CONTENDING FOR FAITH ~ THE RECEIVED TEXT ~ ONCE DELIVERED TO THE SAINTS “For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.” I Thessalonians 2:13
“SHOCK & AWE” IN THE KJV-ONLY CAMP When we first took a stand for the King James Bible many years ago, it never occurred to us that “King James-Only” meant “no Greek and no Hebrew.” It was upon reading Gail Riplinger‟s most recent book, In Awe of Thy Word,, that we discovered that the term “KJV-Only” was to be taken literally. It means that the King James Bible alone is divinely inspired, perfect and superior to all other translations and texts, including the Greek Textus Receptus and the Hebrew Masoretic Text. We have been, and always will be “Textus Receptus Only,” and we mistakenly assumed that this was also the position of the leadership of the KJV-Only movement. Our discovery that this was not the case compelled us to write this lengthy expose of the heresy in Gail Riplinger‟s book and other false teachings in King James Onlyism which we now understand is an important component of the Sionist conspiracy. With this understanding, certain events of the past few years have come into clearer focus. David Bay‟s attack on the King James Bible and Gail Riplinger‟s assault on the Textus Receptus were not spontaneous, mutually exclusive events from rival factions, but well-timed and coordinated deceptions in the overall plan to eliminate the Christian Bible, especially the New Testament, in all of its expressions. Gail Riplinger‟s latest book, In Awe of Thy Word, is both a broadside attack on the Greek Textus Receptus and an introduction to Kabbalah, which is Jewish occultism. Yet the heretical nature of Riplinger‟s book goes undetected by many in the King James-Only community probably because her best-seller, New Age Bible Versions, seemed to uphold the Textus Receptus as the standard text for New Testament translation. When it became apparent that Gail Riplinger had done a volte face on the superiority of the Greek Textus Receptus, it was time for us to reexamine her teachings and to confront many false teachings of King James Onlyism; for there appears to be a “conspiracy of silence” among KJV-Only leaders as Gail takes the movement to a new level of heresy. Mrs. Riplinger is now on a crusade to destroy confidence in the Greek Textus Receptus as well as Greek and Hebrew resources that enable Christians to determine the accuracy of various Bible translations. Instead of encouraging the use of Greek and Hebrew resources to understand the meanings of the words in Scripture, she teaches her readers how to divine “letter meanings” Kabbalistically. Mrs. Riplinger no longer promotes Bible translations based exclusively on the Byzantine text, but translations based on the Alexandrian manuscripts she purports to condemn. And, typical of all KJV-Only publications, In Awe of Thy Word reimages medieval heretics as the “true Christians” who preserved the Traditional Text. The following expose reveals the multitude of outright lies in Gail Riplinger‟s books, her shameless misquoting of sources and manipulation of data, her revision of Church history, her subtle teaching of Jewish occultism and lack of a Christian testimony. Having investigated the endtime deception for well over a decade we thought we had seen everything; however, the sophisticated web of lies, manipulated data and false teachings put out by Gail Riplinger surpasses them all. We urge the reader to take time to read each section of this important report, and to “prove all things” by checking our documentation of the many lies in Riplinger‟s publications and the massive fraud that is King James Onlyism. “Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.” (1 Thess. 5:21) i
TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………………i GAIL RIPLINGER‟S “ROSICRUCIAN MASTERPIECE”
I.
CHAPTER 1.
A PRIMER ON KABBALAH……………………………..…..1
CHAPTER 2. THE TETRAGRAMMATON………………………………....13 CHAPTER 3.
“CHRISTIAN” KABBALAH…………………….….………..29
CHAPTER 4. KJV BIBLE CODES………………………………….….……43
II.
FEAR AND LOATHING OF GREEK RESOURCES CHAPTER 5.
NO GREEK RESOURCES! ………………………….….…...58
CHAPTER 6.
THE RUCKMANITE HERESY……………….………….….73
CHAPTER 7.
THE TRANSLATORS‟ PREFACE….……………………….89
CHAPTER 8.
REVISION OF THE 1611 KJV...…..…………….….….…..110
CHAPTER 9.
THE MARK OF THE BEAST…………………..…….…….121
CHAPTER 10. THE NEW KING JAMES VERSION……………...….…....134 CHAPTER 11. COOKING THE DATA………...…………………….……..148 THE REAL HISTORY OF “KING JAMES ONLYISM”
III.
CHAPTER 12. ORIGIN OF KJV-ONLYISM………………………...….….158 CHAPTER 13. THE ALBIGENSES & CATHARI…………………….……168 CHAPTER 14. BAPTIST SUCCESSIONISM….……………….…….….…182 CHAPTER 15. ANABAPTIST UNITARIANISM…………….………….…196 CHAPTER 16. OLD LATIN & GOTHIC VERSIONS…….………….…….211 CHAPTER 17. ANGLO-SAXON VERSION………………………….…….227 CHAPTER 18. THE WYCLIFFE TRANSLATION…………………..…….248 CHAPTER 19. THE LOLLARD MOVEMENT……………….…….…........261 CHAPTER 20. “CHRISTIAN ROSENKREUZ”……………………….……279
APPENDICES I.
GRAIL RIPLINGER‟S ROSICRUCIAN SYMBOLISM……...…………..…….….....290
II.
GAIL RIPLINGER‟S MISRPRESETNATION OF THE NKJV……………………....320
III.
KJV ERRORS AFFECTING THE INTERPRETATION OF BIBLE PROPHECY......333
IV.
HOW TO AVOID PROFANE BABBLINGS: PERSONAL BIBLE STUDY PLAN....359
V.
SCRIVENER‟S APPENDIX A. “WRONG READINGS OF THE BIBLE OF 1611
AMENDED IN LATER EDITIONS.”………………………………………………..…...366 VI.
PREFACE TO 1611 KJV: “THE TRANSLATORS TO THE READER”…………...394 ii
INTRODUCTION The Translators‟ Preface to the 1611 King James Version has not been included in King James Bibles for nearly two hundred years, ever since the British and Foreign Bible Society and the American Bible Society assumed responsibility for the translation and worldwide distribution of the Bible. The American Bible Society was founded by Baptists in 1816 and funded by the British and Foreign Bible Society which was directed by prominent members of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge of the United Grand Lodge of England. Although founded for the ostensible purpose of circulating the Word of God, the Baptist founders of the British and Foreign Bible Society and the American Bible Society took it upon themselves to exclude the Translators‟ Preface and marginal notes from King James Bibles, a policy which became the defining article in the Constitutions of both Bible societies. Petitions to restore the Translators‟ Preface to the King James Bible have been rejected by modern publishers. The removal of this historic document has made possible the emergence of a movement that is in every respect at variance with the stated beliefs and principles of the King James Translators, as well as the King James Bible. It is the purpose of this report to present the facts with regard to many false teachings that have arisen as a result of the removal of the Translators‟ Preface from the King James Version. The KJV Translators set forth many of their beliefs and principles of Bible translation in their Preface, “The Translators to the Reader.” Among these are the following: 1. The Translators believed that all serious translations of the Greek and Hebrew Scriptures may be read as the Word of God, with the understanding that all translations contain some errors: “Now to the latter we answer; that we do not deny, nay we affirm and avow, that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English, set forth by men of our profession,... containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God. As the King‟s speech, which he uttereth in Parliament, being translated into French, Dutch, Italian, and Latin, is still the King‟s speech, though it be not interpreted by every Translator with the like grace, nor peradventure so fitly for phrase, nor so expressly for sense, everywhere. For it is confessed, that things are to take their denomination of the greater part; and a natural man could say,...A man may be counted a virtuous man, though he have made many slips in his life, (else, there were none virtuous, for in many things we offend all) [James 3:2] also a comely man and lovely, though he have some warts upon his hand, yea, not only freckles upon his face, but also scars. No cause therefore why the word translated should be denied to be the word, or forbidden to be current, notwithstanding that some imperfections and blemishes may be noted in the setting forth of it.” 2. The Translators distinguished between the quality of English translations of the Byzantine Received Text and translations of Alexandrian text-type manuscripts, such as the Latin Vulgate. “For by this means it cometh to pass, that whatsoever is sound already (and all is sound for substance, in one or other of our editions, and the worst of ours far better than their authentic vulgar) the same will shine as gold more brightly, being rubbed and polished; also, if anything be halting, or superfluous, or not so agreeable to the original, the same may be corrected, and the truth set in place.” 3. The Translators believed that only the original Hebrew and Greek manuscripts were inspired by God and therefore inerrant. “For whatever was perfect under the Sun, where Apostles or Apostolic men, that is, men endued with an extraordinary measure of God‟s spirit, and privileged with the privilege iii
of infallibility, had not their hand?... So, by the story of Ezra, and the prophecy of Haggai it may be gathered, that the Temple built by Zerubbabel after the return from Babylon, was by no means to be compared to the former built by Solomon (for they that remembered the former, wept when they considered the latter) [Ezra 3:12] notwithstanding, might this latter either have been abhorred and forsaken by the Jews, or profaned by the Greeks? The like we are to think of Translations.” King James I of England may have “authorised” the translation that bears his name, however, the Greek Received Text is the only “Authorized” Word of God for the New Testament, given by inspiration of the Holy Spirit to the Apostles. “For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it [„The Received Text‟] not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.” (1 Thess. 2:13) “And they were astonished at his [Jesus‟] doctrine: for he taught them as one that had authority [„The Authorized Version‟], and not as the scribes.” (Mark 1:22) Treatment of this most important subject has required an honest assessment of King James-Onlyism, which professes to defend the Greek Received Text, but has relegated it to a subordinate position relative to the King James Version. This report does not represent the departure of Watch Unto Prayer from the King James Version, but a realistic look at its proper place in God‟s plan of Bible transmission with an objectivity and attention to facts that is tragically absent in the King James Only movement. The English translations of the Textus Receptus in use today – the King James Version, the New King James Version, the Geneva Bible, the Tyndale Bible – are based on an uncorrupted Greek text. They are good translations, but not perfect translations despite the claims of King James Onlyism. However, “notwithstanding that some imperfections and blemishes may be noted in the setting forth of them,” these English translations are light years ahead of the horde of modern versions based on corrupt Alexandrian text-type manuscripts. This report is focused mainly on the Greek New Testament rather than the Hebrew Old Testament, for it is the Greek Textus Receptus that is under attack and slated for extinction. Our constant prayer is that our reports will be accurate so that we neither bear false witness nor add to the deception which already abounds in the Church. Every attempt has been made to insure accuracy, however human fallibility dictates that perfection is impossible: “For whatever was perfect under the Sun, where Apostles or Apostolic men, that is, men endued with an extraordinary measure of God‟s spirit, and privileged with the privilege of infallibility, had not their hand?” The goal of our endeavor has been to arrive at the truth concerning the English Bible translations; therefore, any corrections, suggestions, new information and insights will be appreciated. “If we be sons of the Truth, we must consider what it speaketh, and trample upon our own credit, yea, and upon other men‟s too, if either be any way an hindrance to it.” (“The Translators to the Reader”) Barbara Aho May, 2008 WATCH UNTO PRAYER watch-unto-prayer.org “SHOCK & AWE” IN THE KJV-ONLY CAMP watch-unto-prayer.org/TR-0-intro.html iv
SECTION I GAIL RIPLINGER’S ROSICRUCIAN MASTERPIECE CHAPTER I A PRIMER ON KABBALAH ―And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.‖ (Gen. 3:4-5)
In her 2003 book, In Awe of Thy Word: Understanding the King James Bible: Its Mystery & History Letter by Letter, Gail Riplinger warned Christians against the use of all Greek and Hebrew lexicons and concordances, as well as Greek-English and Hebrew-English interlinear translations, as aids to understanding the Bible. Her reason for placing these resources on the KJV-Only ―Index of Forbidden Books?‖ In the course of their research, the Hebrew and Greek scholars who authored them consulted books authored by unsaved liberals: ―What about the Greek and Hebrew interlinears and study aids compiled by Christian men? ―These men may have inspired Greek and Hebrew words, but the English reference books they use to translate them into so-called ‗literal,‘ ‗plain,‘ ‗everyday‘ English, are anything but inspired. Since ancient Koine Greek is not the mother tongue of any living person, they must use the books with the ‗corrupt words‘ of unsaved liberal lexicon writers to create their interlinears and study aids (Dan. 2:9). Since they are forced to use the very reference books used by the new version translators, their so-called English equivalencies or definitions are identical to those in the new versions and are in error.‖ (In Awe of Thy Word, p. 518) In place of using the traditional Hebrew and Greek resources to better comprehend the meanings of the words God used in Scripture, Gail Riplinger recommended that KJV readers ―gather insights about the subject from linguists who have already explored this vast and new scientific field of letter meanings.‖ The meaning of God‘s letters, stated Gail, must be given their proper place, even priority, in determining the meaning of God‘s words: ―God built the Bible, letter by letter. He gave each sound a sense. The meanings of each letter can be found in the Bible, in the book of Genesis... Just as God created the basic chemical elements to use a building blocks to create different things, he also created letters, with significations that they carry to create word meanings. An appendix at the end of this book details some of the central meanings of each letter.‖ (Awe, p. 16)
1
In place of Greek and Hebrew resources to help Christians determine accurate word meanings, Gail Riplinger recommended worldly books from liberal, humanistic and atheistic universities to aid them in determining letter meanings. Computer technology and English dictionaries are recommended to replace interlinear translations, lexicons and concordances as resources for Bible study. The following liberal institutions are among many secular sources of information recommended by Gail for learning the hidden meanings of the ―letters‖ in the King James Bible: ―Stanford Professor, Seth Lehrer, says that ‗Words tell us more than we ever thought...‘ The new field of computational linguistics, with research from the nation‘s leading universities, such as Stanford and MIT, has confirmed letter meanings, as seen in the book of Genesis. Just as the electron microscope allowed scientists to see things that had always existed at the molecular level, so computer technology and computational linguistics allow linguists to see and uncover a pattern of meanings for letters that have always been there. This understanding could revolutionize the teaching of reading… ―…Explore in the KJV what Harvard‘s Literary Guide to the Bible tells readers about the Bible‘s ‗sound-meaning interactions.‘ In the 1500s Erasmus said, ‗God is in every syllable.‘ (The Bible Through the Ages, p. 306) ―…God knows his English ABCs. He apparently wrote them on butterfly wings, even before the English Bible took flight. A Smithsonian Institute photographer has discovered that each of the 26 letters of the English alphabet is written on the wings of butterflies!... ―...Only the KJV‘s words are ‗wholesome words‘..., according to databases such as Oxford University‘s Psycholinguistic Database, Princeton University‘s Cognitive Science Laboratory, and Edinburgh University‘s Associative Thesaurus.‖ (In Awe of Thy Word, p. 18) ―The best dictionary for studying words used in the King James Bible is the online Early Modern English Dictionary Database (EMEDD), compiled by linguists from the University of Toronto to ‗correct the OED‘ and more accurately define words as they were used between 1530 and 1657. Definitions from 16 dictionaries, many available to the KJV translators, appear instantly online when a KJV word is searched.‖ (In Awe of Thy Word, p. 64) ―LITERATURE CITED… Only books having an asterisk (*) are recommended for further study on this subject…‖ The Columbia Encyclopedia, Columbia University Press* The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language, Cambridge University Press* The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language, Cambridge University Press* An American Bible, Stanford University Press* Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th ed. NY Encyclopedia Britannica Inc., 1910-1911* The Cambridge History of the Bible, The West From the Reformation to the Present Day, vol. 3, Cambridge University Press* An American Bible, Stanford University Press*
2
The History of the English Language, S. Lerer, Stanford University, Ph.D. University of Chicago* How to Read and Understand Poetry, Willard Spiegelman, Southern Methodist University, Ph.D., Harvard University Oxford English Dictionary, Oxford: Clarendon Press (Oxford University Press)* Gods of the Word: Archetypes in the Consonants, Thomas Jefferson University Press, (*great linguistics, non-Christian world view) Mysteries of the Alphabet, Marc-Alain Ouaknin, University of Bar-Han, Israel* (In Awe of Thy Word, pp. 1179-83) In Gail Riplinger‘s new cult of ―letter meanings,‖ it is commendable, and even spiritually-minded, to use liberal, humanistic and esoteric resources in order to learn more about the hidden meanings of letters in the KJV, but it is folly and arrogance to use Greek or Hebrew resources in order to learn the original meanings of the words of the Bible. The subtitle of In Awe of Thy Word — Understanding the King James Bible: Its Mystery & History Letter by Letter — means that the King James Bible should be understood according to the meaning of its letters, for the hidden meanings of the KJV‘s letters determines the meaning of the KJV‘s words. The reader may be wondering who on earth interprets the Bible by deciphering its letter meanings. This arcane subject is the obsession of Jewish Kabbalists who seek ―union with the Divine‖ using a complex system of mystical agnosticism and magical practices taught by rabbinic sages. ―Kabbalism...includes...a group of divinatory and magical practices, manipulations of the alphabet and the text of the Pentateuch, magic spells and rites. All of these elements go back to very early days—to the beginnings of Israel in Palestine, and it is these beginnings which shed most light on both scholarly Kabbalism and popular Hasidism, and, in addition, go far to illuminate the real, the abiding spiritual meaning of Judaism in all times and places.‖ (A.E. Waite, The Holy Kabbalah, University Books, 2003, p. ix) How do Gail Riplinger‘s readers know that the unsaved linguists she recommended in her book are not Kabbalists? They don‘t, since Gail has withheld vital information about the pagan beliefs and hidden agenda of her sources. For example, one book ―recommended for further study on this subject‖ of letter meanings is Mysteries of the Alphabet by Marc-Alain Ouaknin, who is a Kabbalist. (see above) Rabbi Ouaknin is also cited as an authority on the letter meanings of the Tetragrammaton, the four lettered name of God (YHWH), with no disclaimer or caveat but simply introduced as ―Professor Marc-Alain Ouaknin of the Center for Research and Jewish Studies in Paris and a professor at the University of Bar-Han in Israel.‖ Rabbi Ouaknin‘s other works include Mysteries of the Kabbalah, an introduction to the Kabbalah in which Rabbi Ouaknin expressed the foundational Kabbalistic principle that God is the ―Text‖ of the Torah. ―For Christians, the infinite deity also becomes finite through the body of Christ. For kabbalists, the incarnation is produced in the body of the Text. This statement indicates the importance of reading and study in Judaism. It has been said, ‗God is the text.‘ This means that the most radical manifestation of divinity is through the text, the Book, and the letters of the alphabet.‖ (Ouaknin, Mysteries of the Kabbalah, pp. 381-2)
3
In other words, Kabbalists such as Rabbi Ouaknin believe that God ―incarnated,‖ not as a man, Jesus Christ, but in the ―letters‖ of the Old Testament! Moreover, says Rabbi Ouaknin, since this ‗Text-God‘ is infinite (Ein-Sof), it is the work of Kabbalists and Talmudists to interpret the letters and text of Scripture so that God‘s words have an infinite number of meanings: ―The ‘Text-God’ must be accorded its status of infinity; in other words, every means must be used to give it an infinite meaning. These means consist of all the rules of interpretation...especially gematria, tseruf [combining letters], and so on. The need to interpret the text as the liberation of the divine is one of the fundamental meanings of all the work of kabbalists and Talmudists... The Talmud...is a means of interpreting the text in such a way that the words it contains...can be interpreted in a plurality of ways. ―And it is this plurality which becomes freedom—of God and men!‖ (Mysteries of the Kabbalah, pp. 381-2) Why would Gail Riplinger recommend the work of a Kabbalist for further study of the subject of letter meanings? Perhaps for the same reason she falsely attributed to Erasmus the Kabbalistic statement, ―God is in every syllable.‖ (above quote) The fact is that Gail Riplinger is teaching the same Kabbalistic approach to the interpretation of Scripture as Rabbi Ouaknin and other Kabbalists whose publications and ideas she promotes in her book, In Awe of Thy Word. Gail Riplinger‘s readers should know where her unconventional approach to interpreting God‘s Word will ultimately lead. According to The Zohar, the central book of Kabbalah, the letters of the Hebrew alphabet function as channels to ―the Light,‖ which is the esoteric term for Lucifer, and the spiritual enlightenment which he offers: The Language of The Zohar ―...the individual letters of The Zohar have special significance. In our everyday lives, we‘re used to thinking of the letters of the English alphabet in purely functional terms... The letters of the Hebrew alphabet (used for both Aramaic and Hebrew) should be understood in an entirely different way. In addition to their functional importance as components of words, each Aramaic letter is also a channel to a unique form of spiritual energy.... The Aramaic alphabet is a gift of the Creator, just as The Zohar itself is a gift... Scanning the letters—just letting your eyes pass over them—opens an unlimited channel to the Light.‖ (The Kabbalah Centre International, http://www.kabbalah.com/11.php) ―GODS‖ IN THE WORDS In Awe of Thy Word is, in essence, a primer on Kabbalah, that is, discovering the hidden meanings in the spiritually energized letters in the King James Bible. An Appendix titled ―The KJV‘s ABCs‖ is a dictionary of the 26 letters of the English alphabet and the ―hidden meanings‖ which Gail has fathomed in each letter. To aid the reader in exploring even deeper meanings in each letter and thereby determine the meaning of the words in the KJV, Gail recommends reading the works of ―computational linguists‖ whose ―letter meanings... are shown to agree 100% with meanings ascribed to letters in Genesis.‖ (Awe,
4
p. 1115) One ―computational linguist‖ highly recommended by Gail is Margaret Magnus, another Kabbalist. ―Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) is the world‘s richest scientific brain bank. One of their researchers, ‗Ph.D. candidate in formal theoretical linguistics at MIT,‘ Margaret Magnus, ‗developed linguistic, lexical, and algorithmic databases used in spelling and grammar checkers by popular typesetting and word processing software.‘ She has numerous linguistic degrees, has done advanced study in mathematics at universities worldwide, and speaks over a dozen languages. While creating dictionaries for word processing software, letter meanings became self-evident to her. This cuttingedge researcher writes...‖ [quotes Magnus‘ book, Gods of the Word: Archetypes in the Consonants]. (Awe, p. 104) Magnus‘ book, Gods of the Word: Archetypes in the Consonants, is also recommended for further study of letter meanings: ―LITERATURE CITED. The books cited here are those from which direct quotations have been noted. They represent only a tiny portion of those used in researching this book. Only books having an asterisk (*) are recommended for further study on this subject... ―Magnus, M. Gods of the Word: Archetypes in the Consonants, Kirksville, Missouri: Thomas Jefferson University Press, 1999. (*great linguistics; non-Christian world view).‖ (Awe, pp. 1179, 1181) ―Non-Christian world view‖ hardly prepares the reader for the esoteric content of Magnus‘ book whose Kabbalistic thesis is that: (1) letters and their sounds in combination are subterranean ―Gods of the Word,‖ (2) the ―Archetypes in the Consonants‖ are ―sound gods‖ or living spirits which actually reside in the consonants of the English alphabet, and (3) the English language is the playground of this collection of sound gods who interact with each other and influence human affairs: ―These sounds do have the look and feel of a pack of Tarot cards. They are large and archetypal in nature. As you spend time with a sound, you see it rise from the dust and live, no less than you or I. It takes on the proportions of a god and moves with a will and destiny of its own. Yet it remains always rooted in its essence, guided by a coherency and logic wider than itself. It lives together in discord or in peace with its neighbors and they fight out their battles and engage in their love affairs within our English words. One suddenly envisions language as the playground of the sound gods... [quotes Carl Jung]...I, too, am a true believer in the autonomy of the archetype. A /t/ or an /h/ is no less than a Zeus. The consonants are not essentially physical, but they live, evolve, and influence human affairs. We overlook something if we deny that they can get up and walk around.‖ (Gods of the Word: Archetypes in the Consonants, pp. 65-6) Portions of Margaret Magnus‘ book are published on her website: http://www.trismegistos.com/, named in honor of Hermes Trismegistos, aka the Egyptian god, Thoth, who communicated to the postdiluvian Grail kings the secret doctrine which the pre-flood civilization had received from fallen angels. Margo's
5
Magical Letter Page explains the meanings of two ―Archetypes,‖ the ―S‖ and the ―G,‖ which letters she maintains are inhabited and informed by the ―serpent‖ and the ―Grail‖ respectively: ―About 300 hours into this research, you start losing your mind. You start imagining you discern archetypes in all those consonants and vowels. (Ho, ho!) For your confoundment and entertainment, I now proffer some data on the serpent in /s/ and the Grail in /g/. ―In truth, I believe data of this type to be incredibly important. What it says essentially is that the consonants and vowels do in fact have a meaning. The most fundamental aspect of that meaning is pure sound without any interpretation or symbolism. That pure sound is meaningful (and how!). But one step above that most fundamental and pure sound-meaning is the archetypal meaning. Since the consonants and vowels form the foundation of the word - not only of its sound, but also of its meaning, then we literally talk in terms of archetypes. Every word is a sound - a shruti note - on which are superimposed a collection of gods whose interaction forms the basis of the word. ―And so, friends, I bid you observe how the mighty serpent abides in English S and informs every word that contains it...‖ (―Margo's Magical Letter Page‖) Magnus then proceeds to show how the ―mighty serpent‖ abides in the English ―S‖ and how the ―Grail‖ inhabits the letter ―G‖, as well as every word that begins with or contains these letters. Gail Riplinger endorses Magnus‘ theory that ―‗S‘ is the serpent‖ as sound linguistics. The ‗S‘ section of Gail‘s ―KJV‘s ABCs‖ is suggestive that Satan is the Spirit who created the world: ―The letter ‗S‘ is as mysterious, as the other letters are simple, at least to the author. ‗S‘ definitely has a non-material sense about it, which is verified by its first use as ‗Spirit‘ in Genesis 1... ―With God‘s Spirit in control in Genesis 1 and 2, ‗s‘ is ‗so‘ ‗star-spangled‘ and sensational. When the ‗subtil‘ ‗serpent‘ shows up in Genesis 3, so does ‗sin,‘ ‗sweat,‘ ‗sorrow‘ and the ‗sword.‘...
