The True English Bible is the King James Bible (1611/AV)

Proverb 18:13 He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.

pervert v. /per-vert/ 1 alter from an original meaning or state to a distortion of what was first intended. 2 lead away from what is right, natural, or acceptable.

© South African Pocket Oxford Dictionary, 3rd Edition 2002

Following on from the recent five part series titled “Pervert Translations and Publishers” which can be found here (please do read each part first if you have not already done so) – Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5 – as well as The Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament Text blog posting; hereunder is a video that lines up with what has been recorded by writer under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Scripture tells us to test all things, as we are to be as the Bereans “… in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.” (see Acts 17:11).

After viewing this video (or before, depending on your preference) there is some exposing of the modern pervert bibles to be done, which impacts on what they teach, how doctrine is twisted and the blatant contradictions that ultimately will affect what you believe, your faith and your studying of the Holy Scriptures.

As you will see from what follows, I do believe what will be revealed here is under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Please understand, and do pray for discernment for our LORD God to open your eyes and do ask for wisdom and understanding. Also know this that if there is any contradictions between Bibles the Holy Spirit will not teach and guide you in all truth in both Bibles as there can only be one Truth! Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ said:

John 16:13a  Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: … [my emphasis]

John 17:17  Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.

We will first start off by saying that before the 1611 Authorized King James Bible there were other English translations that preceded the KJB. These were:

• John Wycliffe New Testament ca.1380 A.D.
• William Tyndale New Testament ca.1526 A.D.
• Myles Coverdale Bible 1535 A.D.
• Matthew Bible 1537 A.D.
• Great Bible 1539 A.D.
• Geneva Bible 1560 A.D.
• Bishops Bible 1568 A.D.

The 1611 Authorized King James Bible in English is the result of the preceding pioneers who stood against the papacy of the Roman Catholic church, and now for 403 years (1611-2014) the KJB has stood the test of time. We will be comparing the King James Bible against – “Today, the better English translations of the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures” according to Dr. John MacArthur at page xxi under subheading Transmission in The MacArthur Study Bible Updated Edition, which he lists as follows:

1. New American Standard Bible (NASB);
2. English Standard Version (ESV); and
3. New King James Version (NKJV).

These translations as completed bibles have been in circulation for less than half a century from the year of their first printing: NASB 43 years (1971-2014), ESV 13 years (2001-2014) and NKJV 32 years (1982-2014).

Please also bear in mind that the three aforementioned translations that are being used, have also used modernised Greek Texts that have the influence of the two Cambridge professors Westcott and Hort – who not only hated the Textus Receptus calling it vile, but was involved with many heretic beliefs and practices including being members of spiritual clubs. You can also read “Chapter 8: Westcott and Hort” from “Gipp’s Understandable History of the Bible” © 1987 by Samuel C. Gipp). Here is also a short quote from Riplinger:

The Men Who Made Themselves Judges

Westcott and Hort were spiritualists. They sought out contact with the spiritual world (talking with the dead, etc.). Riplinger speaks much on this subject and also aligns them with the New Age movement. They started the “Ghostly Guild” in 1851 and before that the “Hermes Club” in 1845. Riplinger links the spiritualist teachings of Westcott and Hort to the occult teachings of Madame Helena P. Blavatsky who wrote the Lucifer magazine. Westcott, Hort, and Blavatsky are all forerunners of the modern day New Age movement which aims at one world religion.

The NASB uses the Greek Text, quote from page xxxi in the Foreword to The MacArthur Study Bible Updated Edition: “Consideration was given to the latest available manuscripts with a view to determining the best Greek text. In most instances the 26th edition of Eberhard Nestle’s NOVUM TESTAMENTUM GRAECE was followed.”

The ESV, as quoted from page x in the Preface under Textual Basis and Resources, reads with regards to the Greek text used: “… and on the Greek text in the 1993 editions of the Greek New Testament (4th corrected ed.), published by the United Bible Societies (UBS), and Novum Testamentum Graece (27th ed.), edited by Nestle and Aland. … Similarly, in a few difficult cases in the New Testament, the ESV has followed a Greek text different from the text given preference in the UBS/Nestle-Aland 27th Edition …”

In respect of the NKJV, besides the “much speech” in the Preface at pages v and vi explaining The New Testament Text, writer will quote the following: “There is more manuscript support for the New Testament than for any other body of ancient literature. Over five thousand Greek, eight thousand Latin, and many more manuscripts in other languages attest the integrity of the New Testament. There is only one basic New Testament used by Protestants, Roman Catholics, and Orthodox, by conservatives and liberals. Minor variations in hand copying have appeared through the centuries, before mechanical printing began about A.D. 1450. … In light of these facts, and also because the New King James Version is the fifth revision of a historic document translated from specific Greek texts, the editors decided to retain the traditional text in the body of the New Testament and to indicate major Critical and Majority Text variant readings in the center-column notes of the present edition. It is most important to emphasize that fully eighty-five percent of the New Testament text is the same in the Textus Receptus, the Alexandrian Text, and the Majority Text.” [Writer: This is not a faithful record that the NKJV editors want you to believe. This is the type of marketing hype men will stoop to to sell their product.] You can read more at this link: The Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament Text blog posting.

Now let us look at a few errors (of thousands) that appear in the modern pervert bibles against the inspired and preserved, inerrant and infallible Word of God as contained in the 403 year old King James Bible.

Jehovah

In the modern translations of the Bible we see that the proper Name of God has been removed from the text. In some instances only a shortened version is recorded and most times only His titles are used. The most common name which is rendered God comes from the Hebrew word Elohiym. One of the titles for God is Lord, which is translated from the Hebrew word Adonay. While the Hebrew proper Name of God is known by the four letters YHVH, also known as the Tetragrammaton [from Greek τετραγράμματον, meaning “(consisting of) four letters”] is the Hebrew theonym יהוה (r to l Yodh Hē Vav Hē)(from classical Greek theos “god” and –onym “name”). This is one of the names of the national God of Israel used in the Hebrew Bible. While “Yahweh” is favoured by most Hebrew scholars and is widely accepted as the pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton, Jehovah is the English translation of the Hebrew Name for God, which while it starts with the letter “J”, and many scholars may say there is no “J” in Hebrew, this is where they err. The English translation of the Hebrew word Yᵉhôvâh which starts with a “Y” is translated Jehovah which starts with a “J” in English. Being an English translation you have the English spelling not the Hebrew spelling, for example, like Israel in English and Yisrael in Hebrew. Further, out of reverence the Jews would not take YHVH’s sacred and holy Name upon their lips out of fear of breaking the Third Commandment of taking His Name in vain:

Exodus 20:7  Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.

Therefore, when Jews read the Torah they use the word Adonay (“Lord”). As a result, God’s Holy Name also is rendered in the English Bibles as LORD. Whilst the modern pervert bibles do explain in their prefaces why the word “LORD” appears, there is also the contention that “Bibles” do not have the proper Name of God in them. This is untrue. The King James Bible has God’s Name recorded as follows:

Exodus 6:3  And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.

Psalm 83:18  That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the most high over all the earth.

Isaiah 12:2  Behold, God is my salvation; I will trust, and not be afraid: for the LORD JEHOVAH is my strength and my song; he also is become my salvation.

Isaiah 26:4  Trust ye in the LORD for ever: for in the LORD JEHOVAH is everlasting strength:

In The Strong’s Complete Word Study Concordance Expanded Edition, 2004, JEHOVAH is translated from the Hebrew word:

3068 יהוה , Yᵉhôvâh, yeh-ho-vaw’; from 1961; (the) self-Existent or Eternal; Jehovah, Jewish national name of God: – Jehovah, the Lord. Compare 3050, 3069.

A noun meaning God. The word refers to the proper name of the God of Israel, particularly the name by which He revealed Himself to Moses (Ex 6:2,3). The divine name has traditionally not been pronounced, primarily out of respect for its sacredness (cf. Ex 20:7; Dt28:58). Until the Renaissance, it was written without vowels in the Hebrew text of the OT, being rendered as YHWH. However, since that time, the vowels of another word ‘ădônây (136), have been supplied in hopes of reconstructing the pronunciation. Although the exact derivation of the name is uncertain, most scholars agree that its primary meaning should be understood in the context of God’s existence, namely that He is the “I AM THAT I AM” (Ex 3:14), the One who was, who is, and who always will be (cf. Rev 11:17). …

Now let us look at the NASB, ESV and NKJV et al compared to the King James Bible:

KJB – Exodus 6:3 And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.

NASB – Exodus 6:3 and I appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as God Almighty, but by My name, ²LORD, I did not make Myself known to them.

ESV – Exodus 6:3 I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as God Almighty,² but by my name the LORD I did not make myself known to them.

NKJV – Exodus 6:3 “I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as God Almighty, but by My name LORD¹ I was not known to them.

Whilst each of the above translations exclude the Name of God YEHOVAH from the main body of text, the NASB has a column note “²Heb YHWH, usually rendered LORD.” So why does the NASB rather record a title, for that is what the word LORD or Lord is just that, a title? Therefore, God is named a title, and at the same time doubt is created in the readers’ minds. In the ESV the only footnote on this portion of Scripture is not for LORD, but for God Almighty which reads: “²Hebrew El Shaddai.” It is also noted in the 1982 NKJV by a footnote: “¹Hebrew YHWH, traditionally Jehovah.” So why don’t they say it in the main body of text? So therefore the King James Bible has always been correct for the past 403 years! The ESV just uses a title in this verse.

What is also of great significance is that the punctuation differs greatly from one translation to another, which can alter the manner in which the verses are conveyed. What must also be borne in mind is that whilst the more recent translations have adopted the practice of capitalising the subject, the object, and the possessive pronouns, when referring to God and His Son, it does not make the text more spiritual by this application. It does not appear that there was a hard and fast rule of practice in 17th century English to capitalise subject, object, and possessive pronouns, nouns, or the like, or use quotation marks for speech. However, capital letters are used when referring to Deity of the Godhead – Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and the subject, object, and possessive pronouns can be understood in the context of the verses as read with the whole chapter and specific book of the Bible. The Holy Spirit brings understanding and it is made clear by studying the Scriptures.

Let us now look at the second set of Scriptures:

KJB – Psalm 83:18 That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the most high over all the earth.

NASB – Psalm 83:18 That they may know that You alone, whose name is the LORD, Are the Most High over all the earth.

ESV – Psalm 83:18 that they may know that you alone, whose name is the LORD, are the Most High over all the earth.

NKJV – Psalm 83:18 That they may know that You, whose name alone is the LORD, Are the Most High over all the earth.

No column or footnotes in the pervert translations to quantify or qualify the title LORD. God’s known Name is removed from the Holy Scriptures in the modern versions of this verse. In this particular verse God Almighty is emphatically stating His Name.

In the third set of Scripture:

KJB – Isaiah 12:2 Behold, God is my salvation; I will trust, and not be afraid: for the LORD JEHOVAH is my strength and my song; he also is become my salvation.

NASB – Isaiah 12:2 “Behold, God is my salvation, I will trust and not be afraid; For the LORD GOD is my strength and song, And He has become my salvation.”

ESV – Isaiah 12:2 “Behold, God is my salvation; I will trust, and will not be afraid; for the LORD GOD⁵ is my strength and song, and he has become my salvation.”

NKJV – Isaiah 12:2 Behold, God is my salvation. I will trust and not be afraid; ‘For YAH the LORD, is my strength and song; He also has become my salvation.’”

In the aforementioned translations relating to Isaiah 12:2, the following is evident. The NASB once again has titles with no column notes, but Dr MacArthur attempts to explain LORD GOD in his commentary at page 954 of The MacArthur Study Bible Updated Edition: “The doubling of the personal name of God serves to emphasize His role as the covenant-keeping One.” This is not a faithful interpretation of the verse. The verse is speaking of trust in the One who gives salvation, but more importantly it is referring to the proper Name of God the LORD JEHOVAH (YHVH). The ESV has a footnote: “⁵Hebrew for Yah, the LORD.” The NKJV includes the abbreviated proper Name of YEHOVAH as YAH, which was previously referred to under the Hebrew word 3068 יהוה , Yᵉhôvâh and is the contracted version being the Hebrew word:

3050 יה , Yah, yaw’, contraction for 3068, and meaning the same, Jah, the sacred name – Jah, the Lord, most vehement. Cp. names in “-iah,” “-jah.”

A neuter pronoun of God, a shortened form of Yahweh, often translated “LORD.” This abbreviated noun for Yahweh is used in poetry especially in the Psalms. …

In closing this section, we will look at the fourth portion of Scripture comparisons hereunder:

KJB – Isaiah 26:4 Trust ye in the LORD for ever: for in the LORD JEHOVAH is everlasting strength:

NASB – Isaiah 26:4 Trust in the LORD forever, For in ¹GOD the LORD, we have an everlasting Rock.

ESV – Isaiah 26:4 Trust in the LORD forever, for the LORD GOD is an everlasting rock.

NKJV – Isaiah 26:4 Trust in the LORD forever, For in YAH, the LORD, is ¹everlasting strength.

Here the NASB and NKJV are attempting to quantify and qualify who the LORD is, whilst they do not appear to be sure how to record God’s proper Name. The NASB uses GOD and has a margin note: “¹Heb. YAH, usually rendered LORD.” And the NKJV uses YAH and has a footnote in reference to everlasting strength: “¹Or Rock of Ages.”

It is evident that the NASB, ESV, NKJV, et al have removed God’s proper Name from the main body of text. These versions might have column and footnote references, but ultimately they cause more dissension by creating doubt, division and mistrust as to what is in the Word of God or what is not! The root causes of this is two fold – firstly the deceptive work of Satan the devil and secondly the love of filthy lucre.

Who Killed Goliath?

According to most first graders attending Sunday School, David killed Goliath the Philistine of Gath – and that is what the Authorised King James Bible says, too (see 1 Samuel 17:49,50).

However, according to 2 Samuel 21:19 in the modern pervert translations Elhanan killed Goliath. From the comparisons of the various Scripture translations one can see that the King James Bible has it correct.

KJB – 2 Samuel 21:19  And there was again a battle in Gob with the Philistines, where Elhanan the son of Jaareoregim, a Bethlehemite, slew the brother of Goliath the Gittite, the staff of whose spear was like a weaver’s beam.

NASB – 2 Samuel 21:19 There was war with the Philistines again at Gob, and Elhanan the son of Jaare-oregim, the Bethlehemite, ¹killed ²Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver’s beam.

ESV – 2 Samuel 21:19 And there was again war with the Philistines at Gob, and Elhanan the son of Jaare-oregim the Bethlehemite killed Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver’s beam.²

NKJV – 2 Samuel 21:19 Again there was war at Gob with the Philistines, where Elhanan the son of ¹Jaare-Oregim the Bethlehemite killed the brother of Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver’s beam.

The NASB has the following column notes: “¹Lit smote ²In 1Ch 20:5, Lahmi, the brother of Goliath”. The MacArthur Study Bible Updated Edition at page 452 also records under the commentary the following: “21:19 Elhanan . . . killed Goliath. The minor scribal omission of “the brother of” (in the Heb.) belongs in the verse, based on 1Ch 20:5 which includes them, and because clearly the Scripture says that David killed Goliath as recorded in 1Sa 17:50. There has probably been a scribal error in the text which should read, “Elhanan . . . killed the brother of Goliath.” A second possible solution is that Elhanan and David may be different names for the same person, just as Solomon had another name (cf. 12:24,25). A third solution is that there were two giants named Goliath.” I would agree with MacArthur on the first part of his commentary that the words “the brother of” in italics confirms who was being slew, i.e. Lahmi, but the “second possible solution” cannot be correct. MacArthur is misleading in his suggestion as he is attempting to explain away the incorrect rendering of 1 Samuel 21:19 that has no Biblical foundation. There were two separate events, one where the Philistines were “gathered together at Shochoh, which belongeth to Judah, and pitched between Shochoh and Azekah, in Ephesdammim.” (See 1 Samuel 17:1) In the second account in 2 Samuel 21:19 it reads: “And there was again a battle in Gob with the Philistines …” (my emphasis). This “second battle” in Gob was without David as in 2 Samuel 21:17b it reads: “… Then the men of David sware unto him, saying, Thou shalt go no more out with us to battle, that thou quench not the light of Israel.” The reason? Because “David waxed faint” (see 2 Samuel 21:15). This event preceded the battle at Gob. Also, Elhanan could not be David as Elhanan was the son of Jaare-oregim (Jair) whereas David was the son of Jesse (see 1 Samuel 17:12). Elhanan was one of David’s servants when you read this portion of Scripture in context. MacArthur’s “third possible solution” is also incorrect saying “that there were two giants named Goliath” because when one cross-references 1 Chronicles 20:5 it clearly states that the Philistine slew by Elhanan was named Lahmi the brother of Goliath:

1 Chronicles 20:5 And there was war again with the Philistines; and Elhanan the son of Jair slew Lahmi the brother of Goliath the Gittite, whose spear staff was like a weaver’s beam.

