan tries to imitate God as Satan wants to be worshipped AS God. Born again believers cannot imitate God. We can't rule the universe. We can only follow God. Remember Jesus DID NOT tell his "fishers of men" to imitate Him. Jesus said: "follow me ...".

Philip 3:8

DUNG

NKJV: "rubbish"

COMMENT: I have rubbish on the top of my office desk, but I don't want 'dung' there!!!

1 Tim 6:10

For the love of money is THE root of all evil ...

NKJV: "For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil ..."

COMMENT: There is a big difference between the NKJV's "a" root and the correct KJV reading of "THE" root.

1 Tim 6:20

... oppositions of science falsely so called

NKJV: "... contradictions of what is falsely called knowledge"

2 Tim 2:15

STUDY to shew thyself approved unto God ...

NKJV: "Be diligent to present yourself approved to God..."

COMMENT: We are supposed to STUDY the Word of God.

Jude 15

... and of all their hard SPEECHES which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him.

NKJV: "... and of all the harsh things which ..."

COMMENT: There is a difference between speeches and things.

2:3 K J V V S. L B

In this section we compare the King James to the "Living Bible" (LB). The Living Bible is a 'paraphrase'. In a 'paraphrased' Bible the renderings are arbitrary.

In this comparison we will show the result of a 'paraphrased' approach.

Lev. 3:13b

AND THE SONS OF AARON SHALL SPRINKLE THE BLOOD THEREOF UPON THE ALTAR ROUND ABOUT.

LB: "The priest shall throw its blood against the sides of the altar."

Numbers 25:11

PHINEHAS ... HATH TURNED MY WRATH AWAY FROM THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL.

LB: "Phinehas has turned away my anger for he was as angry as I."

COMMENT: How can someone be as angry as God?

Judges 7:20b

AND THEY CRIED, THE SWORD OF THE LORD AND OF GIDEON.

LB: "All yelling for the Lord and for Gideon."

Comment: The two verses are not even close!

Judges 19:2

AND HIS CONCUBINE PLAYED THE WHORE AGAINST HIM.

LB: "But she became angry with him and ran away."

Comment: Are PLAYING THE WHORE and running away the same?

I Sam. 20:30

THOU SON OF A PERVERSE REBELLIOUS WOMAN.

LB: "You son of a b----."

Comment: Some 'modern' versions, like the LB, actually contain vulgarity. Notice this verse. Also, take a look in an NIV 'bible' at Ezekiel 23:20.

II Sam. 16:4b

AND ZIBA SAID, I HUMBLY BESEECH THEE THAT I MAY FIND GRACE IN THY SIGHT, MY LORD, O KING.

LB: "Thank you, thank you, sir, Ziba replied."

Comment: There is NO similarity between these two verses.

I Kings 18:27

CRY ALOUD: FOR HE IS A GOD: EITHER HE IS TALKING, OR HE IS PURSUING.

LB: "Perhaps he is talking to someone or else is out sitting on the toilet."

Comment: Sitting on a toilet ???

II Kings 21:6b

HE WROUGHT MUCH WICKEDNESS IN THE SIGHT OF THE LORD, TO PROVOKE HIM TO ANGER.

LB: "So the Lord was very angry, for Manasseh was an evil man in God's opinion."

COMMENT: In God's opinion?

II Chr. 26:4

AND HE DID THAT WHICH WAS RIGHT IN THE SIGHT OF THE LORD ACCORDING TO ALL THAT HIS FATHER AMAZIAH DID.

LB: "He followed in the footsteps of his father Amaziah and was in general a good king as far as the Lord's opinion of him was concerned."

COMMENT: Again, God does NOT have opinions. Men have opinions.

Job 3:26

I WAS NOT IN SAFETY. NEITHER HAD I REST, NEITHER WAS I QUIET: YET TROUBLE CAME.

LB: "I was not fat and lazy yet trouble struck me down."

Psalm 34:20

HE KEEPETH ALL HIS BONES: NOT ONE OF THEM IS BROKEN.

LB: "God even protects him from accidents."

COMMENT: There are NO ACCIDENTS with God!

Ezekiel 2:1

AND HE SAID UNTO ME, SON OF MAN, STAND UPON THY FEET, AND I WILL SPEAK UNTO THEE.

LB: "And he said unto me, Stand up, son of dust and I will talk to you."

COMMENT: In the book of Ezekiel `son of dust' is used in place of `son of man'. Does the term 'son of dust' sound as derogatory to you like as it does to me?

Zech. 2:8

HE THAT TOUCHETH YOU TOUCHETH THE APPLE OF HIS EYE.

LB: "For he who harms you sticks his finger in Jehovah's eye."

Zech. 13:6

AND ONE SHALL SAY UNTO HIM, WHAT ARE THESE WOUNDS IN THINE HANDS? THEN HE SHALL ANSWER, THOSE WITH WHICH I WAS WOUNDED IN THE HOUSE OF MY FRIENDS.

LB: "And if someone asks then, what are these scars on your chest and your back, you will say, I got into a brawl at the home of a friend."

COMMENT: The footnote about this verse says: "That this is not a passage referring to Christ is clear from the context. This is a false prophet who is lying about the reasons for his scars." We wonder how the editor of the LB (Taylor) came to know this.

Mark 9:29

AND HE SAID UNTO THEM, THIS KIND CAN COME FORTH BY NOTHING, BUT BY PRAYER AND FASTING.

LB: "Jesus replied, Cases like this require prayer."

COMMENT: Notice: fasting is left out! Wonder why Satan does not want us to fast?

Luke 23:42

AND HE SAID UNTO JESUS, LORD, REMEMBER ME WHEN THOU COMEST INTO THY KINGDOM.

LB: "Then he said, Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom."

COMMENT: What justification is there to strip Jesus of his title "Lord"?

John 1:17

FOR THE LAW WAS GIVEN BY MOSES, BUT GRACE AND TRUTH CAME BY JESUS CHRIST.

LB: "For Moses gave us only the law with its rigid demands and merciless justice while Jesus Christ brought us loving forgiveness as well."

COMMENT: The Old Testament contained God's mercy and grace, too.

John 2:4

WOMAN, WHAT HAVE I TO DO WITH THEE? MINE HOUR IS NOT YET COME.

LB: "I can't help you now, He said, It isn't yet my time for miracles."

COMMENT: His hour would come at Calvary. His HOUR and His MIRACLES are not the same.

John 3:13

AND NO MAN HATH ASCENDED UP TO HEAVEN, BUT HE THAT CAME DOWN FROM HEAVEN, EVEN THE SON OF MAN WHICH IS IN HEAVEN.

LB: "For only I, the Messiah, have come to earth and will return to heaven again."

Comment: Not true, LB! Remember the angels on Jacob's ladder?

John 6:69

AND WE BELIEVE AND ARE SURE THAT THOU ART THAT CHRIST, THE SON OF THE LIVING GOD.

LB: "And we believe them and know you are the holy Son of God."

COMMENT: The word Christ means "anointed". Why does the LB strip him of his anointing?

John 13:26

JESUS ANSWERED, HE IT IS, TO WHOM I SHALL GIVE A SOP, WHEN I HAVE DIPPED IT.

LB: "He told me it is the one I honor by giving the bread dipped in the sauce."

COMMENT: Was Jesus Christ really HONORING Judas?

Acts 9:5

AND HE SAID, WHO ART THOU, LORD? AND THE LORD SAID, I AM JESUS WHOM THOU PERSECUTEST: IT IS HARD FOR THEE TO KICK AGAINST THE PRICKS.

LB: "Who is speaking sir, Paul asked. And the voice replied, I am Jesus, the one you are persecuting. Now get up and go into the city and await my further instructions."

COMMENT: Jesus title "LORD" is changed to `SIR'. And Saul's name is changed to Paul.

I Cor. 16:22

IF ANY MAN LOVE NOT THE LORD JESUS CHRIST, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA MARANATHA.

LB: "If anyone does not love the Lord, that person is cursed, Lord Jesus, come."

COMMENT: Once again; Jesus Christ is separated from title 'Lord'

II Cor. 8:9

FOR YE KNOW THE GRACE OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST.

LB: "You know how full of love and kindness our Lord Jesus was."

COMMENT: Lord Jesus Christ is stripped down to: Lord Jesus.

I Tim. 2:5-6

FOR THERE IS ONE GOD, AND ONE MEDIATOR BETWEEN GOD AND MEN THE MAN CHRIST JESUS, WHO GAVE HIMSELF A RANSOM FOR ALL, TO BE TESTIFIED IN DUE TIME.

LB: "That God is on one side and all the people on the other side, and Christ Jesus Himself, man, is between them to bring them together by giving His life for all mankind."

I Tim. 3:16

AND WITHOUT CONTROVERSY GREAT IS THE MYSTERY OF GODLINESS: GOD WAS MANIFEST IN THE FLESH.

LB: "It is quite true that the matter to live a godly life is not an easy matter, but the answer lies in Christ who came to earth as a man."

COMMENT: Remember the test for the anti-christ. The anti-christ cannot say: "JESUS CHRIST IS COME IN THE FLESH". Notice how the LB dances around this verse! Apparently the LB cannot say "GOD WAS MANIFEST IN THE FLESH!

I John 1:7

AND THE BLOOD OF JESUS CHRIST HIS SON CLEANSETH US FROM ALL SIN.