S
―The letter ‗ ‘ slides in ‗serpent,‘ ‗subtle,‘... ―The opposing spirit is evident in words such as ‗Satan‘ and ‗serpent.‘ Magnus is quick to tell her readers that, ‗About 25% of /s/ words in the dictionary are related to the serpent‘ (p. 57). Her website takes it so far as to conclude, ‘S’ is the serpent. The warning, ‗watch out for the s,‘ is based on sound linguistic theory... ―The ‗ ‗slide‘...
‘ spirit takes a loose, extending (│) downhill course in ‗sl‘ words, such as
―The first usage of
S
– ‗And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters‘
(Gen. 1:2) – lends emphasis to its sense of north to south movement. It has a linear movement from ‗here to there,‘ like the ‗t,‘ but its curvy, north-to-south (Ps. 75:6; Isa. 14:13), heaven to earth shape give it a ‗more subtil‘ sense... ―The ‗serpent‘ moves and slithers in his S-shaped path...
6
―In conclusion, I must admit that the letter ‗s‘ defies a concrete definition... Perhaps it is because the ‗spirit‘ is not concrete...‖ (Awe, pp. 1144-45)
Gail has just made the following correlation in her readers minds: ―‗ ’ spirit ‗slides‘ downward and
S ’ slides in ‗serpent,‘ ‗subtle,‘‖ the ‗
S is the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters...in a north to
south movement‖ having a ―more subtil‖ sense – the derogatory description of the serpent in Genesis 3:1. (―Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made.‖) These associations suggest ever so subtly that the Creator of the world is Satan, which is a major tenet of Gnostic dualism (See: ―The Gnostic Gospel‖) From this example alone (there are others) we can deduce that it is perilous to interpret God‘s Word by looking for ―hidden meanings‖ in the letters of the KJV or consulting sources like Margaret Magnus‘ Gods of the Word: Archetypes in the Consonants. To determine the meaning of a word in the Bible, it‘s really much safer to consult Hebrew and Greek lexicons, which are dictionaries that define the words of Scripture as they were used in the original languages along with important grammatical information needed for translation. In the place of Greek and Hebrew lexicons, however, Gail urges her readers to determine the meaning of each word in the King James Bible from the shapes and sounds of its letters: ―This chapter shows how word definitions are created and retrieved automatically by the brain, while simply reading faithfully the sounds of the King James Bible. Explore in the KJV what Harvard‘s Literary Guide to the Bible tells readers about the Bible‘s ‗soundmeaning interactions.‘ In the 1500s Erasmus said, ‗God is in every syllable.‘‖ (Awe, p. 16) ―The historical and current shape of each letter is a tremendous clue to its meaning. How and where a letter is pronounced in the vocal chords is another. A letter has more than one meaning... If you forget the sense, simply look at the letter because it pictures its meaning.‖ (Awe, pp. 1115, 1117) Gail‘s analysis of the English alphabet provided detailed visual and phonetic analyses of each letter as guides to understanding their secret meanings. Kabbalist Margaret Magnus also teaches that the combined sound of the letters of a word defines the word. Both ladies are encouraging their readers to bypass the objective meanings of words as they are found in dictionaries and lexicons and to redefine words according to their shapes and sounds. The implications for private interpretation of the Bible are obvious, as we have seen with Gail‘s interpretation of the letter
S.
In the ―G‖ section of Gail‘s ―KJV‘s ABCs,‖ there is no mention of the ―Grail,‖ but the words on the ―G‖ page (photo on left) form the shape of the ―Holy Grail‖!
7
The Grail is also formed on Gail‘s ―Z‖ page (far right). This page is about ―Zion,‖ which the Grail bloodline zealously conspires to possess through military means so they can enthrone their False Messiah on in a rebuilt Temple of Solomon: ―Just as ―J‖ is a letter to begin names, so is ‗Z.‘ It has the active, pointed confrontational face, seen on zealots like Zelotes. ‗Zeal‘ pictures the busy zigzag sense of ‗z.‘ In Hebrew, the letter Zayin which looks like a club or hatchet and also means ‗weapon.‘ This is carried into Zion which means ‗fortress‘; Zebah which means ‗slaughter‘; Zabbai pictures its ‗roving about‘ zigzag nature.‖ (Awe, p. 1153) In the process of deciphering the meaning of the letter ―G‖, Gail discovered that: ―
Gg
The visually Grand, Great, and Gigantic letter ‘G’ frequently communicates
what its size implies, and that is, greatness and grandeur.... God is seen in ‗God,‘ ‗Godhead,‘ ‗Holy Ghost,‘ ‗godliness, and ‗godly‘... The profile of G for ‗God‘ gives a view of the throne C and the book ך...‖ (Awe, p. 1129) Looking at the shape of the letter ‗G‘ caused Gail to see God there: ―God is seen in...‖ ―The profile of G...gives a view of....‖ Visualizing God in the shapes and profiles of letters borders on Margaret Magnus‘ Kabbalistic concept that gods indwell the letters, which may explain why God has forbidden even thinking about Him in terms of the shape of any thing: ―Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.‖ (Exod. 20:4) ―Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man‘s device.‖ (Acts 17:29) Freemasons also see ‗God‘ in the Letter ―G‖ which is their ‗Great Letter‘ as it is Gail‘s Great Letter:
8
―Thus, in the course of the degrees, the Great Letter has descended from heaven to earth, as if to show us the deep meaning of Masonry... God becomes man that man may become God...meanings and much history are thus gathered into the Great Letter, some of it dim and lost to us now. In our Lodges, and in the thought of the craft today, the Letter ‗G‘ stands for Geometry, and also as the initial for our word for God. Now for one, now for the other, but nearly always for both, since all Masonry rests upon Geometry, and in all its lore Geometry is the way to God.‖ (Joseph Fort Newton, Short Talks on Masonry, ―The Letter ‗G‘‖, Kessinger Publishing, pp. 2-3) Gail Riplinger‘s recommendation of Kabbalists such as Margaret Magnus is hedged with disclaimers such as ―Sadly, only sayings of sages and New Agers served as gauges and gave her only counterfeit answers.‖ (Awe, p. 105) The following disclaimer is found in small print in the introduction to Gail‘s ―KJV‘s ABCs‖: ―(The internet can be a real ‗web.‘ Be careful to limit your study to that of verifiable science; avoid mystical New Age information that counterfeits the truth of God (e.g. Kabbalah). They ‗changed the truth of God into a lie‘ and even worship God‘s creation (Rom. 1:25); esoterics have their own nonsense meanings ascribed to letters; these should be avoided. But just because New Age vegans worship ‗mother earth‘ is not reason to quit eating vegetables. Likewise, just because esoterics see in letters ‗gods‘ that are not there, this should not deter true scriptural and scholarly investigation into the word of God.)‖ (Awe, p. 1116)
Disclaimers such as the above are among the dishonest devices often employed by occultists to evade detection and deflect criticism while they purvey their unorthodox teachings to Christians who would otherwise reject them. Should these crypto-occultists be caught in their deception, they can point to their disclaimers as evidence that they disapprove of occult practices. In The Trojan Horse: The New Age Infiltration of the Church, authors Samantha Smith and Brenda Scott observed that such phony denials are quite common: ―In our ongoing study of mysticism/occultism/spiritualism, we often find that the authors deny what they are actually teaching.‖ (The Trojan Horse, Huntington House Publishers, 1993 p. 14) Gail Riplinger introduced Margaret Magnus to her readers as a Ph.D. candidate in formal theoretical linguistics at MIT (the world‘s richest scientific brain bank) who has done advanced study in mathematics, developed linguistic/lexical/algorithmic databases and speaks over a dozen languages. Magnus‘ credentials appear to be in fields of study that are recognized as legitimate sciences. Gail did not inform her readers that Magnus is a Kabbalist and that her book is a primer on Kabbalism, but instead highly recommended the book ―for further study of this subject‖ because it has ―*great linguistics‖ albeit a ―non-Christian world view.‖ In her book which Gail recommends, Margaret Magnus promotes the esoteric belief systems of Plato, Sufism, Cabalism, and Gnosticism among other pagan religions in hopes that belief in the gods of the alphabet will one day become a branch, if not the mainstream, of formal linguistics. Magnus references a broad range of occult literature: ―The Gospel of Truth‖ from the Nag Hammadi Library, The Lost Books of the Bible, the Upanishads (Hindu scriptures), Popul Vuh, The Tao of Physics, Emmanuel Swedenborg, Rudolf Steiner, Joseph Campbell, Friedrich Nietzsche, Wolfram von Eschenbach‘s Parzival, Carl Jung,
9
Darwin‘s Origin of Species, and A Course in Miracles. Portions of Magnus‘ book are devoted to teaching the ―Letter Meanings According to Mystical Traditions‖: ―The Anglo-Saxon (Viking) Runes,‖ ―The Hebrew Alphabet of the Kabbalah,‖ ―The Celtic Tree Alphabet‖ and the ―Japanese Shinto Kototama.‖ References abound to other occult sources, e.g., (See Nigel Pennick, "Magical Alphabets" and Robert Graves "White Goddess"). Gail Riplinger‘s weak denial of Kabbalism, the thesis of Magnus‘ entire book, is neutralized by her generous praise and strong recommendation of this Kabbalist resource for information on letter meanings. Riplinger has exposed her readers to a plague of esoteric philosophy while casually advising them not to catch the fatal disease. In effect, her disclaimer says: ―I highly recommend this thoroughly Satanic book, just be careful to avoid the New Age nonsense. Even though occultists conjure evil spirits using letters for divination and magic, that doesn‘t mean Christians shouldn‘t study their works for new insights about the hidden meanings of letters in the King James Bible.‖ Gail Riplinger stealthily purveys occult literature in her book ―for further study‖ of letter meanings, but solemnly warns her readers not to ever, ever use a Hebrew or Greek lexicon to determine the meaning of words in Scripture: ―Study of today‘s Hebrew Old Testament texts, lexicons, grammars, and reference works draws the sheep – students, pastors, Christians, and so-called Hebrew scholars – away into dangerous enemy territory. Sheet by sheet these reference books sheer away the Christian‘s confidence in the Bible.‖ (Gail Riplinger, In Awe of Thy Word, p. 429) What‘s wrong with this picture? Occult books don‘t ―draw the sheep away into dangerous enemy territory‖ or ―sheer away the Christian‘s confidence in the Bible‖?? The fact is that Gail Riplinger‘s book, In Awe of Thy Word is also a primer on Kabbalah, the mystical art of deciphering the hidden meanings of the letters of Scripture in order to receive spiritual illumination. Gail‘s campaign against Bible study tools aims to sever students of God‘s Word from objective, factual information on the meanings of the words in the English Bible and cast them into a sea of subjectivity where they must privately interpret the meaning of words by subconsciously divining the hidden meaning of the letters by their shapes and sounds. ―God said, ‗[S]eek, and ye shall find‘ (Matt. 7:7)... In searching for the meaning of a word, the Lord allowed me to see that meaning is built into the word itself. God has implanted into his Holy Bible subconscious contextual associations and consequent ‗meanings‘ with each letter of the alphabet. These enable the reader to understand the ‗sense‘ of all of the Bible‘s words. It all happens without the conscious awareness of the reader. There is nothing to learn; one merely needs to read the Bible. ―The historical and current shape of each letter is a tremendous clue to its meaning. It would take an entire book to show how each letter contributes to create a word‘s meaning. ...search the KJV for yourself... If you forget the sense [of a word], simply look at the letter because it pictures its meaning.‖ (Awe, pp. 101-2, 1115-7)
10
Like Jewish Kabbalists, Gail Riplinger is steering students of God‘s Word away from scholarly resources for Bible study onto the mystical path of seeking ―extrabiblical revelations‖ through the analysis of the shapes and sounds of the letters in Scripture. This mystical method is really no different than the Charismatic pursuit of extrabiblical revelations through visualization, dreams and visions. Both cults encourage believers to rely on the subconscious mind for ―new revelations‖ which carry more weight than the literal meaning of the words, verses and passages of the Bible. Whereas Mrs. Riplinger condemns Greek and Hebrew resources as ―private interpretations,‖ she seems to have implicit faith that subconsciously deciphering the hidden meanings of each letter in the KJV will produce a harvest of pure truth. However, the outcome of this mystical quest will not be a true understanding of God‘s Word but rather a heretical interpretation of Scripture which corresponds to the secret doctrine communicated by fallen angels. ―Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;‖ (1 Tim. 4:1) To ascertain whether Christians should use lexicons for Bible study, Gail has consulted ―Dr. Isaac Mozeson, eminent Hebrew and English linguist, [who] agrees that lexicons from the last two centuries are part of the ‗movement of desacrilizing Hebrew‘ (letter on file)‖ (Awe, p. 499) Dr. Isaac Mozeson also agrees with her that ―sound is sense‖ and recommends ―books on the mystical symbolism and meaning of each letter‖ which are ―largely homiletic, symbolic, or kabbalistic.‖ (―The ABCs of Creation‖ http://edenics.homestead.com/abc.html) Gail omitted to mention that the reason Dr. Mozeson rejects Hebrew and Greek lexicons which give the literal meaning of the words in Scripture is that he considers the Bible to be a ―jumble of myths‖ which is not to be taken literally. In 2001, Dr. Mozeson produced his own ―interpretive rendition‖ of the book of Genesis, The Millennium Bible: Genesis, which reveals Dr. Mozeson‘s ―post-denominational‖ Gnostic theology: ―The casual to serious Bible reader may find much to enjoy and be challenged by in The Millennium Bible: Genesis (MBG), but so should a New Age spiritualist, a Sci-Fi fan, or many others who would not, even at their funeral, be caught dead with a Bible.‖ (Introduction) ―...whatever Man is called, he should remember that he is essentially an animal...‖ (Gen. 2:19) ―Humans had been created equally male and female [–an equality they will ultimately recapture–]; while this androgynous creature was called Earthling when they were created, they were blessed and divided to join and attain humanity.‖ (Gen. 5:2) Dr. Isaac Mozeson is also the author of The Word: The Dictionary that Reveals the Hebrew Roots of English and is Chairman of the Hebrew Language Fellowship of the Root & Branch Association 1. ―which promotes Mr. Mozeson‘s research into the Hebrew origins of world languages.‖ Dr. Mozeson is considered a pioneer in the movement to restore the ―Lost Tribes of Israel‖ because he allegedly ―proves
11
that English [words] are ultimately from Biblical Hebrew and that all languages ultimately link up, and only through variations of the original, universal language - Hebrew.‖ Proponents of the Lost Tribes restoration claim that ―the white race descends, not only from the Hebrew peoples, but that the Elohiym godhead were the also their ancestors.‖ This divine bloodline is the ―Red Thread Bloodline of the Ancient Hebrew People,‖ which is also a prominent theme in Gail Riplinger‘s book. (See: Appendix I, ―Grail Riplinger‘s ‗Rosicrucian Masterpiece‘‖) Dr. Mozeson refers to himself as an ―Edenicist,‖ that is a linguist who believes that all words can be traced to the Hebrew language which was ―programmed into Adam and Eve‖ in the Garden of Eden, as stated in his book, The Origin of Speeches: Intelligent Design in Language: ―Our common ancestors were exiled at Eden, but mankind‘s Diaspora began at the Tower of Babel. Books like this can begin the process of getting us all on the same page.‖ Dr. Mozeson, who espouses ―a millennial theology that ennobles all Biblical faiths,‖ wrote The Millennium Bible to ―get us all on the same page‖: ―Christianity is well on its way to a more tolerant, less partisan spirituality... The more evolved Bible believers have accepted the Torah‘s concept that the Creator loves all people and peoples, and has given prophets to many peoples in many generations... The outstanding prophets behind Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Shinto all have divine authenticity and relevance for their culture. Bahai is one later faith that embraces precisely these global, tolerant ideas, while it needs to progress in women‘s issues... Troubled children don‘t mature overnight, and various fundamentalist Jews, Christians, Moslems, etc. may take several more decades to evolve to the Millennium‘s vision of global spirituality.‖ (Introduction) Dr. Mozeson‘s vision for the world is that its ―troubled children...fundamentalist Jews, Christians, Moslems, etc...may...evolve to the Millennium‘s vision of global spirituality.‖ Bear in mind that Isaac Mozeson is the authority Gail Riplinger recommends to Fundamental Christians as a reliable source on the trustworthiness of ―lexicons from the last two centuries.‖ Gail shares Dr. Mozeson‘s contempt for traditional Hebrew and Greek resources. Does she also share his Millennial vision of global spirituality for Christians? Transitioning Christians from traditional Greek and Hebrew resources to Kabbalism will certainly get them on same page with Jews and Moslems in time for the new global spirituality.