Further, the ESV has a footnote: “²Contrast 1 Chronicles 20:5, which may preserve the original reading.” If it “may preserve the original reading” then which is it? Then why does 2 Samuel 21:19 not read the same as 1 Chronicles 20:5 in the ESV for it creates doubt, for if one reads the 2 Samuel 21:9 account it says Elhanan killed Goliath. The NKJV has a footnote: “¹Jair, 1 Chr. 20:5”. Although the NKJV is the translation that is closest to the King James Bible on this particular issue, it lacks credibility in many other verses. It can be clearly seen that column and footnotes together with commentary notes can be misleading and deceptive.

>> No “New Testament” in the New Testament

Whilst we would agree that the Old Testament in the Bible primarily refers to a covenant between God and Israel and therefore referred to as an Old Covenant, our Lord Jesus Christ established a New Testament in His blood through death, as we read in Hebrews 9:15, as it is written:

Heb 9:15  And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

We will compare the Scriptures in the Lord’s Supper and those found in the Book of Hebrews, hereunder. We do note that the modern versions refer to a covenant, but there is no agreement as to whether it is a “covenant” or a “new covenant.”

SCRIPTURE VERSE	KJB (1611/AV)	NASB	ESV	NKJV
Matthew 26:28	new testament	covenant	² covenant	¹new covenant
Mark 14:24	new testament	covenant	¹ covenant	¹new covenant
Luke 22:20	new testament	new covenant	new covenant	new covenant
1 Corinthians 11:25	new testament	new covenant	new covenant	new covenant
2 Corinthians 3:6	new testament	new covenant	new covenant	new covenant
Hebrews 7:22	better testament	better covenant	better covenant	better covenant
Hebrews 9:15	new testament	new covenant	new covenant	new covenant
Hebrews 9:15	first testament	first covenant	first covenant	first covenant
Hebrews 9:16	testament	¹covenant	will	testament
Hebrews 9:17	testament	¹covenant	will	testament
Hebrews 9:18	first testament	first covenant	first covenant	first covenant

References in column and footnotes –

NASB – ¹testament

ESV – ² Some manuscripts insert new; ¹ Some manuscripts insert new

NKJV – ¹NU omits new

The problem arises with the use of “covenant” when Hebrews 9:16,17 comes around for it reads as follows in the King James Bible:

Heb 9:16  For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
Heb 9:17  For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

All the pervert modern versions now correct the errors that they have translated as “covenant”. The NASB uses column notes to refer to “testament”; whilst the ESV uses the word “will”; whilst the unfaithful NKJV uses “testament.” The reason why writer has termed the NKJV “unfaithful” is as a result of the translators who had “set out to only correct the so-called archaic words, initially”, ended up performing a translation where whole words, sentence construction and even doctrines have been changed. Interchanging between “new covenant / covenant / testament” is not a faithful translation when reading the verses in context. Has our Lord Jesus Christ established a New Testament? or Covenant? The NKJV is a totally new translation piggy-backing on the name of the King James Bible, copyrighting a new and different bible for filthy lucre’s sake.

For many years, since 1985, writer was employed at the Master of the Supreme Court (now High Court) offices, at Trust Companies and Attorney Firms as an Estate Controller and Paralegal, and he has dealt extensively with deceased estates that include Last Will and Testaments. In all his years (and even to present date as he does some freelance work to support the ministry by the grace of God providing), writer has never come across a covenant that has been written up by a testator / testatrix. It has always been known as a testament. I have also never heard of lawyers reading out the covenant of the deceased to the heirs. It has always been the Will or Testament. You see a Testator is the author of his Testament. Our Lord Jesus Christ is the Author of His Old and New Testaments.

Here are further documents that you should read to get the full picture:

>> Fables And Facts About The King James Bible

Over the past few decades, new Bible translations have been popping up like popcorn. Many strong Christians have stood their ground and continued to believe, read, and study only the Authorized King James Bible. Many others, however, have forsaken the Book that God has used for centuries. Such people have fallen for smooth advertising schemes and have actually started believing that the modern versions are superior to the King James Bible. It’s very sad that most Christians today have not taken time to study the subject thoroughly enough to see what is really happening. [Read more Here]

>> Why Jesus Cannot Use the New King James Version

This is chapter 8 from Which Bible Would Jesus Use? by Jack McElroy, copyright 2013, used with permission. More information about this book can be found on Jack’s website.

Why can’t the Lord choose the ©1982 New King James Version?

If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself. (John 7:17) [Read more Here]

>> The Truth About The English SUBStandard Version

THE FRUIT OF THE ESV

The beginning of the ESV was May 1997 with a meeting headed by James Dobson. Dobson was deeply troubled with the gender-inclusive issues within the NIV and TNIV. The results of the meeting was the “proposed” creation of a new version without the new-age, homosexual, gender-inclusive agenda. Surprisingly, the “troubled” group united around the liberal and apostate Revised Standard Version (RSV) of the Bible. Thus the dubious birth of the ESV was conceived. In September 1998, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School professor Wayne Grudem and Crossway President Lane Dennis received the blessing of the ecumenical National Council of Churches to build the ESV upon their 1971 revision of the Revised Standard Version. And thus the ESV came to life. . . [Read more Here]

>> The Attack on the Bible

by Terry Watkins

God has placed a lot of importance upon His words.

Matthew 24:35 reads, “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my WORDS shall not pass away.”
Psalms 138:2 says, “. . . for thou hast magnified thy WORD above all thy name.”
Psalms 119:89 says, “For ever, O LORD, thy WORD is settled in heaven.”

The spiritual life-blood of the human race is the word of God.

• It brings salvation: “Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God. . .” (1 Peter 1:23)
• It produces faith: “. . . faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Romans 10:17).
• It produces spiritual growth: “. . .desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby:” (1 Peter 2:2) [Read more Here]

>> Was the KJV inspired or preserved?

Related articles: Inspiration and Translation; Two Lies, The

The following is from Sam Gipp’s The Answer Book.

QUESTION: Is the King James Bible inspired or preserved?

ANSWER: The original autographs were inspired. The King James Bible is those same autographs preserved up to today.

EXPLANATION: The best way to simply describe inspiration and preservation of the Bible is as follows:

Inspiration is when God takes a blank piece of paper (papyrus, vellum, etc.) and uses men to write His words. Preservation is when God takes those words already written and uses men to preserve them to today. Both of these actions are DIVINE and are assured by God as recorded in Psalm 12:6,7.

6 “The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.

7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.”

In Psalm 12:6 God assures us that His originals are perfect. Even though penned by fallible men with the heinous sins of: murder (Moses and David), adultery (David), idolatry (Solomon), and denial of the Lord (Peter). God’s words are untainted by the sins of the penmen.

That the originals were inspired perfect in their entirety is an undisputed belief among fundamentalists today. [Read more Here]

We conclude with the following statement –

“I must under God denounce every attachment to the New American Standard Version. I’m afraid I’m in trouble with the Lord … We laid the groundwork; I wrote the format; I helped interview some of the translators; I sat with the translator; I wrote the preface. When you see the preface to the New American Standard, those are my words … it’s wrong, it’s terribly wrong; it’s frightfully wrong … I’m in trouble; … I can no longer ignore these criticisms I am hearing and I can’t refute them. The deletions are absolutely frightening … there are so many. The finest leaders that we have today haven’t gone into it [new versions of Wescott and Hort’s corrupted Greek text] just as I hadn’t gone into it … that’s how easily one can be deceived … Are we so naive that we do not suspect Satanic deception in all of this?”

Dr. Frank Logsdon
Co-founder, New American Standard Version

>> Logsdon’s Pro KJV Anti NASV – Download MP3

“Frank Logsdon was a major player in the development of the New American Standard Bible (NASB). He was a friend of Dewey Lockman, and was involved in a feasibility study involving purchasing the copyright of the American Standard Version (ASV) with Lockman that lead to the eventual production of the NASB. He interviewed some of the translators for the job, and even wrote the preface to the translation.

“Slowly, he became aware that there was something wrong with the NASB. He eventually rejected it, and promoted the KJV. This was a major defection for the modern version crowd.

“Below is his speech, in it’s entirety, rejecting the NASB, and endorsing the Textus Receptus and the KJV. (The complete transcript is available here)” ~ quoted from the website www. defendproclaimthefaith.org

If you do not believe that God has inspired and preserved His Word in an English Bible then that leaves you as a bible agnostic!

SOLI DEO GLORIA!

The Correct Rendering of Easter in Acts 12:4 ~ Part 2

This blog posting which follows on from Part 1, will deal with two videos that reveal the correct teaching pertaining to Easter being included in Acts 12:4 as opposed to Passover. Each video will also have a link to the text of each video for your study purposes.

We are instructed in Scripture:

2 Timothy 2:15  Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

Video 1

• Why we should not Passover Easter ~ Part 1 by Nick Sayers
• Why we should not Passover Easter ~ Part 2 by Nick Sayers

Video 2

If “Easter” is not the correct word, then every international language that translates “Happy Easter” with the Greek word “πασχα (pascha)”, or the Hebrew word “פסח‬‬ (pesach)”, needs to redefine their language as far as “Easter” is concerned. Here is a list for Happy Easter:

Afrikaans – geseënde Paasfees
Albanian – gëzuar Pashkët
Arabic – فِصْح سعيد
Basque – ondo izan Bazko garaian
Breton – Pask Seder
Bulgarian – честит Великден
Chinese (Cantonese) – 復活節快樂
Chinese (Mandarin) – 復活節快樂
Catalan – bona Pasqua
Cornish – Pask Lowen
Croatian – Sretan Uskrs
Czech – Veselé Velikonoce
Danish – God Påske
Dutch – Vrolijk Pasen / Zalige paasdagen
Esperanto – Feliĉan Paskon
Estonian – Häid lihavõttepühi
Finnish – hyvää pääsiäistä
Flemish – zalig Pasen
French – joyeuses Pâques
Gaelic (Irish) – Cáisc Shona Dhuit/Dhaoibh
Beannachtaí – na Cásca
Gaelic (Manx) – Caisht sonney dhyt
Gaelic (Scottish) – a’ Chàisg sona
Galician – boas Pascuas
German – frohe Ostern
Greek – Καλό Πάσχα
Hebrew – חג פסחא שמח
Hindi – īsṭar maṅgalamay ho
Hungarian – kellemes Húsvéti Ünnepeket
Icelandic – gledilega paska
Indonesian – Selamat Paskah
Italian – buona Pasqua
Japanese イースターおめでとう
Korean – 행복한 부활절이 되시길
Latin – prospera Pascha sit
Latvian – priecīgas Lieldienas
Lithuanian – su Šventom Velykom
Maltese – L-Għid it-tajjeb
Norwegian – god påske
Persian/Farsi – عيد پاک مبارک
Polish – Wesołych Świąt Wielkanocnych
Portuguese – Feliz Páscoa
Punjabi – īsṭar khuśyāṅvālā hove
Romanian – Paşte fericit
Russian – с праздником Пасхи
Serbian – срећан Ускрс
Sicilian – bona Pasqua
Slovak – milostiplné prežitie Veľkonočných sviatkov
Slovenian – Vesele velikonočne praznike
Spanish – felices Pascuas
Swahili – heri kwa sikukuu ya Pasaka
Swedish – glad Påsk
Tagalog – maligayang pasko ng pagkabuhay
Thai – สุขสันต์วันอีสเตอร์
Turkish – paskalya bayramınız kutlu olsun
Ukranian – З Великодніми святами
Volapük – lesustanazäli yofik
Welsh – Pasg Hapus
Yoruba – Eku odun ajinde

It goes without saying, that the majority of the listed international languages translated here use the same root-word pascha/pasach! And that is for Easter!

Soli Deo Gloria!

The Correct Rendering of Easter in Acts 12:4 ~ Part 1

Dear Reader,

If there is one word that would confirm that the King James 1611 Authorised Version of the Holy Bible is correct in using the Textus Receptus and thus will show-up all other mistranslations in modern-day pervert bibles, it is the word “Easter.” This might sound like a bold-faced statement, some might even accuse that it is bordering on arrogance, but remember we all want the Truth – Right? As you embark on reading this article, please remember the following when studying the same:

Proverb 18:13 He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.

pervert v. /per-vert/ 1 alter from an original meaning or state to a distortion of what was first intended. 2 lead away from what is right, natural, or acceptable.

© South African Pocket Oxford Dictionary, 3rd Edition 2002

The Companion Bible shows in the Preface that its Text “is that of the Authorised Version of 1611 as published by the Revisers in their “Parallel Bible” in 1885.” This would appear to contradict itself as the 1881 Revised Version did not use the Textus Receptus, but the Textus Corruptus of Messrs Westcott-Hort’s eclectic Greek New Testament Text. Hereunder you will see how Acts 12:4 reads and also some footnotes in the Companion Bible that read as follows, “Easter. Gr. to pascha, the Passover. Easter is a heathen term, derived from the Saxon goddess Eastre, the same as Astarte, the Syrian Venus, called Ashtoreth in the O.T..” This latter quote will be proved later on in this blog posting to be fallible and a myth in its connection with the heathen goddesses, with due respect a figment of one’s imagination and a false teaching. It is also a false teaching that writer, Gary Stephen Crous, had to repent of. Now, let us get started with the Companion Bible:

The Tyndale Bible 1526 records it as follows:

2 congregation, to vex them. And he killed James the brother
3 of John with a* sword: and because he saw that it pleased the jews, he proceeded further, to take* Peter also. Then were the
4 days of unleavened* bread, and when he had caught him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to be kept, intending after ester to bring him forth to the
5 people.

The Geneva Bible 1599 reads as follows:

And he killed Iames the brother of Iohn with the sword. And when he sawe that it pleased the Iewes, 2, 3
he proceeded further, to take Peter also (then were the dayes of vnleauened bread.) And when he 4
had caught him, he put him in prison, and deliuered him to foure quaternions of souldiers to be kept, intending after the Passeouer to bring him foorth to the people. So Peter was kept in prison, but 5

The King James Bible 1611 reads as follows:

2 And he killed Iames the brother of Iohn with the sword.
3 And because he saw it pleased the Iewes, hee proceeded further, to take Peter also. (Then were the dayes of vnleauened bread.)
4 And when hee had apprehended him, hee put him in prison, and deliuered him to foure quaternions of souldiers to keepe him, intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.
5 Peter therefore was kept in prison, but prayer was made without ceasing of the Church vnto God for him.

So which of the preceding versions are correct? All the modern versions of the Bible have the word “Passover” which is in the pre-crucifixion Old Covenant context from a Jews’ perspective and not “Easter” which is a post-crucifixion resurrection New Testament word from a Judeo-Christian’s perspective. To get a better understanding of the Truth, here is a brilliant teaching at KJV Today titled:

“Easter” or “Passover” in Acts 12:4?

Acts 12:4 in Greek and English

Acts 12:4:

Textus Receptus: “ον και πιασας εθετο εις φυλακην παραδους τεσσαρσιν τετραδιοις στρατιωτων φυλασσειν αυτον βουλομενος μετα το πασχα αναγαγειν αυτον τω λαω”

King James Version: “And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.”

English Standard Version: “And when he had seized him, he put him in prison, delivering him over to four squads of soldiers to guard him, intending after the Passover to bring him out to the people.”

The Greek word, “πασχα (pascha)”, is correctly translated as “Passover” 28 times in the New Testament in the KJV. For this reason, some critics say that the KJV’s isolated instance of translating the word as “Easter” in Acts 12:4 is an error. These critics agree with translations such as the ESV which has “Passover” in Acts 12:4. This article explains why the KJV is correct in translating “Pascha” as “Easter” in Acts 12:4. To begin with, we must set the record straight that “Easter” is not a pagan word.

Easter is not a pagan word

Myth 1: the KJV translators used “Easter” to refer to a pagan festival

The first myth to refute is the claim that the KJV uses “Easter” at Acts 12:4 to refer to a pagan holiday celebrated by king Herod. This myth is propagated by some KJV apologists who may be well-intentioned in upholding the inerrancy of the KJV. Yet such a myth defies what the KJV translators believed and practiced. Included in the 1611 edition of the KJV is a chart for finding the day of Easter in a given year. It is evident that the KJV translators viewed Easter as a Christian holiday. If the KJV translators considered Easter to be a Christian holiday, it is doubtful that they used it to mean a pagan holiday at Acts 12:4.