LB: "The blood of Jesus, His Son, cleanses us from every sin."

COMMENT: Jesus Christ is stripped down to Jesus.

Rev. 6:17

FOR THE GREAT DAY OF HIS WRATH IS COME ...

LB: "Because the great day of THEIR anger is come and who can survive it?"

Comment: What does "HIS" wrath and "THEIR" anger have in common?

2:4 K J V V S. A M P.

In this section we compare the King James to the "Amplified Bible" (AMP).

In this comparison, we will see the results of an 'amplified' approach.

Gen 1:21

And God created great WHALES ...

AMP: "God created the great sea monsters ..."

Matt. 12:40

For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the WHALES's belly ...

AMP: "For even as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the sea monster ..."

COMMENT: God creates monsters?

Gen. 2:7

... and man became a living SOUL.

AMP: "... and man became a living being."

Comment: A MAJOR difference between man and beast is that man is the ONLY creature with a SOUL.

Gen. 2:13

... land of ETHIOPIA.

AMP: "... land of Cush."

Comment: I know where Ethiopia is, but where is Cush?

Gen. 3:4-5

And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods knowing good and evil.

AMP: "But the serpent said to the woman, You shall not surely die. For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be as God, knowing the difference between good and evil."

COMMENT: This is major blasphemy! God (with a big G) is not evil! Think about the difference between "as gods" and "as God".

Lev. 3:13b

... and the sons of Aaron shall SPRINKLE the blood thereof upon the altar round about.

AMP: "... and the sons of Aaron shall throw its blood against the altar round about."

Judges 7:20b

... and they cried, the sword OF the LORD, and OF Gideon.

AMP: "... and they cried, The sword for the LORD and Gideon."

Comment: Notice: "OF" was changed to "FOR".

2 Sam. 21:19

... Elhanan ... slew THE BROTHER OF Goliath ...

AMP: "... Elhanan ... slew Goliath ..."

Comment: The scholars missed this one! Most Sunday school children know that DAVID slew Goliath.

Daniel 3:25

... and the form of the fourth is like THE SON OF GOD.

AMP: "... And the form of the fourth is like a son of the gods!"

COMMENT: It was Jesus Christ, THE SON OF GOD, who was with Shadrach, Messach and Abednego. It was Jesus Christ who saved them from the fiery furnace. And, it is Jesus Christ who saves you and me from the fiery furnace (i.e. Hell). There is a big difference between "THE SON OF GOD" and 'a son' of 'plural' gods! Think about it.

Zech. 11:17

Woe to the IDOL shepherd that leaveth the flock!

AMP: "Woe to the worthless and foolish shepherd who deserts the flock!"

Comment: Idol and worthless/foolish are very different.

Zech. 13:6

And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds IN THINE HANDS? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.

AMP: "And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds on your breast - between your hands? Then he will answer, Those with which I was wounded [when disciplined] in the house of my (loving) friends."

COMMENT: Folks: This is a verse prophesying Jesus Christ. Jesus was wounded IN HIS HANDS (and also on His back), BUT NOT ON HIS BREAST! Also, Jesus WAS NOT BEING DISCIPLINED when He went to the cross! Jesus did nothing wrong! And, lastly, Jesus WAS in the house of "His" friends, but they WERE NOT BEING "loving" back to him!

Matt. 18:11

For the Son of Man IS come to save that which was lost.

AMP: "For the Son of man came to save (from the penalty of eternal death) that which was lost."

Comment: The AMP says Jesus Christ "came" to save that which was lost; a PAST TENSE statement. The AMP implies that ALL who were to be saved, HAVE BEEN saved. Not true. Anyone, TODAY, can be saved by Jesus Christ. The correct reading is PRESENT TENSE. This AMP corruption is very subtle but very important.

Mark 1:2

As it is written IN THE PROPHETS, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee.

AMP: "Just as it is written in the prophet Isaiah: Behold, I send My messenger before Your face, who will make ready Your way;"

Comment: Sometimes verses in the New Testament requote the Old Testament. This is happening here. The verse being quoted is not in Isaiah, as the AMP says, it is from Malachi 3:1. Check it out! Not only does the AMP misquote the Word of God, it even mis-quotes itself. The KJV has the correct reading: "As it is written in the prophets ...", because Malachi was a prophet!

Luke 2:33

And JOSEPH and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him.

AMP: "And His [legal] father and [His] mother were marvelling at what was said about Him;"

Comment: This is blasphemy! Contrary to what the AMP would say, Joseph WAS NOT Jesus' father! God WAS Jesus' father! Every Christian knows this! And contrary to the AMP, God was also Jesus' LEGAL father. Think about what the AMP is saying: If Jesus' had an earthly father, then He is just any man. If He is just any man, then we are still in our sins. If we are still in our sins, then we are not saved. If we are not saved, then we have a BIG PROBLEM.

John 3:13

And NO MAN hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.

AMP: "And yet no one has ever gone up to heaven; but there is One Who has come down from heaven, the Son of man [Himself], Who is - dwells, Whose home is - in heaven."

Comment: Not true AMP. There HAVE BEEN others who have gone up to heaven. Remember the angels of Jacob's ladder? They were ascending and descending. The KJV has the correct reading which is: "... NO MAN hath ascended up to heaven ..."

Acts 12:4

... after Easter ...

AMP: "... after the Passover ..."

Acts 17:22

Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are TOO SUPERSTITIOUS.

AMP: "So Paul, standing in the center of the Areopagus [Mars Hill auditorium] said: Men of Athens, I perceive in every way - on every hand and with every turn I make - that you are most religious ..."

Comment: Come on! Being "most religious" and "TOO SUPERSTITIOUS" are entirely different!

1 Cor. 5:7b

For even Christ our passover is sacrificed FOR US:

AMP: "... for Christ, our Passover [Lamb], has been sacrificed."

COMMENT: Leaving out "FOR US" misses the point entirely.

1 Cor. 16:22

If any man love not the Lord JESUS CHRIST, let him be Anathema Maranatha.

AMP: "If any one does not love the Lord ... he shall be accursed ... "

COMMENT: Leaving out "JESUS CHRIST" leaves us guessing as to whom the AMP wants us to love.

2 Cor. 2:17

For we are not as many, which CORRUPT the Word of God ...

AMP: "For we are not, like so many ... peddling God's Word ..."

COMMENT: Peddling and corrupting are very different. 'Modern' bibles try and hide from the truth they are 'corrupting' the Word of God.

Gal. 2:20

I AM crucified with Christ ...

AMP: "I have been crucified with Christ ..."

COMMENT: The AMP says their crucifixion is over! Not true. The believers crucifixion is an ongoing, PRESENT TENSE, transaction.

Eph. 5:1

Therefore be FOLLOWERS of God ...

AMP: "Therefore be imitators of God ..."

Comment: The AMP documents Satan's position exactly. ONLY Satan tries to IMITATE God as Satan wants to be worshipped AS God. Born again believers cannot imitate God. We can't rule the universe. We can only follow God. Remember Jesus DID NOT tell his "fishers of men" to imitate Him. Jesus said: "follow me ...".

Philip 3:8

... and do count them but DUNG, that I may win Christ,

AMP: "... and consider it all to be mere rubbish ..."

COMMENT: I have rubbish on the top of my office desk, but I don't want 'dung' there!!!

1 Tim. 3:16

... God was MANIFEST in the flesh ...

AMP: "... He (God) was made visible in human flesh ..."

COMMENT: God wasn't just made visible, He was MANIFEST in the flesh. The image of the beast, in Revelation, is going to be made visible!

1 Tim. 6:10

For the love of money is THE root of all evil ...

AMP: "For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil ..."

COMMENT: There is a big difference between AMP's "a" root and the correct KJV reading of "THE" root.

1 Tim. 6:20

... oppositions of SCIENCE falsely so called

AMP: "... contradictions in what is falsely called knowledge"

1 Pe. 2:2

As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk OF THE WORD, that ye may grow thereby:

AMP: "Like new born babes ... desire - the pure spiritual milk, that by it you may ... grow unto [completed] salvation."

COMMENT: The AMP leaves out "OF THE WORD". It's God's Word that makes us grow. Also, unlike what the AMP says, we DO NOT grow to "[completed] salvation". That says salvation is by works! That is heresy. Remember: "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." (Ephesians 2: 8-9).

In chapters 1 and 2, we reviewed the doctrine contained in 'new', 'modern', 'more easily readable', versions of the Bible. Verses, familiar to the reader, were used to compare 'modern' versions to the Authorized King James Bible. As we have seen, 'new' versions contain major error.

In a verse by verse (side by side) comparison, it has been shown that 'modern' versions: Deny God was Jesus' father, omit the deity and Lordship of Jesus Christ, omit Jesus' blood as the atonement for our sins, corrupt the test for the antichrist, misquote Old Testament scripture, omit the purpose of Jesus' coming to earth, omit the fact that Jesus was sacrificed FOR US, omit the need for us to repent, omit the results of not receiving the gift of everlasting life, corrupt the Lord's Prayer, and even misquote Bible stories that most Sunday School children could repeat correctly.

In 'modern' versions we are told: There is more than 1 God, that Joseph was Jesus' father, that justification/salvation is by works, that we should try and imitate God (i.e. be like Satan), that anyone who believes anything is saved, etc. etc.

Clearly, something is wrong!