1. The Root & Branch Association also promotes the Noahide Laws which will be enforced during the Tribulation period for the purpose of exterminating Christians. (See: ―Under the Law‖: http://watch-untoprayer.org/law.html)
WATCH UNTO PRAYER http://watch-unto-prayer.org
12
CHAPTER X THE NEW KING JAMES VERSION Were the Translators with us today, would they approve of a revision of their translation to correct errors and/or update the language? “But we desire that the Scripture may speak like itself, as in the language of Canaan, that it may be understood even of the very vulgar...” (Translators‟ Preface) We may assume from statements in their Preface that the Translators would approve of any faithful English translation of the Greek Textus Receptus, just as they approved of the Tyndale, Coverdale, Geneva and Bishops‟ Bibles. We can also deduce from their negative comments about the Septuagint and the Latin Vulgate that they would not recommend modern versions translated from the Nestles-UBS Text based on the corrupt Westcott-Hort Greek text. Of the corrupt modern versions they would have said, as they did of the Septuagint, that they were “not so sound and so perfect, but it needed in many places correction,” and of the Latin Vulgate, “Erasmus...found fault with their vulgar Translation, and consequently wished the same to be mended, or a new one to be made.” The English translations of the Greek Textus Receptus in print today are the Tyndale Bible, the Geneva Bible, the King James Bible and the New King James Version. Since all translations have “some imperfections and blemishes...For whatever was perfect under the Sun, where Apostles or Apostolic men, that is, men endued with an extraordinary measure of God‟s spirit, and privileged with the privilege of infallibility, had not their hand?” it behooves us to know where those imperfections and blemishes are by comparing these translations with the Greek Text itself. For God has commanded us to “Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.” (1 Thess. 5:21) This is not an impossible task since many English translations, some foreign language translations, the Greek Textus Receptus as well as the Interlinear Greek-English Textus Receptus are available at: http://www.olivetree.com/bible/ and http://www.e-sword.net/ A word of caution is in order concerning the Geneva Bible which is riddled with side notes of a political nature. Scrivener justly remarked of these: “It had by that time grown intolerable, that on the self-same page with the text of Holy Scripture, should stand some bitter pithy comment, conceived in a temper the very reverse of that which befits men who profess to love God in Christ.” (Scrivener, p. 41) The New King James Version also contains many footnotes which are explained in the NKJV Preface: “Significant textual variations, explanatory notes, alternate translations, and cross-references, as well as New Testament citations of Old Testament passages, are supplied in the footnotes. Important textual variations in the Old Testament are identified in a standard form.” The NKJV translators stated that they did not give preferentiality to the manuscripts in their footnotes but simply identified the sources: “The textual notes in the present edition of the New Testament make no evaluation of readings, but do clearly indicate the manuscript sources of readings. They objectively present the facts without such tendentious remarks as „the best manuscripts omit‟ or „the most reliable manuscripts read.‟ Such notes are value judgments that differ according to varying viewpoints on the text. By giving a clearly defined set of variants the New King James Version benefits readers of all textual persuasions.” (NKJV Preface)
134
The NKJV translators indicated that they felt duty-bound to include variations from the Textus Receptus, however, unlike modern versions, their footnotes are at times critical of the NU-Text as unrepresentative of the majority of manuscripts extant. For instance, the footnote for Mark 16:20 states: “Verses 9-20 are bracketed in NU-Text as not original. They are lacking in Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, although nearly all other manuscripts of Mark contain them.” In their Preface, the NKJV translators identified the two Greek Texts which are products of modern scholarship and which appear in footnotes as having textual variations from the Traditional Text, the Textus Receptus: “Where significant variations occur in the New Testament Greek manuscripts, textual notes are classified as follows: 1. NU-Text - These variations from the traditional text generally represent the Alexandrian or Egyptian type of text...found in the Critical Text...of the Nestle Aland Greek New Testament (N) and in the United Bible Societies third edition (U), hence the term, „NU-Text.‟ 2. M-Text - This symbol indicates points of variation in the Majority Text from the Traditional text... “The textual notes reflect the scholarship of the past 150 years and will assist the reader to observe the variations between the different manuscript traditions of the New Testament. Such information is generally not available in English translations of the New Testament.” (NKJV Preface) The NKJV translators expressed their rejection of the textual theory of B.F. Westcott and F.J.A. Hort and the Alexandrian manuscripts these revisers used for their New Greek Text. Although the NKJV translators clearly endorsed the Received Text, they unfortunately fell short of giving it recognition it as the “original Greek” text: “The King James New Testament was based on the traditional text of the Greek-speaking churches, first published in 1516, and later called the Textus Receptus or Received Text. Although based on the relatively few available manuscripts, these were representative of many more which existed at the time but only became known later. In the late nineteenth century, B. Westcott and F. Hort taught that this text had been officially edited by the fourthcentury church, but a total lack of historical evidence for this event has forced a revision of the theory. It is now widely held that the Byzantine Text that largely supports the Textus Receptus has as much right as the Alexandrian or any other tradition to be weighed in determining the text of the New Testament... “Since the 1880s most contemporary translations of the New Testament have relied upon a relatively few manuscripts discovered chiefly in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Such translations depend primarily on two manuscripts, Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus, because of their greater age. The Greek text obtained by using these sources and the related papyri (our most ancient manuscripts) is known as the Alexandrian Text. However, some scholars have grounds for doubting the faithfulness of Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, since they often disagree with one another, and Sinaiticus exhibits excessive omission.” (NKJV Preface) They NKJV translators observed that “the science of New Testament textual criticism is in a state of flux. Very few scholars still favor the Textus Receptus... For about a century most have followed a Critical Text...which depends heavily upon the Alexandrian type of text. More recently many have abandoned this Critical Text...for one that is more eclectic. Finally, a small but growing number of scholars prefer the Majority Text, which is close to the traditional text except in the Revelation.” Based on these facts, the 135
NKJV translators chose to follow the Textus Receptus for the text of the New Testament and to note variant readings from the Westcott-Hort Text (NU-Text) and Majority Text in footnotes: “In light of these facts, and also because the New King James 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 footnotes.” (NKJV Preface) It is regrettable that the NKJV translators not only gave equal weight to the Critical Text and the Textus Receptus, they also contented themselves that there is 85% common agreement among all of the New Testament translations. “Although these variations are duly indicated in the footnotes 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.” This statement clearly minimizes the hundreds of textual variations in modern versions, ultimately based on Alexandrian manuscripts, which adversely affect fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith. However, the tolerant attitude of the NKJV translators is best kept in perspective by recalling the latitude given by the 1611 Translators to a wide range of Bible translations, many not translated from Byzantine-type manuscripts. Of interest, the KJV Translators never clearly differentiated between two Greek text types, at least not in their Preface. Also, the KJV Translators considered translations from the Alexandrian manuscripts to be the Word of God. Finally, they consulted translations made from Alexandrian manuscripts and occasionally chose Alexandrian readings from the Septuagint and Vulgate against the Textus Receptus. Compare the following statements from the Translators‟ Preface to the KJV with the statements from the NKJV Preface cited above: THE TRANSLATION OF THE OLD TESTAMENT OUT OF THE HEBREW INTO GREEK Therefore the word of God being set forth in Greek, becometh hereby like a candle set upon a candlestick, which giveth light to all that are in the house, or like a proclamation sounded forth in the market place, which most men presently take knowledge of; and therefore that language was fittest to contain the Scriptures, both for the first Preachers of the Gospel to appeal unto for witness, and for the learners also of those times to make search and trial by...” TRANSLATION OUT OF HEBREW AND GREEK INTO LATIN ...But now the Latin Translations were too many to be all good, for they were infinite (Latini Interprets nullo modo numerari possunt, saith S. Augustine.) [S. Augustin. de doctr. Christ. lib 2 cap II]. Again they were not out of the Hebrew fountain (we speak of the Latin Translations of the Old Testament) but out of the Greek stream, therefore the Greek being not altogether clear, the Latin derived from it must needs be muddy. This moved S. Jerome a most learned father, and the best linguist without controversy, of his age, or of any that went before him, to undertake the translating of the Old Testament, out of the very fountain with that evidence of great learning, judgment, industry, and faithfulness, that he had forever bound the Church unto him, in a debt of special remembrance and thankfulness...” A SATISFACTION TO OUR BRETHREN And to the same effect say we, that we are so far off from condemning any of their labors that travailed before us in this kind, either in this land or beyond sea, either in King Henry‟s time, or King Edward's (if there were any translation, or correction of a translation in his time) or Queen Elizabeth‟s of ever renowned memory, that we acknowledge them to have been raised up of God, for the building and furnishing of his 136
Church, and that they deserve to be had of us and of posterity in everlasting remembrance. The judgment of Aristotle is worthy and well known: “If Timotheus had not been, we had not had much sweet music; but if Phrynis [Timotheus his master] had not been, we had not had Timotheus.” Therefore blessed be they, and most honoured be their name, that break the ice, and giveth onset upon that which helpeth forward to the saving of souls...” AN ANSWER TO THE IMPUTATIONS OF OUR ADVERSARIES Now to the latter we answer; that we do not deny, nay we affirm and avow, that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English, set forth by men of our profession,... containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God...” (“Translators to the Reader”) King James Only advocates falsely portray the 1611 KJV Translators as virtually the founders and charter members of the KJV-Only movement. One gets the impression from KJVO publications that the Translators were Fundamental Baptists who consulted only the Hebrew Masoretic Text, the Greek Textus Receptus and 100% “pure” English Bibles for their translation—and they would never, ever use corrupted Bibles, Hebrew or Greek texts, or wicked lexicons. An image of near perfection has been created for the KJV Translators, so that many KJV-Only readers believe them to be as divinely inspired as the Prophets and Apostles who wrote the original Hebrew scrolls and Greek manuscripts. On the foundation of a slick PR campaign and falsified textual evidence, the King James Bible has been elevated to stand alone today as the inerrant Word of God. In stark contrast, KJV-Only purists trash the New King James Version and dump it in the garbage heap of modern versions based on the corrupt Nestles-UBS/Westcott-Hort text. It is even heard that the NKJV is the most Satanic Bible ever published, maybe even worse than Church of Satan founder, Anton LaVey‟s version: “The NEW KING JAMES VERSION is the MOST DANGEROUS BIBLE VERSION On The Market Today!! Why do I say this? I say this because it uses the name „King James‟ in its title. It throws the non-thinking Christian off-balance— especially the one who has been used to the KING JAMES VERSION for most of his Christian life. The deceptive use of „KING JAMES VERSION‟ in the title would lead many to think that there are only a few small incidental changes in their NEW KJV, but it is basically just the KING JAMES VERSION with a few minor changes to bring it up to date. NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH!! I certainly do NOT call a PERVERSION of the Bible with upwards of 100,000 CHANGES merely a „FEW MINOR CHANGES‟! ...when the name „NEW KING JAMES VERSION‟ is used, the uninformed observer right a way thinks that this is very CLOSE to the genuine KING JAMES VERSION, and so might buy it and use it. In actuality, it is a DECEPTIVE COUNTERFEIT of the real thing! While the NEW KJV borrows the „NAME‟ of the KING JAMES VERSION, the similarity stops there!... “The NEW KING JAMES VERSION Used The DIABOLICAL Method of „DYNAMIC EQUIVALENCE‟ Repeatedly While Professing A Love For 'COMPLETE EQUIVALENCE.‟ ...The editors...say how they have used „COMPLETE EQUIVALENCE‟ and have shunned „DYNAMIC EQUIVALENCE.‟ This is a lie! As we have shown repeatedly in the evidence herein reproduced, the NEW KJV is replete with the DIABOLICAL „DYNAMIC EQUIVALENCE‟!” (D.A. Waite, The New King James Version Compared to the King James Version and Underlying Hebrew & Greek Texts, 1997, p. ix) Note that D.A. Waite‟s standard of comparison for the NKJV is the King James Version, not the Hebrew Masoretic Text or Greek Textus Receptus. To further impress upon Christians the “diabolical” character of the NKJV, many defenders of the KJV follow the party line (as we once did) concerning the logo originally displayed on the original NKJV cover: 137
“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 interwoven „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 three esoteric „6‟s separated. Plainly displaying the interlocked „666‟. “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... “Would God „mark‟ His word with a symbol in the occult?” (“New King James Version: Counterfeit,” Terry Watkins) The fact is that the publisher, Thomas Nelson Inc., designed and printed the cover for the NKJV, just as the English printer Robert Barker added pagan headpieces, tailpieces and woodcuts to the 1611 King James Bible. Should we judge a Bible by its cover? Perhaps a reminder of David Bay‟s lurid attack on the King James Bible is in order for those, like ourselves, who have been duped by the ubiquitous “NKJV occult logo” propaganda:
“Devil's Goats Heads, Complete Female Nudity, Neptune With His Trident, Flying Devil, And Multiple „6‟s‟ -- Are All Pictured In Either The 1611 or the 1619 King James Bibles (...) 138
“Neptune (Satan) In 1611 KJV, Woodcut “This figure of Neptune astride his horse and lifting his trident high is the woodcut for the first letter „T‟ appearing on the title page of the Gospel of Matthew, 1611 KJV Edition, p. 1143. Note that Neptune is nude in this 1611 woodcut, just as he appears on the right, a picture taken from Dr. Cathy Burns‟ book, „Masonic and Occult Symbols Illustrated‟, p. 252. “Further, note that he sits astride his horse and seems to be fully in control of the entire earthly world, both land and sea. Let us now examine the Neptune writeup from Dr. Burns‟ book. “In the mythologies of Greece and Rome the thunderbolt of Jupiter was threeforked; the sceptre of Neptune was a trident ... In Hindu mythology the worshipper of Vushnu has his forehead decorated with a trident ... A Dictionary of Symbols explains that the trident is an attribute of the god of the unconscious and of sin -- Neptune, whose realm is the haunt of monsters and base forms of life. The triple character of the trident is an INFERNAL replica of the Trinity .. Neptune, the god of the sea, is also known as Poseidon, Hades (hell) and Shiva.”
“Greek God of Sexual Lust and Orgies Is Depicted Prominently Twice In Original 1611 KJV Bible “Historians have always debated why King James felt that Bacon needed this manuscript for one year and what Bacon did with or to the manuscript while he had it for that time. Now, however, we feel confident that Bacon used this time to plan how to coordinate the text with all these symbols -- page after page after page! His intent was to produce a „Rosicrucian Bible‟, which contained Satanic symbols thought by occultists to pulsate with Lucifer‟s power every single second. By placing these Satanic symbols on top of, and around, perfectly good text, Bacon and his Knights of the Helmet were trying to create an occult Bible which would gradually move the Englishspeaking world into the practice of the „Mystic Christianity‟ of Rosicrucianism. “In this article, we shall show the most shocking, excruciating Satanic symbol which could possibly be placed in the most sacred of books, a Bible...” Source: Cutting Edge Ministries, “Defending the KJV” (For evidence that King James would not have given the KJV manuscripts to Francis Bacon and his “Knights of the Helmet,” see our refutation of Cutting Edge Ministries.) Hopefully, the reader will begin to understand the nefarious plan behind the rabid attacks on the only two Bibles in general use which are based on the Textus Receptus. That agenda, as this report has tried to show, is the elimination of the Greek Textus Receptus and, ultimately, all of its translations. This plan is being skillfully executed using the dialectical process, in which the far extremes of the Bible version issue are staging an epic battle which will culminate in the elimination of the Received Text and its most popular 139
current translations, the King James Version and the New King James Version. (See: “The House of God on Trial,” http://watch-unto-prayer.org) To this end, KJV-Only exposes of the NKJV abound with dire warnings and shocking allegations, not only about Satanic symbols, but of serious doctrinal corruption: “The NKJV denies the deity of Christ a half dozen times.” (New Age Bible Versions, p. 102) “The NKJV ignored the KJV Greek Textus Receptus over 1,200 times.” (Gail Riplinger) “The NKJV also uses over 2,000 dynamic equivalencies which either add to God‟s Words, subtract from God‟s Words, or change God‟s Words in some way.” (D.A. Waite, Foes of the King James Bible Refuted, 1997, p. 47) Dynamic equivalence translation attempts to use words and terms that will be understood by the average fluent speaker of a language. Even the King James Translators thought that a literal word-for-word translation does not always convey the original meaning, and may even obscure the meaning of Scripture. The KJV Translators used dynamic equivalence — as thousands of italicized words attest — because they wished to make the meaning of the Bible perfectly clear to even the uneducated reader. The Translators acknowledged their use of dynamic equivalency in their Preface: “Lastly, we have on the one side avoided the scrupulosity of the Puritans, who leave the old Ecclesiastical words, and betake them to other, as when they put WASHING for BAPTISM, and CONGREGATION instead of CHURCH: as also on the other side we have shunned the obscurity of the Papists, in their AZIMES, TUNIKE, RATIONAL, HOLOCAUSTS, PRAEPUCE, PASCHE, and a number of such like, whereof their late Translation is full, and that of purpose to darken the sense, that since they must needs translate the Bible, yet by the language thereof, it may be kept from being understood. But we desire that the Scripture may speak like itself, as in the language of Canaan, that it may be understood even of the very vulgar.” (“Translators to the Reader”) Do our KJV-Only advocates also “desire that the Scripture may speak like itself, as in the language of Canaan, that it may be understood even of the very vulgar”?? “The NEW KING JAMES VERSION Used The DIABOLICAL Method of „DYNAMIC EQUIVALENCE‟ Repeatedly While Professing A Love For „COMPLETE EQUIVALENCE.‟ ...The editors...say how they have used „COMPLETE EQUIVALENCE‟ and have shunned „DYNAMIC EQUIVALENCE.‟ This is a lie! As we have shown repeatedly in the evidence herein reproduced, the NEW KJV is replete with the DIABOLICAL „DYNAMIC EQUIVALENCE‟! This is seen in the 63 examples of „ADDITIONS‟ (pp. 1-3); in the 856 examples of „CHANGES‟ (pp. 3-36); as well as in the 295 examples of OMISSIONS (pp. 67-97). Because of this failing, the NEW KJV CANNOT BE TRUSTED OR RELIED UPON!!” (D.A Waite, The New King James Version Compared to the King James Version and Underlying Hebrew & Greek Texts, p. ix) Although D.A. Waite has often protested dynamic equivalency in the translation of God‟s Word, he generously allows for dynamic equivalence in the King James Version: “When someone accuses the King James Bible translators of making a translation mistake, I look up the word in the Oxford English Dictionary to see what the word meant in 1611 and I find the translation to be accurate.” (Foes of the King James Bible Refuted, p. 60) Ditto for Gail Riplinger, who decries dynamic equivalency in the NKJV, but ignores its many occurrences in the KJV. Instead of recommending an updated English Bible based on the Textus Receptus, such as the 140
NKJV, Gail recommends a secular database to understand how the English words in the KJV were defined in 1611. “The best dictionary for studying words used in the King James Bible is the online Early Modern English Dictionary Database (EMEDD), compiled by linguists from the University of Toronto to „correct the OED‟ and more accurately define words as they were used between 1530 and 1657. Definitions from 16 dictionaries, many available to the KJV translators, appear instantly online when a KJV word is searched.” (In Awe of Thy Word, p. 64) Dr. Waite also finds fault with the NKJV translators for using the Latin Vulgate, the Septuagint, and other ancient versions, as stated in their Preface, while he blithely ignores the KJV Translators‟ use of the Vulgate and Septuagint and never mentions the Translators‟ Preface: “Dr. Farstad implied that the Masoretic Old Testament Traditional Hebrew text of the NKJV is the identical text to that used in the King James Bible. If you read the preface of the New King James you will find that they do not use ONLY the Masoretic Traditional Hebrew. They compare and use upon occasion the readings of the following: (1) the Latin Vulgate, (2) the Septuagint, (3) ancient versions, and (4) the Dead Sea Scrolls.” (Foes of the King James Bible Refuted, p. 17) Dr. Waite holds the New King James Version to a strictly literal standard of translation...but not of the Greek Textus Receptus. Notwithstanding his strong objections to Ruckmanite false teachings, Dr. Waite‟s standard of comparison is also the King James Version. In his book, Foes of the King James Bible Refuted, Dr. Waite stated that he compared the New King James Version to the “Hebrew and Greek that underlies our King James Bible.” “The New King James is not a word-for-word literal type translation as much as the King James itself is... I made a verse by verse analysis of the New King James compared to the Hebrew and Greek that underlies our King James Bible. I found over 2,000 examples of how the New King James added to God‟s Words, subtracted from God‟s Words, and changed God‟s Words... The King James Bible is the only English Bible that is truly „literal‟ or „word-for-word‟ wherever possible.” (Foes, p. 16) On the same page, Dr. Waite plainly shows that he did not compare the NKJV with the Greek Textus Receptus: “John Ankerberg said the New King James was based on „the same Greek text as the 1611.‟ ... This is not completely true. I have found at least three examples of the New King James Version‟s use of the Westcott and Hort type of text being used in the text itself. How many other examples of non-Textus Receptus Greek text used in the top of the pages, I cannot say. It is presumed if I found three, there might be many other examples.” (Foes, p. 16) On page 45 of Foes of the King James Bible Refuted, which was published in 1997, D.A. Waite again admitted, “The New King James Version claims to use the Textus Receptus, but I stumbled across at least 2 or 3 places where they used the Westcott and Hort critical text. I have not made a thorough check. There may be hundreds of other places involved!” In 1990 Dr. Waite published a revised edition of his book, The New King James Version Compared to the King James Version and Underlying Hebrew & Greek Texts. Note that the title is not The New King James Version Compared to the King James Version and the Hebrew Masoretic Text & Greek Textus Receptus. The reason for this is that Dr. Waite did not compare the NKJV to the Masoretic Text or the Textus Receptus, but 141
to only to the King James Version. “Underlying Hebrew & Greek Texts” seems to mean whatever Hebrew and Greek words underlie the KJV words. Although Dr. Waite claimed that “changes from the KJV...were compared with the MASORETIC HEBREW TEXT in the Old Testament and with the TEXTUS RECEPTUS GREEK TEXT in the New Testament” (p. v), close examination of his charts demonstrates that this was not the case. In these charts, “KJV/MT/TR READING” really means “KJV READING” only. The deceptive way in which Dr. Waite categorized and structured the tables in this book creates the overall impression that the text of the NKJV departs from the Masoretic Text and Textus Receptus in thousands of verses. The book consists of 79 pages of verses categorized according to parts of speech which the NKJV either added to, changed or omitted from the “KJV/MT/TR READING” which, upon inspection, turns out to be the KJV reading only. Dr. Waite has misrepresented the NKJV as having added or changed or omitted from the Masoretic Text or Textus Receptus either a noun or verb or a pronoun, or having changed a noun to a pronoun or a verb or an adjective, or vice versa, or having changed the number or person of a pronoun, or changed a prepositional phrase to a noun, or changed singular to plural, or having split an infinitive, etc. etc. For example, “to utterly slay” in the KJV was changed to “to slay utterly” in the NKJV in 2 Chronicles 20:23. The following examples from Dr. Waite‟s book are representative of about 2,000 verse comparisons which show that the KJV was the standard of comparison rather than the Hebrew Masoretic Text or the Greek Textus Receptus. Close examination of the Masoretic Text and the Textus Receptus reveals that the “NEW KJV READING” is frequently an acceptable translation option, or a more accurate translation, of the Hebrew or the Greek. The first four columns are randomly selected verses from among the 2,000+ verses analyzed in the book. The last 2 columns present the facts regarding the texts in question, facts which have been omitted or falsified by Dr. Waite. THE NEW KING JAMES VERSION COMPARED TO THE KING JAMES VERSION & UNDERLYING HEBREW & GREEK TEXTS By Rev. D.A. Waite, Th.D., Ph.D... COMME O B KJB/MT/TR BIBLE PG. NT NO. / T K READING CATE REFER NO. NKJV N N NEW KJV GORY ENCE NOTE T O. READING
1
3
3
2031
N T
2018
N T
1282
O T
EVIDENCE THAT D.A. WAITE DID NOT COMPARE THE NKJV WITH THE MASORETIC TEXT OR THE TEXTUS RECEPTUS BUT ONLY WITH THE KJV READING OF THE MASORETIC TEXT OR TEXTUS RECEPTUS Greek Textus Receptus: “For yet fleshly ye are. for where among you emulation and strife and divisions [there are], not fleshly are ye, and walk according to man?”
46
I COR. 3:3
WALK AS MEN BEHAVING AS MERE MEN
ADDS ADJE CTIV E
42
LK. 6:40b
PERFECT PERFECTLY TRAINED
ADDS VERB
Greek Textus Receptus: “...not is a disciple above the teacher of him; but perfected every one shall be as his teacher.”
25
LAM. 5:10
BLACK HOT
CHAN GES ADJE CTIV E
Hebrew Masoretic Text: “Our skin is hot like an oven because of the burning heat of famine.”
7
0937
O T
19
PSAL M 49:9
CORRUPTION THE PIT
CHAN GES NOUN
16
2468
N T
52
I THESS . 2:8
OUR OWN SOULS OUR OWN
CHAN GES NOUN
142
Hebrew Masoretic Text: “For too costly is the redemption of their soul, and must be let alone for ever. That he should still live alway, that he should not see the pit.” Greek Textus Receptus: “Thus yearning over you, we were pleased to have
TEXTUAL DATA Strong‟s #444 - anthropos Perschbacher #444 anqrwpon - genitive, singular, masculine noun. The NKJV put the adjective “mere” in italics to indicate it is not in the Greek text. Strong‟s #2675 - katartizo verb -perfect, passive, participle - to render, i.e. to fit, sound, complete ..to strengthen, perfect, complete, make one what he ought to be The Greek word “katartizo” is a verb. Strong‟s #3648 - kamar The adjectives “hot” and “black” are both translation options of the Hebrew word. Strong‟s #7845 - shachath 1) pit, destruction, grave 1a) pit (for catching lions) 1b) pit (of Hell) The NKJV correctly translated the Hebrew word as “the pit.” Strong‟s #5590 - psuche 1) breath 1a) the breath of life 1b) life 1c) that in
LIVES
31
2036
57
2514 NUTEXT-PURGED SINS
N T
N T
47
58
2 COR. 7:10b
NOT TO BE REPENTED OF NOT TO BE REGRETTED
CHAN GES THEO LOGI CAL TERM
HEB. 1:3b
PURGED OUR SINS PURGED OUR SINS
NONTEXT US RECE PTUS
imparted to you not only the glad tidings of God, but also our own lives, because beloved to us ye have become.” Greek Textus Receptus: “...for the grief according to God works out repentance to salvation not to be regretted; but the grief of the world works out death.” Greek Textus Receptus “...by Himself [the] purification having made of our sins sat down on [the] right hand of the greatness on high,”
which there is life 2) the soul “Souls” and “lives” are both translation options of the Hebrew word psuche. Strong‟s #278 ametameletos - 1) not repentant of, unregretted The NKJV translated the verb as it is in the Greek Textus Receptus The “Non-Textus Receptus” reading is not in the text of the NKJV, but a footnote.