“To find Easter for ever.” (modern spelling)

The Holy Bible: 1611 Edition (Nashville: Thomas Nelson)

Myth 2: “Easter” comes from the goddess named “Ishtar” or “Astarte”

Those who propagate myth 1 typically identify Herod’s pagan holiday as that of the Semitic goddess, Ishtar or Astarte. This false connection between “Easter” and these names of a Semitic goddess can be traced to the work of the Scottish minister Alexander Hislop. Hislop was an outspoken critic of Roman Catholicism. His book The Two Babylons exposed many of the unbiblical doctrines and practices of Roman Catholicism. However, Hislop erred when it came to statements about the etymological relationship between Easter and the ancient idols, Ishtar or Astarte. At page 103 of his book, he writes:

What means the term Easter itself? It is not a Christian name. It bears its Chaldean origin on its very forehead. Easter is nothing else than Astarte, one of the titles of Beltis, the queen of heaven, whose name, as pronounced by the people of Nineveh, was evidently identical with that now in common use in this country. That name, as found by Layard on the Assyrian monuments, is Ishtar. (Alexander Hislop, The Two Babylons (1858), p. 103)

Sure enough, “Ishtar” (a form of “Astarte”) may sound similar to “Easter”, but the two words are not etymologically related. Astarte is “עשׁתּרות (ashtarot)” in Hebrew. This name is derived from the word “עשׁתּרה (‛ashterâh)” which means “increase” or “flock” (Brown-Driver-Briggs’ Hebrew Definitions). “עשׁתּרה (‛ashterâh)” is translated as “flocks” four times in the KJV. Hence, the name “Astarte” or “Ishtar” is a Semitic word related to animal fertility. This makes sense because Astarte was regarded as a goddess of fertility.

The etymology of “Easter” on the other hand has nothing to do with “flocks” or animal fertility. “Easter” (“Ostern” in German) is a Germanic word derived from the word “east” (“Ost” in German). Today, “east” refers to the direction from which the sun rises. The direction of east goes by that name because the Saxon word “east” meant “dawn”, “sunrise” or “morning”. The etymology of “east” is as follows:

• “Old English east “east, easterly, eastward,” from Proto-Germanic *aus-to-, *austra- “east, toward the sunrise” (cf. Old Frisian ast “east,” aster “eastward,” Dutch oost Old Saxon ost, Old High German ostan, German Ost, Old Norse austr “from the east”), from PIE *aus- “to shine,” especially “dawn” (cf. Sanskrit ushas “dawn;” Greek aurion “morning;” Old Irish usah, Lithuanian auszra “dawn;” Latin aurora “dawn,” auster “south”), literally “to shine.” The east is the direction in which dawn breaks.” (Online Etymological Dictionary)

There is nothing in “East” that suggests animal fertility. Hence the word has nothing to do with Astarte or Ishtar. Relating the Germanic word “Easter” to the Semitic word “Ishtar” is as fallacious as relating the English word “Baby” to the Semitic word “Babylon”.

Myth 3: “Easter” comes from the goddess named “Eostre”

“Easter” means “dawn”

The Old English word for the month of April was “Eosturmonað”. The Venerable Bede (672-735) claimed that the word “Eostre” came from the name of a Saxon spring fertility goddess who went by that name. He wrote:

“Eostur-monath, qui nunc Paschalis mensis interpretatur, quondam a Dea illorum quæ Eostre vocabatur, et cui in illo festa celebrabant nomen habuit: a cujus nomine nunc Paschale tempus cognominant, consueto antiquæ observationis vocabulo gaudia novæ solemnitatis vocantes.” (De Ratione Temporum)

“Eostur-monath, which now is translated Paschal month, was once called after a goddess of theirs named Eostre, and whose name was celebrated in the festival at that [time]: by whose name they now designate the Paschal season, calling the joys of the new festival by the familiar ancient observance.” (Translation by KJV Today)

Thus unlike the Easter/Ishtar connection myth, there is some linguistic basis to the claim that the name “Easter” comes from the name of a Saxon goddess called “Eostre”. However, if the feast of the goddess was as ancient as Bede claimed, it is doubtful that he would have actually known which came first, the name of the month “Eostur-monath” or the goddess “Eostre”. In fact, “Eostur-monath” comes from “Ōstar-mānod”, the Old Germanic name for the month of April. Thus the origin of this name of the month of April is more ancient than the Anglo-Saxon language itself. By Bede’s time, the tradition of the goddess had already been established so it may have appeared to him that the month was named after the goddess. However, it is far more logical that the name of the month, which means, “East/Sunrise month”, came first in the ancestral language of the Saxons, which is Old Germanic, because March is the time when the days noticeably begin to start earlier (as stated under the section for myth 2, the Saxon word “east” was a descriptive word that referred to the dawn or sunrise. The -er suffix in “Easter” comes from the influence of either the Proto-Germanic austra or the Old Frisian aster). This religiously neutral origin for the name of Eosturmonað, derived from the Old Germanic Ōstar-mānod, is very likely because each of the months of the Old Germanic calendar is named after a natural phenomenon that characterizes the month:

Modern months	Old Germanic months	Meaning
January	Harti-mánód	Severe frost month
February	Hornung	Shedding of antlers
March	Lenzin-mānod	Spring month
April	Ōstar-mānod	East/Sunrise month
May	Winni-mánód	Graze month
June	Brāh-mānod	Fallow month
July	Hewi-mānod	Hay month
August	Aran-mānod	Harvest month
September	Herbist-mānod	Leaves month
October	Wīndume-mānod	Vintage month
November	Wintar-mānod	Winter month
December	N/A	N/A

Given how all the Old Germanic months are named after seasonal characteristics, it is more likely than not that “Ōstar-mānod” was originally a name given to the month based on its seasonal characteristic of the sunrise starting earlier. The Saxons borrowed the name for April from Old Germanic. It is clear that by the time of the Saxons, some of the months had been named with religious overtones (e.g. Yule, Rheda, Blood (sacrifice)). It may well be that by the time of the Saxons, a pagan meaning had become attached to the name of “Eostur-mónaþ”; but that was a later development.

Modern months	Anglo-Saxon months	Meaning
January	Æftera Jéola	After Yule
February	Sol-mónaþ	Soil month
March	Hréð-mónaþ	Rheda’s month or wilderness month
April	Eostur-mónaþ	East/Sunrise month
May	Þrimilki-mónaþ	Three milkings month
June	Ærra Líða	Before midsummer
July	Æftera Líða	After midsummer
August	Weod-mónaþ	Plant month
September	Hærfest-mónaþ	Harvest month
October	Win-mónaþ	Wine month
November	Blót-mónaþ	Blood (sacrifice) month
December	Ærra Jéola	Before Yule

(sources: Wikipedia entry on “Germanic calendar“)

The naming of the first spring month as “East/Sunrise month” is logical and it is most likely afterwards that Old Germanic and Saxon pagans personified and deified this “sunrise” or “dawn” and celebrated her feast during the month (the Saxons called her “Eostre” and the Old Germans called her “Ostara”). What is commonly seen among cultures is that some words referring to natural phenomena become personified as pagan deities. For example, the Semitic fertility goddess Ashtoreth (Joshua 9:10) is the deification of the Semitic word “עשׁתּרה (‛ashterâh)” which means “flock” (e.g. Deuteronomy 7:13). Another example is the Semitic fertility god Dagon (Judges 16:23) who is the deification of the Semitic word “דּגן(dâgân)” which means “wheat” (e.g. Jeremiah 31:12). Another example is the name of the Roman goddess Aurora, which is the Latin word for “dawn”. The Latin word “aurora” just means “dawn” if it is used in an ordinary sense. If a Christian goes on an “Aurora Borealis Tour”, he is by no means participating in a pagan activity but is rather simply enjoying a magnificent “dawn-like” natural phenomenon in the arctic regions. Likewise, the fact that a Saxon goddess went by the name “Eostre” does not mean that “Easter” is a pagan word. Those who hold this myth make it sound as if there was once a goddess with a certain name and Saxon Christian simply took that name arbitrarily without any biblical basis. If, for example, the pagans worshiped a goddess by the name of “Sally” and Christians today refer to the day of the Lord’s resurrection as “Sally”, then surely we have a problem. But that is not the case for Saxon Christians using “Easter” as the name of the day of the Lord’s resurrection. As “easter” was a descriptive word that referred to the dawn or sunrise, we can understand why both pagans and Christians wished to use the word “east” for their respective purposes. Pagans wished to worship a goddess of sunrise so they called her “Eostre”. Christians on the other hand wished to celebrate a very special dawn, so they called the day “Easter”.

The resurrection morning = “dawn” par excellence

The Bible describes Christ’s resurrection as being discovered in the “morning” at “dawn” or at “the rising of the sun” (see John 20:1 where it says the stone was already rolled aside while “it was yet dark”):

• “In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.” (Matthew 28:1)

• “And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun.” (Mark 16:2)

• “Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them.” (Luke 24:1)

As the Bible associates the resurrection with the dawn, there is biblical basis to calling the time of the resurrection the “dawn” par excellence. “Par excellence” means the reference is deserving of that noun more than any other. There have been many dawns throughout history, but that special dawn on the day of the resurrection is deserving of that noun more than any other. We often refer to notable biblical events using par excellence nouns, such as “the fall”, “the flood”, “the exodus”, “the exile”, “the advent”, “the cross”, etc. “Easter” is the Saxon word for this greatest dawn in all of history. By way of metonymical association, this term which refers to the “dawn” of the resurrection came to refer to the entire day of the resurrection.

The resurrection = spiritual “dawn”

Christ’s resurrection is a “dawn” also in a spiritual sense because that is when the light of salvation rose (resurrected) from the darkness of death. The following passages compare Christ to the sun rising from darkness:

• “Arise, shine; for thy light is come, and the glory of the LORD is risen upon thee. For, behold, the darkness shall cover the earth, and gross darkness the people: but the LORD shall arise upon thee, and his glory shall be seen upon thee. And the Gentiles shall come to thy light, and kings to the brightness of thy rising.” (Isaiah 60:1-3)

• “But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings;” (Malachi 4:2)

• “And thou, child, shalt be called the prophet of the Highest: for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways; To give knowledge of salvation unto his people by the remission of their sins, Through the tender mercy of our God; whereby the dayspring from on high hath visited us, To give light to them that sit in darkness and in the shadow of death, to guide our feet into the way of peace. (Luke 1:76-79)

• “We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:” (2 Peter 1:19)

• “I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.” (Revelation 22:16)

Some Christians try to avoid anything that has to do with sunrise imagery, presuming that it is pagan. Yet God in his Holy word compares Christ to the rising sun. The word, “Easter” (austra in Proto-Germanic and aster in Old Frisian; see above), with its connotation of a sunrise, pays tribute to this biblical imagery of Christ as the “Sun of righteousness”. The word translated “dayspring” at Luke 1:78 is “ανατολη”, which means “1) a rising (of the sun and stars); 2) the east (the direction of the sun’s rising)” (Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon). The Old West-Saxon version of the Gospel of Luke translates the word as “eastdæle”, which is the Saxon word for “east/sunrise”. Luke 1:78 in West-Saxon reads, “þurh innoþas ures godes mildheortnesse. on þam he us geneosode of eastdæle up springende;” This is another proof that the word “Easter” came from the biblical language of the Saxons.

The etymology of “Easter” is similar to that of Aνατελλω

“Easter” is etymologically related to “east” (the direction) and refers to the “rising” of our Lord. This connection between the eastern direction and the resurrection makes some Christians nervous about a possible pagan influence. However, there is no reason for such concern because this connection between the eastern direction and the verb “to rise” is even found in the language in which the New Testament was written. The Greek verb “ανατελλω (anatello)” means “to rise” (Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon) and it is the word translated as “arise” in the above passage in 2 Peter 1:19 about Christ rising in our hearts. It is also the word used in Hebrews 7:14 which says that our Lord “sprang out of Juda”. And “ανατελλω” is related to the word, “ανατολη (anatole)”, which means, “the east (the direction of the sun’s rising)” (Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon). So there is a connection between the eastern direction and the verb “to rise” even in the language of the New Testament. The writers of the New Testament did not avoid using the verb “ανατελλω” (to rise) despite its derivation from the Greek word for “east”.

Myth 4: “Easter” is tainted by residual pagan etymology

Despite any explanation that “Easter” is derived from a generic Saxon word for “dawn” that is not pagan in and of itself (as with the Proto-Germanic austra and the Old Frisian aster), the mere possibility that a goddess went by the name of “Eostre” appears to scare some Christians into avoiding the word “Easter”. These Christians need to realize that pagans should not be given monopoly over valid words in the English lexicon. If today it is discovered that a pagan sect calls its goddess by the name “Dawn”, would these Christians abandon the word “dawn” from their everyday usage? No, that would be silly and it would amount to surrendering a perfectly biblical name to pagans. Anglo-Saxon and Old Germanic Christians may have been aware that a goddess went by the name “Eostre” or “Ostara”. These Christians may have deliberately taken a word that was popular among pagans in order to reclaim the proper use of the word. Thus the word “Easter” (“Ostern” in German) stands as a testimony of the Anglo-Saxon and Old Germanic Christians’ rejection of the goddess in reception of the true God, Jesus Christ. Such a victorious reclaiming of a beautiful word for the cause of Christ should be honored, not opposed.

The funny thing is that many Christians who oppose the use of the word “Easter” still celebrate Good Friday. Yet the word “Friday” is based on the name of a pagan goddess. The word “Friday” means “Day of Frige” – Frige being the name of a Norse goddess. “Good Friday” literally means “Good day of Frige (the goddess)”. Some Christians say that Christ died on Wednesday or Thursday and rose on Saturday. Yet “Wednesday”, “Thursday,” and “Saturday” are also derived from the names of the pagan gods Woden, Thor and Saturnus, respectively. If one would actually like to avoid a “pagan connection”, he would be wiser to avoid using the words “Friday”, “Thursday”, “Wednesday” and “Saturday” rather than the Christian word “Easter”. Avoiding all of these words, of course, is an impossibility if we wish to communicate with others regarding the days of the week. We just have to admit that the English language is the language of a people who were once pagan and that there are many vestiges of pagan etymology in English. Also to be noted is the irony that this word “Ishtar” which some Christians wish to avoid appears to be related to “Esther”, which is the name of an entire book of our Holy Bible. Esther lived in a pagan culture and was given a pagan name as with Mordecai (which is related to the pagan god Marduk). While it has been demonstrated that Easter has nothing to do with Ishtar, the Bible itself shows that God can redeem a name even if it is in fact related to Ishtar.

Myth 5: “Easter eggs” and “Easter bunnies” discredit Easter

Eggs and bunnies are fertility symbols and as such they can be considered pagan symbols. When Christians brought the celebration of the Lord’s resurrection to pagan nations, these symbols of spring became associated with the Christian celebration of Easter which happens in spring. Spring fertility festivals have ancient origins, and some of their practices are described in the Bible in passages such as Ezekiel 8:14-16 and Jeremiah 7:18 & 44:17-19. There are Christians today who avoid using the word “Easter” for fear that it necessarily refers to these pagan symbols and practices. However, the fact that our culture has come to associate fertility symbols with the name “Easter” does not mean that “Easter” itself is pagan. As with the word “Easter”, even the Greek word “Pascha” has become associated with pagan fertility symbols in present day Greece because “Pascha” is the Greek word for “Easter” (this will be explained in the next section of this article). Yet nobody in his right mind would advise Christians against using the word “Pascha”. Somehow the prejudice against the word “Easter” has become so strong among some Christians that logic no longer holds sway. Guilt by association is a logical fallacy. Moreover this logical fallacy is not applied consistently towards the word “Pascha”. Christians would be wise to purge Easter of its pagan symbols, but the word “Easter” itself remains a biblical word.

Myth 6: The calculation of the date of Easter is pagan

Even if the eggs and bunnies are taken out of Easter, some Christians might still oppose the celebration of Easter by virtue of its perceived roots in Roman Catholicism and paganism. What concerns these Christians is the date of Easter, which in Western countries is calculated based on a formula adopted by the Roman Catholic Church at the First Council of Nicaea in 325 AD. According to this formula, Easter lands on the first Sunday after the full moon following the spring equinox. Some Christians seem to think that this dependence on a Roman Catholic formula, which in turn is based on natural events such as the lunar cycle and the advent of spring, is in and of itself pagan.