So, are these examples the "ONLY" problems in 'new' versions of the Bible?

The answer, unfortunately, is no.

Further research into 'new' versions shows that, not counting the Old Testament, there have been about 5,337 changes in the New Testament alone!

Now, could random chance cause 5,337 problems in the New Testament? Could key Christian doctrine become messed up by 1 verse mistranslated here, 1 verse mistranslated there?

How could ANY mistranslation (or corruption) come about; since 'modern' translators have the King James Bible to check their work?

No dear reader; random chance cannot explain this. Something else is wrong!

Somehow, the straight path in the King James Bible has become a crooked path in these new 'versions'.

How did 'new' versions become filled with so much error?

We will answer that question in the next chapter.

Return to:
Table of Contents | Forum Discussion | ConcernedMembers.com

3
C H A P T E R 3

H O W C O U L D T H I S H A P P E N ?

In the Authorized King James Bible the Old Testament comes from a Hebrew text called the 'Massoretic Text'; and the New Testament comes from a Greek text called the 'Textus Receptus'.

MANY PEOPLE ASSUME THAT MODERN VERSIONS ARE SIMPLY WORDING 'UPDATES' TO THE SAME HEBREW AND GREEK TEXTS (i.e. updates to the Massoretic Text and updates to the Textus Receptus). This is what I thought. To me, this was a logical assumption.

But, I found out there was a problem with my assumption; it was wrong!

Actually, a DIFFERENT Old Testament Hebrew text and a DIFFERENT New Testament Greek text have been SUBSTITUTED in place of the Massoretic Text and in place of the Textus Receptus.

As to the Old Testament, we learn that: "The NKJV and all new versions have abandoned the Traditional Hebrew, Ben Chayyim Massoretic Text, and follow Rudolph Kittel's 1937 corruption, Biblia Hebraica ..." [S3P594].

Reader note: Rudolph Kittel was "... a German rationalistic higher critic ... [who rejected] Biblical inerrancy and [was] firmly devoted to evolutionism" [S19P9]. And the younger Kittel (Gerhard Kittel) was the chief architect of Hitler's anti-semitism. It was Gerhard Kittel who made the extermination of Jews "theologically respectable" [S3P593].

As to the New Testament we find out that: "In our day there are ... about 110 ... translations of the Bible or New Testament ... in the English language alone ... Of those 110 ... only the King James Version (Authorized) is translated from the Received Text (Textus Receptus). All the others, even though no two of them agree with each other, were translated from ... the ... Westcott and Hort Text" [S14P3-4].

When this Westcott and Hort Greek text is compared with the more than 5,000 known Greek New Testament manuscripts, it is found to DIS-AGREE with them in 90-95% of the cases!

When the Textus Receptus is compared with the 5,000 known Greek New Testament manuscripts, it is found to AGREE with them in 90-95% of the cases.

Rudolph Kittel's corrupted O.T. text and Westcott and Hort's corrupted N.T. text form the basis for more than 110 'modern' versions.

With a bad underlying Hebrew O.T. text, and with a bad underlying Greek N.T. text, it DOESN'T MATTER how good a job a translation committee tries to do: A house built on sand will fall.

Thus, there are really only 2 'versions' of the Bible: The Authorized King James Bible based on the Massoretic Text and Textus Receptus, and then ALL the other 'modern versions' based on 'different' Old and New Testaments.

The 'new' Bibles which publishers want to sell you, are NOT new translations of the same, original, texts. Instead, they are a total departure, based on a bad foundation.

3:2 B I B L E P U B L I S H E R ' S

C H A N G E G O D ' S W O R D S O N P U R P O S E

Although 'new versions' come from the SAME CORRUPTED TEXTS, they are all DIFFERENT from each other !

Sounds amazing, but it is true!

One reason new versions differ from each other is that they have to!

What I'm saying is this:

For a 'new' version to be called a 'new' version, Bible publishers MUST change God's words (and ignore His warning in the book of Revelation). If they don't change God's words, they can't call it a 'NEW' version!

So 'new', 'modern' versions come from corrupted, underlying texts. Then, on top of that, publishers purposely change the translation so they can sell it as a 'new' version!

Now, 'different' and 'changed' products are fine in the business world, because this maximizes profits. But, 'different' and 'changed' Bibles are DISASTROUS for Christian doctrine.

Think about this:

Do you remember that game you played as a child? You know the one where one person would tell something to a second. Then that person would tell the same thing to a third. This would continue until the last person would tell it to the first person.

Do you remember how the message was so messed up, by the time it came around, that the first person could not recognize his/her own message? The message that came back was not even close to the original! And that was when everyone was TRYING to repeat the SAME message!

The message the Bible is repeating is the message of salvation. We're talking about people's souls, here. We are talking about where they will live for eternity. We're talking about an important message.

But, 'new', 'modern' versions (and their publishers) are ignoring God's warning in Revelation and are PURPOSELY CHANGING the message from Bible to Bible.

God says: straight is the path and narrow is the way that leads to life eternal. And broad is the way that leads to destruction. (Matthew 7:13-14).

Clearly, 'modern' versions are on the wrong path. And with more than 110+ of these in print; a broad road is being offered.

So, which path do we want to take? Should we take the path that leads to life eternal or the broad road? And, which path should we teach/encourage our family/friends to take?

3:3 W H A T D O I D O N O W ?

Ok, you've been sold (or given) a 'new', 'modern' version of the Bible. A good question would be: What do I do now?

I wrestled with this question for some time, before making the following recommendations:

In my opinion, you have a DEFECTIVE PRODUCT. I think you should go back to the store (or person) who sold you/gave you that 'modern' Bible. I would take 30 minutes to talk with them. In Christian love, I would take some sample verses of key Christian doctrine, agree on the right answer, and then show them the error.

If you were RECENTLY SOLD the 'modern' Bible; then, you have at least 3 options. In preference order, I would:

If they won't do that, then I would:

2) Ask for your money back and go get a King James Bible at another store.

If they won't give you your money back, then I would:

3) Take the 'modern' Bible, mark up these sample errors, and show them to others. I recommend showing them to: your pastor/Bible study leader, your family, and your relatives.

Note: I would NOT personally USE a corrupted version in my daily walk nor in my daily feeding on God's Word. I would ONLY use the corrupted version to show others the error so they STAY OFF OF THE BROAD ROAD !

3:4 W E N E E D T O T U R N A R O U N D A N D G O B A C K !

Clearly 'modern versions' are going down the wrong road. And, worse than that, they are trying to get Christians to go down the wrong road with them!

When travellers realize they are lost, or when they realize they are going down the wrong road; they stop, turn around, and go back to where they took the wrong turn. Then, they get started onto the right road.

We need to stop, go back, and retrace the path of the Bible. We will review the history of 'corrupted' versions; and, we will review the history of the King James Bible. By doing so, we will find out how 'modern' versions got onto the wrong road.

To re-trace the path, requires that we go back to the beginning ...

Return to:
Table of Contents | Forum Discussion | ConcernedMembers.com

4
C H A P T E R 4

" I N T H E B E G I N N I N G ... "

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God" (John 1:1).

When the Word was written down, the Word was then called 'Scripture'.

The original recordings of Scripture are called 'autographs'. Animal skins and papyrus (paper) were used for these first autographs. Unfortunately, because of decay, these original autographs no longer exist.

What does remain are copies, made by scribes, of these original autographs. These scribal copies are called 'manuscripts'.

The manuscripts of the Old Testament were written in Hebrew and the manuscripts of the New Testament were written in Greek.

We do not have many Old Testament manuscripts. But, we have more than 5,000 New Testament manuscripts.

From these manuscripts variant readings are analyzed and an agreed upon master 'text' is derived. From the agreed upon 'master text' a Bible can then be translated into the desired language.

Thus our Bible was first the Word of God, then an original 'autograph', then a scribal copy 'manuscript', then an agreed upon 'master text', then an English Bible.

4:2 G O D ' S T R U T H

T H E O L D T E S T A M E N T T E X T

"The Bible was written from 1650 BC to 90 AD" [S4P96]. (These dates include both the Old and New Testaments). As to the Old Testament:

"The Hebrew Scriptures were written by Moses and the prophets and other inspired men to whom God had given prophetic gifts" [S8P7].

The Old Testament text (Hebrew scriptures) were passed down both orally and in the written form. As to the oral tradition, we know the following:

"The original Hebrew manuscripts were not 'pointed', that is, the written text was made up of consonants, without the vowel sounds that make words pronounceable. The spoken text was passed down through the centuries by the Hebrew priests, who by their public reading of the Scriptures gave full understanding to the consonantal text" [S15P7].

This oral tradition continued until:

"... a Jewish sect known as the Massoretes, concerned that the demise of this oral tradition would make the Hebrew Scriptures incomprehensible, set out to produce a standardized copy of the Hebrew Old Testament complete with vowel sounds" [S15P7].

Thus, the Massoretes standardized the Hebrew Text, giving us the 'written tradition'.

In Alfred Levell's book "The Old Is Better"; we are told how the Old Testament was copied and passed down in written form:

"For the Old Testament, the copying was done with extreme care by the Jewish priesthood in the centuries before Christ ... After the time of Christ, copies were made by Jewish scribes, and especially by those from the 6th century onward called the Massoretes, who took extraordinary pains to ensure the correctness of their copies" [S13P17].