In the chart above, Dr. Waite claimed the NKJV added a verb to Luke 6:40, however, the original Greek word “katartizo” is a verb which the KJV Translators mistranslated as an adjective! In 1 Cor. 3:3, he claimed that the NKJV added the adjective “mere” to 1 Cor. 3:3, but this is not true, for the translators of the NKJV italicized the word mere to indicate that it is not in the Greek Textus Receptus, just like the KJV Translators italicized words which they added to the text. (Note: The 1982 NKJV, which Dr. Waite used for his book, did italicize words supplied by the translators.) The last four verses demonstrate that the NKJV readings alleged to be mistranslations are, in fact, accurate translations of the Hebrew Masoretic Text and the Greek Textus Receptus. It is important to reiterate that the italicized words in the KJV were words which the 1611 Translators “added” to the Greek Textus Receptus and the Hebrew Masoretic Text. F.H.A. Scrivener criticized this unwarranted and inconsistent addition of words, not only in the 1611 KJV but also in the Bishops‟ and other English Bibles which preceded it. (See: Chapter 7) A brief history of this practice is presented by Scrivener who observed that the Great Bible derived these “added words” directly from the Latin Vulgate and the Old Latin versions! “The practice of indicating by a variation of type such words in a translation of the Bible as have no exact representatives in the original is believed to have been first employed by Samuel Munster in his Latin version of the Old Testament published in 1534. Five years later this diversity of character („a small letter in the text‟ as the editors describe it) was resorted to in the Great Bible, in order to direct attention to clauses rendered from the Latin Vulgate which are not extant in the Hebrew or Greek originals. A good example of its use occurs in Matt. xxv.1 where „(and the bride)‟ is added to the end of the verse from the Old Latin, not from any Greek copy known in that age. As the readings of the Vulgate came to be less regarded or less familiar in England, subsequent translators applied the smaller type to the purpose for which Muster had first designed it, the rather as Theodore Beza had so used it in his Latin New Testament of 1556. Thus the English New Testament published in Geneva at 1557, and the Genevan Bible of 1560, „put to that word, which lacking made the sentence obscure, but set it in such letters, as may easily be discerned from the common text.‟ The same expedient was adopted by the translators of the Bishops‟ Bible (1568, 1572), somewhat too freely indeed in parts. It is one of the most considerable faults of this not very successful version, that its authors assumed a liberty of running into paraphrase, the ill effects of which this very difference in type tended to conceal from themselves. From these two preceding versions, then held in the best repute, the Geneva and the Bishops‟ Bibles, the small Roman as distinguished from the black letter (now and as early as the Bible of 1612 respectively represented by the Italic and Roman type) was brought naturally enough into the Bible of 1611, and forms a prominent feature of it, whether for good or ill... “...Taking for granted...the right of the Translators...to resort to the italic type, and the general propriety of their mode of exercising it, the only enquiry now open to us is whether they were uniform, or reasonably consistent, in their use of it. 143
“And in the face of patent and well ascertained facts it is impossible to answer such a question in the affirmative. Undue haste and scarcely venial carelessness on the part of the persons engaged in carrying through the press the issues of 1611, which are only too visible in other matters..., are nowhere more conspicuous than with regard to this difference in the type. If it be once conceded that the Translators must have intended to use or refrain from using italics in the selfsame manner in all cases that are absolutely identical (and the contrary supposition would be strange and unreasonable indeed), their whole case in this matter must be given up as indefensible. There is really no serious attempt to avoid palpable inconsistencies on the same page, in the same verse : and those who have gone over this branch of their work will be aware that even comparative uniformity can be secured only in one way, by the repeated comparison of the version with the sacred originals, by unflagging attention so that nothing however minute may pass unexamined. This close and critical examination was evidently entered upon, with more or less good results, by those who prepared the Cambridge Bibles of 1629 and more especially of 1638 (for before these appeared the italics of 1611, with all their glaring faults, were reprinted without charge), and in the next century by Dr Paris in 1762, by Dr Blayney and his friends in 1769...” (Scrivener, pp. 61-63) Regarding Matthew 25:1, we would add that the Wycliffe Bible is based on the Latin Vulgate which adds “and the bride” to the end of the verse. Returning to Dr. Waite‟s charts, inspection of many other verses reveals that the standard of comparison is NOT the Hebrew Masoretic Text and the Greek Textus Receptus as stated, but the King James Version. “KJV/MT/TR READING” is a devious way to camouflage D.A. Waite‟s highly distorted analysis of the NKJV and is akin to Gail Riplinger‟s misleading term “KJV Greek Textus Receptus” of which more will be said in the next chapter. The tricky phraseology in both expressions works because the KJV-Only reader has already been indoctrinated that the KJV is a word-for-word translation of the Masoretic Text and the Textus Receptus. KJV-Only advocates state this claim in such a way as to deceive laymen, but are careful to leave a loophole in the event that scholars, who know better, decide to call their bluff: “The King James Bible is the only English Bible that is truly „literal‟ or „word-for-word‟ wherever possible.” (D.A. Waite, Foes of the King James Bible Refuted, p. 16) Several pages of Dr. Waite‟s booklet are devoted to NKJV verses which use the word “regret” or “relent” instead of “repent.” These verses fall under the category of “CHANGES VERB” or “CHANGES THEOLOGICAL TERM” which means the NKJV did not use the “theological term” repent in every place it is used in the KJV. The reader is never told that regret and relent are translations of different Hebrew and Greek words, such as nacham, metanoeo, ametameletos, metamellomai. These words in the original texts have varying meanings and are not always best translated as repent. In most of the verses listed, the NKJV translators seem to have simply chosen another legitimate translation option in order to convey the meaning of the Hebrew or Greek word in the context of the verse. Several of the verses listed in the booklet apply to God and, according to Numbers 23:19, “God is not a man, that He should lie, Nor a son of man, that He should repent.” Therefore, a different translation option is appropriate in verses referring to God, e.g., the NKJV‟s translation of the Hebrew word nacham in Judges 2:18 and Jeremiah 26:3, 13: “And when the LORD raised up judges for them, the LORD was with the judge and delivered them out of the hand of their enemies all the days of the judge; for the LORD was moved to pity by their groaning because of those who oppressed them and harassed them.” (Judges 2:18 NKJV) “Perhaps everyone will listen and turn from his evil way, that I may relent concerning the calamity which I purpose to bring on them because of the evil of their doings...
144
“Now therefore, amend your ways and your doings, and obey the voice of the LORD your God; then the LORD will relent concerning the doom that He has pronounced against you.” (Jer. 26:3, 13 NKJV) Strong‟s #5162 - nacham - to be sorry, console oneself, repent, regret, comfort, be comforted In the New Testament, the NKJV translation of the Greek words metanoeo, ametameletos, metamellomai agrees with the Textus Receptus. Even so, D.A. Waite protests the NKJV‟s use of any and all words other than the KJV‟s theological term “repent”: 2 CORINTHIANS 7:8-10 King James Version (KJV) 8 For though I made you sorry with a letter, I do not repent, though I did repent for I perceive that the same epistle hath made you sorry, though it were but for a season. 9 Now I rejoice, not that ye were made sorry, but that ye sorrowed to repentance: for ye were made sorry after a godly manner, that ye might receive damage by us in nothing. 10 For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death. New King James Version (NKJV) 8 For even if I made you sorry with my letter, I do not regret it; though I did regret it. For I perceive that the same epistle made you sorry, though only for a while. 9 Now I rejoice, not that you were made sorry, but that your sorrow led to repentance. For you were made sorry in a godly manner, that you might suffer loss from us in nothing. 10 For godly sorrow produces repentance leading to salvation, not to be regretted; but the sorrow of the world produces death. Greek Textus Receptus 8 <3754> FOR <1487> IF <2532> ALSO <3076> (5656) I GRIEVED <5209> YOU <1722> IN <3588> THE <1992> EPISTLE, <3756> <3338> (5736) I DO NOT REGRET [IT], <1487> IF <2532> EVEN <3338> (5711) I DID REGRET; <991> (5719) <1063> FOR I SEE <3754> THAT <3588> <1992> <1565> THAT EPISTLE, <1487> IF <2532> EVEN <4314> FOR <5610> AN HOUR, <3076> (5656) GRIEVED <5209> YOU. 9 <3568> NOW <5463> (5719) I REJOICE, <3756> NOT <3754> THAT <3076> (5681) YE WERE GRIEVED, <235> BUT <3754> THAT <3076> (5681) YE WERE GRIEVED <1519> TO <3341> REPENTANCE; <3076> (5681) <1063> FOR YE WERE GRIEVED <2596> ACCORDING TO <2316> GOD, <2443> THAT <1722> IN <3367> NOTHING <2210> (5686) YE MIGHT SUFFER LOSS <1537> BY <2257> US. 10 <3588> <1063> FOR THE <2596> ACCORDING TO <2316> GOD <3077> GRIEF <3341> REPENTANCE <1519> TO <4991> SALVATION <278> NOT TO BE REGRETTED <2716> (5736) WORKS OUT; <3588> <1161> BUT THE
145
<3588> OF THE <2889> WORLD <3077> <2288> DEATH <2716> (5736) WORKS OUT.
GRIEF
There is also a category in Dr. Waite‟s booklet for “Non-Masoretic Text” readings in the NKJV. These NKJV readings usually agree with the KJV reading, however, a footnote in the NKJV presents the reading of the Septuagint, Vulgate, Targums, Samarian Pentateuch, Josephus, etc. Thirty pages of Dr. Waite's booklet are devoted to “Non-Textus Receptus” readings in the NKJV which actually agree with the KJV and the Textus Receptus, but the NKJV footnote documents the NU-Text reading. There are 9 pages of verses in which the NKJV “OMITS SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD,” however, the reason for this is that the subjunctive mood is less commonly used in the English language than it was in 1611. Today, English-speaking people do not say “if he repent, forgive him” as the KJV translated Luke 17:3 but “if he repents, forgive him,” as the NKJV translated the verse. Many such verses in the NKJV are more accurate translations of the Textus Receptus because the Greek verb is not in the subjunctive mood. For example, in the NKJV, 1 Corinthians 15:13 begins “if there is no resurrection of the dead” instead of “if there be no resurrection of the dead” (KJV). The KJV reading is misrepresented by Dr. Waite as the “KJV/MT/TR READING,” however, in the Textus Receptus the Greek verb estin is the third person singular present indicative mood rather than the subjunctive mood. 1 Cor 15:13 - {BUT IF} <386> {A RESURRECTION} <3498> {OF [THE] DEAD} <3756> <2076> (5748) {THERE IS NOT,} <3761> {NEITHER} <5547> {CHRIST} <1453> (5769) {HAS BEEN RAISED:} Strong’s #2076 - third person singular present indicative of 1510; v
In his introduction, Dr. Waite asserted that, in the multitude of verses listed in his study, the NKJV “chose to disregard utterly” the subjunctive mood used in “the original language”: “In the New Testament Greek, the subjunctive mood is used in these New Testament instances which are given in this study, yet the NKJV has chosen to DISREGARD UTTERLY the original language at this point. This is NOT FAITHFULNESS IN TRANSLATION. It is NOT ACCURACY IN TRANSLATION. It is NOT RELIABILITY IN TRANSLATION. It is DIABOLICAL DYNAMIC EQUIVALENCY!!” (NKJV Compared to KJV and the Underlying Hebrew & Greek Texts, p. xv) The same spurious allegation is made with respect to many other verses where the NKJV, in fact, accurately translated the indicative mood of the Greek Textus Receptus. For example, in Acts 25:11b the KJV reading is “if there be none” but the NKJV reading is “if there is nothing,” which agrees with the Textus Receptus, again proving that D.A. Waite‟s misleading “KJV/MT/TR READING” is really only the “KJV READING”: Acts 25:11b - {BUT} <1161> {IF} <3762> {NOTHING} <2076> (5748) {THERE IS} <3739> {OF WHICH} <3778> {THEY} <2723> (5719) {ACCUSE} <3450> {ME,} <3762> {NO ONE} <3165> {ME} <1410> (5736) {CAN} <846> {TO THEM} <5483> (5664) {GIVE UP.} <2541> {TO CAESAR} <1941> (5731) {I APPEAL.} Strong’s #2076 - third person singular present indicative of 1510; v
D.A. Waite‟s 1990 book, The NKJV Compared to the KJV and Underlying Hebrew & Greek Texts, established early on in the minds of many Christians the misconception that the New King James Version is a thoroughly corrupt translation no better than modern versions based on the corrupt Westcott-Hort/NU-Text. The book is organized to confuse the reader, according to parts of speech. Moreover, the average reader could never afford the time it would take to check all of the additions, changes or omissions of verbs, noun, 146
pronouns, adjectives, adverbs, prepositional phrases, etc., etc. against the Masoretic Text and the Greek Textus Receptus to see if the NKJV text actually deviates from these texts in said verses. Thankfully, even a partial comparison of KJV and NKJV verses against the Textus Receptus quickly proves that Dr. Waite has done a superb job of cooking the data to make it appear that the NKJV is corrupt and the KJV is perfect. We do not take the position that the NKJV is a perfect translation of the original texts. There are translation errors in the NKJV which are of concern, but there appear to be more textual and translation errors of importance in the King James Version, at least in the area of end-time Bible prophecy. For our analysis of these, please see Appendix III: “Translation Errors in the KJV Which Affect the Interpretation of Bible Prophecy” D.A. Waite stated that the NKJV “is just another NEW TRANSLATION that came out in 1982, with more similarity to the ENGLISH REVISED VERSION (ERV) of 1881, the AMERICAN STANDARD VERSION (ASV) of 1901, the NEW AMERICAN STANDARD VERSION (NASV) OF 1968, or the NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION (NIV) of 1978, than to the KJV of 1611!!” Dr. Waite‟s books certainly do not prove his assertion, but just the opposite. Let‟s see if Gail Riplinger has been able to prove that the NKJV is closer to modern versions than it is to the 1611 KJV or the Textus Receptus. WATCH UNTO PRAYER http://watch-unto-prayer.org
147
CHAPTER XI MANIPULATING TEXTUAL DATA The template for many Internet exposes of the NKJV seems to be Gail‘s tract, ―New King James Errors & Omissions.‖ Also, her books, New Age Bible Versions, The Language of the King James Bible, In Awe of Thy Word, as well as her CDs and videos employ the same line of reasoning found in the tract which has so effectively persuaded readers to reject the NKJV. The unstated premise of all of Gail‘s so-called ―exposes‖ of the NKJV is that the King James Bible alone is the inerrant Word of God. Every word, yea, every letter of the KJV, is divinely inspired and may never be changed. Therefore, every word and every letter in every Bible in the world, as well as Hebrew and Greeks texts, must conform to every word and every letter in the King James Version. All translations that differ from the KJV must be rejected as corrupt, even if they are faithful to the Greek Textus Receptus, which is no longer God‘s standard for translation! Of course, this premise is never stated, so the reader does not realize that all of Gail Riplinger‘s charts and comparisons reflect the NKJV‘s departure from the KJV, not from the Textus Receptus. So when Gail says, ―The NKJV ignored the KJV Greek Textus Receptus over 1,200 times,‖ what she really means is ‖The NKJV ignored the KJV over 1,200 times.‖ Notice how deftly this statement is worded, merging the KJV and the Greek Textus Receptus into the ―KJV Greek Textus Receptus‖ as if they are one and the same, which they are not. For the King James Version differs from the Greek Received Text in many places; however, to know where they differ, the student of God‘s Word would need to consult an Interlinear Greek-English New Testament. Unfortunately for many KJV readers, Gail has effectively confiscated all Hebrew and Greek resources by thoroughly discrediting them. Lip service is paid to the Textus Receptus as a cover for her contempt for the Greek text as an ―unnecessary‖ relic of the past. ―There existed a true original Greek (i.e. Majority Text, Textus Receptus). It is not in print and never will be because it is unnecessary. No one on the planet speaks first century Koine Greek, so God is finished with it. He needs no ‗Dead Bible Society‘ to translate it into ‗everyday English‘…‖– In Awe of Thy Word, p. 956 In an Addendum to our report, ―Gail Riplinger‘s Misrepresentation of the NKJV,‖ we have analyzed the charts in Gail‘s tract, ―New King James Errors & Omissions,‖ with her tables expanded to show how each verse reads in the KJV, the NKJV, the Hebrew Masoretic Text and the Greek Textus Receptus. Researching Gail‘s charts led us to the stunning discovery that nearly all of the KJV verses she cited disagreed with the Greek Textus Receptus. Conversely, in these verses the NKJV agreed with the Greek Textus Receptus against the KJV. In her tract, Gail claims that in the NKJV, there are 22 omissions of ―hell,‖ 23 omissions of ―blood,‖ 44 omissions of ―repent,‖ 50 omissions of ―heaven,‖ 51 omissions of ―God,‖ and 66 omissions of ―Lord.‖ The terms ―devils,‖ ―damnation,‖ ―JEHOVAH,‖ and ―new testament‖ are completely omitted.‖ Because she provided no specific verses as evidence, we asked AV Publications for a list of the verses in the NKJV which omitted these ―key Christian words‖ which are ―critical to mankind‘s salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ.‖ AV Publications responded with an offer to send us the NKJV tract which, of course, we already had in hand. There was no response from Gail to our second request for specific verses. We then commenced our own analysis of the tract and appended our findings as additional columns to the charts. Please see this important addendum: ―Gail Riplinger‘s Misrepresentation of the NKJV,‖ http://watch-unto-prayer.org/TR-nkjv-misrepresentation.html
147
Since Gail cited no verses as proof of the multitude of ―key Christian words‖ omitted in the NKJV, we did our best to locate these omissions by comparing verses in the KJV with the NKJV, the Greek Textus Receptus and the Hebrew Masoretic Text. Our findings did not prove that the NKJV ―ignored the Textus Receptus,‖ but that it is a good translation of the Greek TR. A brief summary of our research follows:
BLOOD: Of the 450 times ―blood‖ appears in the KJV, it is also translated ―blood‖ in the NKJV, except for 19 instances where the NKJV translated it as ―bloodshed.‖ In most of these verses, the KJV translated the words ―shed blood.‖ (Ex. 22:2; Lev. 17:4; Deut. 17:4, 22:8, II Chron. 19:10; Prov. 28:17; Is. 33:15; Ezek. 9:9, 19:10, 22:9, 22:13, 38:22; Hos. 1:4, 12:14; Joel 3:21; Micah 3:10; Hab. 2:12; Heb. 12:4) In I Sam. 25:26, II Sam. 16:8; 20:1, the NKJV has ―bloodthirsty‖ instead of ―blood.‖ In Lev. 19:16, the NKJV uses the phrase ―take the life‖ instead of ―stand against the blood‖ of thy neighbor in the KJV. Although the word ―blood‖ is not used here, it is a good translation.
REPENT: There are 105 verses in the KJV where the word ―repent‖ occurs. In most verses where the Interlinear TR renders the Greek as ―repent,‖ it is also in the NKJV, e.g. Matt. 3:2: ―Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand!‖ In verses in which God changes His mind, the NKJV uses a different word in keeping with the Greek, e.g. Heb. 7:21, ―The Lord has sworn and will not relent, You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek‖ In such verses where the TR differs from the KJV, such as ―regret‖ in II Cor. 7:8, the NKJV follows suit. ―For also if I grieved you in the epistle, I do not regret it…‖
Therefore, ―repent‖ is the proper translation when referring to men changing their minds and turning from sin, however, the Holy Bible says that, ―God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?‖ (Num. 23:19) Nevertheless, the 1611 KJV translated the Hebrew word ―nacham‖ and the Greek word ―metamellomai‖ as ―repent,‖ even when the context pertains to God.
HELL: In verses where the word ―hell‖ is used in the KJV, the original Hebrew word was ―sheol‖ and the original Greek word was ―hades.‖ The NKJV leaves the original Greek and Hebrew words untranslated. The KJV translators used dynamic equivalence by rendering sheol and hades as hell. The etymology of the word ―hell‖ is interesting. Chambers‘ Etymological Dictionary of the English Language states: ―A.S. [Anglo-Saxon] Ger. hölle, old Ger. helle, Ice. hel, death; orig. A.S. hell = the goddess of death.‖ (p. 226) The Online Etymology Dictionary states that the word hell was transferred from paganism into Christian usage. Although the KJV is mentioned here, translation of the Hebrew sheol and the Greek hades as helle can be traced to the Wycliffe Bible: ―O.E. hel, helle ‗nether world, abode of the dead, infernal regions,‘ from P.Gmc. *khaljo (cf. O.Fris. helle, O.N. hel, Ger. Hölle, Goth. halja ‗hell‘) ‗the underworld,‘ lit. ‗concealed place,‘ from PIE *kel- ‗to cover, conceal, save‘... The Eng. word may be in part from O.N. Hel (from P.Gmc. *khalija ‗one who covers up or hides something‘), in Norse mythology Loki‘s daughter, who rules over the evil dead in Niflheim, the lowest of all worlds (nifl ‗mist‘), a death aspect of the three-fold goddess. Transfer of a pagan concept and word to a Christian idiom, used in the K.J.V. for O.T. Heb. Sheol, N.T. Gk. Hades, Gehenna.‖
TESTAMENT: The Interlinear Greek-English Textus Receptus and the NKJV use the phrase ―new covenant‖ instead of ―new testament.‖ The Greek word ―diatheke‖ can be translated as ―testament,‖ ―will,‖ ―compact‖ or ―covenant.‖ The word ―testament‖ does not have the same connotation as ―covenant‖ which conveys the idea of close relationship, whereas a ―testament‖ is a strictly legal term. Interestingly, the KJV and the Douay Rheims used the word ―covenant‖ in verses pertaining to Jews, but ―testament‖ in most verses pertaining to the Church.
148
DEVILS: The Greek word ―daimonion‖ in the Textus Receptus is translated ―demon‖ in the NKJV, however, the KJV transliterated the word as ―devil.‖ King James I titled his treatise exposing witchcraft ―The Daemonologie.‖
DAMNATION: The NKJV uses the word ―condemnation‖ instead of ―damnation,‖ which is an abbreviated form of ―condemnation.‖ The KJV used the shortened form, ―damnation.‖
LORD: There are 22 pages devoted to ―Lord‖ in the Strong‘s Concordance. How are we to know the 66 verses where ―Lord‖ is used in the KJV but missing in the NKJV? Gail could have identified the verses so readers could verify her statement, but she chose not to. Why? Probably because the reader would see that these are not omissions at all, but legitimate translations. In fact, the NKJV uses the title ―Lord‖ for Jesus Christ, but not for human masters. Example: Matt. 10:24: ―A disciple is not above his teacher, nor a servant above his master.‖ (NKJV) The KJV renders the Greek word kurios as ―lord‖ instead of ―master.‖
JEHOVAH: ―Jehovah‖ is a corruption of the Hebrew name of God, YHWH. (See Chapter 2) There are 7 instances of ―JEHOVAH‖ in the KJV but the Hebrew word for God, YHWH, is translated ―Lord‖ or ―Lord God‖ in thousands of other KJV verses. In the 7 verses where the KJV uses ―JEHOVAH‖, the NKJV correctly translates the word ―Lord‖ (Ps. 84:18) or ―YAH, the LORD‖ (Is. 12:2; 26:12) or ―LORD‖ with ―Hebrew YHWH, traditionally JEHOVAH‖ in a footnote (Exod. 6:3). In Gen. 22:14, the NKJV translates ―Je-ho-vah-ji-rah‖ as ―The-LORD-Will-Provide‖ with the footnote ―Hebrew YHWH Jirah”; in Exod. 17:18, ―Je-ho-vah-nis-si‖ as ―The-LORD-Is-My-Banner‖ with footnote ―Hebrew YHWH Nissi‖; and in Judges 6:24, ―Je-ho-vah-sha-lom‖ as ―The-LORD-IsPeace‖ with footnote ―Hebrew YHWH Shalom‖
For a full, detailed analysis of this very deceptive tract, please see our addendum ―Gail Riplinger‘s Misrepresentation of the NKJV‖. COOKING THE DATA Books have been written delineating the ethical principles governing research against which the actions of all researchers should be judged. God will also judge those who deceive His sheep: ―Therefore seeing we have this ministry, as we have received mercy, we faint not; But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully...‖ (2 Cor. 4:2) ―Cursed be he that doeth the work of the LORD deceitfully...‖ (Jer. 48:10) Gail Riplinger has demonstrated great skill at skewing information to promote the KJV-Only agenda and it is important that her readers understand her modus operandi so as not to be deceived by her next book which promises to be an intensification of her assault on the Greek Textus Receptus: ―My upcoming new book, Greek and Hebrew Study Dangers: The Voice of Strangers, is subtitled, The Men Behind the Smokescreen, Burning Bibles Word by Word (possibly ready in 2008). It documents the heresies held by Strong, Thayer, Liddell, Scott, Moulton, Milligan, Gesenius, Brown, Driver, Briggs, Bauer, Danker, Arndt, Gingrich and others. Their beliefs are shocking. The Bible teaches that ‗man‘s wisdom‘ is ‗not‘ to be our tool for Bible study; spiritual things must be compared within one‘s own Holy Bible.‖ (Riplinger Report, 10-6-07)
149
We have already seen how Gail misrepresented George Ricker Berry‘s Interlinear Greek-English Textus Receptus by falsely stating that the Interlinear ―has been drawn chiefly from Thayer‖ who was a Unitarian. She manipulated the facts by removing this phrase from its context—Berry‘s Introduction to his Lexicon, which was an appendix—and applying it to the Interlinear as a whole, which was translated by Thomas Newberry not George Ricker Berry. She also discarded the main part of the paragraph in which Berry explained that he used Thayer‘s Lexicon only to provide ―some indication of the history of a word‖ — not the meaning of words—in his lexicon, and also as one of many other Greek resources which he consulted. The authors of Responsible Conduct of Research explain on how easy it is to skew the data to promote an agenda. Anyone who does research knows that this is true: ―It is easy to employ experimental designs that tend to bias the data and results... Some forms of bias involve intentional deception (or research misconduct), such as ‗cooking‘ the data (the practice of designing an experiment to produce a desired outcome).‖ (p. 29) ―Cooking the data‖ means retaining only information which proves the researcher‘s theory and omitting anything that might disprove the theory. Other ways of manipulating the data are ―trimming the data‖ and ―forging the data,‖ described in Miller and Wicker‘s Handbook of Research Methods in Public Administration: ―Ethical concerns are not limited to the treatment of human subjects, but also arise during the process of the collection, analysis and reporting of...research data. Learning to design good research assumes that the methods used to collect data will have intellectual integrity and be trustworthy. Once collected, data can be manipulated in various ways that undermine the aims of...science. The expectation in...research is that the data be collected and interpreted ‗objectively.‘ But interpretive objectivity can be compromised by unethical research practices.—Babbage (1969) identifies three ways this can occur during the interpretive process. One violation occurs when researchers select only those data that fit the research hypothesis — this is referred to as ‘cooking’ the data (1969). Another way that objectivity is manipulated is by ‘trimming’ the data. This refers to the practice of massaging the data to make them look better (see for example Huff‘s 1954 classic How to Lie with Statistics). The third way that ‗objectivity‘ can be compromised is by ‘forging’ the data—which refers to the fabrication of data... ―The ethics of scientific investigation are to observe and report all data accurately and completely, even if it means that one of the researcher‘s treasured theories is threatened by such data.‖ (p. 16) The authors conclude, ―Research ethics present a set of principles against which the actions of researchers (and science) are judged.‖ Darrell Huff‘s best-seller, How to Lie with Statistics, is an eye-opener that reveals how statistical data is frequently distorted to promote an agenda. The book was written to help honest people recognize the tricks practiced by professional data manipulators. ―The secret language of statistics, so appealing in a fact-minded culture, is employed to sensationalize, inflate, confuse, and oversimplify. Statistical methods and statistical terms are necessary in reporting the mass data of social and economic trends, business conditions, opinion polls, and the census. But without writers who use the words with honesty and understanding and readers who know what they mean, the result can only be semantic nonsense. ―...Like the ‗little dash of powder, little pot of paint,‘ statistics are making many an important fact ‗look like what she ain‘t.‘ A well-wrapped statistic is better than Hitler‘s ‗big lie‘; it misleads, yet it cannot be pinned on you. ―This book is sort of a primer in ways to use statistics to deceive. It may seem altogether to much like a handbook for swindlers. Perhaps I can justify it in the manner of the retired burglar whose published reminiscences amounted to a graduate course on how to pick a lock and muffle a football.