While the scientific accuracy of the Nicaean formula for calculating the date of Easter is certainly open for debate, there is no basis to connect the formula to paganism. The formula is simply intended to make Easter land every year on a Sunday that is around the same time of the lunisolar year as when our Lord resurrected on that first Easter Sunday. Early Christians chose to celebrate the resurrection on a Sunday because the resurrection occurred on a Sunday (“the first day of the week” Matthew 28:1, Mark 16:2, Luke 24:1, John 20:1). The celebration was to be held annually because of its connection to the Passover which happens annually. The date of Easter happens around the same time in spring not because of a calculated effort to coincide the date with a pagan spring festival, but because it is a historical fact that our Lord resurrected on a Sunday at this time of the year after the Jewish Passover, which happens in the first spring month of the Jewish calendar. Unlike the date of Christmas, the date of Easter is based on biblical and historical facts.

The use of a formula to observe an annual Sunday celebration around the same time of the lunisolar year each year is not pagan, as even the date of Passover is set based on a formula using the lunisolar year. There is no biblical precept requiring the use of the Nicaean formula for calculating the date of Easter, but there is also no precept forbidding such a formula. The fact that this formula was adopted by Roman Catholicism at the Council of Nicaea does not mean that it is based on a Roman Catholic heresy. The Council of Nicaea did offer many sound points of theology. Once it was determined that the celebration of Christ’s resurrection should occur each year on a Sunday around the same time of the year, the formula for calculating that date was purely based on the science of the time and not based on pagan practices. If Christians today wish to come up with a better formula for calculating the date to celebrate the resurrection or do not wish to celebrate the resurrection on an annual basis (perhaps based on the belief that the resurrection should be celebrated weekly or daily), these Christians have the liberty to do so. But Christians who choose to celebrate Easter according to the Nicaean formula have the liberty to do so and their practices should not be called pagan.

The KJV is correct in having “Easter” at Acts 12:4

“Pascha” means Easter today

Now that it has been demonstrated that “Easter” is a biblical word referring to the day to celebrate Christ’s resurrection, it will be shown why the KJV is correct in translating “Πάσχα (Pascha)” as “Easter” at Acts 12:4. For starters, here are some modern Greek-English dictionaries showing that at least in modern Greek the primary meaning of “Pascha” is “Easter”, not “Passover”:

Oxford Greek-English Learner’s Dictionary (Oxford UP, 2012)

Collins Greek-English Dictionary (HarperCollins, 2003)

Divry’s Modern English-Greek and Greek-English Desk Dictionary (D.C. Divry, 1991)

Divry’s Modern English-Greek and Greek-English Desk Dictionary (D.C. Divry, 1991)

“Pascha” is a polyseme, a word with multiple meanings. In certain contexts it refers to the Jewish Passover (celebration of the Exodus). In other contexts it refers to the Christian Easter. When used by Jews in a context prior to Christ’s resurrection, the word always refers to the Jewish Passover. However, when used by Greek Christians in a context after Christ’s resurrection (as Luke, the narrator of Acts, did in Acts 12:4), the word refers to Easter.

“Kalo Pascha”

A Greek Christian Easter Card

Many English-speaking people are deceived by the similar sounds between “Pascha” and “Passover” and therefore find it difficult to understand that “Pascha” could mean Easter. The English word, “Passover”, is a perfect translation of “Pascha” in the context of the Jewish celebration because the root Hebrew word, “פּסח (pasach)”, means “to pass over” (Brown-Driver-Briggs’ Hebrew Definitions). Yet it is only in English that the verb, “pass over”, and “Pasach/Pascha” are phonetically similar. In other languages, it is not so obvious from phonetics that “Pascha” refers to the Passover. Perhaps that is why in most other languages the primary meaning of “Pascha” is not Passover. For example, in modern Greek, “Πάσχα (Pascha)” primarily means Easter. When a non-Jewish Greek person says, “Καλό Πάσχα! (Happy Pascha!)”, he is not wishing you a happy Jewish holiday but rather a happy Christian holiday. In modern Greek, Passover is the secondary meaning of “Pascha”. “Pascha” means Passover only when the context is clearly Jewish or when the word is qualified as being the Hebrew or Jewish “Pascha” as follows:

• Easter = Πάσχα (Pascha)
• Passover = εβραϊκό Πάσχα (Hebrew Pascha), Πάσχα των ιουδαίων (Pascha of the Jew)

Although “Pascha” was originally a Hebrew word (“פּסח (pesach)”), Greek, being the language of a predominantly Christian nation, had appropriated the Jewish word and gave it the Christian meaning of “Easter”. That is why in modern Greek, the primary meaning of “Πάσχα” is Easter and Passover is actually the secondary meaning when “Πάσχα” is qualified as the “εβραϊκό Πάσχα (Hebrew Pascha)” or the “Πάσχα των ιουδαίων (Pascha of the Jews)”. Many other languages of Christendom are like modern Greek in making Easter the primary meaning of the transliteration of “Pascha”:

Language	Word for Easter	Word for Passover
Danish	Påske	Påsken
Dutch	Pasen	Joods Paasfeest
French	Pâques	Pâques de Juifs
Italian	Pasqua	Pasqua ebraica
Latin	Pascha	Pascha
Portuguese	Páscoa	Páscoa dos judeus
Romanian	Paşti	Paștele evreiesc
Spanish	Pascua	Pascua Judía
Swedish	Påsk	Judarnas Påskhögtid

As with modern Greek, the transliteration of “Pascha” in these languages could refer to either Easter or Passover depending on context or a modifier. But often the primary meaning of “Pascha” is Easter. In French, for example, Easter is “Pâques” and Passover is “Pâques de Juifs” (“Pascha of the Jews”).

“Pascha” meant Easter in the first century

There is no doubt that “Πάσχα” means Easter in modern Greek. The charge, however, is that “Πάσχα” did not mean Easter until centuries after the composition of Acts 12:4. This is not true. In the Gospel of John there is already a distinction being made between the Christian Πάσχα and the Jewish Πάσχα. One of the words for Passover in modern Greek is “Πάσχα των ιουδαίων” (Passover of the Jews). We see this same phrase already in the time of John the Apostle:

• John 2:13: “And the Jews’ passover was at hand….” (και εγγυς ην το πασχα των ιουδαιων)

• John 11:55: “And the Jews’ passover was nigh at hand….” (ην δε εγγυς το πασχα των ιουδαιων)

The fact that John writes, “Jews’ Pascha (πασχα των ιουδαιων)” indicates that there was a need to qualify the word “Pascha” for the immediate audience of John’s Gospel. Such a phrase would be redundant unless there were already a distinction between a “Jew’s” Pascha and “another” Pascha. Apparently within the first century, Christians had already appropriated the word “Pascha” to refer to the Christian celebration of the resurrection.

Eusebius’ testimony is clear that the Apostles were already celebrating the “Saviour’s Pascha”, which is clearly not the “Jews’ Pascha”:

“Ζητήσεως δῆτα κατὰ τούσδε οὐ σμικρᾶς ἀνακινηθείσης, ὅτι δὴ τῆς Ἀσίας ἁπάσης αἱ παροικίαι ὡς ἐκ παραδόσεως ἀρχαιοτέρας σελήνης τὴν τεσσαρεσκαιδεκάτην ᾤοντο δεῖν ἐπὶ τῆς τοῦ σωτηρίου πάσχα ἑορτῆς παραφυλάττειν, ἐν ᾗ θύειν τὸ πρόβατον Ἰουδαίοις προηγόρευτο, ὡς δέον ἐκ παντὸς κατὰ ταύτην, ὁποίᾳ δἂν ἡμέρᾳ τῆς ἑβδομάδος περιτυγχάνοι, τὰς τῶν ἀσιτιῶν ἐπιλύσεις ποιεῖσθαι, οὐκ ἔθους ὄντος τοῦτον ἐπιτελεῖν τὸν τρόπον ταῖς ἀνὰ τὴν λοιπὴν ἅπασαν οἰκουμένην ἐκκλησίαις, ἐξ ἀποστολικῆς παραδόσεως τὸ καὶ εἰς δεῦρο κρατῆσαν ἔθος φυλαττούσαις, ὡς μηδ’ ἑτέρᾳ προσήκειν παρὰ τὴν τῆς ἀναστάσεως τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν ἡμέρᾳ τὰς νηστείας ἐπιλύεσθαι” (Church History, Book V, 23:1)

“A question of no small importance arose at that time. For the parishes of all Asia, as from an older tradition, held that the fourteenth day of the moon, on which day the Jews were commanded to sacrifice the lamb, should be observed as the feast of the Saviour’s passover. It was therefore necessary to end their fast on that day, whatever day of the week it should happen to be. But it was not the custom of the churches in the rest of the world to end it at this time, as they observed the practice which, from apostolic tradition, has prevailed to the present time, of terminating the fast on no other day than on that of the resurrection of our Saviour.” (Church History, Book V, 23:1, Translation from www.newadvent.org)

Typical English translations of Eusebius’ Church History, such as that above, translate “σωτηρίου πάσχα” as “Saviour’s passover”, but the literal translation is “Saviour’s Pascha”. Eusebius here is describing the Quartodecimanist controversy which arose when the churches in the second century could not agree on the day to celebrate the Saviour’s Pascha. While some Christians are rightly sceptical of the writings of Eusebius by virtue of his connection to the Roman Catholic church, his testimony above simply concerns a fact that Christians celebrated the Saviour’s Pascha. Eusebius gives a balanced report of the situation, even reporting that the Saviour’s Pascha originally fell on the date of the Passover instead of on a Sunday, contrary to later Roman Catholic practices. Regardless of who was right in the Quartodecimanist controversy, the fact is that Christians from early times were all celebrating the Saviour’s Pascha, which is the celebration of the resurrection of the Saviour. This was not the Jewish Passover but rather the Christian celebration of Easter.

Those who deny that “Πάσχα” came to mean “Easter” in Apostolic times are unable to explain when the shift in meaning arose. There is no record of councils or debates documenting the shift in the meaning of “Πάσχα” in Greek. There is also no logical reason for the shift in meaning to take place over hundreds of years. As far back as we can document, Greek Christians have accepted that “Πάσχα” refers to the celebration of the Lord’s resurrection, which is “Easter”. Given John’s use of the word and the uncontradicted testimonies of early church fathers, it is far more candid to accept that “Πάσχα” already meant “Easter” in the first century. In the Bible, “Πάσχα” means Passover only when used by Jews or by anyone specifically referring to the Jewish celebration. In passages prior to Christ’s resurrection, the KJV translates “Πάσχα” as “Passover” because the narrators and characters are still referring to the Jewish festival. The only times the KJV translates “Πάσχα” as “Passover” after the resurrection are in 1 Corinthians 5:7 and Hebrews 11:28. In 1 Corinthians 5:7, the word “passover” refers to the passover lamb rather than the day of the year, so it is correctly translated “passover”. In Hebrews 11:28, the narrative refers retrospectively to Moses’ conduct, which was before the resurrection, so the word is properly translated “passover”. The following diagram explains these distinctions visually:

“Pascha” meant Easter to Luke, the narrator of Acts 12:4

Whether “Πάσχα” should be Passover or Easter at Acts 12:4 must be determined by discerning who is using the word in this instance. If the word is used by a Jew, then the word would mean Passover. If the word is used by Herod, then the word would mean Passover or perhaps a pagan festival (although the possibility of “Πάσχα” referring to a pagan festival has no basis in history or etymology). Contrary to what many believe, it is neither the Jews nor Herod who is using the word “Πάσχα”at Acts 12:4. It is actually Luke, the Christian narrator of Acts, who is using the word “Πάσχα” to describe the timeline of events for his Christian readers in the latter first century, many of whom were Gentile Christians. At the time of Luke’s writing, “Πάσχα” at Acts 12:4 was no longer the Passover but Easter. When Luke speaks in Acts 12:4 as narrator, he is using words according to the mutual Christian perspective of himself and his readers. This is evident because he uses the word “church” (εκκλησία) at Acts 12:1 to refer to Christians. This is a dignifying Christian word to refer to the congregation of those who are called out by God. Neither Herod nor the Jews would have referred to these rebels as “the called-out ones”. However, when coming from a Christian narrator for a Christian audience, the word “εκκλησία” carries a Christian meaning. The same goes for the word “πασχα”. It may well be that Herod and the Jews had no concern or knowledge about Easter. Although Herod and the Jews were waiting for the Jewish Passover, Luke uses “πασχα” according to its Christian meaning of “Easter” to explain the timeline of events to his Christian readers. That is why “πασχα” is Easter in Acts 12:4.

/ Part 2 of 2 to follow …

Pervert Translations and Publishers ~ Part 5

Proverb 18:13 He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.

pervert v. /per-vert/ 1 alter from an original meaning or state to a distortion of what was first intended. 2 lead away from what is right, natural, or acceptable.

© South African Pocket Oxford Dictionary, 3rd Edition 2002

by Terry Watkins

coun ter feit \’kaunt-er-fit\: to imitate or copy closely especially with intent to deceive.

The greatest method of deception is to counterfeit.
And the master of counterfeit and deception is Satan.

The Bible in 2 Corinthians 11:14-15 warns of Satan’s counterfeit: “And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; …” Isaiah 14:14 tells of Satan’s ultimate counterfeit: “… I will BE LIKE the most High.”

And among his greatest counterfeit’s is the New King James Bible (NKJV). Christians that would never touch a New International Version (NIV), New American Standard (NASV), Revised Standard (RSV), the New Revised Standard (NRSV) or other per-versions are being “seduced” by the subtle NKJV.

And though the New King James does indeed bear a “likeness” to the 1611 King James Bible, as you’ll soon see, there’s something else coiled (see Genesis 3:1) “underneath the cover” of the NKJV.

WHAT ABOUT THAT MYSTERIOUS MARK?

Symbols are used throughout the occult. Harpers’ Encyclopaedia of Mystical & Paranormal Experience (p.594) says, “Symbols are important to all esoteric teachings, for they contain secret wisdom accessible only to the initiated.”

Many people have asked about the mysterious symbol on the NKJV.

Thomas Nelson Publishers (publishers of the NKJV) claim, on the inside-cover, the symbol, “… is an ancient symbol for the Trinity.” But Acts 17:29, clearly FORBIDS such symbology: “… we ought NOT to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, GRAVEN BY ART and man’s device.”

And why does The Aquarian Conspiracy, a key New Age  “handbook”, bear a similar symbol? New Agers freely admit it represents three inter-woven “6”s or “666”.

Constance Cumbey, author of The Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow and a notable authority on the New Age Movement, said, “On the cover of the Aquarian Conspiracy is a Mobius, it is really used by them as triple six (666). The emblem on the cover of the New King James Bible is said to be an ancient symbol of the Trinity. The old symbol had gnostic origins. It was more gnostic than Christian. I was rather alarmed when I noticed the emblem …“ (The New Age Movement, Southwest Radio Church, 1982 p.11)

The three esoteric “6”‘s separated.
Plainly displaying the interlocked “666”.

The Triqueta is used  as the centerpiece for the logo for The Institute of Transpersonal Psychology (ITP). The ITP is a new age school following the Jungian Psychology [occultist Carl Jung]. One of their stated goals is “… to reach the recognition of divinity within” (www.itp.edu/about/tp.html) (see Genesis 3:5, “…ye shall be as gods …”)

The same symbol (with a circle) is displayed by the rock group Led Zeppelin. Members of Led Zeppelin are deeply involved in satanism and the occult. Guitarist Jimmy Page, so consumed with satanism, actually purchased satanist Aleister Crowley’s mansion. Most believe the symbol is from the teachings of Aleister Crowley and represents 666.

The following picture is “The Hierophant” taken from the Tarot card set designed by satanist Aliester Crowley. The “Hierophant” is a priest in the occult and Eleusinian. Notice the “three circles” at the top of the wand or rod in the Hierphant’s hand. Inside the the three intertwined circles is the “NKJV symbol”.

To the left is the top of the wand enlarged. Notice the “NKJV symbol” (upside down) inside the three circles.

One of the most occultic television shows ever aired is “Charmed”. “Charmed” details the spells and occultic practices of three witches. The “NKJV symbol” is the show’s primary symbol of witchcraft and is splattered throughout the series. Notice the “NKJV symbol” displayed on “The Book of Shadows”. The Book of Shadows is commonly used in witchcraft and satanism:

Book of Shadows: Also called a grimoire, this journal kept either by individual witches or satanists or by a coven or group, records the activities of the group and the incantations used. (Jerry Johnston, The Edge of Evil: The Rise of Satanism on North America, p. 269)

THE NKJV & WITCHCRAFT?

The Craft: A Witch’s Book of Shadows
The Witch’s Book of Shadows or Grimoire is a book of spells, enchantments, and rituals. Includes Rituals, Spells, and Wicca Ethics

The Craft Companion: A Witch’s Journal

By Dorothy Morrison, a high priest of Witchcraft.

NOTE: We circled (in YELLOW and RED), and also enlarged to the side The NKJV symbol.