The extraordinary pains that the Massoretes used included:

"... many complicated safeguards ... such as counting the number of times each letter of the alphabet occurs in each book" [S8P13].

David Fuller expands on the care which went into copying the Hebrew manuscripts. He says:

"The Jews cherished the highest awe and veneration for their sacred writings which they regarded as the 'Oracles of God'. They maintained that God had more care of the letters and syllables of the Law than of the stars of heaven, and that upon each tittle of it, mountains of doctrine hung ... In the transcription of an authorized synagogue manuscript, rules were enforced of the minutest character. The copyist must write with a particular ink, on a particular parchment. He must write in so many columns, of such a size, and containing just so many lines and words. No word to be written without previously looking at the original. The copy, when completed, must be examined and compared within thirty days; if four errors were found on one parchment; the examination went no farther - the whole was rejected" [S2P112-113]

In his book "God Wrote Only One Bible", Jasper James Ray also speaks about the carefulness of the scribes:

"In making copies of the original manuscripts, the Jewish scribes exercised the greatest possible care. When they wrote the name of God in any form they were to reverently wipe their pen, and wash their whole body before writing 'Jehovah' lest that holy name should be tainted even in writing. The new copy was examined and carefully checked with the original almost immediately, and it is said that if only one incorrect letter was discovered the whole copy was rejected. Each new copy had to be made from an approved manuscript, written with a special kind of ink, upon skins made from a 'clean' animal. The writer had to pronounce aloud each word before writing it. In no case was the word to be written from memory. They counted, not only the words, but every letter, and how many times each letter occurred, and compared it to the original" [S4P94-95].

Notice: These 2 previous historical accounts differ slightly in a couple of places: namely did 1 or 4 errors cause the rejection of the whole copy; and did the copy get examined almost immediately or within 30 days. Suffice it to say that, even though these 2 quotes differ somewhat, the copies were made with extreme care. And, that is the point.

Therefore, we can have confidence in the Massoretic Old Testament text, because of what we have just learned, as well as:

"... the extreme reverence with which the Jews regarded their Scriptures affords a powerful guarantee against any deliberate corruption of the text" [S2P118].

And the Massoretic Old Testament has also been confirmed through other means, namely the:

"... many secondary witnesses ... including translations into other languages, quotations used by friends and enemies of biblical religion, and evidence from early printed texts" [S18P153].

Additionally, David Fuller points out (about the Massoretic Old Testament text):

"The Old Testament, precisely as we have it, was endorsed by Jesus Christ, the Son of God ... The Old Testament was our Lord's only study book .... Five hundred and four times is the Old Testament quoted in the New" [S2P113-114].

In the booklet "God's Inspired Preserved Bible" the author says (of the Massoretic Text):

"As a summary we may say that 10% of Christ's words were taken directly from the Old Testament" [S7P7].

Thus, the Massoretic Old Testament Text has been carefully reproduced and has been attested to by Jesus Christ. It is this Massoretic Text, which forms the Old Testament, of our King James Bible.

4:3 G O D ' S T R U T H

T H E N E W T E S T A M E N T T E X T

"The books which make up the Bible were written over a period of 1700 years from 1650 B.C. to 90 A.D. by men who were directly inspired by God" [S4P96]. (These dates include both the Old and New Testaments).

As to the New Testament:

"The last of the Apostles to pass away was John. His death is usually placed about 100 A.D. In his closing days he co-operated in collecting and forming of those writings we call the New Testament" [S4P94].

"John the Apostle was said to be about the only writer of the New Testament who did not die a violent death as a martyr. Then, following the completion of the New Testament, most of the men who translated the Bible manuscripts into the language of the common people were put to death. History reveals the surprising fact that it was members of the clergy, those supposed to be ministers of Christ, who directed and carried out the cruel deeds of martyrdom" [S4P96].

We now have about 5,000 manuscripts of the New Testament. These manuscripts were written in Greek. And, as we have said earlier; the Greek Text used in the King James Bible, agrees with 90-95% of these 5,000 manuscripts.

Later, we will discuss the 5-10% of the manuscripts and why they are different.

Because the King James New Testament agrees with the majority of these 5,000 manuscripts, it is called the 'Majority Text'. It has also been referred to as the 'Traditional Text' and it is also called 'The Textus Receptus'.

The New Testament of the KJV got its name 'Textus Receptus' because; in 1624 the Elzevir brothers printed, in the preface of their 1624 edition of the Greek New Testament, the following words (translated into English):

"Therefore thou has the text (textum) now received (receptum) by all, in which we give nothing altered or corrupt. From Textum Receptum came the words we now use as the Textus Receptus, or Received Text" [S4P96].

So the King James Bible is called the 'Majority Text', the 'Traditional Text', the 'Textus Receptus' and the 'Received Text'. All of these names refer to the SAME Greek New Testament Text. All of these names refer to the King James Bible.

For this report I will be use the term 'Traditional Majority Text' to describe the text which underlies the King James Bible.

And, I will use the term 'Corrupted Minority Text' to describe the substitute text used in 'modern' versions.

Now, let's trace the history of both the 'Traditional Majority Text' and the 'Corrupted Minority Text' and their translations into various languages.

Return to:
Table of Contents | Forum Discussion | ConcernedMembers.com

5
C H A P T E R 5
G O D ' S T R U T H

T H E P E S H I T T A B I B L E ( 150 A.D. )

( The Traditional Majority Text In Syrian )

After the Apostle John died, the Church used its collection of New Testament manuscripts. With the guidance of the Holy Spirit, these separate manuscripts were brought together into codex (book) form.

In the very early years of the Church, the Traditional Majority Text (i.e. the Bible) was called the Greek Vulgate; Greek because it was written in Greek and Vulgate because Vulgate means:

"... that which is popular; the usual or best known, and most used by the majority of the people" [S4P97].

Then around 150 A.D. the Greek Vulgate (the Traditional Majority Text) was translated into Syrian. This Bible, for the Syrian Church, was named the 'Peshitta Bible'. Syriac scholars state that the Peshitta Bible was:

"... careful, faithful, simple, direct, literal version, clear and forceful in style" [S4P97].

In his book: "Believing Bible Study", Edward F. Hills compares the Syrian Peshitta Bible to the Traditional Majority Greek Text:

"The Peshitta Syriac version agrees closely with the Traditional text found in the vast majority of the Greek New Testament manuscripts ..." and he says: "... the Peshitta was regarded as one of the most important witnesses to the antiquity of the Traditional text" [S8P94].

The statement above is VERY, VERY, important. The original reason (i.e. excuse) given by Westcott and Hort to make a 'new' (i.e. corrupted) Greek New Testament was that the Textus Receptus did not date back to the early manuscripts. The quote above shows the 'Traditional Majority Text', i.e. the text used in the King James Bible, dates back to the early Syrian Church, and thus to the earliest manuscripts.

It used to be that: "... some scholars of the nineteenth century believed that the 'Majority Text' was a fourth century recension and did not represent the earliest manuscripts ... This [theory] has been abandoned by most present day scholars" [S3P480].

Isn't it appropriate that the Traditional Majority Text can be traced back to the early Church in Syria. I say this because it was in Syria, specifically at Antioch the capital of Syria, where believers were first called 'Christians'! ( Acts 11:26 ).

Return to:
Table of Contents | Forum Discussion | ConcernedMembers.com

6
C H A P T E R 6
G O D ' S T R U T H

T H E I T A L I C B I B L E ( 157 A.D. )

( The Traditional Majority Text In Latin )

At the same time as the Syrian translation, but in another part of the world; the common language of Italy, France, and Great Britain was not Syrian, but Latin. Thus, for these countries, a Bible was needed in Latin. Therefore, the original Greek Vulgate (The Traditional Majority Text) was translated from Greek into Latin. This is believed to have occurred no later than 157 A.D.

"One of the first of these Latin Bibles was for the Waldenses in northern Italy ..." [S4P98]. The Waldenses were: "lineal descendents of the Italic Church" [S4P98-99]. More will be said of the Waldenses later on, but as for the Italic Church suffice it to say that:

"Allix, an outstanding scholar, testifies that enemies had corrupted many manuscripts, while the Italic Church handed them down in their apostolic purity" [S4P98].

Augustine, speaking of the Latin Bibles, said: "Now among translations themselves the Italian (Itala) is to be preferred to others, for it keeps closer to the words without prejudice to clearness of expression" [S2P208].

Dr. Nolan, who acquired fame for his Greek and Latin scholarship, traced the history of the 'Traditional Majority Text' to the Waldenses of the Italic Church. He says the Traditional Majority Text was:

"... adopted into the version that prevailed in the Latin Church" [S4P99]. This means:

"... the basis for the King James Bible has been proven to be in harmony with translations which go back to the second century" [S4P99].

This statement about the Italic Bible of 157 A.D., along with the statement about the Syrian Peshitta Bible of 150 A.D., both date the 'Traditional Majority Text' with the earliest Church manuscripts.

For terminology sake we will call this Latin Bible the 'Old Latin'. And, as history shows, it's this 'Old Latin' Bible which agrees with the 'Traditional Majority Text' used in the King James Bible.

This Old Latin Bible saw widespread use. In his book: "An Understandable History of the Bible", Reverend Gipp says:

"The true gospel was fast spreading all over Europe due to the Old Latin translation ..." [S1P82]. He goes on to say that:

"The Old Latin Vulgate was used by the Christians in the churches ... throughout Europe. This Latin version became so used and beloved by orthodox Christians and was in such common use by the common people that it assumed the term 'Vulgate' as a name. Vulgate ... which is Latin for common" [S1P67].