150
The crooks already know these tricks; the honest men must learn them in self-defense.‖ (Huff, How to Lie with Statistics, pp. 8-9) Considering the recurring pattern in KJV-Onlyism of manipulating their data, readers of KJV-Only books and articles should approach these works as critically as they read works authored by modern version proponents. Do not assume that KJV-Only authors are quoting their sources, or even Scripture verses, accurately. Take nothing for granted!!! As Jesus warned, ―Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.‖ (John 7:24) ―Righteous judgment‖ requires digging below the surface. Make it a point to check the author‘s quotations, Bible verses and allegations to verify his/her claims. Carefully examine charts and tables, comparing each Bible verse with the Greek Textus Receptus. Every author makes errors, especially during the research and writing of lengthy works, and infrequent errors may be excused. However, a recurring pattern of manipulated data is an altogether different matter. Gail Riplinger manipulates textual data using each of the above practices, including forging data. For example, here and there throughout In Awe of Thy Word Erasmus is cited to support her pantheistic/Kabbalistic scheme: ―In the 1500s Erasmus said, ‗God is in every syllable‘‖ (Awe, p. 109, et al) Gail‘s reference for this quotation is The Bible Through the Ages published by Reader‘s Digest. This source actually attributes the statement to Martin Luther. In Part V, in the section ―The Printed Word: Luther‘s Bible‖ is found the actual quote: ―‘God in every syllable’ Luther began with the New Testament using Erasmus‘ emended Greek text as his standard. He painstakingly labored over every detail in recognition that ‗God is in every syllable. No iota is in vain.‘‖ (The Bible Through the Ages, Reader‘s Digest Association, Inc, NY: 1996, p. 306) Why ascribe Luther's statement to Erasmus? Martin Luther was not the textual authority that Erasmus was, but merely a translator who admitted after starting his German translation that ―the task far exceeds my powers.‖ (Ibid.) Since Luther was a lightweight on textual issues, the source of the quote was falsified to support Gail‘s agenda. Gail Riplinger‘s most effective ploy, however, is to throw the New King James Version into the mix with modern versions as having omitted, added or changed key words in verses which establish fundamental doctrine (and some which do not). Arranging charts so that the NKJV is sandwiched amongst corrupt modern versions, including the Jehovah‘s Witness Version and Catholic Bible, has the subliminal effect of implicating the NKJV in the conspiracy to corrupt the Word of God. The visual effect works so well that the reader often fails to notice that the reference states ―NKJV note,‖ which means that the omitted, added or changed words are not omitted, added or changed within the text of the NKJV, but rather a footnote at the bottom of the page annotates the omission in the NU-Text. ―NU text omits...‖ or ―NU text adds...‖ or ―NU-Text reads...‖ refers to the Nestles-UBS Critical Text based on the corrupt Westcott-Hort New Greek Text which is not the Greek Text underlying the NKJV. Meanwhile, the verse in the NKJV is usually identical or very close to the KJV, but the reader has been conned into viewing the NKJV as a corrupt version no different than the NIV, NASB, TNIV, Jehovah Witness Version (New World Translation), etc. A few examples are representative of the charts in Gail Riplinger's various publications. In these charts, ―OMIT‖ is frequently applied to the New King James Version. However, comparison of the text of the NKJV with the text of the KJV usually reveals that all of the Greek words in the Textus Receptus are correctly translated by the NKJV, which is often identical to the text of the KJV! The following chart on page 630 of In Awe of Thy Word demonstrates the misleading ―NKJV note‖ ploy:
151
“The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.” Rom. 16:24. Gothic pre-A.D. 350
ansts fraujins unsaris Iesuis Xristaus miÞ ahmin izwaramma. amen
KJV
The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen
NIV, NASB
OMIT
NKJV note
OMIT
Jehovah Witness Version Catholic Version
OMIT OMIT
See errors in HCSB, ESV, NLT, NRSV, RSV, NCV, etc.
The truth is that Romans 16:24 in the New King James Version is identical to the King James Version: ―The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.‖ (NKJV) A footnote states: ―NU-Text omits this verse‖ which means the corruption is annotated in a footnote at the bottom of the page. (See: Romans 16:24 NKJV) In this chart, Gail also misrepresented the Catholic Version which contains Romans 16:24 translated exactly as the KJV: ―The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.‖ (Romans 16:24 Douay Rheims) And there is not even a footnote in the Douay Rheims! This chart is typical of the many other deceptive charts in Gail Riplinger‘s books and pamphlets. For example, the following chart on page 631 contains even more false data. The new versions deny that Christ is God. “...for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God. So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.” Romans 14:10-12 GOTHIC
Xristaus...guþa...guþa
pre-A.D. 350
Christ... God...God
KJV
Christ... God... God
NASB
God...
God... God
NKJV note
God...
God... God
God...
God... God
God...
God... God
Jehovah Witness Version Catholic Version
See errors in HCSB, ESV, NLT, NRSV, RSV, NCV, etc.
In Galatians 4:7, the text of the NKJV is essentially the same as the KJV: ―But why do you judge your brother? Or why do you show contempt for your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. For it is written: ‗As I live, says the LORD, Every knee shall bow to Me, And every tongue shall confess to God.‘ So then each of us shall give account of himself to God.‖
152
A footnote states: ―NU-Text reads of God.‖ (See: Romans 14:10-12 NKJV) This chart is all the more deceiving because Gail again misrepresents the Catholic Douay Rheims Version as omitting the verse, which it does not (see Douay Rheims Romans 14:10-12), and portrays the Arian Gothic Version, which was translated by the Arian missionary Ulfilas, as supporting the deity of Christ, which he did not. (See: Chapter 16) ―OMIT‖ in Gail Riplinger‘s charts can also mean that words found in the KJV were omitted from the text of the NKJV because these words were not in the Greek Textus Receptus. Of course, this fact is not disclosed, leaving the reader to believe that the NKJV omits words that are in the Textus Receptus. The following example is from Gail‘s tract, ―New King James Errors & Omissions‖: How the NKJV Matches Jehovah Witness Version (NWT) Demotes Jesus Christ NKJV Mark
OMIT
KJV Jesus
2:15
Mark 2:15 in the Textus Receptus reads as follows: ―And it came to pass as he reclined [at table] in his house, that many tax-gatherers and sinners were reclining with Jesus and his disciples;‖ The NKJV translation is similar: ―Now it happened, as He was dining in Levi‘s house, that many tax
collectors and sinners also sat together with Jesus and His disciples; for there were many, and they followed Him.‖ The KJV, however, has two occurrences of ―Jesus‖: ―And it came to pass, that, as Jesus sat at meat in his
house, many publicans and sinners sat also together with Jesus and his disciples: for there were many, and they followed him.‖ In the first instance, the KJV mistranslated the Greek word ―,‖ which means ―he,‖ as ―Jesus.‖ Ignoring the Textus Receptus, Gail alleged that the NKJV omitted ―Jesus‖ from Mark 2:15. ―OMIT‖ can also mean that the NKJV omits words that are in italics in the KJV because they are not in the original Hebrew or Greek texts. On page 740 of In Awe of Thy Word, Gail claims the NKJV is in error because the word ―holy‖ is not in Matt. 12:31. What she omitted to mention was that, in the KJV, ―holy‖ is in italics which means it was not in the Textus Receptus. When the NKJV is alleged to have a New Age reading, the reader should always check the Textus Receptus for the meaning of the Greek word(s). Most often the NKJV agrees with the Textus Receptus, as it does in Mark 10:30 (Awe, pp. 736) where the Greek word ―aion‖) should be translated ―age‖ and not ―world.‖ However, ―the world‖ is also a translation option for and was the KJV Translators‘ choice for Luke 1:70. The second chart below misrepresents the NKJV and the Catholic Version, neither of which translated ―aion‖ as ―age,‖ although that would have been an acceptable translation. The NKJV followed the KJV reading (―world‖) and the Catholic Douay Rheims‘ ―from the beginning‖ is similar to the Textus Receptus‘ ―since time began.‖ The ―Creation or evolution?‖ chart would be another example of ―forged data.‖
153
“A new earth or a new age?” “…and in the world to come eternal life” Mark 10:30 Anglo-Saxon pre-A.D. 700
worulde
Wycliffe 1389
world
Tyndale 1526-1534
worlde
Geneva 1560-1599
world
Bishops' 1568
worlde
KJV
world
NASB, NIV, TNIV
age
NKJV
age
Catholic Version
age
See errors in HCSB, ESV, NLT, NRSV, RSV, NCV, etc.
Textus Receptus Mark 10:30: ―that shall not receive a hundredfold now in this time: houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and lands, with persecutions, and in the age that is coming life eternal.‖
“Creation or evolution? “…which have been since the world began:” Luke 1:70 Anglo-Saxon pre-A.D. 700
worldes
Wycliffe 1389
world
Tyndale 1526-1534
worlde
Geneva 1560-1599
world
Bishops' 1568
worlde
KJV
world
NIV, TNIV
of long ago
NASB
of old
NKJV
age / world
Catholic Version
age / from the beginning.
See errors in HCSB, ESV, NLT, NRSV, RSV, NCV, etc.
Textus Receptus Luke 1:70: ―according as he spoke by [the] mouth holy prophets since time began‖
154
CUT & PASTE Gail Riplinger‘s charts are very deceptive because words are removed from their contexts and then misrepresented as doctrinal corruptions. Unless the reader is checking each verse in each Bible version, giving attention to the context of each word, the deception works every time. A few examples will hopefully alert the reader to the illusory nature of Gail Riplinger‘s charts. In ―New King James Errors & Omissions,‖ titles which apply to human beings are made to apply to Jesus Christ with the misleading indictment ―the NKJV Demotes Jesus Christ.‖ In Luke 13:8, ―Sir‖ is properly used by a keeper of a vineyard to address the owner of the vineyard and, in Matt. 18:26, ―Master‖ is the proper form of address used by a servant who did not ―worship‖ but ―fell down before‖ his human master, a human king:
How the NKJV Demotes Jesus Christ NKJV
KJV
Luke 13:8
Sir
Lord
Matt. 18:26
fell down
and worshipped him,
before him,
saying, Lord
saying, Master
CONTEXT OF VERSES: ―He also spoke this parable: ‗A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard, and he came seeking fruit on it and found none. Then he said to the keeper of his vineyard, ‗Look, for three years I have come seeking fruit on this fig tree and find none. Cut it down; why does it use up the ground?‘ But he answered and said to him, ‗Sir, let it alone this year also, until I dig around it and fertilize it. And if it bears fruit, well. But if not, after that you can cut it down.‘‖ (Luke 13:6-9 NKJV) ―Therefore the kingdom of heaven is like a certain king who wanted to settle accounts with his servants. And when he had begun to settle accounts, one was brought to him who owed him ten thousand talents. But as he was not able to pay, his master commanded that he be sold, with his wife and children and all that he had, and that payment be made. The servant therefore fell down before him, saying, ‗Master, have patience with me, and I will pay you all.‘ Then the master of that servant was moved with compassion, released him, and forgave him the debt.‖ (Matt. 18:23-27 NKJV) These verses have nothing to do with the deity of Jesus Christ yet Gail Riplinger gets away with this kind of deceit in chart after chart because few readers, if any, check the context of the words or verses. There are other verses in the same tract which are deceptively misapplied to Jesus Christ: How the NKJV Matches Jehovah Witness Version (NWT) Demotes Jesus Christ Heb. 4:8
Joshua
Jesus
Acts
Joshua
Jesus
7:45
155
CONTEXT OF VERSES: ―Since therefore it remains that some must enter it, and those to whom it was first preached did not enter because of disobedience... For if Joshua had given them rest, then He would not afterward have spoken of another day.‖ (Hebrews 4:6, 8 NKJV) ―Our fathers had the tabernacle of witness in the wilderness, as He appointed, instructing Moses to make it according to the pattern that he had seen, which our fathers, having received it in turn, also brought with Joshua into the land possessed by the Gentiles, whom God drove out before the face of our fathers until the days of David, who found favor before God and asked to find a dwelling for the God of Jacob.‖ (Acts 7:43-46 NKJV) In the contexts of Hebrews 4 and Acts 7 it is obvious that the Greek name ―‖ (―Iesous‖ ), which in Hebrew is ―Joshua,‖ does not apply to Jesus Christ, but to Joshua who led the Israelites into the Promised Land in the Old Testament! Yet Gail has dishonestly applied Hebrews 4:8 and Acts 7:45 to Jesus Christ with the misleading claim ―the NKJV Matches Jehovah Witness Version (NWT)‖ and outright lie, the NKJV ―Demotes Jesus Christ.‖ ―New King James Errors & Omissions‖ is a stellar sample of Gail Riplinger‘s techniques of cooking, trimming, forging and otherwise manipulating the textual data of the KJV and NKJV to deceive Christians. A thorough analysis of this tract is presented in our addendum ―Gail Riplinger‘s Misrepresentation of the NKJV‖. CAVEAT LECTOR! (Let the reader beware.) Time and space preclude an exhaustive investigation of the manipulated data with deceptive results in all of Gail Riplinger‘s books and articles. The examples we have cited are merely the tip of the iceberg, representative of many other charts and falsely documented research in her publications. The reader will hopefully be motivated to independent investigation. The lesson is that KJV-Only publications should be evaluated with the same critical approach used to analyze and refute the works of modern version proponents. Charts and tables in KJV-Only materials must be scrutinized by comparing each Bible verse with the Hebrew Masoretic Text or the Greek Textus Receptus. Quotations and their sources should be checked to verify their authenticity and the accuracy of KJV-Only claims and allegations. Of course, time does not permit the average reader to check every chart, table, source and quotation in KJV-Only publications, but careful examination of a even a portion of the documentation will reveal the fraudulent claims of KJV-Onlyism. Checking an author‘s sources is not as difficult as it may seem. The Internet has made it possible for nearly everyone to access great deal of information, including complete online books. In addition to online books, many books are now searchable using the Google Book Search engine. Amazon.com also makes it possible to ―Search Inside‖ many books. Hard-to-find non-reference books can usually be obtained at no cost through the Interlibrary Loan department of most local libraries. There is also a great wealth of English Bibles, Hebrew and Greek Texts and Interlinear translations which can be searched online at Olive Tree, which has the Greek-English Interlinear Textus Receptus. There are also online Interlinear translations of the Hebrew Masoretic Text, the Greek Septuagint and the Latin Vulgate. Also online is the King James Bible with Strong's Reference. A more complete list of Bible study resources is presented in an addendum: ―How to Avoid Profane Babblings.‖ Please understand that we are not recommending the Greek Septuagint, Latin Vulgate or modern versions based on corrupted texts except for textual comparison and research purposes, and that includes verifying the information presented in our own reports.