Here’s some examples of Satanic and Pagan Jewellery which includes the NKJV logo.

LEFT BOX: Notice the satanic pentagram ring in the top right corner. The ring with the NKJV logo is the fourth down on the left, we highlighted it with a yellow circle.

BOTTOM BOX: Notice the very satanic Baphomet Goat. We broke out and colored the NKJV symbol found in the other two satanic pieces of jewellery.

LEFT: The image on the left is from the rock group Deicide’s album “Once Upon the Cross”. It is a triquetra (the NKJV logo) with pentagrams and upside down crosses. The group Deicide members are very serious Satanists. Lead Singer Glen Benton has an upside down cross branded on his forehead. The inside cover of the album “Once Upon the Cross” has the Lord Jesus Christ, sliced up the middle, with his insides removed. The name Deicide means the death of God.

RIGHT: The triquetra (the NKJV logo) is also the logo for the Rap / Metal band P.O.D.

The book “Blood on the Doorposts” by former Satanists, Bill and Sharon Schnoebelen, also documents the “trio of sixes (666)” in the “NKJV symbol” and goes so far as claim it is “symbolic of the anti-christ”:

“A disguised interlocked trio of sixes, symbolic of the anti-christ. Also symbolizes the triple goddess of Wicca (three interlocked vesica pisces together). Commonly used in Catholic liturgical iconography, and has recently found its way into the logo of the New King James Bible.” (Bill and Sharon Schnoebelen, Blood on the Doorposts, p. 150)

Dr. Cathy Burns writes in her book, Masonic and Occult Symbols Illustrated, concerning the “NKJV symbol”:

“Marilyn Ferguson, a New Ager, used the symbol of the triquetra (another name for the triskele) on her book The Aquarian Conspiracy. This is a variation for the number 666. Other books and material have a similar design printed on them, such as books from David Spangler, the person who lauds Lucifer, and The Witch’s Grimoire. As most people know, the number 666 is the number of the beast (see Revelation 13:18) and is evil, yet the occultists and New Agers love this number and consider it to be sacred.

As stated earlier, many organizations, such as the World Future Society and the Trilateral Commission, incorporate this symbol into their logo. I think it is quite interesting to see that this same symbol appears on the cover of the New King James Bible as well!” (Dr. Cathy Burns, Masonic and Occult Symbols Illustrated, pp. 242-243)

Would God “mark” His word with a symbol in the occult?

The Preface to the New King James Version (NKJV) reads, “A special feature of the New King James Version is ITS CONFORMITY to the thought flow of the 1611 Bible … the new edition, while much clearer ARE SO CLOSE to the traditional …”

Among the first changes that greets the reader of the NKJV is the removal of the much maligned “thee, thou and ye”. The Preface to the NKJV states, “… thee, thou, and ye are replaced by the simple you, … These pronouns are no longer part of our language.” But “thee, thou and ye” were “NO LONGER part of the language” during 1611 either. (Just read the intro to the 1611 King James, there are no “thee”, “thou” and “ye”). In fact, Webster’s Third New International Dictionary, says of ye: “used from the earliest of times to the late 13th century …” (p.2648) And yet the 1611 King James was published 400 years later in the 17th century!

So why are they there?

The Greek and Hebrew language contain a different word for the second person singular and the second person plural pronouns. Today we use the one-word “you” for both the singular and plural. But because the translators of the 1611 King James Bible desired an accurate, word-for-word translation of the Hebrew and Greek text – they could NOT use the one-word “you” throughout! If it begins with “t” (thou, thy, thine) it’s SINGULAR, but if it begins with “y” (ye) it’s PLURAL. Ads for the NKJV call it “the Accurate One”, and yet the 1611 King James, by using “thee”, “thou”, “ye”, is far more accurate!

By the way, if the “thee’s” and “thou’s” are “… no longer part of our language” – why aren’t the NKJV translators rushing to make our hymnbooks “much clearer”? “How Great Thou Art” to “How Great You Are”, or “Come Thou Fount” to “Come You Fount” Doesn’t sound right, does it? Isn’t it amazing that they wouldn’t dare “correct” our hymns – and yet, without the slightest hesitation, they’ll “correct” the word of God!

The NKJV claims to make the “old” KJV “much clearer” by “updating obsolete words” (New King James Version, 1982e. p.1235).

How about that “obsolete word” – “hell”. The NKJV removes the word “hell” 23 times! And how do they make it “much clearer”? By replacing “hell” with “Hades” and “Sheol”! Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary defines Hades: “the underground abode of the dead in Greek MYTHOLOGY“. By making it “much clearer” – they turn your Bible into MYTHOLOGY! Not only that, Hades is not always a place of torment or terror! The Assyrian Hades is an abode of blessedness with silver skies called “Happy Fields”. In the satanic New Age Movement, Hades is an intermediate state of purification!

Who in their right mind would think “Hades” or “Sheol” is “up-to-date” and “much clearer” than “hell”?

Matthew 16:18

KJV: “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”

NKJV: “And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.”

Luke 16:23

KJV: “And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.”

NKJV: “And being in torments in Hades, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.”

Hell is removed in 2 Sam. 22:6, Job 11:8, 26:6, Psalm 16:10, 18:5, 86:13, 116:3, Isaiah 5:14, 14:15, 28:15,18, 57:9, Jonah 2:2, Matt. 11:23, 16:18, Luke 10:15, 16:23, Acts 2:27, 31, Rev. 1:18, 6:8, 20:13,14.

Then the NKJV decides that maybe “Hades” should be “grave”! So the NKJV makes 1 Corinthians 15:55 “much clearer” by changing “grave” to “Hades”! “… O Hades, where is your victory?” Clear as mud …

Another one of those “obsolete words” is “repent”. They take it out 44 times! And how does the NKJV make it “much clearer”? In Matthew 21:32 they use “relent”. Matthew 27:3 it’s “remorseful” Or Romans 11:29 they change “repentance” to “irrevocable”.

The term “new testament” is NOT in the NKJV! (see Matt. 26:28, Mark 14:24, Luke 22:20, 1 Cor. 11:25, 2 Cor. 3:6, Heb. 9:15,) The NKJV replaces “new testament” with “new covenant” (ditto NIV, NRSV, RSV, NASV). An obvious assault at the written word!

The word “damned”, “damnation” is NOT in the NKJV! They make it “much clearer” by replacing it with “condemn” (ditto NIV, RSV, NRSV, NASV). “Condemned” is NO WHERE NEAR AS SERIOUS as “damned”! Damned is eternal! One can be “condemned” and not “damned”. Romans 14:22 says, “… Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth.” Webster defines “condemned”: to declare to be wrong, but the much more serious and eternal “damn”: “to condemn to hell”.

The word “devils” (the singular, person called the “devil” is) is NOT in the NKJV! Replaced with the “transliterated” Greek word “demon” (ditto NIV, RSV, NRSV, NASV). The Theosophical Dictionary describes demon as: “… it has a meaning identical with that of ‘god’, ‘angel’ or ‘genius'”. Even Vines Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words (p.157) defines “demon” as: “an inferior deity, WHETHER GOOD OR BAD”. Webster defines “demon” as: “divinity, spirit, an attendant power or spirit”, but “devil” as: “the personal supreme spirit of EVIL …”

In 2 Timothy 2:15, the NKJV (like the NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV) remove that “obsolete” word – “study”! The only time you’re told to “study” your Bible. AND THEY ZAP IT! Why don’t they want you to “study” your Bible? Maybe they don’t want you to look too close – you might find out what they’ve ACTUALLY done to your Bible! The “real” KJV is the only English Bible in the world that instructs you to “study” your Bible!
That “obsolete” word “virtue” is replaced with “power” in Mark 5:30, Luke 6:19, 8:46! How does anybody confuse “virtue” with “power”? Simple – by being “bosom-buddies” with the NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV! That’s what they did!

One of the most absurd changes ever made is changing the word “servant” to “slave”! The NKJV in Romans 6:22, reads: “But now having been set FREE from sin, and having become SLAVES OF GOD …” The NKJV, in 1 Corinthians 7:22, calls the Christian, “Christ’s slave”. Talk about a contradiction! John 8:36 says, “If the Son therefore shall make you FREE, YE SHALL BE FREE INDEED.” But isn’t a Christian supposed to serve? Yes, in love. Not as a slave! Galatians 5:13 explains it, perfectly: “For, brethren, ye have been called unto LIBERTY;(not slavery!) only use not LIBERTY for an occasion to the flesh, but BY LOVE SERVE one another.”

In order to “harmonize” with the satanic New Age Movement (and of course the NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV!), the NKJV changes “end of the WORLD” to “end of the AGE“! And in it’s no longer the “WORLD to come” but “AGE to come”. The New Age Movement teaches a series of ages (hence the name: New AGE). See Matthew 12:32, 13:39, 13:40, 13:49, 24:3, 28:20, Mark 10:30, Luke 13:30, 20:34,35, 1 Cor 1:21.

The New Age Movement and the occult are longing for one called the Maitreya. The Bible calls him the Anti-Christ. New Ager’s refer to him as the “the Coming One” – AND SO DOES THE NKJV! In Luke 7:19, 20 (see also Matt 11:3) John told his disciples to ask Jesus: “Are You THE COMING ONE. . .” In the “The Great Invocation”, a “prayer” highly reverenced among New Agers and chanted to “invoke” the Maitreya, says, “Let Light and Love and Power and Death, Fulfil the purpose of the Coming One.”

And to REALLY show their sympathy with the satanic New Age Movement – BELIEVE IT OR NOT – in Acts 17:29 the New Age NKJV changes “Godhead” to “Divine Nature”! (ditto NIV, NASV)

And if you think the NKJV just “innocently” updated the “obsolete words”, removed the “thee’s and thou’s” – here’s what the translators proudly admit: “IT IS CLEAR that this revision REQUIRED more than the dropping of “-eth” endings, removing, “thee’s” and “thou’s,” and updating obsolete words.” (The New King James Version, 1982e. p.1235)

AND THEY AIN’T JUST A KIDDIN’!

Here’s a sampling of the required changes:

Genesis 2:18: The NKJV ought to make Hillary Clinton proud: “And the Lord God said, It is not good that man should be alone; I will make a helper COMPARABLE TO HIM”

Genesis 22:8: One of the greatest verses in the Bible proclaiming that Jesus Christ was God in the flesh: “God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering:” The NKJV adds that little word “for”: “God will provide for Himself the lamb for a burnt offering” And destroys the wonderful promise! Where’d they get their little “for”? From the NASV!

Genesis 24:47: The “old” KJV reads: “I put the earring upon her face”. But the NKJV has different plans for beautiful Rebekah: “I put the nose ring on her nose”. Where did it get the ridiculous idea to “cannibalize” Rebekah? Just take a peek at the NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV!

Ezra 8:36: The KJV reads, “And they delivered the king’s commissions unto the king’s lieutenants …” The “much clearer” NKJV reads, “And they delivered the king’s orders to the king’s satraps …” Who in the world thinks “satraps” is “much clearer” than lieutenants? The NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV – they do! They put in the same “much clearer” word!

Psalms 109:6: removes “Satan”. (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV).

Matthew 7:14: change “narrow is the way” to “difficult is the way”. There’s nothing “difficult” about the salvation of Jesus Christ! Jesus says in Matt. 11:30, “For my yoke is EASY, and my burden is light.” THE EXACT OPPOSITE! Boy, you talk about a contradiction!

Matthew 12:40: change “whale” to “fish” (ditto NIV) I don’t guess it matters (what’s the truth got to do with it?), the Greek word used in Matthew 12:40 is ketos. The scientific study of whales just happens to be – CETOLOGY – from the Greek ketos for whale and logos for study! The scientific name for whales just happens to be – CETACEANS – from the Greek ketos for whale!

Matthew 18:26 & Matthew 20:20: The NKJV removes “worshipped him” (robbing worship from Jesus) (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)

Mark 13:6 & Luke 21:8: removes “Christ” (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)

John 1:3: change “All things were made BY him;” to “All things were made THROUGH Him” (NIV, NRSV, RSV)

John 4:24: change “God is a spirit” to the impersonal, New Age pantheistic, “God is spirit” (NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV)

John 14:2: (NKJV 1979 edition) change “mansions” to “dwelling places” (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)

John 14:16: change “comforter” to “helper” (refers to Holy Spirit) (NASV)

Acts 4:27, 30: change “holy child” to “holy servant” (refers to Jesus) (NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV)

Acts 12:4: change “Easter” to “Passover” (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)

Acts 17:22: changes “superstitious” to “religious” (NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV)

Acts 24:14: change “heresy” to “sect” (NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV)

Romans 1:18: change “hold the truth” to “suppress the truth” (NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV)

Romans 1:25: change “changed the truth” to “exchanged the truth” (NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV)

Romans 5:8: change “commendeth” to “demonstrates” (NIV, NASV)

Romans 16:18: change “good words and fair speeches” to “smooth words and flattering speech” (NIV, NASV, NRSV)

1 Cor. 1:21: change “foolishness of preaching” to “foolishness of the message preached” (ditto NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV) There’s nothing foolish about the gospel of Jesus Christ. Unless you’re not saved! 1 Cor. 1:18 says: “For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish FOOLISHNESS …” I wonder where that leaves the translators of the NKJV, NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV?

1 Cor. 1:22: change “require” to “request” (NASV)

1 Cor. 6:9: removes “effeminate” (NIV, NRSV, RSV)

1 Cor. 9:27: change “castaway” to “disqualified” (NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV)

2 Cor. 2:10: change “person of Christ” to “presence of Christ” (NASV, NRSV, RSV)

2 Cor. 2:17: With all the “corruptions” in the NKJV, you’d expect 2 Cor. 2:17 to change. IT DOES! They change, “For we not as many which CORRUPT the word of God” to “For we are not, as so many, PEDDLING the word of God” (ditto NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV)

2 Cor. 5:17: change “new creature” to “new creation” (NIV, NRSV, RSV)

2 Cor. 10:5: change “imaginations” to “arguments”. Considering New Age “imaging” and “visualization” is now entering the church, this verse in the “old” KJV just won’t do. (NIV, RSV)

2 Cor. 11:6: change “rude in speech” to “untrained in speech” (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)

Gal. 2:20: omit “nevertheless I live” (NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV)

Phil. 2:6: (NKJV 1979e.) change “thought it not robbery to be equal with God” to “did not consider equality with God something to be grasped”. (robs Jesus Christ of deity) (NIV, NASV, RSV)

Phil. 3:8: change “dung” to “rubbish” (NIV, NASV, NRSV)

1 Thess. 5:22 change “all appearance of evil” to “every form of evil” (NASV, RSV, NSRV)

1 Timothy 6:5: The NKJV changes “gain is godliness” to “godliness is a MEANS OF gain”. There are NO Greek texts with “means of” in them! Where, oh where, did they come from? Care to take a wild guess? YOU GOT IT! The NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV!

1 Timothy 6:10: The NKJV changes “For the love of money is the root of all evil:” to “For the love of money is a root of all KINDS OF evil”. The words “KINDS OF” are found in NO Greek text in the world! Where did they get them? Straight from the NIV, NASV, NRSV!

1 Tim. 6:20: change “science” to “knowledge” (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)

Titus 3:10: change “heretic” to “divisive man” (NIV)

Hebrews 4:8 & Acts 7:45: “Jesus” is changed to “Joshua”. (NIV, NASV, RSV)

2 Pet. 2:1: change “damnable heresies” to “destructive heresies” (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)

1 John 3:16: remove “love of God”; (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)

1 John 5:13: The NKJV reads: “These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may CONTINUE TO believe in the name of the Son of God.” They add “CONTINUE TO” without any Greek text whatsoever! Not even the perverted NIV, NASV, NRSV and RSV go that far! A cruel, subtle (see Genesis 3:1) attack on the believer’s eternal security!

Rev. 2:13: change “Satan’s seat” to “Satan’s throne” (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)

Rev. 6:14: “Heaven” is changed to “sky” in (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)

AND THAT DOESN’T SCRATCH THE SURFACE OF ALL THE CHANGES!

The NKJV removes the word “Lord” 66 times!
The NKJV removes the word God 51 times!
The NKJV removes the word “heaven” 50 times!
In just the New Testament alone the NKJV removes 2,289 words from the KJV!
The NKJV makes over 100,000 word changes!
And most will match the NIV, NASV, RSV, or NRSV!

And Thomas Nelson Publishers have the audacity to claim in an ad for the NKJV (Moody Monthly, June 1982, back cover), “NOTHING HAS BEEN CHANGED except to make the original meaning clearer.”

The New King James is a COUNTERFEIT!

It’s NOT NEW! The changes are already in the NIV, NASV, NRSV, or RSV!