6:2 S A T A N I S N O T F A R B E H I N D

In the Garden of Eden, after God spoke with Adam, Satan came by to offer his own translation!

It seems to follow; that whenever God makes His original, it's not long before Satan comes by with a counterfeit.

Satan will offer a counterfeit to God's original Greek Bible as well as a counterfeit to God's original 'Old Latin' Bible, and on and on.

As David Fuller points out in his book "Which Bible?": "From the beginning there has been no pause in the assault on God's Son and God's Word" [S2P4].

The following quote, referring to Christ's victory at Calvary, summarizes Satan's actions against God's Bible:

"Vanquished by The Word Incarnate, Satan next directed his subtle malice against The Word written" [S2P96].

Return to:
Table of Contents | Forum Discussion | ConcernedMembers.com

7
C H A P T E R 7
S A T A N ' S C O U N T E R F E I T

T H E O R I G I N - E U S E B I U S B I B L E

( The Corrupted Minority Text In Greek )

To attack God's true Word, Satan had to come up with a corruption. The history goes as follows:

Around the year 200 A.D. a man named Clement:

"... founded the 'Catechetical School' at Alexandria. He brought the wisdom of the world into the teachings of the Christian faith and began to collect a group of corrupt manuscripts" [S7P8]. "Clement expressly tells us that he would not hand down Christian teachings, pure and unmixed, but rather clothed with precepts of pagan philosophy" [S2P191].

These 'historically early' changes to God's Word were also verified by Colwell who found that: "... as early as A.D. 200 scribes were altering manuscripts, changing them from a Majority-type text to a minority type" [S3P484] ).

These changes to the Word of God took place at Alexandria, Egypt.

Reader note: "... it was Antioch that the Holy Spirit chose for the base of Christian operations" [S1P51]. Thus, Antioch was good.

But, we must remember that Egypt was bad. In the Word, God says Egypt is: "... the house of bondage" (Exodus 20:2). Egypt is: "... the iron furnace" (Deuteronomy 4:20).

It was the Egyptians whom Abraham thought would kill him after seeing he had a beautiful wife (Genesis 12:2). It was in Egypt that Joseph was sold into slavery (Genesis 37:36). It was in Egypt that Israel had taskmasters set over them to afflict them with burdens (Exodus 1:11). It was about Egypt that God said to Israel: "Ye shall henceforth return no more that way" (Deuteronomy 17:16). And, it was in Jeremiah 46:25 that God promises to bring punishment onto Egypt.

Thus, Egypt is a type of this world, it is evil. And, as for Alexandria, Egypt; it was a: "... pagan city known for its education and philosophy ..." [S1P51].

Now, back to the story.

"... The best known graduate of this Alexandrian School was Origen who followed Clement as the head of the school. He became the most influential leader of his generation. He edited a six column Bible called the 'Hexapla'. Each of the columns had a different version of the Bible. He continually changed Bible verses that did not agree with his liberal ideas. He spiritualized God's Word. He believed Christ to be a created being just as Jehovah's Witnesses teach today" [S7P8].

Also:

"Origin did not believe that Jesus lived physically on earth!" [S5P65]. We know: "Origin was the first person to teach purgatory" [S1P75] and that Origin was quoted to say: "The laws of men appear more excellent and reasonable than the laws of God" [S3P527]. And, we also know that: "Origin was baptized as an infant, and he gave no indication that he was spiritually saved" [S4P112].

In her book "New Age Bible Versions" [S3P529] G.A. Riplinger tells us the church rejected Origin because of his heretical beliefs. For example, Origin believed (against scripture) that:

2) There was no physical resurrection of Christ nor will there be a second coming. Man will not have a physical resurrection.

3) Hell is non existent; purgatory, of which Paul and Peter must partake, does exist.

4) All, including the devil, will be reconciled to God.

5) The sun, moon, and stars are living creatures.

6) Emasculation, of which he partook, is called for, for males.

Origin was also the author of the 'Septuagint'.

The Septuagint is a Greek translation of the Old Testament.

Remember, it was the Massoretic Old Testament Text which Jesus quoted when he walked the earth. And, it was the Massoretic Old Testament Text that has been verified.

Yet, some 'modern textual critics' use the Greek Septuagint to determine the wording of 'new versions'. Instead of using the proven Hebrew Massoretic Old Testament Text, some translators admitted they used Origin's Septuagint. For instance; the NIV translators said they used the Old Testament Text that was: "standardized early in the third century by Origin" [S3P537].

Thus, we see that Origin was a key participant in the corruption of God's Word.

"It is clear that Origin is not a safe guide in textual criticism any more than in theology" [S7P8]. "Origin, though once exalted by modern day Christianity as a trustworthy authority, has since been found to have been a heretic who interpreted the Bible in the light of Greek philosophy ..." [S1P74].

7:2 C O N S T A N T I N E

After Origin, "The next step in corrupting the Bible was taken in the time of Constantine." [S7P8].

In 331 A.D. Constantine was the Emperor of Rome and he sought to: "... unite Christianity with pagan Rome" [S2P195]. He regarded himself as: "... the director and guardian of ... [the] world church" [S2P195]. "Constantine, the wolf of Paganism, openly assumed the sheep's clothing of the Christian religion" [S4P19]. "He accepted the Christian faith for political purposes and ordered a Bible that would appeal to the masses. Eusebius, a follower of Origin, was chosen for this task. This was the beginning of the Arian controversy concerning the Deity of our Lord and the spirit of ecumenism" [S7P8].

At this point, let's pause for some clarification and definition:

B) Ecumenism is the belief in a one world church where I'm OK, your OK, we're all OK. The ramification here is that no one is a sinner. Therefore, we do not need to be saved. This is NOT scriptural. This is a big lie. ( Note: Ecumenism is happening today ).

The truth is: "The Bible God wrote through holy men, does not teach ecumenicalism, i.e. that all religious systems should be united into one world-wide fellowship. Instead the Word of God teaches fellowship-separation between true believers and false professors" [S4P113].

Now, back to the history of the Bible.

Eusebius has just been chosen by the so called 'Christian' Emperor Constantine to produce a corrupted Bible 'for the masses'. From historical records we know that:

"Eusebius was a great admirer of Origen and a student of his philosophy. He had just edited the fifth column of the 'Hexapla' which was Origin's Bible. Constantine chose this, and asked Eusebius to prepare 50 copies for him ... The Emperor Constantine gave orders that ... this edition should be used in the Churches" [S4P18-19].

"Together Constantine and Eusebius called for religious toleration, which is invariably followed by amalgamation. To placate both Christian and heathen, they took a 'middle of the road position' regarding the deity of Christ. Consequently ... the doctrine that Jesus was 'the eldest and highest of creatures', rather than 'God manifest in the flesh', was adopted ..." [S3P535]. And: "... the amalgamation of heathen and Christian doctrine - smoothing out differences thereby allowing for unity - was perfect for Constantine's purposes" [S3P535].

Thus, Eusebius carried on Origin's work in corrupting the scriptures. And, as it turns out:

"Many of the important variations in the modern versions may be traced to the influence of Eusebius and Origin ..." [S2P3].

Looking back at this point in history, G.A Riplinger makes an interesting observation. In her book "New Age Bible Versions" she says:

"Corrupt bibles, with their loose doctrine, seem to create loose living in A.D. 333 and in the 1990's" [S3P536].

Something to think about.

Return to:
Table of Contents | Forum Discussion | ConcernedMembers.com

8
C H A P T E R 8
S A T A N ' S C O U N T E R F E I T

J E R O M E ' S L A T I N B I B L E ( 380 A.D. )

( The Corrupted Minority Text In Latin )

After Origin, Constantine, and Eusebius:

The "... corruption of God's Word was taken over by Jerome who was called upon by the Pope to prepare a Bible that would favor the Roman Catholic teaching" [S7P8]. "Jerome was furnished with all the funds that he needed and was assisted by many scribes and copyists" [S2P217].

"Jerome in his early years had been brought up with an enmity to the Received text, then universally known as the Greek Vulgate ... The hostility of Jerome to the Received Text made him necessary to the Papacy" [S2P219].

"Jerome was devotedly committed to the textural criticism of Origin, an admirer of Origen's critical principles ..." [S2P218]. To corrupt the Bible, Jerome went to "... the famous library of Eusebius ... where the voluminous manuscripts of Origin had been preserved" [S2P218].

As to the manuscripts of Origin and Eusebius, we know that: "it was from this type of manuscript that Jerome translated ..." [S2P195]. And we also know that Jerome's translation "... became the authorized Catholic Bible for all time" [S2P195].

"... It was through Jerome that ... Apocryphal books were placed in the Bible. These were soon accepted by the Roman Catholic Church as authoritative" [S7P8]. "Jerome admitted that these ... DID NOT belong with the other writings of the Bible. Nevertheless, the Papacy endorsed them ..." [S2P218].

In his book "An Understandable History Of The Bible" Reverend Gipp tells us that:

"Rome enlisted the help of a loyal subject by the name of Jerome. He quickly translated the corrupt Local Text into Latin. This version included the Apocryphal books ... which no Bible believing Christian accepts as authentic" [S1P82].