156
God has commanded us to do our own research, so beware of those who steer Christians away from independent research and stigmatize those who use a broad range of resources to help them to understand His Word. ―Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.‖ (2 Tim. 2:15) CHAPTER XII ORIGIN OF KING JAMES-ONLYLISM
CONTEND FOR THE FAITH: THE TEXTUS RECEPTUS http://watch-unto-prayer.org/TR-0-intro.html WATCH UNTO PRAYER taho@watch-unto-prayer.org http://watch-unto-prayer.org
157
SECTION III THE REAL HISTORY OF “KING JAMES ONLYISM” CHAPTER XII ORIGIN OF “KING JAMES ONLYISM” The leadership of the King-James Only movement likes to trace its staunch principles of Biblical preservation and purity to John William Burgon (1813-88), the preeminent textual scholar of his day and arch critic of the Westcott-Hort New Greek Text and English Revised Version. An Anglican clergyman and Dean of the Cathedral of Chichester, England, John Burgon wrote several articles and books on textual criticism, notably The Revision Revised: The New Greek Text, The New English Version and Westcott & Hort’s New Textual Theory and The Causes of the Corruption of the Traditional Text of the Holy Gospels (London, George Bell & Sons, 1896). Dean John Burgon is extensively cited as a textual authority in Riplinger‘s New Age Bible Versions but is mysteriously absent in her later book, In Awe of Thy Word. Burgon is also regularly cited in the works of other KJV-Only defenders such as D.A. Waite who, in 1978, organized and has served as the president of ―The Dean Burgon Society‖ for the ―defense of Traditional Bible texts.‖ The problem with the Dean Burgon Society is that the views of John W. Burgon on the KJV and the Textus Receptus diverge significantly from its ―Articles of Faith.‖ For example, ―Article of Faith ‗A‘‖ of the Dean Burgon Society states: ―We believe that all the verses in the King James Version belong in the Old and the New Testaments because they represent words we believe were in the original texts, although there might be other renderings from the original languages which could also be acceptable to us today. For an exhaustive study of any of the words or verses in the Bible, we urge the student to return directly to the Traditional Masoretic Hebrew Text and the Traditional Received Greek Text rather than to any other translation for help.‖ (Dean Burgon Society ―Articles of Faith,‖ November, 1978) Although Dean Burgon passionately refuted the very corrupt Westcott-Hort Greek Text and the English Revised Version, he was not of the opinion that all of the verses in the KJV represented words that were in the original texts, i.e., that the KJV was without error. Burgon‘s The Revision Revised mentioned at least one ―palpable mistranslation‖ in Luke 23:42 in the context of refuting the ERV‘s omission of ―LORD‖: ―In S. Luke xxxiii. 42, by leaving out two little words ( and ), the same blind guides, under the same blind guidance, effectually misrepresent the record concerning the repentant malefactor. Henceforth they would have us believe that ‗he said, ‗JESUS, remember me when thou comest in thy kingdom.‖‘ (Dr. Hort was fortunately unable to persuade the Revisionists to following him in…substituting ‗into thy kingdom‘ for ‗in thy kingdom‘; and so converting what is in the A.V., is nothing worse than a palpable mistranslation, into what would have been an indelible blot…) Whereas none of the Churches of Christendom have ever yet doubted that S. Luke‘s record is, that the dying man ‗said unto Jesus, LORD, remember me,‘ &c.‖ (The Revision Revised, p. 72). Nor did Burgon believe that the Textus Receptus was inerrant, but stated only that it was ―practically identical‖ to the Text ―which was in popular use at the end of three centuries from the date of the sacred autographs themselves.‖
158
―But pray, who in his senses,—what sane man in Great Britain,—ever dreamed of regarding the ‗Received,‘—aye, or any other known ‗Text,‘—as ‗a standard from which there shall be no appeal‘? Have I ever done so? Have I ever implied as much? If I have, show me where... I mistake the Received Text, (you imply,) for the Divine Original, the Sacred Autographs,—and erect it into ‗a standard from which there shall be no appeal,‘—‗a tradition which it is little else but sacrilege to impugn.‘ That is how you state my case and condition: hopelessly confusing the standard of Comparison with the standard of Excellence… ―We must have some standard whereby to test,—wherewith to compare,—Manuscripts. What is more…to the end of time it will probably be the practice of scholars to compare MSS. of the N.T. with the ‗Received Text.‘…And,—What standard more reasonable and more convenient than the Text which, by the good Providence of GOD, was universally employed throughout Europe for the first 300 years after the invention of printing? Being practically identical with the Text which…was in popular use at the end of three centuries from the date of the sacred autographs themselves, in other words, being more than 1500 years old.‖ (The Revision Revised, pp. 385-6) ―In other words I have not made [the Textus Receptus] ‗the final standard of appeal.‘ All critics, — wherever found, — at all times, have collated with the commonly received text: but only as the most convenient standard of Comparison; not, surely, as the absolute standard of Excellence.‖ (The Revision Revised, Preface, p. xviii) Dean John Burgon‘s views concerning the inerrancy of the KJV and the Textus Receptus are important because they demonstrate that the King James-Only movement does not derive its precepts from this eminent 19th century textual scholar. For this reason, we must look elsewhere for the source of the KJV-Only claims. The co-founder of the Dean Burgon Society with D.A. Waite was David Otis Fuller, who served as its Vice President until his death in 1988. Fuller also edited three books which were compilations of the works of various KJV advocates: Which Bible? (1970), True or False? The Westcott-Hort Textual Theory Examined (1973) and Counterfeit or Genuine? (1978). Whereas Counterfeit or Genuine? was a condensed edition of John Burgon‘s book, The Last Twelve Verses of Mark, along with other contributors, fully one-half of Fuller‘s first book, Which Bible, was an edited reprint of Benjamin Wilkinson‘s book, Our Authorized Bible Vindicated (1930). Benjamin Wilkinson (1872-1968) was a prominent leader of the Seventh Day Adventist Church and his books were published by the SDA, but these details are nowhere stated by David Otis Fuller who merely wrote of his source: ―Dr. Wilkinson taught for many years in a small but obscure Eastern college.‖ (p. 174) Also, quoting Wilkinson: ―In addition to the author‘s tasks in the classroom and his evangelical work as pastor of a city church, he wrote this book in response to urgent requests.‖ (p. 175). In his widely-read book, Which Bible?, David Otis Fuller never so much as mentioned Wilkinson‘s religious affiliation, much less his leadership role as one of the Seventh Day Adventists‘ leading propagators and proselytizers. Benjamin Wilkinson actually directed numerous SDA Conferences, served in various leadership positions of SDA schools, was an SDA missionary in remote regions of world and worked in the SDA headquarters for several years with SDA founder, Ellen G. White. The title page of Wilkinson‘s online book states his official position at the Washington Missionary College: OUR AUTHORIZED BIBLE VINDICATED BENJAMIN G. WILKINSON, PH.D. DEAN OF THEOLOGY, WASHINGTON MISSIONARY COLLEGE TAKOMA PARK, D.C. WASHINGTON D.C JUNE, 1930 As Dean of Theology of the SDA‘s Washington Missionary College, Wilkinson‘s ministry in Takoma Park, D.C., where the SDA was headquartered, overlapped that of SDA founder, Ellen G. White (1827-1915). 159
According to the SDA Statement of Fundamental Beliefs: ―Ellen. G. White [was] the Lord's messenger, her writings are a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction.‖ It appears that Wilkinson actually worked alongside Ellen G. White in the cult‘s world headquarters, which was located on part of the former estate of the wealthy Carroll family which had produced a signer of the Declaration of Independence (Charles), the Constitution (Daniel) and the founder of Georgetown University (John) – all Freemasons: ―Manor House. This house once sat alone in the circular drive still called ‗Manor Circle.‘ A small corner of the vast Carroll estates, it was home to Major General Samuel Sprigg Carroll until his death in 1893. Later occupants included Seventh-Day Adventist leader Ellen White and several generations of students attending the Washington Missionary College (now Columbia Union College).‖ (Takoma Voice) ―In 1904, a significant new player moved to Takoma Park. Helping with relocation of the Michigan based Seventh Day Adventist Church, search committee member A. G. Daniells wrote in June of 1903, ‗One of the finest places we have found was a place called Takoma Park… It is a magnificent place.‘ ―With a missionary college and a sanitarium in mind, the Adventist church first purchased a 50-acre site on Sligo Creek from Dr. Flower, whose plans, despite a $60,000 investment, remained stillborn. ―In 1907, the Church dedicated its Foreign Missionary Seminary (today‘s Columbia Union College), and a year later, the Washington Sanitarium building. ―The church acquired a second large tract, in the center of Takoma, for a General Conference building, a publishing center, and a church; they also bought land between Tulip and Carroll Avenues to resell as residential lots to church members. ―From its headquarters in Takoma Park, the General Conference Center oversaw 2,874 churches around the world by 1912, and published texts and literature for church use from its companion Review and Herald Publishing Association building. At its opening, the Review and Herald print shop reportedly employed between 60 and 70 people.‖ (Historic Takoma, Inc.) Benjamin Wilkinson‘s book, Our Authorized Bible Vindicated, would appear to be the template upon which the leading lights of the KJV-Only movement based their various books. Most of the major themes found in Wilkinson‘s book – from the promotion of the medieval Gnostics as the ―true Christians‖ persecuted by the evil Roman Church to purveying heretical translations such as the Syriac Peshitta, Old Latin and Gothic bibles – these claims are parroted nearly verbatim in the books of David Otis Fuller, D.A. Waite, Gail Riplinger, Peter Ruckman, James Sightler, David Cloud, Samuel Gipp, William Grady, and all of their protégés. THE WALDENSES A good portion of Wilkinson‘s book is devoted to portraying the medieval Waldenses as the ―true Christians‖ who preserved the Textus Receptus during the Dark Ages. ―Anyone who is interested enough to read the vast volume of literature on this subject, will agree that down through the centuries there were only two streams of manuscripts. ―The first stream which carried the Received Text in Hebrew and Greek, began with the apostolic churches, and reappearing at intervals down the Christian Era among enlightened believers, was protected by the wisdom and scholarship of the pure church in her different phases; by such as the church at Pella in Palestine where Christians fled, when in 70 A. D. the Romans destroyed Jerusalem; by the Syrian Church of Antioch which produced eminent scholarship; by the Italic Church in northern Italy; and also at the same time by the Gallic Church in southern France and by the Celtic Church in Great Britain; by the pre-Waldensian, the Waldensian, and the churches of the Reformation.‖ (Our Authorized Bible Vindicated, p. 12) 160
―For nine hundred years, we are told, the first Latin translations held their own after the Vulgate appeared. The Vulgate was born about 380 A.D. Nine hundred years later brings us to about 1280 A.D. This accords well with the fact that at the famous Council of Toulouse, 1229 A.D., the Pope gave orders for the most terrible crusade to be waged against the simple Christians of southern France and northern Italy who would not bow to his power. Cruel, relentless, devastating, this war was waged, destroying the Bibles, books, and every vestige of documents to tell the story of the Waldenses and Albigenses. ―Since then, some authorities speak of the Waldenses as having as their Bible, the Vulgate. We regret to dispute these claims. But when we consider that the Waldenses were, so to speak, in their mountain fastnesses, on an island in the midst of a sea of nations using the Vulgate, without doubt they knew and possessed the Vulgate; but the Italic, the earlier Latin, was their own Bible, the one for which they lived and suffered and died.‖ (Our Authorized Bible Vindicated, p. 28) ―It is evident that the so-called Christian Emperor gave to the Papacy his endorsement of the Eusebio-Origen Bible. It was from this type of manuscript that Jerome translated the Latin Vulgate which became the authorized Catholic Bible for all time. ―The Latin Vulgate, the Sinaiticus, the Vaticanus, the Hexapla, Jerome, Eusebius, and Origen, are terms for ideas that are inseparable in the minds of those who know. The type of Bible selected by Constantine… was different from the Bible of the Waldenses, and, as a result of this difference, the Waldenses were the object of hatred and cruel persecution, as we shall now show. In studying this history, we shall see how it was possible for the pure manuscripts, not only to live, but actually to gain the ascendance in the face of powerful opposition.‖ (Our Authorized Bible Vindicated, p. 22) It is highly improbable that the Waldensians would have appealed to the Pope for approval of a Bible that had not been translated from the Roman Catholic Vulgate. The dishonesty of Wilkinson‘s claim is apparent in many reliable sources which confirm the well-established fact that Peter Waldo translated from the Latin Vulgate. ―The Latin Vulgate Bible was the only edition of the Scriptures at that time in Europe; but that language was inaccessible to all, except one in an hundred of its inhabitants. Happily for Waldo, his situation in life enabled him to surmount that obstacle…. [H]e either himself translated, or procured some one else to translate the four Gospels into French…‖ (William Jones, History of the Christian Church, Vol. II, pp.7, 9, 10; 5th Ed., 1826). ―The ‗Lingua Romana,‘ or Roumant tongue, was the common language of the south of Europe from the eighth to the fourteenth century… Into this tongue—the Roumant—was the first translation of the whole of the New Testament made so early as the twelfth century. This fact Dr. Gilly has been at great pains to prove in his work, The Roumant Version of the Gospel according to John [1848]. The sum of what Dr. Gilly, by a patient investigation into the facts, and a great array of historic documents, maintains, is that all the books of the New Testament were translated from the Latin Vulgate into the Roumant, that this was the first literal version since the fall of the empire, that it was made in the twelfth century, and was the first translation available for popular use…it was made, as Dr. Gilly, by a chain of proofs, shows, most probably under the superintendence and at the expense of Peter Waldo of Lyons, not later than 1180…‖ (J. A. Wylie, History of the Waldenses, 1870, 4th ed., pp. 12, 13) ―He [Waldo] employed Stephen of Ansa and Bernard Ydross to translate the Gospels from the Latin Vulgate of Jerome into the Romance dialect for the common people.‘ (Thomas Armitage, History of the Baptists, Traced by their Vital Principles and Practices, from the Time of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to the Year 1886, p.295).
161
The reason behind Wilkinson‘s heavy promotion of the Waldenses seems to be that, like the Plymouth Brethren, the Unitarians and the Baptists, the Seventh-Day Adventists claim to have descended spiritually from the Waldenses. Ellen G. White‘s book, The Great Controversy, devoted an entire chapter to ―The Waldenses‖: ―In lands beyond the jurisdiction of Rome there existed for many centuries bodies of Christians who remained almost wholly free from papal corruption... These Christians believed in the perpetuity of the law of God and observed the sabbath of the fourth commandment.... But of those who resisted the encroachments of the papal power, the Waldenses stood foremost.... Through ages of darkness and apostasy there were Waldenses who denied the supremacy of Rome, who rejected image worship as idolatry, and who kept the true Sabbath... Here, for a thousand years, witnesses for the truth maintained the ancient faith.‖ (Chap. 4) A footnote states: ―A report of an inquisition before whom were brought some Waldenses of Moravia in the middle of the fifteenth century declares that among the Waldenses ‗not a few indeed celebrate the Sabbath with the Jews.‘ – Johann Joseph Ignaz von Doellinger, Beitrage zur Sektengeschichte des Mittelalters (Reports on the History of the Sects of the Middle Ages), Munich, 1890, 2d pt., p. 661.)‖ The Waldenses were a movement organized in the 12th century by Peter Waldo, who began to preach in the town of Lyon in southern France, the region in which the Merovingian Jews also lived – which explains why ―not a few‖ Waldenses ―celebrated the Sabbath with the Jews.‖ In modern times the name has been applied to members of a Protestant church located on the border of France and Italy, which formed when remnants of the earlier movement became Swiss Protestant Reformers. The Unitarian Church also claims descent from the Waldenses, and a sizeable section of the Unitarian Church also keeps the Jewish Sabbath: ―Andreas Eossi became the leader of the Unitarian Church on the death of Francis Davidis in 1579. Davidis had established the Unitarian Church in Transylvania in 1566 from Hungarian elements of the Unitarian church called Waldensians. Eossi was converted and became a Unitarian in 1567. Similarly to the western Waldensians at the commencement of the Reformation, the East European Church split into Sunday and Sabbath-keepers from the death of Davidis and Eossi became leader of the Sabbath-keepers.‖ (Christian Churches of God) In addition to observance of the Jewish Sabbath, the Unitarian Church holds other doctrines deriving from Judaism – denial of the doctrines of the Deity of Jesus Christ and the Trinity. Earl Morse Wilbur, the author of A History of Unitarianism: In Transylvania, England and America, Vol. I, reveals historic parallels between Unitarianism and Judaism: ―As early as 1583 the Jesuit writer Possevino reports that a great many of the people of Kolozsvár are forsaking the Gospel for the Prophecies of the Old Testament, and that the Unitarian ministers in Szeklerland universally…abstain from blood and pork. [Cf. his Transslvania (1584), p. 66; Epistolae et Acta, i, 280.] In their literal devotion to the teachings of Scripture many of them discovered more and more points in which its plain commands were being neglected by Christians: such points as observance of the Sabbath and of feast or fast days, unleavened bread, abstinence from blood or unclean meats, and circumcision; and conscience made them feel bound to keep these commands, which had never been abrogated, as well as to abandon certain Christian usages which had never been ordained in Scripture. It was therefore but natural that these literal biblical Christians should presently be given the reproachful name of Judaizers or Sabbatarians, and be looked at askance as corrupters of true Christianity; and the measures against innovators passed at frequent intervals in the Diets during half a century from 1578 on were undoubtedly more often aimed… 162
―Sabbatarianism as a religious movement was at first simply a variety of Christianity, which for various reasons commended itself to the more active-minded Unitarians, and to a considerable extent also to the Reformed, especially among the inhabitants of the Szekler counties. Though it had its roots in Christianity it was much influenced by Old Testament elements which Christianity had neglected but Judaism had retained, as noted above. It held that the whole law of Moses was to be kept as still valid, and that the Gospel had abolished none of its requirements. It held strongly to the absolute unity of God, and taught that Jesus, though not to be worshiped, was greater than all the Prophets, and was the promised Messiah.‖(A History of Unitarianism: In Transylvania, England and America, Vol. I, Chap. VII) The English historian, Robert Robinson, a Unitarian Baptist, claimed in his Ecclesiastical Researches that most Waldensians were Unitarians. Baptist author, Thomas Williamson, conceded Robinson‘s point in his defense of the Waldenses, with a rare admission of the Unitarian (Arian) heresy of other medieval sects which Baptists claim as their predecessors: ―The question of whether the Waldenses held orthodox views on the subject of the Trinity and the deity of Christ is worthy of examination. After all, the study of dissenting sects in the Middle Ages yields many disturbing hints of belief in Adoptionism, the notion that Christ was a mere man who was endowed with Divine attributes at His baptism by God the Father. Through the centuries there have been churches with a Baptist name and testimony which yet have held Arian and Socinian views; such churches are prominent in the church history of Poland and Transylvania in the late 16th Century, and of England in the 18th Century… ―…it is beyond doubt that the early Waldenses must have been exposed to Arian influences, which were numerous in the early Middle Ages. We are justified in stopping to ask whether the Waldenses preserved their orthodoxy, untainted by the Arian and Adoptionist heresies, through the misty gloom of the Dark Ages. The 18th-Century English historian Robinson claimed that most of the ancient Waldenses were Arians: ‗In regard to the great leading point, the most were Unitarians, but many held the same opinions as the church of Rome did, and consequently the doctrine of the Trinity.‘ [Robinson, op.cit, p. 316] Of the later Bohemian Waldenses he says: ‗They were all indiscriminately called Waldenses and Picards, and they all rebaptized: but they were of very different sentiments; some held the divinity of Christ, others denied it.‘ [Ibid., p. 517] ―If Robinson, a Baptist of militant Unitarian views, was willing to admit that some of the Waldenses were Trinitarians, we can be sure that some of them were.‖ (―The Waldenses Were Independent Baptists‖) Even if we accept Williamson‘s claim that the predecessors of the Independent Baptists were not the Unitarian Waldenses, there is solid evidence that the other Waldenses, the Trinitarians, were not the guardians of ―true Christianity‖ as defined by Scripture. A well-researched book on the various medieval sects which KJV-Only Baptists also claim as their spiritual ancestors is James Edward McGoldrick‘s Baptist Successionism: A Crucial Question in Baptist History. A chapter devoted to the teachings and practices of the Waldenses reveals that they had more in common with Roman Catholicism than Protestantism: ―In 1179 a small delegation of Waldenses appeared at Rome during the Third Lateran Council and asked Pope Alexander III (1159-81) for his approval of the Waldenses‘ ministry. At that time the Waldenses gave the pope a copy of their Bible translation. The pope and council recognized the Waldenses‘ right to practice evangelical perfection but denied them the right to preach… As of yet the Waldenses had issued no pronouncements which could have 163
been rightly construed as heresy, and in 1180 Waldo signed a statement of faith dictated by a papal legate in which the popular exponent of apostolic living subscribed to all of the major tenets of traditional Catholicism… ―…Because Waldo‘s confession of faith is quite specific in its affirmation of loyalty to traditional Catholicism, it bears quoting at length: ―‗…We believe in one Church, Catholic, Holy, Apostolic and Immaculate, apart from which no one can be saved, and in the sacraments therein administered through the invisible and incomprehensible power of the Holy Spirit, sacraments which may be rightly administered by a sinful priest…‘‖ ―…Waldo‘s outlook on the Christian life was at least semimonastic… When Waldo adopted a life of poverty, he left his family after giving some of his possessions to his wife and come to a convent of nuns, to which he entrusted the care of his daughters… ―In a statement of faith…Peter Waldo affirmed his belief in transubstantiation, prayers for the dead and infant baptism. The famed Baptist historian A.H. Newman drew the only conclusion warranted by the evidence. ‗Waldo and his early followers had more in common with…Roman Catholicism than with any evangelical party. His views of life and doctrine were scarcely in advance of many earnest Catholics of the time.‘ ―…the early generations of the sect maintained the essentially Catholic view that salvation comes by grace plus human works of merit… in the early phase of their history they retained a priest-centered, sacramental view of salvation. They accepted all seven sacraments of the medieval church, including infant baptism, the real presence of Christ in the eucharist, and priestly absolution from sin. In fact, a Waldense confession of faith composed at a relatively late date of 1508 espoused all of these tenets.‖ (McGoldrick, pp. 71-80) A Mennonite classic, The Martyrs’ Mirror, identifies the Waldenses as ―Albigenses‖ living in the southernmost district of France. The Mennonites, along with the Anabaptists and Quakers are modern-day Cathars, the greater sect of which the Albigenses were a local body in the Languedoc. Of the Manichean dualism of the Cathars and Albigenses more will be said in the next chapter. ―About A. D. 1170. For the year 1160, we gave an account of Peter Waldo and his conversion, as well as of his having brought many who sat in the darkness of popery, to the light of the holy Gospel. It is stated of these people, that in doctrine, faith, and life they were like the Apostolics, of whom we made mention for the year 1155, and stated, that they were opposed to infant baptism, purgatory, etc. The rise of these people, called Waldenses and Albigenses, is fixed about A. D. 1170, that is, ten years after Peter Waldo began to teach them; which matters shall hereafter be treated more fully and circumstantially. Compare Bapt. Hist., page 599, with Nietigh., page. 85; also, Introduction to the Martyrs" Mirror, fol. 50, col. 1, 2, (although the principal rising of said people is there fixed A. D. 1176) from Bar. in Chron., A. D. 1176, num. 1, 2, 3… ―When Peter Waldo with his adherents, through the cruel hatred of the papists, had to leave the city of Lyons, on account of his faith, they became distributed and scattered into different parts of the world, and, hence, received various appellations, with regard to the places where they resided, as well as with regard to their faith, and to the accusations brought against them, especially by the Romanists. ―In the History of the Waldenses, by D. Balthasar Lydius, 1st book of the first part, cap. 3, page 4, col. 2, and page 5, col. 1, the following account is found of the various names of said people, ‗They, in the first place, called them Waldenses, after Waldo, who was a citizen of Lyons: and, after the district of Albi, they called them Albigenses.‘… ―NOTE.-That the Albigenses also, who were one with the Waldenses, were defenseless, peaceable, and meek people, living in quiet under certain papistic authorities, who protected them. See, among others, Introduction, page 50, cot. 2, and page 51, cot. 1, from Baron. in Annal.‖ (Martyrs‘ Mirror)
164