And it’s certainly NOT true to the 1611 King James Bible!

---

THE END

Pervert Translations and Publishers ~ Part 4

Proverb 18:13 He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.

pervert v. /per-vert/ 1 alter from an original meaning or state to a distortion of what was first intended. 2 lead away from what is right, natural, or acceptable.

© South African Pocket Oxford Dictionary, 3rd Edition 2002

Abundant Translations

Do we need the abundant translations that proliferate in our society? Believe me, this will not be the last that we will see more and more pervert bible translations flooding the marketplace and cluttering the bookshelves of believers, laymen, pastors and theologians. Sadly, these very same pervert bibles will be handed out in evangelistic endeavours given to the new unsuspecting converts – this is shameful, wicked and evil to say the least.

The current translations will continue to be printed and even supposedly “newer and better translations” will be produced all in the name of greed for filthy lucre’s sake! The King James Bible has it precise when it makes reference to filthy lucre. Modern dictionaries even refer to it as money, but a Google search brings up this description:

lu-cre /’lōokar/ noun : money, especially when regarded as sordid or distasteful or gained in a dishonorable way.

The Oxford Dictionaries’ website entry under the US English Dictionary for filthy lucre gives the description as:

filth-y lu-cre noun : Money, especially when gained in a dishonest or dishonorable way. Origin early 16th century: with biblical allusion to Titus 1:11.

Titus 1:11 is very appropriate and reads as follows:

Tit 1:11  Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre’s sake.

Let us do some hermeneutics and see what the Greek words for lucre reveal in the Strong’s Complete Word Study Concordance:

146. αίσχροκϵρδής , aischrokerdēs, ahee-skhrok-er-dace’; from 150 and κέρδς , kerdos (gain); sordid:– given to (greedy of) filthy lucre.

147. αίσχροκϵρδώς , aischrokerdōs, ahee-skhrok-er-doce’; adverb from 146; sordidly:– for filthy lucre’s sake.

150. αίσχρός , aischros, ahee-skhros’; from the same as 153; shameful, i.e. base (specially venal):– filthy.

2771. κέρδος , kerdos, ker’-dos; of uncertain affinity; gain (pecuniary or genitive):– gain, lucre.

As can be seen when one looks in secular dictionaries and in a concordance looking up the Greek words for filthy lucre, the meanings of filthy lucre remain the same. This can dispel the notion that the KJV English is too archaic and cannot be understood. The reason why people come up with this excuse is because they are living in a generation where they expect to be spoon-fed and pampered and they are just plain lazy or as the Scripture says slothful:

Hebrews 6:12  That ye be not slothful, but followers of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises.

To be “slothful” is more than just being “sluggish” as the NASB puts it. To be “sluggish” in today’s language is to be “slow moving”, but let us see where this word “slothful” comes from and ye will see that the Word of God is not pampering to those that are lazy. The Greek word for slothful in the Strong’s Complete Word Study Concordance reads as follows:

3576. νωθρός , nōthros, no-thros’; from a derivative of 3541; sluggish, i.e. (literal) lazy, or (figurative) stupid:– dull, slothful.

3541. νόθος , nothos, noth’-os; of uncertain affinity; a spurious or illegitimate son:– bastard.

One can see that to be slothful is to show one’s laziness and stupidity which also disqualifies you, if you take the derivative, as an illegitimate son. An illegitimate son cannot inherit the promises. One has to be a child of God to inherit the promises through faith and patience. So how can a person be an illegitimate son through being sluggish (slow moving)? Where is the connection?

This is where the doctrine to Study is correct in the KJV. As believers we are to listen to and be taught by the Holy Spirit who will reveal all truth:

John 15:26  But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:

John 16:13  Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

John 17:17  Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.

2 Timothy 2:15  Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
2 Timothy 2:16  But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.

To be taught by the Holy Spirit comes about by you applying your part of studying the Word of God, which is a doctrine of the Bible.

I will most probably come under attack from many MacArthur-idolizers – but please understand when I was still a young believer, of which I still am, I listened to many of Dr MacArthur’s sermons and learned much, but in the process of time I fell into idolatry by placing him on a pedestal and I had to repent of my idolatry and ask God for forgiveness of my sin. Man is not the final authority. That belongs to God Almighty alone. This is a warning that the flesh is easily pampered to and this is not a smear campaign against MacArthur, but these writings would not be necessary to be written if MacArthur was not courting controversies himself. We are told in Scripture to contend for the faith (see Jude 1:3) and that would include revealing error. Please test all that is written here.

The MacArthur NIV Study Bible?

The following clip hereunder starts off with Dr John MacArthur explaining that he had been approached by the publishers of the NIV to assist them with a “new NIV Study Bible” where MacArthur will be providing them with his notes from his NASB Study Bible. Part of the interview that appears on the video-clip below (please watch the same to get the full context of the interview), reads as follows, quote:

“I was approached and asked if I would be willing to do an edition of the MacArthur Study Bible in the NIV – it was a lot to think about. First thing to know about is that 40% of the English bibles in the world are NIV, it is 9% ESV, and 2% NAS and the New King James is in there, and so by far the majority bible in the English speaking world is the NIV [Phil Johnson interjection: It is not your favourite translation?] um, it is not my favourite translation. That was the first question. The second question was that if anybody who reads the NIV even cares what it means? So [much laughter] Obviously you get the question. You know what I am saying, it’s like a pew bible. …”

“… So, you can curse the darkness in a sense and say oh it’s terrible they’ve got an NIV, or else you can turn on the light inside the NIV. If I wanted to do anything to help people to understand the bible who use an NIV the best thing I can possibly do is get inside their NIV and explain it – (shrug) Right? … Later on the following statement is made: “There is an 11% change from the older one to the 2011 NIV from what I understand, 11% change …”

This project would obviously show up the errors in the NIV text which therefore shows that it is not a faithful translation and the preserved Word of God. In the words of MacArthur, “There is an 11% change from the older one to the 2011 NIV from what I understand, 11% change …”. If the NIV is purported, by many theologians, to be a “better translation” than the KJV, why would MacArthur have to, in his own words, “If I wanted to do anything to help people to understand the bible who use an NIV the best thing I can possibly do is get inside their NIV and explain it – (shrug) Right?” Surely this is the work of the Holy Spirit and not a man’s job! This project will be just another deceptive bible being placed in the marketplace encouraging more people to go and buy another corrupted and changed bible, which is only “different” because it has “MacArthur’s NASB notes” inside; which is also a deception on MacArthur’s part for he says that the NIV is an erroneous bible. You see the hypocrisy, underhandedness and double-standards that is manifesting here? Will MacArthur be swayed by some of his “partners” showing concern about him being associated with this NIV project and even threatening to withdraw their sponsorship from Grace to You ministries? Why no, not in the least. You see economically speaking MacArthur can make filthy lucre from this project. He will obviously receive some royalties for his input and the printers will have duped the “NIV-loving” public into buying another copy of a pervert bible. Why would Zondervan need to print another type of NIV Study Bible, when they already have many? The reason: Greed driven by the devilish HarperCollins group! And besides, MacArthur’s “The Gospel According to Jesus” book and his own NASB Study Bible are printed by HarperCollins’ subsidiaries Zondervan and Thomas Nelson respectively, just to mention two products.

*John MacArthur on the NIV and other Controversies*

It is a dangerous business where “pastor-teachers” align themselves with the works of darkness, and they profit from these very publishers – that places them on the filthy lucre enrichment payroll. Consider the following write-up that appears at WND – the original article can be read Here. It is a mockery where Rupert Murdoch a purveyor of pornography is called a “born-again Christian.” Murdoch IS NOT a Christian – for a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit (see Matthew 7:17).

–000–

MEDIA MATTERS

MURDOCH PASTOR GETS HEAT FOR MOGUL’S PORN CHANNELS

Christian leaders question Rick Warren for church’s cozy ties with Fox owner

Published: 05/10/2007 at 1:00 AM

Mega-pastor Rick Warren is being challenged by other Christian leaders for not disciplining a prominent member of his California Saddleback Church flock for being one of the world’s leading pornographers.

That would be Rupert Murdoch, chairman of News Corp., which, in addition to building a media empire on the chests of topless models and edgy, pushing-the-envelope Fox TV network shows, recently began building a stable of hard-core porn channels for its BSkyB subsidiary.

“Rupert Murdoch is a born-again Christian and Rick Warren claims to be his pastor,” says Chris Rosebrough, head of the Christian Accountability Network. “As a Christian, Murdoch is committing an egregious sin by owning, expanding and profiting from pornographic channels, and Rick Warren, his pastor, has a biblical duty to call Murdoch to repentance and/or put him out of the church.”

He is supported in that call by Jim Lupacchino of the Christian Research Network, Pastor Ken Silva of Apprising Ministries, and a growing list of others who have the Internet buzzing with stories about the pastor and the porn purveyor.

Rosebrough said Murdoch’s decision to run porn channels represents “a clear case of a Christian openly committing a monstrous and unthinkable sin.”

“Sadly, Murdoch’s actions have already damaged his credibility as a Christian,” added Rosebrough. “If Pastor Warren does not act swiftly and call on Murdoch to dismantle his porn distribution network, then the credibility of the Christian message will be compromised around the globe.”

The ties between Warren and Murdoch go beyond the spiritual. Murdoch also owns Zondervan, the company that published Warren’s explosive bestseller “The Purpose Driven Life.”

“We hope that Warren’s business ties to Murdoch’s company haven’t clouded his judgment and impacted his resolve to carry out his biblical duty as Murdoch’s pastor,” added Rosebrough.

News of Murdoch’s hard-core porn venture broke in the London publication The Business late last year. The story alluded to the seeming contradiction of a “born-again Christian” building a hard-core porn network.

Multiple WND messages left with News Corp. seeking a response were unanswered.

Warren, who did not respond to WND’s email requests to address the controversy, has at least twice publicly claimed Murdoch as a member of his church.

In a New Yorker interview published in September 2005, Warren is quoted as saying: “I had dinner with Jack Welch (former chief executive officer of GE) last Sunday night. He came to church, and we had dinner. I’ve been kind of mentoring him on his spiritual journey. And he said to me, ‘Rick, you the biggest thinker I have ever met in my life. The only other person I know who thinks globally like you is Rupert Murdoch.’ And I said, ‘That’s interesting. I’m Rupert’s pastor! Rupert published my book!”

In a Nov. 12, 2006, Orange County Register story, Warren was asked about pastoring a man who publishes tabloids featuring topless women. He responded: “I don’t have to agree with 100 percent of what another person does in order to work with them on the 20 percent that we do agree on.”

The article also points out Murdoch was among the first patrons to support Warren’s PEACE plan, contributing $2 million.

Even Warren’s critics point out he maintains an otherwise exemplary record in speaking out against pornography and its effects. His church’s website, Pastors.com, regularly publishes condemnations of porn and urges Christians to battle it in their communities.

Yet, even before the BSkyB venture into hard-core porn, Murdoch’s News Corp. was steeped in the business.

“News Corp. is a major owner of DirecTV, which sells more pornographic films than (Hustler magazine founder and porn film producer Larry) Flynt,” says porn fighter Gail Dines, professor of American Studies at Boston’s Wheelock College. “In 2000, the New York Times reported that nearly $200 million a year is spent by the 8.7 million subscribers to DirecTV. Among News Corp.’s other media holdings are the Fox Broadcasting and cable TV networks, 20th Century Fox, the New York Post and TV Guide. Welcome to synergy: Murdoch also owns Harper Collins, which published pornography star Jenna Jameson’s best-selling book, ‘How To Make Love Like a Porn Star.’”

Murdoch built his media empire as an Australian newspaper heir who added topless, alluring Page 3 girls to the mix – a practice some of his papers, including the British holding the Sun, still follow today. Last week he made a bid to buy the Wall Street Journal.

Silva says Warren does not seem to be living up to his own convictions about how pastors are to deal with people in sin. He points to an article by Warren dated May 1 of this year [2007] in which he writes: “Sin is to be confessed only as widely as it affects others. Private sin requires only private confession to God. Personal sin that involves others requires interpersonal confession to the people involved. Public sins (those that affect a large group of people in our congregation) regrettably must be dealt with publicly as a warning to others.”

“One would certainly have to think that ‘owning and expanding a network of pornographic channels in Europe’ has to qualify as ‘public sins,’” concludes Silva. “Since Rupert Murdoch’s flagrant and obvious ‘public sins’ have now been brought before the church, and because Warren is a pastor-teacher who is very well known to the public himself, then Warren simply must deal with Murdoch publicly ‘as a warning to others.’”

Saddleback Church, with 30,000 members, was begun by Rick and Kay Warren in 1979 and now has more than 200 ministries in the Orange County, California area. “The Purpose Driven Life” has now sold about 23 million copies.

–000–

Conclusion

As can be deducted from the evidence provided it is clear God Almighty has preserved His inspired Word in the English language through the King James Bible. The evidences here reveal the Devil’s blatant twisting and corrupting of the Holy Word of God through the deceptive modern day pervert bibles that leave the reader in most instances doubting what is in the bibles and what is not in the bibles. It can also be seen that the channels through which the modern day pervert bibles come are through a perverted system of publishers and corrupted texts where any right thinking person can conclude that God would not allow pervert channels to keep and provide His Word for generations to come. Let’s put off the works of darkness,

Romans 13:10  Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.
Romans 13:11  And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed.
Romans 13:12  The night is far spent, the day is at hand: let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light.
Romans 13:13  Let us walk honestly, as in the day; not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife and envying.
Romans 13:14  But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof.

Ephesians 5:6  Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.
Ephesians 5:7  Be not ye therefore partakers with them.
Ephesians 5:8  For ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord: walk as children of light:
Ephesians 5:9  (For the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness and righteousness and truth;)
Ephesians 5:10  Proving what is acceptable unto the Lord.
Ephesians 5:11  And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.
Ephesians 5:12  For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret.
Ephesians 5:13  But all things that are reproved are made manifest by the light: for whatsoever doth make manifest is light.
Ephesians 5:14  Wherefore he saith, Awake thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light.
Ephesians 5:15  See then that ye walk circumspectly, not as fools, but as wise,
Ephesians 5:16  Redeeming the time, because the days are evil.
Ephesians 5:17  Wherefore be ye not unwise, but understanding what the will of the Lord is.

The reason why the “modern church” has little to no power today is because it is caught up in a cesspool of darkness through the pervert bibles that masquerade as the Word of God. The Holy Spirit is being quenched, for we know only the Truth can set us free as we are sanctified by the Word, as our Lord Jesus prayed to His Father,

John 17:17  Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.

Today, repent of taking God’s Word for granted through pervert bibles and get back to the Truth! And steer clear of the pervert publishers that are vehicles of the Devil – don’t support them, and have nothing to do with the darkness they promote!

The final part of this series will deal exclusively with the counterfeit New King James Version (NKJV) that is not a better update of the King James Bible. It will reveal the many errors also contained in some of the other modern day pervert bibles.

If you say there is no perfect translation of the Bible, but only some better and some worse, then you are saying God Almighty is unable to give us His full Word and we are subject to and at the mercy of man’s feeble attempts to give us a whole plethora of imperfect translations that need to be explained rather than taught! The pastor-teacher, evangelist should TEACH The Word of GOD and not spend their time explaining away and judging the Word of God by correcting how one should interpret, understand and correct what is the better word or translation from the Hebrew and Greek text in these feeble, English-translated, pervert modern-day words of the gods!

The final Word belongs to JEHOVAH* (the LORD – see Exodus 6:3; Psalm 83:18; Isaiah 26:4),

Psalm 118:8 It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man.
Psalm 118:9 It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in princes.

_________________

* 3068 יהוה , Yᵉhôvâh, yeh-ho-vaw’; from 1961; (the) self-Existent or Eternal; Jehovah, Jewish national name of God: – Jehovah, the Lord. Compare 3050, 3069.

A noun meaning God. The word refers to the proper name of the God of Israel, particularly the name by which He revealed Himself to Moses (Ex 6:2,3). The divine name has traditionally not been pronounced, primarily out of respect for its sacredness (cf. Ex 20:7; Dt28:58). Until the Renaissance, it was written without vowels in the Hebrew text of the OT, being rendered as YHWH. However, since that time, the vowels of another word ‘ădônây (136), have been supplied in hopes of reconstructing the pronunciation. Although the exact derivation of the name is uncertain, most scholars agree that its primary meaning should be understood in the context of God’s existence, namely that He is the “I AM THAT I AM” (Ex 3:14), the One who was, who is, and who always will be (cf. Rev 11:17). … The Strong’s Complete Word Study Concordance Expanded Edition, 2004

/ Part 5 of 5 to follow …

Pervert Translations and Publishers ~ Part 3

Proverb 18:13 He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.

pervert v. /per-vert/ 1 alter from an original meaning or state to a distortion of what was first intended. 2 lead away from what is right, natural, or acceptable.