"The Latin version of Jerome, translated by order of the Roman Catholic Church, was published in about 380 A.D. It was rejected by real Christians until approximately 1280 A.D. The Roman Catholic Church chose the name 'Vulgate' ... for Jerome's translation in an attempt to deceive loyal Christians into thinking that it was the true common Bible of the people ... It would seem that such deception lacks a little in Christian ethics, if not honesty" [S1P68].

But: "The name 'Vulgate' on the flyleaf of Jerome's unreliable translation did little to help sales. The Old Latin Bible, or 'Italic' as it is sometimes called, was held fast by all true Christians ..." [S1P83]. Thus: "The common people recognized the true Word of God because the Holy Spirit bears witness to it" [S1P82].

So: "... the people for centuries refused to supplant their old Latin Bibles ... The old Latin versions were used longest by the western Christians who would not bow to ... Rome" [S1P84]. "True Protestants have always rejected ... Roman Catholicism and maintained the very opposite" [S12P103].

This 'Old Latin' Bible was:

"... universally accepted by faithful Christians ..." [S1P68] and that "... it was responsible for keeping the Roman Catholic Church contained to southern Italy for years. It was not until the Roman Catholic Church successfully eliminated this Book through persecutions, torture, Bible burnings, and murder that it could capture Europe in its web of superstitious paganism" [S1P68].

Reverend Gipp says:

"Perhaps we should learn a lesson. Where the ... King James Bible reigns, God blesses .... Oh, that America could but look at what has happened to England ... Yes, the sun began to set on the British Empire in 1904, when the British Foreign Bible Society changed from the pure Textus Receptus ..." [S1P69].

Thus, Satan used Jerome and the Catholic Church to substitute his counterfeit Latin Bible. But, this corruption "... which we will now call Jerome's translation - did not gain immediate acceptance everywhere. It took nine hundred years to bring that about. Purer Latin Bibles than Jerome's had already a deep place in the affections in the West. Yet steadily through the years, the Catholic Church has uniformly rejected the Received Text wherever translated from the Greek into Latin and exalted Jerome's ..." [S2P220].

8:2 T W O B I B L E S T R E A M S

In the history of the Bible, we see the development of two 'streams' of Bibles: God's true Word and Satan's counterfeit. This started in the Garden of Eden and continues today. In fact, every Bible both old and 'new', and every Bible in every language, falls into one of these two categories.

We also see that some people are (knowingly or unknowingly) propagating the corruption and some are passing on the original.

In the next chapter we will break from our historical study and look at the personal side of the struggle for God's Word. We will look at a group of people, within the 'true Church', called the Waldenses.

The Waldenses, of the Italian Church, are trying to pass on God's original Bible.

Their's is an interesting story. Let's review the role they played in history.

Return to:
Table of Contents | Forum Discussion | ConcernedMembers.com

9
C H A P T E R 9
S A T A N ' S P E R S E C U T I O N

O F T H E T R U E C H U R C H

( One Example: The History Of The Waldenses )

Previously, we mentioned a group of people named the Waldenses (or Waldensians). We said that they made sure God's Word was kept pure. We said this in connection with the Italic Bible of the Italian Church. In this chapter, we will examine their role in history.

As to these people we know that:

"The Waldenses were among the first of the peoples of Europe to obtain a translation of the Holy Scriptures. Hundreds of years before the reformation, they possessed the Bible in manuscript in their native tongue. They had the truth unadulterated, and this rendered them the special objects of hatred and persecution ..." [S2P215].

"The Waldenses of northern Italy were foremost among the primitive Christians of Europe in their resistance of the Papacy. They not only sustained the weight of Rome's oppression but also they were successful in retaining the torch of truth until the reformation took it from their hands and held it aloft to the world" [S2P205].

When Constantine became Emperor and 'called a truce' with the Christians, his effort was only a 'surface gesture'. Constantine was actually a wolf in sheep's clothing. Beneath his sheep's wool, he was actually trying to unite pagan Rome with the true Church and thus dilute Christian doctrine with the heretical teachings of Rome. History records that the Waldenses did not fall for this deception. For instance:

"... when Christianity, emerging from the long persecutions of pagan Rome, was raised to imperial favor by the Emperor Constantine, the Italic Church in northern Italy - later the Waldenses - is seen as standing in opposition to papal Rome" [S2P207].

Thus, the Waldenses remained steadfast in their faith. They could not be moved by 'the carrot' (i.e. a deceptive truce) nor could they be moved by 'the stick' (i.e. persecution).

In his book "Which Bible?", David Otis Fuller exposes Rome's efforts against the Waldenses:

"The agents of the Papacy have done their utmost to calumniate their [The Waldenses] character, to destroy the records of their noble past, and to leave no trace of the cruel persecution they underwent. They went even further-they made use of words written against ancient heresies to strike out the name of the heretics and fill the blank space by inserting the name of the Waldenses. Just as if, in a book, written to record the lawless deeds of some bandit like Jesse James, his name should be stricken out and the name of Abraham Lincoln substituted" [S2P205].

Not only was the character of the Waldenses corrupted in the documentation that has remained, but other records of the Waldenses were blatantly destroyed:

"The destruction of Waldensian records, beginning about 600 A.D. by Gregory the I, was carried through with thoroughness by the secret agents of the Papacy" [S2P206].

And if this was not bad enough, the Waldenses were physically persecuted by Rome.

"History does not afford a record of cruelty greater than that manifested by Rome toward the Waldenses. It is impossible to write the inspiring history of this persecuted people, whose origin goes back to apostolic days and whose history is ornamented with stories of gripping interest. Rome has obliterated the records" [S2P206].

In his book "An Understandable History Of The Bible", Reverend Gipp says:

"We find that Rome's wicked persecutions of the Waldenses culminated in a devastating massacre of their number in 1655. They were hounded as 'heretics' until the mid 1800's when their persistence paid off and the vile actions against them ceased" [S1P85-86].

We owe a lot to the Waldenses:

"To Christians such as these, preserving apostolic Christianity, the world owes gratitude for the true text of the Bible. It is not true, as Rome claims, that she gave the Bible to the world. What she gave was an impure text, a text with thousands of verses so changed as to make a way for her unscriptural doctrines" [S2P214-215].

So "Throughout the centuries, the Waldenses ... had sown the seed ..." [S2P224].

Thus; the name 'Waldenses' is forever recorded in history.

For us, they passed on the pure Word of God (until the reformation would do it in mass). They withstood Rome. They held fast in their faith. And, they did this even unto death by massacre.

There is no telling how many souls were saved because of the Waldenses. Maybe yours, maybe mine. No one knows.

This chapter is dedicated to the Waldenses, and to the role they played, in history, to preserve God's Word.

Now, back to the history of our Bible.

Return to:
Table of Contents | Forum Discussion | ConcernedMembers.com

10
C H A P T E R 1 0

T H E D A R K A G E S ( 476 A.D. - 1453 A.D. )

Beginning around 476 A.D., the world entered 'The Dark Ages'. This lasted almost 1,000 years.

In this short chapter, we will explore the cause of 'Dark Ages'.

When we last left the history of the Bible, the Catholic Church hired Jerome to make a corrupted Latin Bible. The purpose was to go up against the true Latin Bible ( the Italic Bible ) of the early Italian Church.

Jerome completed his corruption in 380 A.D., and the Catholic Church adopted Jerome's corrupted Bible as their standard. In addition to Jerome's Latin Bible, the Papacy adopted another measure to: "... keep Europe under its domination" [S2P216]. We find out that:

"... the Papacy was against the flow of Greek language and literature to Western Europe. All the treasures of the classical past were held back in the Eastern Roman Empire, whose capital was Constantinople. For nearly one thousand years, the western part of Europe was a stranger to the Greek tongue" [S2P216]. "The West became exclusively Latin, as well as estranged from the East; with local exceptions ... the use and knowledge of the Greek language died out in Western Europe" [S2P216].

"When the use and knowledge of Greek died out in Western Europe, all the valuable Greek records, history, archaeology, literature, and science remained untranslated and unavailable to Western energies. No wonder, then, that this opposition to using the achievements of the past brought on the Dark Ages (476 A.D. to 1453 A.D.)" [S2P216].

Thus, the people were denied access to valuable Greek records. And they were fed Jerome's corrupted Bible.

So, during this 1,000 year timeframe, the sun came up every day; just like it had since creation. The Dark Ages DID NOT refer to a 'celestial problem'. No, the Dark Ages referred to a 'spiritual problem'.

The Church needs to learn a lesson from the 'Dark Ages'. Edward F. Hills tells us the bottom line:

"From the study of the Bible and Church history two conclusions may be safely drawn. First, spiritual darkness and apostasy ALWAYS begin with false notions concerning faith. Second, reformation and revival ALWAYS REQUIRE the correction of these errors ..." [S8P55].

Return to:
Table of Contents | Forum Discussion | ConcernedMembers.com

11
C H A P T E R 1 1
G O D ' S T R U T H

E R A S M U S ' B I B L E ( 1516 A.D. )

( The Traditional Majority Text In Greek )

As you remember from the last chapter, the Papacy cut off Western Europe from Greek literature. Also, the Papacy substituted Jerome's corrupted Bible for God's true Bible. This brought on the 'Dark Ages'.

For almost 1,000 years ( 476 A.D. - 1453 A.D. ), the world went through a time of spiritual darkness.