Benjamin Wilkinson‘s other book, Truth Triumphant: The Church in the Wilderness, presents a succession of religious sects who carried on the teachings and practices of ―primitive Christianity‖ throughout Church history and passionately resisted the doctrinal decrees of the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches. These medieval sects are presented as the ―true Christians,‖ not only because they rejected the sacraments and teachings of Roman Catholicism, but because they preserved the Saturday Sabbath. In fact, according to Truth Triumphant, the Waldenses were the principal Sabbath-keepers for 200 years preceding the Reformation: ―Robert Cox has cited the fact that Erasmus pointed out how strictly Bohemian Waldenses kept the seventh-day Sabbath.12 ―…The Reformers took a wrong attitude on the Ten Commandments. They respected them as a code of teaching, but not as a law of binding obligation. Most all the Reformers could be quoted, but only one statement will be given, from the English Reformer Tyndale: ‗As for the Saboth, a great matter, we be lords over the Saboth; and may yet change it into the Monday, or any other day, as we see need; or may make every tenth day holy day only, if we see a cause why.‘… The papacy did not recognize the obligatory observance of the Sabbath of the fourth commandment. Therefore, during the 1260 years, whenever the fourth commandment had its proper place, it was always the work of the Sabbathkeepers of the Church in the Wilderness. We have seen the crises brought on by the powerful antagonism of the papacy to the Sabbath of the fourth commandment.‖ (Benjamin Wilkinson, Truth Triumphant: The Church in the Wilderness, Pacific Press Publishing Assoc., pp. 385-6) A section follows on ―The Background of the Day of Worship‖ in which Wilkinson asserts that the ―true Christianity‖ was of the ―Judean type‖ and was preserved, not by the Roman Church of the West, but by the Semitic churches of the Persian Empire. ―It was a great moment in the agelong struggle between the Bible and tradition when, in 489 the Roman emperor in his zeal for hierarchical doctrine, closed the notable college established by the Assyrian Church at Edessa. This act resulted in the erection of a barrier between the evangelical East and the papal West. The Church of the East promptly left Edessa, which was just within the border of the Roman dominion, and moved the institution to Nisibis, a few hundred miles within the Persian Empire. Here, near the Tigris River, a great university was established, which for a thousand years not only confirmed the Persian Christians in the Judean type of teachings as against the papal type, but also spread Greek culture and Roman civilization to the nations of the Orient. Nine years later (A.D. 498) the Assyrian Church, in council assembled, renounced all connection with the church of the Roman Empire. Many writers point out the Semitic nature of the nations in the midst of which this new college was placed. This settled once and forever that the teachings of Semitic Abraham and his descendants, not the state religion of the West in its pagan philosophy, would color the churches of Asia. Thus, the graduates of Nisibis as they stood like prophets before the sovereigns of China and Japan would preach the Sabbath of the fourth commandment. ―It was attested by the early church historians, Socrates and Sozomen,…as well as by other authorities, that at this time all the churches of the world, except Rome and Alexandria, sanctified with divine services the worship of the Sabbath of the Decalogue. Wherever Sunday was also observed, it was with memorial resurrection services. The papal church, yes, even the Reformers, did not recognize Sunday as a continuation of, or a substitute for, the Sabbath. Sunday was in no way considered as having been instituted by a divine commandment, but only by a church ordinance.‖ (Truth Triumphant, pp. 386-7) The Assyrian Church at Edessa which brought the ―Judean type of teachings‖ into the Persian Empire did not separate from papal Rome over the ―Saturday Sabbath‖ observance, as Wilkinson avers, but rather over the nature of Jesus Christ. For the Assyrian Church at Edessa (presently Urfa in Turkey) was and is still known as the ―Nestorian Church‖ precisely because it preserved the heresy of Nestorius who denied that the two natures of God and man coexisted in the person of Jesus Christ. Nestorius taught that Christ was actually two persons— God the Son and the man Christ Jesus—a heresy that was condemned by the Council of Ephesus in A.D. 431. 165
Nestorius had been a student of the School of Antioch which produced the Syriac Peshitta, a hybrid translation based on the corrupt Alexandrian as well as Antiochan manuscripts, contrary to the claims of KJV-Only defenders that the Peshitta was in the manuscript line of the Textus Receptus. (See: ―The Semitic New Testament‖) The Seventh-Day Adventist cult, of which Benjamin Wilkinson was a prominent leader, embraced an earlier heresy than Nestorianism, that of the heresiarch Arius (c 250-336) of Alexandria. Arius claimed that Jesus Christ, the Son, was not of the same substance of the Father but was a subordinate deity who was created or begotten by the Father and then exalted to the level of God in preparation for his role as an agent for creating the world. The Arian heresy was embraced by Ellen G. White, who also taught that Jesus was Michael the Archangel. According to former Adventist, Dr. Verle Streifling, author of the expose, ―Did Ellen White teach ‗A Different God‘?‖ Seventh-Day Adventism taught the Arian heresy from its inception: ―It is well known that the early Adventist leaders and founders were Arians, who denied the deity of Christ, and the Trinity. Their article ‗The Doctrine of the Trinity Among Adventists‘ by Gerhard Pfandi, of their Biblical Research Institute (referred to as ‗Trinity‘ henceforth) tells us on page 1: ‗Two of the principal founders of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, Joseph Bates and James White, were originally members of the Christian Connection Church which rejected the doctrine of the Trinity… Other prominent Adventists who spoke out against the Trinity were J.N. Loughborough, R.F. Cottrell, J.N. Andrews, and Uriah Smith…‘ ―These SDA leaders denied Jesus‘ deity and the Trinity. Joseph Bates, raised in the Congregational Church, repudiated the Trinity doctrine upon joining the Christian Connection Church. Bates learned the Sabbath doctrine from Rachel Oakes, a Seventh-day Baptist; however, Bates did not accept the Seventh-day Baptist doctrine of the Trinity. So, early Adventists had more in common with the Shakers, who not only kept the Sabbath and had prophets, but also believed in Arianism. Only by the turn of the century did Adventism begin to move out of Arianism to espousing Jesus‘ deity, and subsequently, the Trinity. This was hard to do in light of Ellen White‘s statements, spanning over 50 years, upholding Arianism. Ellen White‘s Arian Views ―Ellen often called Jesus ‗The Son of God‘ at original creation. We read these words not seeing them as the Arian views they are, for they evoke the question ‗How was He ‗the Son of God?‘‘ John 1:1-3 and Hebrews 1:10 show He was YHWH, the Word at creation, but became ‗Son of God‘ and ‗Son of Man‘ at His incarnation (Heb 1:5-6) when the Father said ‗I will become to Him a father, and He will become to me a Son‘ (cf Lk 1:35). Arians teach he was the ‗Son of God‘ by being created or begotten by the Father, and then God created other things through him. So he was only a lesser deity, whose pre-eminence over the angels was conferred to him, by the Father. Ellen G White also held this Christdebasing view: ―‗…yet, Jesus, God‘s dear Son, had the pre-eminence over all the angelic host. He was one with the Father before the angels were created. Satan was envious of Christ and gradually assumed command which devolved on Christ alone. [Devolve: To transfer from one person to another: hand down. Webster's Dictionary] “‘The great Creator assembled the heavenly host, that he might in the presence of all the angels confer special honor upon his Son…The Father then made known that it was ordained by himself that Christ, his Son, should be equal with himself." (Spirit of Prophecy, vol. 1, pp. 17, 18, emphasis supplied) 166
―The article ‗Trinity‘ acknowledges this implies that ‗he was not equal to the Father before that time‘, for Jesus‘ command was only ‗devolved‘ or handed-down from the Father, and his equality was ‗conferred‘ or positional equality rather than being equal by nature, as necessary for True Deity. (Gal 4:8).‖ (Ellen G. White Research Project) The Seventh-Day Adventist Church claims that around the turn of the century Ellen G. White ―received more light‖ and embraced the Biblical doctrines of the pre-existence and deity of Jesus Christ and also the Trinity. However, according to Streifling, Mrs. White‘s volte face was not a repudiation of Arianism, but a project of certain Adventists who revised her writings in order to cite certain statements as proof of her orthodoxy— statements which do not agree with other statements which maintain the Arian heresy that were made by White during the same time period. And so we are confronted with the appalling fact that the esteemed leaders of King James Only movement have promoted the fraudulent claims of a minister in the Arian Seventh-Day Adventist Church, without notifying their followers of his credentials, and that among Wilkinson‘s falsehoods are claims that the Waldenses were among those ―enlightened believers‖ of the ―pure church‖ ―in her different phases‖ which preserved the manuscripts that would become the Textus Receptus, when in fact they were, at best, Judaized Roman Catholics, or, even worse, Unitarians or Manichean dualists. CHAPTER XIII ALBIGENSES & CATHARI
CONTEND FOR THE FAITH: THE TEXTUS RECEPTUS http://watch-unto-prayer.org/TR-0-intro.html WATCH UNTO PRAYER taho@watch-unto-prayer.org http://watch-unto-prayer.org
167
CHAPTER XIII THE ALBIGENSES & CATHARI Upon investigating the origins of the ―King James Only‖ movement it becomes evident that its proponents across the board derived their teachings, not from the textual scholar Dean John William Burgon, but from a Seventh-Day Adventist missionary, teacher and colleague of Ellen G. White— Benjamin Wilkinson—and that Wilkinson‘s books blazed the trail of ―KJV-Onlyism‖ which is carrying on the SDA‘s mission of mainstreaming, not only the medieval cults which embraced the Gnostic heresy, but their corrupt bible translations as well. For all of the leading King James Only defenders preach that the heretical Cathars, Albigenses, Bogomils, Paulicians, Donatists, Waldenses, etc. etc. were the ―true Christians‖ who were ―cruelly persecuted‖ by the Roman Catholic Church for preserving the Received Text when, in fact, they were Manichean dualists who rejected Jesus Christ and the Word of God. David Cloud, Rome and the Bible: ―The persecutions which were poured out upon these Bible-believing people beginning in the 7th century caused them to be scattered throughout Europe, everywhere carrying with them the New Testament faith. The Lutheran historian Mosheim, writing in the 17th century, says:... They were later known by many names, including Paterini, Cathari, Bulgarians, Patarins, Gazarians, Turlupins, Runcarians, and Albigenses... The term ‗Albigenses‘ probably derived from a Council which was held in the year 1176 at the town of Lombers near Albi, ‗for the purpose of examining certain reputed heretics‘ (Faber, p. 221)... ―The Bogomiles, possibly an offshoot from the Paulicians, were condemned as heretics and suffered great persecution...The Alibgenses rejected the Roman Church and esteemed the New Testament above all its traditions and ceremonies... Reineriou also falsely accused the Waldensians with Manicheanism. This Reinerius is probably the same persecutor employed by Pope Innocent III to hunt out the ‗heretical‘ Waldenses and Cathari throughout southern France and northern Spain...‖ (Way of Life Literature, 1996, pp. 34, 36, 37) Samuel Gipp, An Understandable History of the Bible: ―‗From Antioch…the Universal Text was sent up into Europe. From there is spread through Syria and Europe through its translation into the Syriac Peshitto version and the Old Latin Vulgate… The Old Latin Vulgate was used by the Christians in the churches of the Waldenses, Gauls, Celts, Albigenses, and other fundamental groups throughout Europe.‖ (p. 67) William P. Grady, Final Authority: ―The first Latin translation of the Bible is known as the ‗Old Latin‘ and was made no later than A.D. 157 for the young churches established throughout the Italian Alps. The fifty extant manuscripts of this version are classified by either of their eventual twofold areas of expanded circulation – Europe or Asia. Also referred to as the Itala Bible, this venerable witness was also closely allied with the Textus Receptus – a full century before the so-called Lucian Recension! ―Because of this we are not surprised to learn that the Roman Bishop Damascus commissioned Jerome to revive the ‗archaic‘ Old Latin Bible in A.D. 382. As mentioned in chapter two, the completed monstrosity became known as the Latin ‗Vulgate‘ (for received) and was used by the devil to usher in the Dark Ages. ―By contract and in the face of this romanish recension, true Latin-speaking believers continued to perpetuate their beloved Itala through the centuries. These readings were eventually preserved through a translation into sixteenth-century Italian by the reformer 168
Diodati becoming the official Bible of the Albigensen and Waldensian assemblies. Satan‘s wrath for this pure Alpine text was vividly confirmed by the blood which flowed through the otherwise peaceful valleys amidst repeated Catholic atrocities.‖ (pp. 35-6) Floyd Jones, Ripped Out Of the Bible: ―…the ‗Traditional Text‘…has been read and preserved by the Greek Orthodox Church throughout the centuries. From it came the Peshitta, the Italic, Celtic, Gallic, and Gothic Bibles, the medieval versions of the evangelical Waldenses and Albigenses, and other versions suppressed by Rome during the Middles Ages.‖ (p. 40) Jack Moorman, Forever Settled: ―Ruckman, quoting ISBE says, ‗The Albigenses continued to use the Old Latin long after Jerome‘s Vulgate came out and their preservation of this text is attributed (according to Burkitt) to the fact that they were ‗heretics‘.‘ ―As Rome did not send any missionaries toward the West before 250 AD, the early Latin Bibles were well established before these churches came into conflict with Rome. Not only were such translations in existence long before the Vulgate was adopted by the Papacy, and well established, but the people for centuries refused to supplant their old Latin Bibles by the Vulgate. ‗The Old Latin versions were used longest by the western Christians who would not bow to the authority of Rome - e.g., the Donatists; the Irish in Ireland, Britain, and the Continent; the Albigenses, etc.‘ ―And as there were really only two Bibles - the official version of Rome, and the Received Text - we may safely conclude that the Gallic (or French) Bible, as well as the Celtic (or British), were based on the Received Text. Neander claims that the first Christianity in England, came not from Rome, but from Asia Minor, probably through France... That the messengers of God who carried manuscripts from the churches of Judea to the churches of northern Italy and on, brought to the forerunners of the Waldenses a Bible different from the Bible of Roman Catholicism…‖ (pp. 86, 107) Peter Ruckman, The Christian Handbook of Biblical Scholarship: ―The ‘TRADITIONAL TEXT’ in Latin from A.D. 120 to 240 was the Old Latin of the Waldenses that matched the Syrian Greek Receptus of Antioch… You see, until Martin Luther‘s time, there was no European recognition of the correct Bible text. It was traveling by ‗underground railroad‘ through Europe, being propagated by Lollards, Waldenses, Albigenses, Picards, Lyonists, Petrobrusians, Henricians Berengarians, Bogomiles, Paulicians, Catharis, and ‗Montanists,‘ but they had the ‗dice loaded against them.‘‖ (pp. 87, 103) Gail Riplinger, Which Bible is God’s Word?: ―The Waldenses were those Christians who lived in the Vaudois valley in northern Italy. Beza dates the Waldensian church from A.D. 120 and their Old Itala Bible from A.D. 157. It was a translation of the true text into the rather rude Low Latin of the second century. Historians like Allix, Leger, Gilley, Comba, and Nolan document this church‘s continual use of the pure text of the bible. They were persecuted severely between the fourth and thirteenth centuries by the Church of Rome. The bible of the Waldenses was used to carry the true text throughout Europe. Olivetan, a pastor of the Waldensian valley, translated a Waldensian Bible into French. This French Olivetan (Olivetan was a relative of Calvin), in turn, became the basis of the Geneva Bible in English. Luther used the German Tepl Bible, which represented a translation of the Waldensian Bible into German, to make Luther‘s German Bible. Diodati‘s Italian Bible was one in a line of Waldensian-type texts. ―All of these pure Waldensian-based texts, as well as several other Waldensian manuscripts, like Dublin MsA4 were among the rich variety of pure documents used by the KJV translators.‖ (p. 53) 169
James Sightler, A Testimony Founded Forever: ―There are essentially only two textual streams, and these have run parallel down the centuries. The received text was set down by 150 A.D. at Antioch in Syria as the Peshitta version. From there the apostles and missionaries carried it overland to the Balkans, to southern France, Germany and northern Italy. It was the Bible of the Waldenses who were the forerunners of the Baptists and who preserved and protected it against the onslaught of the papal system for a thousand years… ‖ (p. 12) D.A. Waite, Defending the King James Bible: ―...The Italic Church in Northern Italy (157 A.D.) used the Received Text… The Gallic Church of Southern France (177 A.D.) used the Received Text... The Celtic Church in Great Britain used the Received Text. Why did all these have their Bibles based on the Received Text?—the churches in Italy, France, and Great Britain—why? Because that was the true Word of God and they knew it. That was the Received Text. They lived in 150 A.D. The Bible was completed in 90-100 A.D. They had the originals right there in their hands, and they based it on that which was pure, accurate, and preserved by God… These churches used this text and not any other... The Church of Scotland and Ireland used the Received Text… The Pre-Waldensian churches used the Received Text… The Waldensians (120 A.D. and onward) used the Received Text… The Gothic Version of the 4th century used the Received Text.‖ (pp. 45-6) The foregoing citations are only a sampling of many such false statements concerning the doctrinal orthodoxy of the Albigenses, Cathars, Bogomils, Donatists, Paulicians, Waldenses, etc.—all of which spread the Gnostic heresy and Gnostic manuscripts throughout Europe, rather than the Received Text. The inevitable result of falsifying the history of the Traditional Text by attributing its preservation to these heretical sects will be the abandonment of Biblical orthodoxy and promotion of their heretical doctrines as ―primitive Christianity‖—heresies which are supported by the hybrid texts used by the medieval heretics. By means of this stealth operation, the KJV-Only leaders are planting the seeds for a revival of medieval heresies among their adherents, and Gail Riplinger is breaking new ground with her bold departure from sound doctrine into Gnostic mysticism. If the KJV-Only movement abandons Biblical orthodoxy for the sake of an historical thesis, then it is just a step further to redefine orthodoxy and then claim historical descent by way of new revelation, private interpretation, and other Gnostic traditions. The Albigenses with whom Benjamin Wilkinson and his Fundamental Baptist protégés identify as early Baptists were a medieval sect of a Gnostic heresy known as the Catharism, which was the vanguard of a larger movement that became known as the ―Free Spirit.‖ The Free Spirit movement encompassed a variety of medieval sects which followed the Gnostic path of ―enlightenment‖ with the promise of recreating a literal Paradise on earth: ―Thus, the name ‗Free Spirit‘ – and such officially-recognized Biblical phrases as ‗paradise,‘ ‗innocence of pleasure,‘ and ‗ecstasy‘ – are part of a kind of elaborate disguise: ‗The movement disguising itself under the clerical name of the Free Spirit traced, beneath the filaments of everyday life, a path more secret and less tolerable than the alchemical magistracy and its degeneration into the genesis of the work of art.‘ The path traced by the movement of the Free Spirit: toward ‗a new world in which the goods necessary for survival [are] held in common, property [is] abolished, and marriage, which reduce[s] women to an object of ownership, [is] done away with.‘ Heaven on earth.‖ (―Movement of the Free Spirit‖) The term ―free spirit‖ served as a religious cover for hedonism. All things that pertained to the original Paradise, before and after the Fall, were practiced by the Free Spirit/ Cathar movement: nudity, incest, murder, rebellion, feminism, rejection of sin, work and private property, etc. In his book, Lipstick Traces: 170
A Secret History of the Twentieth Century (Harvard, 1989), Greil [Grail?] Marcus, presented a nutshell version of the Free Spirit heresy: ―In Lipstick Traces, incest figures as a particularly vivid example of Free Spirit libertinism; but it is only an example; it isn‘t the distinctive feature of that libertinism itself, the thing that defines it. For Greil, the distinctive feature of the Brethren of the Free Spirit was their refusal of work. He writes, ‗The house of the Free Spirit had many mansions. As the adepts believed that sin was a fraud, they believed that property – the result of work, humanity‘s punishment for Original Sin – was a falsehood. Thus all things were to be held in common, and work to be understood as hell, which was ignorance – only fools worked. Work was a sin against perfect nature.‘ ―‗Like the Ranters, [the free spirits] stripped off their clothes and preached naked,‘ Greil writes. ‗If they did not commit incest or murder it was because they wished not to.‘‖ (―Brethren of the Free Spirit‖) The Albigensian Cathars derived their name from Albi, a town in the Languedoc of South France where the Merovingian heresy had taken root and which had long enjoyed the protection of the French nobility. The Albigenses were not even remotely Christians but Manichean dualists who denied the deity of Jesus Christ and represented a rival religion to Christianity—Manichaeism. Their origin, history and doctrine are described in some detail by James McGoldrick, Professor of History at Cedarville College. The following excerpts from his book, Baptist Successionism: A Crucial Question in Baptist History, present an overall profile of this major heretical cult which threatened the very existence of Western Christendom: ―Proponents of Baptist successionism have assigned a place of special honor to the sect known as Albigenses or Cathars. Almost every conceivable effort has been expended by authors of that persuasion to exonerate them of the charge of Manichaeism levied by Catholics and to portray them as part of the true church in the High Middle ages… ―The name Albigenses is derived from the town of Albi in southern France, where the Cathari had a center of strength in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. Cathar comes from the Greek term Katharos, ‗pure,‘ and is of ancient usage. Novations and Manichees in the third century called themselves Cathars. In the twelfth-century congregations of Cathars could be found in various parts of Europe, but France and Italy were the countries in which they were most numerous. In the interest of conciseness, this study will concentrate for the most part on the French Cathars—the Albigenses. ―As the chapter on the Bogomils shows, a complete and radical dualism that postulated two gods or two eternal principles of good and evil became characteristic Bogomil belief in the Balkans. A similar world-view appeared among the Cathars in the twelfth century, and the penetration of Bogomil influence is the most reasonable explanation for its emergence in Western Europe… ―As indicated above, radical dualism became the hallmark of the Cathars‘ world- and life-view. They denied categorically the biblical doctrine of creation by contending that the material world was produced by an evil god. In the words of Bernard Gui, the Albigenses were guilty of ‗affirming that the creation of all visible and material things was not the work of God the Heavenly Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, but of the devil and Satan, the evil deity, whom you [Peter Auterius, an Albigense] call the God of this world, the creator and Prince of this world.‘ (Bernard Gui, ―Sentence on Peter Auterius,‖ in FD, 271.) ―Since the Albigenses regarded material as evil per se, they refused to believe that the good god could become man, as the Christian doctrine of the incarnation proclaims. Instead, some of them contended that there were two Christs. The one described in the New Testament as being born in Bethlehem and crucified at Jerusalem was actually ‗a bad man, and that Mary Magdalene was his concubine… The good Christ…never ate, nor drank, nor 171
took upon him true flesh, nor was ever in this world, except spiritually in the body of Paul.‘ (Milan Loos, Dualist Heresy in the Middle Ages, p. 246)… ―Because the person and work of Christ constitute the heart of Christianity, the teaching of any sect on Christology is the test by which its claims must be measured. Applying this test to the Albigenses and other Cathars reveals that they should not be regarded as Christians at all. They rejected the Trinity and with it the eternity and deity of Christ. Most Cathars believed that Christ was a perfect creature, a spiritual being, who came to earth in the guise of flesh to liberate human souls from their imprisonment in fleshly bodies. Christ did not redeem men by his death; his mission was that of a teacher who had come to proclaim the true way of salvation, and only those who became Cathars would enjoy the benefits of his work. When he appeared for his public ministry, Christ was opposed by John the Baptist with his water baptism, a material ablution which Christ abhorred. Radical dualist Cathars taught that the death of Christ was without suffering because his celestial body could not experience physical pain. ―The Cathar doctrine of salvation was based on the belief that rebellious angels committed the first sin and that their souls were infused into fleshly bodes as punishment. Salvation could be achieved only within the ‗pure‘ church of the Cathars, which offered a sacramental means of eternal life called the consolamentum —‗consolation.‘ It was a spiritual baptism in contrast to the water baptism of the medieval church. Because the consolamentum was administered only to those who requested it, it was a sort of believer‘s baptism. Those who pass from this life without being consoled would, in Cathar belief, go through a chain of reincarnations until they received the consolation at last…‖ (Baptist Successionism, pp. 57-63) According to Prof. McGoldrick and many other historians, Catharism was not only a threat to Western Christendom, but also to Western Civilization: ―Documentary evidence shows that the Cathars viewed marriage and procreation as capital sins for which pardon could be obtained only when one forsook such carnal relationships and received the consolation. Reinerius Saccho reported that all Cathar churches taught ‗that carnal marriage is always a mortal sin, and that the future punishment of adultery and incest will not be greater than that of lawful matrimony, nor would anyone among them be more severely punished.‘ The same source indicates that the Cathars considered the eating of meat, cheese, or eggs as deadly sins… ―The Cathar-Albigense Church was organized around a core of clergymen known as the perfecti, and admission to that circle was through the consolamentum. Those who accepted Cathar teaching but were not yet ready to adopt the rigorous asceticism of the ‗perfected ones‘ were called credentes—‗believers.‘ The latter attended services conducted by the clergy and professed to be seeking perfection for themselves, but they lived by ordinary standards until they were ready for the consolation… ―Cathars considered the consolamentum a ‗spiritual baptism‘ and a ‗baptism of the Holy Spirit,‘ and they taught that no one could be saved without it… Because of their aversion to water as a material element, the Cathars practiced baptism by laying on of hands by the perfecti while the book of the Gospels was held over the candidates‘ head and prayer was offered for him. This sacrament was said to accomplish cleansing from original sin and from all personal transgressions… ―There were, of course, occasions when a person who was consoled on his ‗deathbed‘ showed signs of recovering. Would he be able to discharge the duties of one who had been perfected? One way to resolve this dilemma was to subject him to the endura, which was the practice of allowing the sick person to starve to death, thereby assuring him of immediate salvation. Often the endura was accepted by the sick person and so became a voluntary death, a suicide. There are records, however, of the perfecti practically imposing it upon people whom they suspected would lapse from the faith at a later time. Apparently, 172