© South African Pocket Oxford Dictionary, 3rd Edition 2002

At this point, I hope you are seeing the deceptions and misleading that are taking place with a corrupt eclectic textual criticism NT Greek text and a conglomerate media network that promotes profane wicked and evil works alongside pervert bibles and other christian literature packaged as “wholesome” literature, but in fact it is the wiles of the Devil working through greedy money-lusting publishers. It is all about the love of money and the perverting of God’s Holy Word!

The Bible Industry. From Geez magazine, Fall 2009.Credit: Darryl Brown and Aiden Enns.

Should a business which has a tycoon in the ilk of Rupert Murdoch (who was awarded a papal knighthood by Pope John Paul II in 1998) who’s personal fortune was pegged by Forbes at $6.3 billion in 2010, be dealing in profanity and bible distribution at the same time? It comes down to the “love of money which is the root of all evil” (1 Timothy 6:10) and it is of great concern that Christians are supporting this empire, that shows no moral ethics. The magnitude is that the Murdoch empire under the brand of Zondervan that controls the publishing of the NIV has published well in excess of 300 million copies of the same. At the same time it is part of the HarperCollins Publishers who also publish the Satanic Bible. Evil is prevailing.

Is Scripture Preserved Through Multiple Revisions?

What is also of great concern is that renowned pastor-teacher Dr John MacArthur who’s NASB MacArthur Study Bible Updated Edition is published by “Nelson Bibles – A Division of Thomas Nelson Publishers Since 1798.” Under the heading “How We Got the Bible”, the subheading “Preservation” on page xx, we can read the following:

How can one be sure that the revealed and inspired, written Word of God, which was recognized as canonical by the early church, has been handed down to this day without any loss of material? Furthermore, since one of the Devil’s prime concerns is to undermine the Bible, have the Scriptures survived this destructive onslaught? In the beginning, he denied God’s Word to Eve (Ge 3:4). Satan later attempted to distort the Scripture in his wilderness encounter with Christ (Mt 4:6,7). Through King Jehoiakim, he even attempted to literally destroy the Word (Jer 36:23). The battle for the Bible rages, but Scripture has and will continue to outlast its enemies.

God anticipated man’s and Satan’s malice towards the Scripture with divine promises to preserve His Word. The very continued existence of Scripture is guaranteed in Is 40:8, “The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God stands forever” (cf. 1Pe 1:25). This even means that no inspired Scripture has been lost in the past and still awaits rediscovery.

The actual content of Scripture will be perpetuated, both in heaven (Ps 119:89) and on earth (Is 59:21). Thus the purposes of God, as published in the sacred writings, will never be thwarted, even in the least detail (cf. Mt 5:18; 24:25; Mk 13:1; Lk 16:17).

According to MacArthur, and this part I agree with, he says, quote: “Thus the purposes of God, as published in the sacred writings, will never be thwarted, even in the least detail.” (writer’s emphasis). But that is exactly what the NASB has “lost” is translation “even in the least detail.” The NASB has used the same manuscripts from the Westcott-Hort NT Greek text. We can read further from the NASB MacArthur’s Study Bible Updated Edition on page xx under the subheading “Transmission” the following:

… Through the centuries, the practitioners of textual criticism, a precise science, have discovered, preserved, catalogued, evaluated, and published an amazing array of biblical manuscripts from both the Old and New Testaments. …

This is an interesting quote, for in Part 1 we mentioned that Messrs Brooke Foss Westcott (1825-1901) and Fenton John Anthony Hort (1828-1892) denied God and became themselves judges of God’s Word through their eclectic textual criticism NT Greek text. So to which “textual criticism, a precise science” is MacArthur referring? And “through which centuries” is he alluding to? Later on under the same subheading “Transmission” MacArthur records the following on page xxi:

… By this providential means, God has made good His promise to preserve the Scriptures. We can rest assured that there are translations available today which indeed are worthy of the title, The Word of God.

The history of a full, English translation Bible, essentially began with John Wycliffe (ca. A.D. 1330-1384), who made the first English translation of the whole Bible. Later, William Tyndale was associated with the first complete, printed New Testament in English, ca. A.D. 1526. Myles Coverdale followed in A.D. 1535, by delivering the first complete Bible printed in English. By A.D. 1611, the King James Version (KJV) had been completed. Since then, hundreds of translations have been made – some better, some worse. Today, the better English translations of the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures include: 1) New American Standard Bible (NASB); 2) English Standard Version (ESV); and 3) New King James Version (NKJV). … [writer’s emphasis, not MacArthur’s]

The most glaring error that comes out of MacArthur’s statements above is that there are hundreds of translations which have been made – “some better, some worse” – and that God has preserved His Word (is this not an oxymoron?), but the King James Bible which has been serving Christians for 403 years (1611-2014) is not one of the “better English translations,” so common sense tells us that the preachers and theologians like Matthew Henry (1662-1714), Jonathan Edwards (1703-1758), George Whitefield (1714-1770), Charles H. Spurgeon (1834-1892), and Dwight L. Moody (1837-1899) who’s numerous sermons and writings were extensively in KJV English were not using a “God preserved better English translation” as can be deduced from MacArthur’s reasoning. However, during these periods of time, there were some of the greatest revivals, church preaching and open-air evangelism by these men who all used the trusted King James Bible and many, many souls were won to Christ Jesus. Charles Spurgeon who is known as the “prince of preachers” was so fond of the KJV that he said regarding it that it would “never be bettered, as I judge, till Christ shall come.” [The Autobiography of Charles H. Spurgeon (Cincinnati: Curtis and Jennings), 4:269.]

The so-called “better English translations” according to MacArthur and many other preachers and theologians, are very recent additions to the vast bible market, as can be seen from the following data:

1) NASB complete bible published in 1971 and updated in 1995, is a revision of the American Standard Version (ASV) of 1901. It was an alternative to the Revised Standard Version (1946-1952/1971), which is considered to be theologically liberal [R. Laird Harris, Inspiration and Canonicity of the Bible: An Historical and Exegetical Study. Contemporary Evangelical Perspectives. 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1969), p.58.] The OT was published in 1971 and the NT published in 1963. The NASB was published in the following stages:

• Gospel of John (1960)
• The Gospels (1962)
• New Testament (1963)
• Psalms (1968)
• Complete bible, Old and New Testaments (1971)
• Modified Editions (1972, 1973, 1975, 1977)
• Updated Edition (NASU: 1995)

In 1992, the Lockman Foundation – which copyright and trademark to the NASB text are owned by them – commissioned a limited revision of the NASB. In 1995, the Lockman Foundation reissued the NASB as the NASB Updated Edition (more commonly the Updated NASB or NASB95). Since then, it has become widely known as simply the “NASB”, supplanting the 1977 text in current printings, save for a few (Thompson Chain Reference Bibles, Open Bibles, Key Word Study Bibles, et al.) …

© The Lockman Foundation, 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1995.

2) ESV complete bible published in 2001 (revision in 2007 changed 500 words in grammar, consistency and clarity. This edition was issued in April 2011 and the 2007 edition has been gradually phased out), and is a revision of the 1971 edition of the Revised Standard Version (RSV). The RSV had the OT printed in 1952 and NT printed in 1946 and the RSV is a revision of the American Standard Version (ASV). The initial RSV of 1881 is the Westcott and Hort perversion of the KJV. The RSV was published in the following stages:

• New Testament (first edition) 1946 (originally copyrighted to the International Council of Religious Education)
• Old Testament (and thus the full Protestant Bible), 1952
• Apocrypha, 1957
• Modified Edition, 1962
• RSV Catholic Edition (NT 1965, Complete Bible 1966)
• New Testament (second edition), 1971
• Common Bible, 1973
• Apocrypha, expanded edition, 1977
• Second Catholic Edition, 2006
• In later years the RSV served as the basis for two revisions – the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) of 1989, and the English Standard Version (ESV) of 2001

The publisher, citing that the ESV has been growing in popularity, came up with an edition of the ESV with the Biblical apocrypha included, which was developed by Oxford University Press and published in January 2009. The publisher’s hope for the new edition which includes the Apocrypha is that it will be used widely in seminaries and divinity schools where these books are used as a part of academic study. [Oxford University Press, 2012]

The ESV version of the Apocrypha is a revision of the Revised Standard Version 1977 Expanded Edition. …

© 2001 by Crossway Bibles, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers of Wheaton, Illinois, U.S. Apocrypha Copyright 2009 by Oxford University Press.

3) NKJV complete bible published in 1982, is a modern translation of the bible published by Thomas Nelson, Inc. (a subsidiary of HarperCollins and News Corp.). The NKJV was published in the following stages:

• The New Testament was published in 1979
• The Psalms was published in 1980
• The full bible was completed in 1982

It took a total of 7 years to complete. [“New King James Version (NKJV)” The Bible Gateway. Retrieved 2011-09-14]. The anglicized edition was originally known as the Revised Authorized Version, but the NKJV title is now used universally.

The aim of its 130 translators was to update the vocabulary and grammar of the King James Version, while preserving the classic style and literary beauty of the original 1611 KJV version. [In fact the translators failed on all accounts as they desecrated the original work by changing words that have specific reason for being there and therefore there is an adding and diminishing from the Word of God. More will be elaborated on this later. ~ writer’s note].

© 1979, 1980, 1982 Thomas Nelson, Inc.

Resources – Wikipedia

Judging by the various interchanging bibles and translations with many revisions, it is a “hotchpotch” of perversions of the Word of God. So which version is the inspired and preserved Word of God?

To set the record straight about the supposed revisions of the King James Bible, here is a quote from “NIV Omissions” by Keith Piper on page 110:

Has the KJV been Revised Four Times?

Answer: No. There have been 4 editions, but no revisions.
Critics ask, "Which King James version do you use, the 1611, 1629, 1638, 1762 or 1769 version?" Critics claim that since the KJV has been revised four times, there should be no objection to more revisions. This myth was used by Westcott and Hort in 1881 to produce the Revised Version. Printing was invented in 1450 by Gutenberg in Germany. Each letter was set one piece at a time. This was difficult and gave rise to some printing or typographical errors. Critics have found only about 400 alleged textual alterations since 1611. The 4 main editions are:

1. The 1629 edition was a correction of earlier printing errors.
2. The 1638 edition corrected 72% of the 400 printing errors. Both the 1629 and 1638 editions were two stages of the one process of correcting earlier printing errors.
3. The 1762 edition standardized the spelling.
4. The 1769 edition completed the standardizing of the spelling. These were two stages in the second process. The tale of so-called thousands of changes made in four revisions is a fraud & a lie.

Question: What is the nature of these changes?
1. Typographical changes in the 1629 and 1638 editions:
Change in the type font from Gothic (originating in Germany) to Roman type font style. Originally the printers chose the Gothic style for its beauty. In 1612 the first King James Bible was printed in Roman type font style. For example,

a) a Gothic lower case "s" at the beginning or middle of a word looks like our "f", so that "also" was written as "alfo", and "set" was written as "fet".
b) Gothic "v" was written as "u", and Gothic "u" was written as "v", so that "love" was written as "loue", "us" was written as "vs", and "ever" was written as "euer".
c) Gothic "j" was written as our "i", so that "Jesus" was written as "Iefus", and "joy" as "ioy".

Key: These are type style changes, not spelling changes. These changes account for most of the so called "thousands" of changes in the KJV, yet do no harm to the text.

2. Spelling changes in the 1762 and 1769 editions. In the 1600’s there was no such thing as correct spelling. Spelling was according to whim. Not until the 1700’s did spelling stabilize, which resulted in the KJV spelling being standardized in the 1762 and 1769 editions. Examples include,

a) "e" was added to the end of some words, such as feare, darke, beare.
b) Double vowels were common: "me", "be", "moved" were written as "mee", "bee" and "mooved".
c) Double consonants were common: "ran", "evil", "stars" were written as "ranne", "evill", "ftarres".

Key: These typographical and spelling changes account for almost all the so-called thousands of changes in the KJV. None of them alter the text as do the changes of modern versions.

3. Printer’s mistakes such as a) singular and plurals were interchanged. b) A word was miswritten for a similar word. c) A word or phrase was omitted. Examples are:

1611 Reading	Present Reading	Date
right doeth	right hand doeth	1613
of our father’s	our fathers	1616
seek good	seek God	1617
requite good	requite me good	1629
the crowned	thy crowned	1629
this book	the book	1629
this thing	this thing also	1638
now	both now	1638
And Parbar	At Parbar	1638
returned	turned	1769

These are all correction of printing errors made by weary typesetters who misread the master copy. Only 400 of these printing errors were made in the 1611 KJV. These have been corrected since.

Conclusion:

1) From 1611, there were no true revisions of updating the language or correcting translation errors in KJV. They were only typographical errors that were corrected in later editions.
2) Compare these 400 printer’s errors with the approximate 60,000 changes in NKJV, such as:
"thy voice" (KJV) to "your excuse (NKJV) (Eccles 5:6), "equity" (KJV) to "skill" (NKJV) (Eccles 2:21), "God answereth him" (KJV) to "God keeps him busy" (NKJV) (Eccles 5:20).

The NKJV is not a continuation of what happened with the KJV. It is an entirely new translation.

No copyright exists – the KJV is public domain.

What also needs to be brought to your attention is that all the modern versions of the Bible have a copyright exercised over them which even limits a person quoting from their text, where the King James Bible has no such copyright and is free for use and public domain.

Thou, Thee, Thy and Thine

The English words “thou, thee, thy and thine” are translated from an emphatic Greek and Hebrew personal pronoun, stressing the identity of the one being addressed to the exclusion of all others. A “pronoun” is a word that “stands in for” another noun or noun-phrase. A “personal pronoun” is one which stands for a person. The personal pronouns are classified as first person, second person and third person by their relationship to the one speaking.

1st Person – The speaker himself, and any others he may include as part of his group.

2nd Person – Those to whom the speaker is speaking.

3rd Person – Those about whom the speaker is speaking.

Thus, we have the following table which we can construct in English, once we differentiate between the purpose of the various pronouns:

		Nominative	Objective	Possessive
1st Person	Singular Plural	I We	Me Us	My (or Mine) Our (or Ours)
2nd Person	Singular Plural	Thou Ye	Thee You	Thy (or Thine) Your (or Yours)
3rd Person	Singular Plural	He/She/It They	Him/Her/It Them	His/Her/Its Their (or Theirs)

Verses expressing the Importance of “thou, thee, thy and thine.”

Exodus 4:15, “THOU shalt speak … I will be with THY mouth…and will teach YOU what YE shall do.” “Thou/Thy” refer to Moses himself, but “You/Ye” refer to the entire nation of Israel.

Exodus 29:42, “… I will meet YOU, to speak there unto THEE.” The “You,” referring to the children of Israel, is explained in the following verse, but “Thee” refers to Moses, who had the holy privilege of hearing the words of God directly (Leviticus 1:1).

2 Samuel 7:23, “And what one nation in the earth is like THY people, even like Israel, whom God went to redeem for a people to himself, and to make him a name, and to do for YOU great things and terrible, for THY land, before THY people, which THOU redeemedst to THEE from Egypt.” Here David prayed to God in the second person singular, but referred to the people of Israel as “You.” What confusion could result if this important distinction were done away? It could be incorrectly thought that David was praying in part to the nation, or that the land belonged to the people and not to God.

Matthew 26:64, “Jesus saith unto him, THOU has said: nevertheless I say unto YOU, hereafter shall YE see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.” “Thou” refers to the High Priest, but “You/Ye” include all those who were standing there in addition to the high priest.

Luke 5:24, “But that YE may know … say unto THEE take up THY couch, and go into THINE house.” “Ye” refers to the crowd, but “Thee/Thy/Thine” refer only to the man with palsy.

John 3:7, 11, “Marvel not that I said unto THEE, YE must be born again.” The message was spoken to the individual Nicodemus (“Thee”), but obviously has wider application to all those who desire to follow Christ (“Ye”).

John 14:9, “Have I been so long time with YOU, and yet hast THOU not known me?” The “You” refers to the crowd, but “Thou” is addressed specifically to only one man, Philip.

1 Corinthians 8:9-12, “… this liberty of YOURS … . If any man see THEE which hast knowledge … through THY knowledge … but when YE sin.” The plural forms “Yours/Ye” refer to the liberty and sin of all believers in Christ as a whole, but the singular forms “thee/thy” refer only to those individual believers that find themselves in this particular circumstance.