Also, in the last chapter we learned that: "spiritual darkness and apostasy ... begin with false notions concerning faith" [S8P55] and "reformation and revival ... require the correction of these errors ..." [S8P55].

God moved in a mighty way and the 'Dark Ages' ended in 1453. Then, 1 year later in 1454, printing with movable type was invented.

Movable type printing, along with revival, spread God's Word quickly.

We pick up our study of the Bible, during this God given revival, which history has named: 'The Reformation'.

11:2 E R A S M U S

One person who changed the world, during the reformation, was Erasmus. Erasmus was a "... giant intellect and scholar ..." [S2P225]. And, Erasmus' name: "... was a household word all over the known world ..." [S10P4].

History records that:

"Probably the most important figure in the renaissance of learning and religion was Erasmus. He traveled around Europe's great learning centers, such as Oxford, Cambridge, Paris, Rome and others. He left his mark in history as the editor of the first published Greek New Testament printed in 1516" [S9P4].

Endowed by God: "... with a mind that could do ten hours work in one, Erasmus, during his mature years ... was the intellectual giant of Europe. He was ever collecting, comparing, writing, and publishing. Europe was rocked from end to end by his books which exposed the ignorance of the monks, the superstitions of the priesthood, the bigotry, and the childish and coarse religion of the day" [S2P225].

"... Erasmus looked for manuscripts ... during his travels and ... he borrowed them from everyone he could" [S8P193]. "There were hundreds of manuscripts which Erasmus examined, and he did; but he used only a few" [S2P226].

So why did Erasmus use only a few manuscripts, when he had personal access to hundreds of them? This question is answered consistently from author to author. For instance:

David Otis Fuller says: "The vast majority of manuscripts are practically all the Received Text" [S2P226].

And Barry Burton says: "The vast majority of Greek manuscripts agree together. They have been passed down thru the centuries by true Bible-believing Christians. In 1516 Erasmus compiled, edited, and printed the Greek 'Textus Receptus'. This is the text that the Protestants of the Reformation KNEW to be the Word of God (inerrant and infallible)" [S5P59-60].

Even ENEMIES of the Traditional Majority Text concede that: "The manuscripts Erasmus used, differ, for the most part, only in small and insignificant details from the bulk of the cursive manuscripts ..." [S2P227].

Erasmus examined every manuscript he could find and he found agreement among them. From the massive collection of manuscripts, Erasmus selected a sample to use. We find out that:

Erasmus' Greek New Testament was produced from: "... nine manuscripts chosen from a very large mass" [S10P4].

So these manuscripts were in agreement; but what about their quality?

David Otis Fuller says (of Erasmus' text):

"Moreover the text he chose had an outstanding history in the Greek, the Syrian, and the Waldensian Churches, and ... it constituted an irresistible argument for and proof of God's providence" [S2P227].

So, not only did these manuscripts agree with each other, but they had an excellent history.

Now, did Erasmus' great knowledge and detailed Godly effort result in a trouble free life?

Hardly! We discover that:

"It is customary even today with those who are bitter against the pure teachings of the Received Text, to sneer at Erasmus. No perversion of the facts is too great to belittle his work" [S2P225].

Thus, the greatest mind of that day had enemies.

For example, in 1521, Erasmus said:

"I did my best with the New Testament but it provoked endless quarrels. Edward Lee pretended to have found 300 errors. They appointed a commission, which professed to have found bushels of them. Every dinner-table rang with the blunders of Erasmus. I required particulars, and could not have them" [S2P226].

"... I required particulars and could not have them ..."

I think that says it all.

We see Erasmus taking a stand for God's Word. We see him trying to understand the comments of his detractors, in an effort to do the best possible work; yet there were never any 'facts' to discuss.

The quote above gives insight into the true 'problem'. The people who sneered at the greatest mind of their day weren't actually against Erasmus; they were against God's Holy Word. They were against the Traditional Majority Text.

And, although some tried to belittle his work, history is very clear about Erasmus' personal worth and character:

"... while he lived, Europe was at his feet. Several times the King of England offered him any position in the kingdom, at his own price; the Emperor of Germany did the same. The Pope offered to make him a cardinal. This he steadfastly refused, as he would not compromise his conscience. In fact, had he been so minded, he perhaps could have made himself Pope. France and Spain sought him to be a dweller in their realm; while Holland prepared to claim him as her most distinguished citizen" [S2P225-226].

And so, Erasmus went on with his work ...

"Book after book came from his hand. Faster and faster came the demands for his publications. But his crowning work was the New Testament in Greek. At last after one thousand years the New Testament was printed (1516 A.D.) in the original tongue ... the world ... read the pure story of the gospels. The effect was marvelous. At once, all recognized the great value of his work which for over four hundred years (1516 to 1930) was to hold the dominant place in the era of Bibles. Translation after translation has been taken from it, such as the German, and the English, and others [S2P226].

Thus: "The God who brought the New Testament text safely through the ancient and medieval manuscript period did not fumble when it came time to transfer this text to the modern printed page" [S8P196].

Finally, the 'Dark Ages' passed:

"When the 1,000 years had gone by, strains of new gladness were heard. Gradually these grew in crescendo until the whole choir of voices broke forth as Erasmus presented his first Greek New Testament at the feet of Europe. Then followed a full century of the greatest scholars of language and literature the world ever saw" [S2P225].

Return to:
Table of Contents | Forum Discussion | ConcernedMembers.com

12
C H A P T E R 1 2
G O D ' S T R U T H

L U T H E R ' S B I B L E ( 1522 A.D. )

( The Traditional Majority Text In German )

In the previous chapter, we learned that Erasmus' Greek New Testament found its way into Bibles of several languages. One of those was the translation, into German, by Martin Luther.

We pick up the history of the Bible in Whittenberg, Germany:

"A major blow to the authority of Rome came in 1517, when a young Catholic priest by the name of Martin Luther nailed his historic 95 theses on the church door in Whittenberg. The nail drove deep into the hearts of truly born-again Christians who had for centuries been laboring under the tyranny of the Roman Catholic Church ..." [S1P86].

History tells us that "... Martin Luther brought in the Protestant Reformation by insisting on the difference between faith and works" [S8P56]. From this ... the fires of reformation were kindled" [S1P86]

"Within 35 years after Luther had nailed his theses upon the door of the Cathedral of Whittenberg, and launched his attacks upon the errors and corrupt practices of Rome, the Protestant Reformation was thoroughly established. The great contributing factor to this spiritual upheaval was the translation by Luther of the Greek New Testament of Erasmus into German" [S1P232].

"The most vital and immovable weapon in Luther's arsenal came in the form of the New Testament of 1522. This put the pure words ... back into the hands of 'Bible starved' Christians. The reformation ran wild across the continent, fueled by this faithful translation. Rome at this point was totally helpless to stop it" [S1P86-87].

"The medieval Papacy awakened from its superstitious lethargy to see that in one-third of a century, the Reformation had carried away two-thirds of Europe. Germany, England, the Scandinavian countries, Holland, and Switzerland had become Protestant. France, Poland, Bavaria, Austria, and Belgium were swinging that way" [S1P232].

And so: "... Constantinople fell in 1453, ... Europe awoke as from the dead ... Columbus discovered America. Erasmus printed the Greek New Testament. Luther assailed the corruptions of the ... church. Revival of learning and the Reformation followed swiftly" [S2P217].

Return to:
Table of Contents | Forum Discussion | ConcernedMembers.com

13
C H A P T E R 1 3
G O D ' S T R U T H

T H E T Y N D A L E B I B L E ( 1525 A.D. )

( The Traditional Majority Text In English )

Throughout history the Roman Catholic Church has 'stonewalled' efforts to give God's Holy Word to the common person.

But a man named Tyndale would champion the cause of the common man.

"The first printed English version of the Bible was that of William Tyndale, one of England's first Protestant martyrs" [S12P214]. "The burning desire to give the common people the Holy Word of God was the reason Tyndale translated it into English" [S2P239].

Tyndale was born: "... in the county of Gloucester near the Welsh border, about 1484" [S9P5]. "Tyndale entered Magdalen Hall at Oxford at an early age, completing his graduate work there. Further studies were done in Cambridge, which was also a center for reform. Many of the reformation martyrs were from Cambridge" [S9P5] Tyndale: "... went from Oxford to Cambridge to learn Greek under Erasmus, who was teaching there from 1510 to 1514" [S12P214].

Tyndale was: "... completely at home in eight languages, French, Hebrew, Greek, German, Spanish, Dutch, Latin and in his own tongue. He could speak any one of the seven as well as his mother tongue. He translated all of the New Testament and part of the Old, from the Greek or Hebrew, into English. His English was so perfect that the King James translators used 85% of his translation without changing a word. That was a miracle, because those scholars naturally would wish to use their own way of translating, but instead gave Tyndale's choice of words and phrases the preference" [S10P4].

In a dispute with a learned man, who put the Pope's laws above God's laws, Tyndale said: "If God spare my life, ere many years, I will cause a boy that driveth a plough to know more of the Scripture than thou ..." [S2P229].

For this, Tyndale: "... was called before a council to answer charges of heresy" [S9P5].

"From that moment ... his life was one of continual sacrifice and persecution" [S2P229].

"About 1520 he became attached to the doctrines of the Reformation and conceived the idea of translating the Scriptures into English" [S12P214].

To find a place to translate the Bible, Tyndale went to see Bishop Tonstall. The purpose was to:

"... ask for a place for his employ ... The Bishop had no room for him. It had been decreed at the Council of Constance in 1417, that the Scriptures were NOT to be translated into the vernacular ... Tyndale wrote that ... there was not only no room in the Bishop's palace to translate the Bible, but not in all of England" [S9P5].

Unable to translate the Bible in England, Tyndale:

"... set out for the Continent in the spring of 1524 and seems to have visited Hamburg and Wittenberg. In that same year (probably at Wittenberg) he translated the New Testament from Greek into English for dissemination in his native land. It is estimated that 18,000 copies of this version were printed on the Continent of Europe between 1525 and 1528 and shipped secretly to England. After this Tyndale continued to live on the Continent as a fugitive, constantly evading the efforts of the English authorities to have him tracked down and arrested. But in spite of this ever present danger his literary activity was remarkable. In 1530-31 he published portions of the Old Testament which he had translated from the Hebrew and in 1534 a revision both of this translation and also of his New Testament. In this same year he left his place of concealment and settled in Antwerp, evidently under the impression that the progress of the Reformation in England had made this move a safe one. In so thinking, however, he was mistaken. Betrayed by a friend, he was imprisoned in 1535 and executed the following year. According to Foxe, his dying prayer was this: "Lord, open the King of England's eyes" [S12P214]. "Henry VIII had banned all Bibles printed in English in his realm. Eleven months after Tyndale's death Henry gave the order to print the Bible in English ..." [S10P5].

As to translating from Greek into English (vs from Latin into English) Tyndale said:

"The Greek tongue agreeth more with the English than with Latin. And the properties of the Hebrew tongue agreeth a thousand times more with the English than with the Latin. The manner of speaking is both one; so that in a thousand places thou needest not but to translate into the English, word for word: when thou must seek a compass in the Latin" [S6P86].

And where did Tyndale get the Greek text that he used for his English translation?

His text: "... came from the pure Greek text of Erasmus" [S2P222].

As to the quality of his English translation, Tyndale said:

"I call God to record, against the day we shall appear before our Lord Jesus Christ to give a reckoning of our doings, that I never altered one syllable of God's Word against my conscience, nor would to this day, if all that is in the earth-whether it be honour, pleasure, or riches-might be given me" [S6P85].

And so: "William Tyndale translated from the original Greek into English ... For this he was imprisoned in 1535 for about 18 months, afterwards strangled and burnt at the stake in October, 1536" [S9P4-5]. "His great offense was that he had translated the Scriptures into English and was making copies available against the wishes of the Roman Catholic hierarchy" [S2P3].

"But his life's work had been completed. He had laid securely the foundations of the English Bible" [S12P214].

Return to:
Table of Contents | Forum Discussion | ConcernedMembers.com

14
C H A P T E R 1 4

T H E C O U N C I L O F T R E N T ( 1545 A.D. )

( Satan Is Not Far Behind )

The reformation is running wild across Europe. There is revival in the land. Major changes are occurring and the good news of the gospel of grace is spreading. Many people are being blessed and many are thankful.

However, not everyone likes the gospel of grace. There are enemies to this good news.

In this chapter, Satan is once again seeking to kill, steal, and destroy. And, he is seeking those he may 'use'.

"In 1545 the Roman Catholic Church formed the Council of Trent" [S1P87]. "The Council of Trent was dominated by the Jesuits" [S2P235]. The purpose was to: "... undermine the Bible, then destroy the Protestant teaching and doctrine" [S2P237].

"The Council of Trent systematically denied the teachings of the Reformation. The Council decreed that 'tradition' was on equal authority with the Bible" [S1P87].

The Council of Trent also decreed that:

"... justification was not by faith alone in the shed blood of Jesus Christ. In fact it stated that anyone believing in this vital Bible doctrine was CURSED" [S1P87]. The council's exact words were:

"If anyone saith that justifying faith is nothing else but confidence in the divine mercy which remits sins for Christ's sake or that this confidence alone is that whereby we are justified, let him be ANATHEMA" [S1P87].

"Now we see that the Roman Catholic Church is guilty of officially cursing Jesus Christ! Would God use this 'Church' to preserve his Words?" [S1P87].

So this was the 'policy' of the Council of Trent. But what about the results?

Specifically, history records that:

2) The Council of Trent condemned: "That the meaning of Scripture is plain, and that it can be understood without commentary with the help of Christ's Spirit".

3) As to certain books in the Traditional Majority Text, the Council of Trent condemned them saying: "... they were apocryphal and not canonical".

4) The Council of Trent also said that: "... lay members of the church had NO RIGHT to interpret the Scriptures apart from the Clergy" [S2P237].

5) "The Council of Trent, after a prolonged and stormy session, also issued a decree that the entire Old Testament, including the Apocryphal books, were to be received and venerated with unwritten tradition as the Word of God" [S4P100].

6) On April 8th 1546, the Council of Trent declared that Jerome's, corrupted, Latin Bible was: "... the authentic Bible of the Roman Church" [S4P99].

And lastly:

"The Papal machine officially closed all investigation into the Greek and Hebrew manuscripts in 1546, at the Council of Trent, by declaring - without a single German philologist, historian, or scholar present - that the corrupt manuscripts ... are the inspired, canonical scriptures, and that anyone who does not go along with them is anathema - ACCURSED" [S11P61].

So we see Satan using the Roman Catholic 'Church', the Jesuits, and the Council of Trent to resist the Reformation and to resist the spread of the true Word of God.

Return to:
Table of Contents | Forum Discussion | ConcernedMembers.com

15
C H A P T E R 1 5

T H E R O M A N C A T H O L I C C H U R C H

In chapter 7 of his book: "An Understandable History Of The Bible", Reverend Gipp gives us some insight into the Roman Catholic 'Church'. He first begins with a contrast:

"It is necessary to salvation that every man should submit to the Pope." (Boniface VIII Unum Sanctum, 1303.) [S1P80].

"FOR BY GRACE ARE YE SAVED THROUGH FAITH; AND THAT NOT OF YOURSELVES: IT IS THE GIFT OF GOD: NOT OF WORKS LEST ANY MAN SHOULD BOAST." (Ephesians 2:8-9) [S1P80].

As Reverend Gipp says: "Here lie two totally contradictory statements. They cannot both be correct. The one which you believe will depend on the authority you accept" [S1P80].

"The Roman Catholic Church has always been antagonistic to the doctrine of salvation by grace. If salvation is by grace, who needs mass? If salvation is by grace, who needs to fear purgatory? If Jesus Christ is our mediator, who needs the Pope? If the Pope cannot intimidate people into obeying him, how can he force a nation to obey him?" [S1P80]

"Rome can only rule over ignorant fear-filled people. The true Bible turns 'unlearned and ignorant' men into gospel preachers and casts out 'all fear' [S1P80-81].

"The true Bible is the arch-enemy of the Roman Catholic Church [S1P80-81].

Therefore, Rome wanted a 'different' Bible.

So: "Rome received the corrupted ... text ... and further revised it to suit her own needs" [S1P81]. "This text suited the Roman Catholic Church well since it attacked the doctrines of the Bible. Rome is wise. To attack salvation by grace directly would expose her plot to all. So instead she used subtlety. The Roman Catholic Church strips Jesus Christ of His deity, separates the divine title "Lord" and "Christ" from the human name Jesus, having the thief on the cross address Him as "Jesus" instead of "Lord" (Luke 23:42). It also removes the testimony to His deity in Acts 8:37, and it eliminates the Trinity in I John 5:7" [S1P81].

And so, summarizing the corrupted Minority Text: "Its two outstanding trademarks are that orthodox Christianity has never used it, and that the Roman Catholic Church has militantly (read that 'bloodily') supported it" [S1P69].

As to the gospel of Christ: "Would not a weakening of the place of Jesus Christ weaken the Roman Catholic Church's reason for even existing? The answer is 'No'. The Roman Catholic 'Church' does not even claim to represent the gospel of Jesus Christ" [S1P81]. Romanist Carl Adam admits this:

"We Catholics acknowledge readily, without any shame - nay with pride - that Catholicism cannot be identified simply and wholly with primitive Christianity, nor even with the gospel of Christ" [S1P81].

Thus the TRUE 'doctrine' of Rome !

Now, let's find out what Rome substitutes in place of the gospel of Jesus Christ:

"The vacancy left by the removal of Christ would be easily filled by Mary and other 'saints' along with a chain of ritualism so rigid that no practitioner would have time to 'think' about the true gospel" [S1P82].

What else does history record about Rome? Some samples:

2) It was Rome who: "... burned persons who provided the Bible in a language the laity could read for themselves" [S3P140].

3) In the 16th century: "... the Roman Catholic Church put the Majority Greek New Testament text, then called the Textus Receptus, on 'The Index' of forbidden books" [S3P140].

4) It was Rome who was responsible for crucifying Christ (Matt.27:35).

5) It was Rome who was responsible for throwing Peter into prison (Acts 12:4 ).

6) It was Rome who was responsible for cutting off James' head (Acts 12:1).

and

7) It was Rome who was responsible for killing Paul (2 Tim 4:6).

Return to:
Table of Contents | Forum Discussion | ConcernedMembers.com

CONTINUTED IN PART II OF II

FastCounter by bCentral