Surely, you will notice that replacing “thou/thee/thy/thine” with the ambiguous “you/your” does NOT clarify, but tends to muddy, the Scriptures. Just about all modern bibles replace “thou/thee/thy/thine” with the ambiguous “you/your” which converts a clear meaning passage with a vague interpretation.

/ Part 4 of 5 to follow …

Pervert Translations and Publishers ~ Part 2

Proverb 18:13 He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.

pervert v. /per-vert/ 1 alter from an original meaning or state to a distortion of what was first intended. 2 lead away from what is right, natural, or acceptable.

© South African Pocket Oxford Dictionary, 3rd Edition 2002

God’s Word Attacked

Sadly, the modern translations of the Bible mostly use the Westcott and Hort New Testament Greek text, and it is in these versions that the Scriptures have been corrupted where portions of text are left out, certain words that have doctrinal implications are dropped and the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ is diminished or out-rightly blasphemed. What also causes great concern is that this creates a situation where doubt is created in the minds of the readers as to what is the actual reading as “truth” and this is further advocated when footnotes that question the veracity of which Scriptures are to be included and which are not to be included in the main body of Bible text. This also causes uncertainty as to what God Almighty is actually saying. When contentions exist, the Word of God can be “attacked” as not being infallible, inerrant and preserved which then brings about mocking from the unbelieving heathen world that God Almighty’s Word is not Divinely inspired. The other issue that is so prevalent within the assembly of believers is that when the Scriptures are read from the Bible, mostly all are reading from different versions which can lead to no cohesion in reading the Word and following the same, with much “teachings” as to which “words” should be in the Bible and which is a better translation of the words. This causes confusion and God Almighty is not a God of confusion, as we read:

1 Corinthians 14:33  For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

Here in an article in pdf format that is titled: “Serious Omissions in the NIV Bible” by Keith Piper; which deals with not only the New International Version (NIV) that has been corrupted, but this document also shows the flaws within the other modern versions, including the ‘New American Standard Version,’ the ‘Good News for Modern Man,’ the ‘Living Bible,’ the ‘Revised Version’ of 1881 and the ‘NKJV.’ The document is worth reading all 138 pages to gain a better understanding why there has to be a defence for the King James Bible and to steer away from the satanic influences of corrupting God’s Holy Word. The old adage of, “If you don’t stand for Truth, you will stand for anything” rings loud and true.

Publishers

We can also see that the enemy – Satan the devil – wants nothing more than to have a corrupted version of God’s Holy Word in circulation that teaches half-truth deceptions and lies! Our Lord Jesus Christ warns that the religious order of the day belonged to their “father the devil … for he is a liar, and the father of it” as we read:

John 8:44  Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

It is very important to know that publishers and their publishing houses together with academics on the translating committees play a very significant role in distributing these modern-day perversions that flood the market place and the churches of today. Look at the history surrounding two of the largest “Christian Literature” printing houses Zondervan and Thomas Nelson that have been bought out and become subsidiaries of HarperCollins, which in turn is controlled by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation. You will see from the two articles hereunder that it is shameful, wicked and evil, the material that this media conglomerate produces in homosexual, pornographic and satanic literature together with these pervert editions of the bible. If you are purchasing and supporting these media groupings, which also include a whole host of supposedly christian literature by men and women preaching another gospel (see Galatians 1:6-9), then you are aligned with their devilish practices. We are given principals by way of commandments that we should abstain from all appearance of evil (1 Thess 5:22), hold fast that which is good (1 Thess 5:21), and to walk in the light and not in darkness (see Eph 5:8). This is an earnest plea to my beloved brethren to examine all things and get back to walking the narrow way, not deviating to the right or left. Besides these two articles hereunder there is also a podcast that I encourage you to listen to that deals with these very issues.

— 000 —

The NIV, the Satanic Bible and Homosexual Translators
July 29th, 2007 by Dr. Scott Johnson

http://www.chick.com/bc/2005/word.asp

In this teaching we will be taking an eye opening look at the NIV bible: ‘In 1988, Zondervan became a division of HarperCollins’ If you visit online at Harpercollins.com, you will find some very evil books for sale that are published by this company like PRO-HOMOSEXUAL titles. And amidst these evil books, we find the following advertisement from this same publishing company: ‘The foregoing is excerpted from ‘Satanic Bible’ by Anton La Vey. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be used or reproduced without written permission from HarperCollins Publishers, 10 East 53rd Street, New York, NY 10022′. Notice that HarperCollins not only publishes homosexual books, they publish the ‘Satanic Bible.’ Zondervan is a subsidiary of HarperCollins, which is owned by News Corp, which is owned by Rupert Murdoch. He is one of the biggest producers of worldwide pornography on the planet. And his company, Zondervan, holds the exclusive distribution rights to the NIV. This conglomerate also publishes ‘Good News for Modern Man’ and ‘The Amplified Version.’ We will also be looking at NIV Stylist, rabid lesbian, new ager and author of ‘OmniGender: A Trans-Religious Approach’ Virginia Mollenkott and THE CHAIRMAN OF THE NIV’S OLD TESTAMENT TRANSLATION COMMITTEE, Dr. Marten H. Woudstra, also a homosexual. We will then examine the two distinct streams of Bibles that have resulted in all the translations available today: One Stream Pure one Stream Corrupt.

Click Here to Play the Audio for this Teaching

PDF: NIV

— 000 —

Christianity Today

HarperCollins Buys Thomas Nelson, Will Control 50% of Christian Publishing Market

Where will Thomas Nelson fit in Murdoch’s empire, which already includes Zondervan?

by Ted Olsen [ posted 10/31/2011 02:38PM ]

HarperCollins Publishers today announced it was buying Christian/inspirational publisher Thomas Nelson “for an undisclosed sum.” It’s a huge move since the company will now reportedly control about half of the Christian publishing market.

The question now is how the acquisition will play with Zondervan, Thomas Nelson’s chief competition. HarperCollins, which is owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation, acquired Zondervan in 1988. (It also owns religion and spirituality imprint HarperOne.) Thomas Nelson says it is reportedly the largest Christian publisher in the world and the seventh largest trade-book publisher in the United States. Zondervan says it is the world’s leading Bible publisher.

In 2009, then-Thomas Nelson CEO Michael Hyatt reported that his publisher and Zondervan control half of the Christian publishing market – a percentage that had held relatively steady over the previous few years.

It’s been a long road for Thomas Nelson, which was founded in Edinburgh in 1798 and gained religious prominence in the U.S. through the publication of the American Standard Version and Revised Standard Version of the Bible. In 1960, it merged with The Thomson Organization (which later merged with Reuters), but was bought out by eager Lebanese-American Bible publisher Sam Moore in 1969. Moore ran the company until Hyatt succeeded him in 2004.

By then Thomas Nelson had gotten into and out of the music business, swallowing Christian publishing powerhouse Word, Inc. in the early 1990s. In 2006, the company, which had been publicly traded since Moore’s Royal Publishers was first listed on the exchange in 1961, was bought for $473 million and began operating as a private company. Private equity firm Kohlberg and Company acquired a majority ownership last year, and put former HarperCollins Worldwide CEO Jane Friedman on its board.

— 000 —

As can be seen HarperCollins which now has Zondervan and Thomas Nelson under its umbrella controls, as reported in Christianity Today, 50% of the Christian publishing market. This deals with one of the “best selling” bible versions, the perverted NIV, and others, and is also being sold alongside homosexual, pornographic and Satanic Bible products.

/Part 3 of 5 to follow …

Pervert Translations and Publishers ~ Part 1

Proverb 18:13  He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him.

pervert v. /per-vert/ 1 alter from an original meaning or state to a distortion of what was first intended. 2 lead away from what is right, natural, or acceptable.

© South African Pocket Oxford Dictionary, 3rd Edition 2002

Inspiration and Preservation

This blog treatise over five parts will look at the issues that surround the publication of the Bible into hundreds of translation versions in the English tongue. This is the real issue that needs to be addressed here. Countless written thesis papers, website postings, commentaries and debates with counter-debates have been engaged in to determine which English translation is the best “version” from the “original” Hebrew (some Aramaic) and Greek texts and which of the manuscripts are more authentic and reliable than the other – earlier ones opposed to latter ones, and vice versa? From Scripture we know that God Almighty who created the Heavens and the Earth, Who is all powerful (omnipotent), all knowing (omniscient) and all present (omnipresent) would not only inspire His Word, but would also preserve His Word. You cannot have the inspiration of God’s Word without the preservation of God’s Word, for it would not make sense why God Almighty would inspire His Word, but not preserve His Word. And if He did not preserve His Word it would not matter whether He inspired His Word or not! It is not only an issue of whether God Almighty inspired and preserved His Word, but also whether the Judeo-Christians who read His Word do believe as their Statements of Faith or chosen Confessionary Statements declare that the Bible is the inerrant and infallible Word of God. You either believe that with your full conviction or you must abandon the same. One cannot be a fence-sitter to suit one’s own position to fit with one’s dogma or man-made traditions and customs or your worldview. So what is your position? Did God Almighty give us an infallible, inerrant, inspired and preserved Word in an English Holy Bible? Or not?

If God Almighty did, then which English version is it? And enough from all the academics and theologians who think they can argue their point of view instead of listening to the teaching and revelation of the indwelling Holy Spirit. How can two Christians debate about which “Bible” is the correct Bible and think that the Holy Spirit is not grieved by the senseless debates by men trying to win the argument through academia! If this is the case, then the professing believers need to take a hard look at where they stand on the Word of God. It should also be noted that the Holy Spirit is gentle and not argumentative between two who belong to the Lord Jesus Christ. Are you of the opinion that Christ is divided?

I have just recently watched a debate on LIVE@NINE between Dr James White (Alpha & Omega Ministries and author of The King James Only Controversy: Can You Trust Modern Translations?) and Mr Jack Moorman (one who is pro King James Bible and an author), who debated extensively from the learned position of which Hebrew and Greek manuscript texts were used and should the King James Bible be the English standard or should the more modern versions also be used. I will make my position known upfront that I read, study, meditate and preach as an evangelist from the King James Bible, and I truly believe that the same IS the English version that has been inspired and preserved by God Almighty as the very Word of God to the English speaker and reader. This is my conviction and belief, trusting God Almighty at His Word. If this is not the case then the protesting reformers and translators who brought the Word of God to the common man, who staked  their lives on the line to stand against the Roman Catholic church was all in vain, and they lost their lives in futility. If that is the case, then it can be reasoned that from 1611 until 1881 when the Revised Version of the Authorised Version of the King James Bible was “updated”, it left all the believers in our Lord Jesus Christ with a “counterfeit” English translation for 270 years. If contentions are made that the text used was not the correct one, or that it is Old Elizabethan English with archaic words which cannot be understood in this age (in fact that Old English was most probably the purist form of English compared to what is dished up in society today), etc, then there was no Word of God for that duration of time, and generations of believers could not be obedient to all of God’s Word. If that is the reasoning and case, then God Almighty could never hold English speaking protestants accountable of knowing His Word, for He did not preserve His inspired Word for about three hundred years, and the so-called “latter 20th century better translations” would only bring about the ‘preserved’ Word of God that should be accepted by modern man and the masses at a later time! You see the profundity of this reasoning? Well it seems, that much-learned theologians don’t seem to deal with the real issues – maybe it’s a pride issue to deal with such meaningless matters as these.

If God Almighty has not given us all His Word then it is tantamount to saying we don’t have to keep and obey His Word for we do not have a full counsel of His Word. If words change or are added to or are diminished from the Scriptures, then doctrines do change and the deity of Christ Jesus has been blasphemed. Here are some very important Scriptures that confirm that God Almighty had to give us an inspired, preserved, infallible, inerrant, full counsel of His Word or else the following Scriptures are not True:

Deuteronomy 4:2  Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.

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

Psalm 119:89  LAMED. For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven.

Proverb 30:5  Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.
Proverb 30:6  Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.

Isaiah 40:8  The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever.

Matthew 4:4  But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

Matthew 24:35  Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.

2 Timothy 3:16  All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
2 Timothy 3:17  That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

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

If you trust these words, then you agree that God Almighty has inspired and preserved all His Words for every generation, and in this case, in the English language, and therefore you should also question why would God Almighty have other English translations that add to and diminish from His Word, even altering doctrine?

What we fail to hear often in “live debates” is the addressing of the new Greek translations that were done by heretics such as Messrs Brooke Foss Westcott (1825-1901) and Fenton John Anthony Hort (1828-1892). These men denied God and became themselves judges of God’s Word through their eclectic textual criticism NT Greek text as can be seen from the following extensive quote from “Modern Bible Versions, and Westcott and Hort” by pastor Tobin Pederson. You can also read “Chapter 8: Westcott and Hort” from “Gipp’s Understandable History of the Bible” © 1987 by Samuel C. Gipp):

The Men Who Made Themselves Judges

And what do we know about these men who made themselves the judges over God’s holy Word? Much has been written about them, but also their own recorded words shed light on their beliefs. The following is information taken from two sources, G.A. Riplinger’s New Age Bible Versions, and Mr. Joseph Van Beek’s tract, KJV vs NIV.

“In 1841 an old manuscript (Codex Vaticanus) was discovered lying on a shelf in the Vatican library. In 1844 part of another old manuscript (Codex Sinaiticus) was found in a wastebasket in St. Catherines’s monastery (the other part was found in 1859). It is generally believed that these were from the 50 that Eusebius prepared for Constantine. In 1853 these two Cambridge professors, Westcott and Hort, began to prepare a Greek Text based primarily on the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus manuscripts. They passed by the Traditional Text (Textus Receptus) which was the text upon which the King James Version is based. Instead they used the corrupted manuscripts of the Gnosticism-Origen-Eusebius-Jerome-Augustine lineage.” (Joseph Van Beek‘s tract: KJV vs NIV, pgs 5 & 6)

As to the personal beliefs of Westcot and Hort: 1) They never claimed or testified that the Bible was verbally inspired or inerrant. 2) They denied the Genesis account of creation and questioned whether Eden ever existed……Instead they praised Darwin’s 1859 theory of evolution. 3) Hort wrote, “The popular doctrine of substitution is an immoral and material counterfeit. Certainly nothing could be more unscriptural than the modern limiting of Christ’s bearing our sins and sufferings to his death; but indeed that is only one aspect of an almost universal heresy.” 4) Hort wrote, “I have been persuaded for many years that Mary-worship and Jesus worship have very much in common in their causes and their results.” Westcott found a statue of Mary and a crucified Christ in a remote chapel and wrote, “Had I been alone, I could have knelt there for hours.”

Please note that neither Westcott nor Hort believed that the Bible was God’s Word. Hort did not believe in the complete blood atonement of Christ for the forgiveness of sins, calling such doctrine “heresy”. Both found nothing wrong with the worship of Mary.

The following are quotes of Westcott and Hort, found in Riplinger’s book.

Westcott – “I reject the word infallibility of Holy Scriptures overwhelmingly.” Riplinger, pg 622

Hort – “Evangelicals seem to me perverted . . . There are, I fear, still more serious differences between us on the subject of authority, especially the authority of the Bible.” Riplinger, pg 621

Hort – “[T]his may be cowardice – I have sort of a craving that our text should be cast upon the world before we deal with matters likely to brand us with suspicion. I mean, a text issued by men who are already known for what will undoubtedly be treated as dangerous heresy will have great difficulty in finding its way to regions which it might otherwise hope to reach and whence it would not be easily banished by subsequent alarms. (Hort’s letter to Westcott regarding their writing other things.)” Riplinger, pg 623

Westcott – “I shall aim at what is transcendental in many peoples eyes . . . I suppose I am a communist by nature.” Riplinger, pg 624

Westcott – “our Bible as well as our Faith is a mere compromise.” Riplinger, pg 625

Westcott and Hort were spiritualists. They sought out contact with the spiritual world (talking with the dead, etc.). Riplinger speaks much on this subject and also aligns them with the New Age movement. They started the “Ghostly Guild” in 1851 and before that the “Hermes Club” in 1845. Riplinger links the spiritualist teachings of Westcott and Hort to the occult teachings of Madame Helena P. Blavatsky who wrote the Lucifer magazine. Westcott, Hort, and Blavatsky are all forerunners of the modern day New Age movement which aims at one world religion.

The question that should be raised is: Why do the Bible scholars and theologians when debating the merits of the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts never really deal with the Westcott-Hort issues? No mention is made of these men and their New Testament Greek text! Why?

Here is a pdf document worth studying titled:

INSPIRED PRESERVATION – A STUDY OF THE INSEPARABLE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN BIBLICAL INSPIRATION AND PRESERVATION BY JESSE M. BOYD.

Here is also a diagram showing where the two lines of manuscripts come from: the Antioch line and the Alexandria line.

/ Part 2 of 5 to follow …