it was sometimes imposed upon children… ―When the papacy decided to take vigorous measures against the Albigenses, Innocent III sent Dominic Guzman, founder of the Order of the Preachers, to seek their conversion by persuasion. Dominic advised Roman Catholic clerics to avoid ostentatious displays, which might give credence to the criticisms of heretics. He also realized the Cathars had great appeal to the religious sensibilities of women, so he established a religious foundation for females and directed his disciples to work for the education of girls. These endeavors, although accompanied by extensive preaching missions, did not achieve the desired results. The powerful Albigense nobles opposed Dominic and thwarted his efforts. When the papal legate Peter of Castelnau was murdered by nobles who supported the heretics, Innocent III called for a crusade to destroy the French Cathars.‖ (Baptist Successionism, pp. 63-66) Prof. McGoldrick concluded, ―While the above description of Albigense beliefs and practices is far from complete, it shows conclusively that the Cathar movement was a major threat which the Catholic authorities had to combat. Nowhere was the suppression of Catharism more difficult than in southern France, where the heretics drew support from various socio-economic levels of society, and where a considerable portion of the nobility allied with them.‖ (McGoldrick, p. 65) We can reasonably infer that the French nobility protected the Albigenses because they were Merovingians preserving their own. In researching the Prieuré de Sion, Fritz Springmeier discovered a book which documented the Merovingian nobility of France as distinctively Jewish: ―In my research of high level Satanists, it became clear that the bloodline that was key in their minds was the House of David—not Jesus Christ‘s lineage. I discovered that the House of David had set up a Kingdom in southern France. I discovered this while rummaging through history books on the Middle Ages. I came upon a book A Jewish Princedom in Feudal France 768-900. This book was the key for me to realize that the Merovingian dynasty which wove its bloodline into the royal bloods of Europe was Jewish in origin.‖ (The Top 13 Illuminati Bloodlines, p. 80) The Paulicians of the 7th-9th centuries are also misrepresented by KJV-Only advocates as Christians. The Paulicians lived in Armenia and the eastern Byzantine Empire and later occupied the territory of the Languedoc, in the south of France where the Albigensian stronghold was located. A History of the Baptists by John T. Christian documents this succession from various sources: ―It was in the country of the Albigenses, in the Southern provinces of France, that the Paulicians were most deeply implanted, and here they kept up a correspondence with their brethren in Armenia. The faith of the Paulicians ‗lived on in Languedoc and along the Rhine as the submerged Christianity of the Cathars, and, perhaps, also among the Waldenses. In the Reformation this Catharism comes once more to the surface, particularly among the so-called, Anabaptists and Unitarian Christians between whom and the most primitive church ‗The Key of Truth‘ and the Cathar Ritual of Lyons supply us with the two great connecting links.‘ (F.C. Conybeare, Key of Truth, x). ―Many historians, besides Gibbon, such as Muratori and Mosheim, regard the Paulicians as the forerunners of the Albigenses, and, in fact, as the same people. One of the latest of these, already frequently quoted, is Professor Conybeare, one of the highest authorities in the world on Paulician matters… ―One thing is certain, that in Italy, in France, and along the Rhine, the Paulicians and the Albigenses were found in the same territory, and there were no great differences between them in practice and doctrines. Writers go so far as to assert that there was a succession of churches and of interests.‖ (A History of the Baptists, Vol. I, Chap. IV)
173
Protestant and other historians besides McGoldrick have documented the radical dualist beliefs of the Cathari – a belief system which not only endangered the doctrinal foundation of Christianity, but threatened the survival of the human race. James Webb, author of The Occult Underground, described Catharism as worse than a heresy; it was altogether another religion masquerading as Christianity: ―The word ‗Cathar‘ probably comes from the Greek ‗pure,‘ and the Cathar doctrines show the sect to have been Gnostic of the ascetic type. They believed that the world had been created by an evil being—that there were a series of spheres of being between God and the material world-that procreation was evil because it introduced another spark of the divine into matter. These are familiar tenets. In the Languedoc the Cathars flourished, until in 1207 Pope Innocent III solicited help from the magnates of the North to crush the dangerous heresy. Strictly speaking it was not a heresy, but a rival religion; and as such it was ruthlessly wiped out.‖ (439:207) In his Medieval Heresy, Malcolm Lambert wrote that Catharism was not a Christian religion by any measure: ―Cathar belief, just like Bogomilism, to which it was heir, upset the structure of sacramental life in favour of one rite of supreme importance, the consolamentum; replaced a Christian morality by a compulsory asceticism, which made faults consist rather in a soiling by matter than an act of will, eliminated redemption by refusing to admit the saving power of the crucifixion; and rejected the Trinity in favour of a subordination of two persons to the Father. Cathars could not admit that Christ was God an angel, perhaps, or a son of God, but still not equal with the Father. Nor could they logically admit that he was man, with a body like that of other men. So the hinge of Christian belief, the Incarnation, was destroyed. Radical dualism went still further in its destruction of the pillars of Christian belief, and can hardly be regarded even as an extreme Christian heresy. With its belief in two gods and two creations, it might almost be described as another religion altogether.‖ (Malcolm Lambert, Medieval Heresy, pp. 125-26) According to Brewer’s Dictionary of Phrase and Fable, the Bogomils, precursors of the Cathars in Bulgaria, believed that Jesus and Satan were brothers: ―Bogomils. Member of an heretical sect, which sprang up in Bulgaria in the 10th century, their name probably coming from Slavic Bog, ‗God‘. One of their main tenets was that God the Father had two sons, Satan and Christ.‖ (Brewer’s Dictionary of Phrase and Fable, ―Bogomils‖) (843:136) Joseph Strayer, author of The Albigensian Crusades, wrote that Catharism, had it continued to flourish, would have destroyed the human race. ―The contrary charge, that Catharism would have extinguished the human race by its denunciation of sexual intercourse is more logical…‖ (Joseph R. Strayer, The Albigensian Crusades, 1971, p. 35) Likewise, Inquisition historian H.C. Lea, who can hardly be accused of bias toward the Roman Catholic Church, wrote of the threat which the Cathars posed, not only to Christianity, but to Western Civilization: ―However much we may deprecate the means used for its suppression and commiserate those who suffered for conscience‘ sake, we cannot but admit that the cause of orthodoxy was in this case the cause of progress and civilization. Had Catharism become dominant, or even had it been allowed to exist on equal terms, its influence could not have failed to 174
prove disastrous.‖ (Henry Charles Lea, The Inquisition of the Middle Ages, Vol. I. p 106 I) Catholic historian Godefroid Kurth described the spread of the Albigensian cult as ―a dark night which came down with the weight of lead and with the coldness of ice upon the mind and the heart, a chancre of death which ate at all the luminous and elevated faculties of the human soul, a deadly folly that choked the joy of living and made existence here below like a bad dream.‖ (Kurth, The Church at the Turning Points of History, p. 68) In his book, Medieval Heresies: Popular Movements from Bogomil to Hus, Malcolm Lambert revealed that Cathar leaders concealed the heretical nature of the cult until their adherents were sufficiently disaffected with the established Church—a pattern that is replicated today by the KJV-Only leaders: ―In all areas methods of missioning followed the pattern of the Bogomils: there was a pedagogic progression from the generalities, which seemed to blend easily into the religious environment, to the inner mysteries, reserved for the perfect or for believers of long standing. The approach, natural to all sects influenced by Gnosticism, had the effect of concealing the profoundly heretical nature of Catharism from the neophyte until he was sufficiently detached from the influence of orthodox belief.‖ (p. 119) The Albigensian Cathars were exterminated, not just for heresy, but on criminal grounds, specifically for their initiation rites which were a form of ritual murder. The Albigenses seem to have been a medieval version of the ―Heaven‘s Gate‖ death cult of more recent notoriety, according to Steve Kellmeyer: ―In the twelfth century, the Catholic Church fought the incredibly pernicious Cathar, or Albigensian, heresy. For Cathars, the world, the flesh, all of it is pure evil, a hellish existence from which we can only be released through death. Cathars saw procreative sex as evil because the ensoulment of the body trapped the divine spark of the human person in the hell of the material world. It had one sacrament, the consolatum, which was immediately followed by the endura, ritual suicide by starvation. ―The heresy became so popular in southern France that entire geographical regions were depopulating through decreased family size and ritual suicide. St. Dominic‘s new order of priests, the Inquisition and the Crusades were all created in order to stop the spread of the suicidal sect. Even so, adherents persisted through the 1400‘s. ―The power of the Catholic Church to intervene in the culture is largely gone. Secular government will have to deal with today‘s Cathars. Sadly, there is no evidence we really understand what we are up against.‖ (Steve Kellmeyer, Catholic Citizens) Modern Cathars have not only succeeded in reviving the medieval rite of ―endura,‖ they have obtained the legal right to impose it on their victims as a ―spiritual experience.‖ ―‗I will tell you that as it appears to me, Mrs. Schiavo‘s death is not imminent by any means,‘ George Felos told the Associated Press Saturday. ‗She is calm; she‘s peaceful, she is resting comfortably… Frankly when I saw her ... she looked beautiful. In all the years I‘ve seen Mrs. Schiavo, I‘ve never seen such a look of peace and beauty upon her,‘ said Felos. ―One explanation for Felos‘ comments is suggested in the attorney‘s own 2002 book, Litigation As Spiritual Practice. Felos, a longtime volunteer hospice worker, discovered killing as a spiritual experience: ―‗As I continued to stay beside Mrs. Browning at her nursing home bed, I…experienced a sense of heightened awareness. As Mrs. Browning lay motionless before my gaze, I suddenly heard a loud, deep moan and scream and wondered if the nursing home personnel heard it and would respond to the unfortunate resident. In the next moment, as this cry of pain and torment continued, I realized it was Mrs. Browning. 175
―‗I felt the mid-section of my body open and noticed a strange quality to the light in the room. I sensed her soul in agony. As she screamed I heard her say, in confusion, ‗Why am I still here … why am I here?‘ My soul touched hers and in some way I communicated that she was still locked in her body. I promised I would do everything in my power to gain the release her soul cried for. With that the screaming immediately stopped. I felt like I was back in my head again, the room resumed its normal appearance, and Mrs. Browning, as she had throughout this experience, lay silent.‘‖ (Kellmeyer, Ibid.) George Felos was the attorney for Michael Schiavo and instrumental the murder by starvation of his wife, Terry Schiavo, despite the medical fact that she was not in a persistent vegetative state. Felos claimed in his book that he speaks to people in comas and PVS via ―soul speak.‖ Having been chosen by God to determine their wishes, Felos removes their feeding tubes after asking if they want to die and hears them beg, via soul speak, ―Yes, I want to die! Please kill me.‖ From one review of Litigation As Spiritual Practice: ―Reading it is a descent into a New Age snakepit. To say Felos is strange is an exercise in charity. He has some odd notions that God speaks to him directly and that God somehow thinks that Felos is his Death Angel on earth... ―In just one example of how bizarre this book is, Felos claims he has the God-given ability to ‗psychically connect‘ with PVS and coma victims. How does he do it? He SHOUTS at them, ‗Do you want to LIVE?? Do you want to LIVE??‘ ―Obviously George Felos thinks everyone in a brain-injured state is also DEAF. But it doesn‘t matter; Felos also claims that because of God, he can ‗hear‘ the ‗souls‘ of the conscious-impaired ‗talk‘ to him ‗inside his head.‘ ―According to the book, none of the ‗souls‘ ever told George they want to live.‖ (Amazon review) Little wonder that the appellation ―Albigenses‖ is the name of a demonic lineage whose ancestry is said to be the subterranean race which inhabited the pre-flood world: ―The papal machine went so far as to slaughter some 35,000 Ring Lord supporters in a savage campaign from 1209. The Cathars of Languedoc were adherents of the Anjou bloodline of Mélusine, the Mermaid-Queen of the Holy Grail. In her role as a Shining One, they referred to her as an Elf (or, in the language of old Provence, an Albi), while the Grail dynasty in general was called the ‘Albi-gens‘ (Elven bloodline). The Cathars refused to acknowledge the ineligible dynasty of Church-installed monarchs, and so the Vatican troops were sent with the order to ‗Kill them all‘! In allusion to the elven nature of the Cathar tradition, the brutal onslaught was called the Albigensian Crusade.‖ (Laurence Gardner, Realm of the Ring Lord) And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy. - Revelation 13:1 THE NEO-CATHAR CHURCH Reviving the Cathar heresy is presently the project of a group of ―reincarnated Cathars‖ who claim to have been martyred in the Albigensian Crusade. According to an old Cathar prophecy, ―‗At the end of seven hundred years, the laurel will be green once more.‘ – Anon. Troubadour, 13th Century‖ (―The Legend of the Cathars) A British psychiatrist and psychic, Dr. Arthur Guirdham, has written many books about the Cathars, one of these a journal of his treatment of people in disparate locations who all claim they were Cathar martyrs of the Albigensian Crusade. We Are One Another: Astounding Evidence of Group Reincarnation opens by introducing the ―reincarnated‖ Cathars: 176
―This is a record of group reincarnation. It involves eight people who, alive in the twentieth century, had a previous existence in the thirteenth. In seven out of the eight cases I have been able to trace their thirteenth-century identity. In the eighth case I am aware of the person‘s Christian name but not of her family connections… The group lived, in the Middle Ages, in the Languedoc. In the twentieth century they were either born, lived or were educated within a dozen miles of Bristol… ―The members of this group were all practitioners of the mediaeval form of Dualism known as Catharism. Its exponents believed that there were two primary energies of good and evil operating in the universe from the beginning and continuing to the end. They believed that the world was created by the Devil. These beliefs were an attempt to answer the agonising question, ‗If God is all-merciful and, at the same time, all-powerful, why does He permit such horrors to happen in this world?‘ Though the Cathars preached the word of Christ more than the orthodox, they rejected the idea of redemption by His sacrifice. Purification was achieved by successive incarnations… ―A few words are necessary to explain the events to which the characters in this story so frequently return. Their memories are chiefly concentrated on the years 1242-1244. There is a remarkably generalised preoccupation with the massacre of the Inquisitors at Avignonet. This was a gesture of defiance and self-protection launched by the representatives of the Languedoc against the tyranny and cruelty of the French Catholic invaders. The Avignonet affair stimulated the French crown to cut off the dragon‘s head of heresy. This was the Chateau of Montsegur which had for years been a centre of instruction for Cathar sympathisers and of initiation for the priesthood. The fortress was besieged from 1243 to 1244… The characters in this book tune-in with remarkable precision to the siege, to the evacuation of the castle of the Cathar treasure, probably rare books, and above all, to the last celebration of the Consolamentum before the Cathars perished at the stake after the capitulation. The Consolamentum was the only sacrament recognised by the Cathars. It signified a voluntary renunciation of the flesh and of attachment to the things of this world. Six of the characters in this story attended the final celebration of this rite. ―The major events in this story were unfolded between late August 1968 and the early summer of 1972.‖ (Arthur Guirdham, We Are One Another, 1974, pp. 5-7) Dr. Guirdham is presently working with these ―reincarnated Cathars‖ and ―discarnate entities‖ to revive the Cathar belief system as ―true Christianity.‖ Although the KJV-Only apologists would never publicly espouse the Dualist heresy, by reimaging the Cathar/Albigense heretics as ―pure Christians‖ they are preparing the way for the ―reincarnated‖ Cathars and their fellow Dualists to be received by the Church as the ―separated Christians‖ of the Middle Ages. When the moment comes for the reappearance of these ―martyred‖ heretics as the reincarnated ―Cathar Church‖, their sanitized image will have preceded them and it will be very difficult, if not impossible, to persuade the masses of Christians of their true character. As Mark Twain once said, ―Give a man a reputation as an early riser and he can sleep till noon.‖ President George Bush is a stellar example of the power of the media to ―reimage‖ high level occultists as bornagain Christians. A neo-Cathar website, the General Conference Cathar Church, is proof that ―Catharism‖ has been revived, as promised, and is alive and well in the 21st century. The ―Mission Statement of the Cathars of North America‖ presents Catharism as ―a nondenominational, noncreedal, house-church movement. Claiming a diasporal descendant from surviving remnants of the medieval Inquisition 800 years ago, good Christians today seek substantive unity among the People of GOD…‖ The mission of the neo-Cathars is ―to spread the radical good news of salvation‖ which is to ―challenge people to Divine self-knowledge through Christ‘s way as the Messenger of GOD.‖ ―Divine self-knowledge‖ is the expression used for ―gnosis.‖ When ―knowledge of self‖ is attained, gnosis releases the ―divine spark‖ imprisoned in an initiate who then starts on a mystic ascent to be reunited with the ―divine substance‖ and return to his native ―realm of light.‖ ―Divine self-knowledge‖ (gnosis) is achieved ―through Christ‘s way as the Messenger of GOD‖ rather than ―salvation given through the blood of Jesus Christ‖ 177
In lieu of preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ to sinners, ―This mission calls people of faith to discipleship and obedience in the pursuit of personal and social holiness,‖ in other words, the ―works salvation‖ so typical of Gnostics. The nature of ―social holiness‖ is the subject of an annual ―Anarchism and Christianity Conference‖ which is recommended in the Cathar Church News. Also advocated by the neo-Cathar GCCC is euthanasia, specifically the ―right to be starved and dehydrated‖ as in the Cathar rite of ―Endura‖: ―At last week‘s Toronto conference of the International Right to Die movement, AGC and other speakers laid out the course for legalization of euthanasia and assisted suicide around the world, with special emphasis on the right to be starved and dehydrated to death in accordance with the practice of the Endura. Steve Hopcraft, the political organizer for the recent California campaign to legalize assisted suicide, said that the movement must work to ban the word ‗suicide‘ from its lexicon.‖ (GCCC News) The General Conference Cathar Church also has a ministry to the Gay & Lesbian community. From the GCCC booklet ―Your Search is Over: Gay & Lesbians‖ published by the Assembly of Good Christians, Church of God, Montsegur: ―We encourage the practice of safe sexual practices among our believers, sponsoring a number of efforts in that direction. In particular, we support JOCK JACKS CAMPUS JACKS CITY JACKS in addition to a pre-screened introduction service for men called MEMBER-MATCH. At present these programs are geared toward gay and bisexual males.‖ In the face of overwhelming historical and current evidence of the heresy and pagan practices of the Cathars and Albigenses, Baptist successionists up to the present day have denied their dualist heresy and eulogized the cult as the ―true Church‖ of the Middle Ages. Prof. McGoldrick wrote of their deceit: ―Proponents of Baptist successionism have assigned a place of special honor to the sect known as the Albigenses or Cathars. Almost every conceivable effort has been expended by authors of that persuasion to exonerate them of the charge of Manichaeism levied by Catholics and to portray them as part of the true Church of the High Middle Ages. Orchard was especially profuse in praising the Albigenses. He regarded them and the Waldenses as the ‗two witnesses‘ predicted in Revelation 11:3-4 and concluded that they and their fraternal associates comprised ‗the only body of people who were not immersed in the corruption of the times, and who unceasingly proclaimed the word of truth in the face of every class of superstitions and every degree of vice both in clergy and laity.‘ [fn. Orchard, Concise History, 161]‖ (Baptist Successionism, p. 57) The following are just a few examples of this sort of historical revisionism by the KJV-Only Baptists: David Cloud, ―Examining ‗The King James Only Controversy‘‖: ―[Michael] Horton speaks of the early history of the Roman Catholic Church in glowing terms. He says, ‗It was Rome that stood up to the Montanists, Manicheans, Donatists, Pelagians, Cathari, Albigensians, Arians, and Monophysites…‘ (p. 245). This is only partly true. Many of the ‗heretics‘ that Rome stood against were actually Bible believing Christians who refused to be moved from the truth. In his diligently researched book (The History of the Donatists, 1875), 178
respected nineteenth-century Baptist historian David Benedict, working directly from ancient Latin texts, revealed that the Donatists were not the heretics that Rome made them out to be. The same is true for the Albigensians, the Cathari, and others that Horton mentions. Though there might have been true heretics who were called Donatists and Albigensians, these people, in the main, were much closer to the Bible than Rome was. The term ‗Manichean‘ was also misused by Rome to slander many people. Though there were some who were known as Manicheans who held to strange and unscriptural doctrines, many who were labeled Manichean were not heretics but were falsely accused by Rome.‖ James Sightler: “Notes to my students in Baptist History at Tabernacle Baptist College, 19902005‖ ―There were a number of groups which sprang up as a reaction to apostasy within the early church. These are the spiritual kin of modern Baptists. The Montanists 150 AD The Novatians 250 AD The Donatists 325 AD The Paulacians 700 AD The Vaudois (valley people) or Waldenses 500-1400 AD The Albigenses 1200 AD [Cathars] ―All these groups were called heretics and Manicheans by the Roman church. But the charge was not true. All the groups listed above believed: · The absolute authority of the Bible and the rejection of church traditions of human origin. · The church is local and visible. · The local church is autonomous. · Church purity was insisted upon with a new profession and rebaptism for those who lapsed from the faith under persecution from Decius and Diocletian, who had required emporer [sic] worship. · That Baptism and the Lord‘s Supper are symbolic ordinances. · All rejected infant baptism and the sacral society which joined church and state. · All rejected the mass and the Roman church and purgatory. · All baptized adult believers only. · All rejected the Roman hierarchy.‖ Notice that Dr. Sightler does not list belief in the deity of Jesus Christ and the Trinity—the most fundamental of Christian doctrines—as an article of faith of the Montanists, Novatians, Donatists, Paulicians, Waldenses or Albigenses, who were Cathars in the region of Albi, a Merovingian stronghold in South of France. The reason for this was the Cathars, Albigenses, Bogomils, et al were all contemporaries and fellow Gnostics of the Merovingian Knights Templar. All of these cults – Cathari/Albigenses, Bogomils and Templars – were medieval extensions of the ancient Teutonic religion which posed as Christianity but was dedicated to its destruction. In an article titled, ―Hitler and the Occult: Nazism, Reincarnation and Rock Culture,‖ Suzanne Rini identified the quest for the ―Grail of the racially pure blood…of the ancient Aryan root race‖, the fallen angels of Genesis 6, as the spiritual connection between the ancient Teutonic mystery religion, the medieval Cathars, Albigenses and the Knights Templar – and the neo-Templar Satan worshippers of contemporary Western culture: ―For what were the Cathars and the Albigensians but the reiteration and transmogrification of 179
the old, pagan Teutonic religion, never quite eradicated with the coming of Christianity, and ever at hand in any anxious or defiant age… ―The heresies most applicable to the Nazis are also those most pervasive in the West today: Gnosticism and its extension, Catharism… ―…the Cathars are credited, even by the most Inquisition-hating historians as having been the first heretics to propitiate Satan as the god of matter. They are credited too, with being the first to celebrate the Black Mass and to offer human sacrifice, both of which were drawn upon by 19th Century Satanists. It was the 17th century Cathars who introduced to devil-worship the ritualistic elements today passed off as ancient but which were unknown in both the early Christian centuries and in the Renaissance, when black magic became influential through the work of Pico de Mirandola, who believed that white magic was not efficient enough for the matters at hand. It was the ritualistic, propitiatory Cathar ‗tradition‘ which was adapted by the surge of Satanism that took place in the 19th century well-described by Huysmanns in La Bas. ―[Carl] Raschke nails down the Cathar-Nazi convergence and its connection to contemporary Satanism. Donald Nugent in ‗Satan is a Fascist‘ (The Month, April 1972) analyzes the ‗unholy Trinity of Adolf Hitler, Charles Manson ... and Anton LaVey;‘ For all three the ‗satanist and the superman are one,‘ Nugent writes. He also points out that mysticism and humanism are ‗the two routes to satanism.‘ Catharism mixed with the secular ideology of state control became Hitlerism. German mysticism mingled with LaVey‘s libertarian philosophy of laissez aller, or ‗let anything pass,‘ becomes the nine satanic statements [of LaVey].‘ ―‗Nugent also discusses [Charles] Manson‘s fanatical racism; his sporting of Nazi swastikas, which he wears on his forehead to this day and his own cryptic allusions to ‗superman.‘ He cites the congruity with ‗LaVey‘s political objectives of a ‗benign police state‘ in which the weak are winnowed away. In the satanist mentality, according to Nugent, ‗[T]he world is a hospital—and a mental hospital. The world is the lustful will to power, wanton destructive violence, man‘s inhumanity to man. The world is the paradise that has been polluted. The world is the exploitative society, the place where nothing is holy and everything has its price. The world is a brothel.‘ That has been LaVey's sentiment to the letter. If the world is a brothel, then destruction and violence are the most justifiable course. All of one's corrupt surroundings must be unmasked, dismembered, and dispersed into nothingness.‘ ―The swastika was originally a Sanskrit sun symbol, denoting a heliocentric cosmos ordered by an Aryan nature god who became the reinterpreted ‗God‘ of the Nazis… ―The Thule Society was the quasi-secret gnostic society behind Munich‘s tiny German Workers Party which, in turn, provided the philosophical basis and early membership for Hitler‘s German National Socialist Party. Dusty Sklar, in the very well-researched Nazis and the Occult, establishes that Hitler took many ideas and props from the Thule Society: the ‗fuhrerprinzip,‘ the swastika…, the idea for the stormtroopers, and the very salute, ‗Sieg Heil!‘ But at the bottom of all of these lay a barbarian‘s antipathy to none other than Christianity, as well as to Judaism, and especially to the Catholic Church. Had the war been won by Germany, the Church would have probably been pandemically persecuted. Thus, the swastika and the SS runes are historically the symbols of satanism and beneath them lay visceral hatred of Judeo-Christian civilization. ―‗[In The Return of the Goddess…Edward C.] Whitmont claims that the lore of the swastika traces directly back to the Knights Templars, who were routed by the Church for allegedly satanic-like practices. The Templars were also affiliated with the Grail myth, a major element of which was worship of an ancient, Celtic/Teutonic god involving prescribed rituals and prayers: ‗All this purportedly constituted a Grail liturgy dedicated to reviving the ancient forgotten mysteries of the old sacred tradition (ascribed to a legendary Aryan Thule) from 180
which the whole Indo-Germanic culture was supposed to have originated.‘‘ ―The central symbol of the Thule Grail mysteries was represented by a swastika, the ancient symbol of renewal, flanked by two horns of the moon (the horns of the old Celtic shamanic god Cerunnus). It is held within and over a moon sickle, as in a cup.‘ ―Of the Nazis, those ‗new Templars,‘ Whitmont says, ‗This emblem was now said to be the most secret symbol of the Armanentum Armandom, the name given to the order by its high priests and spiritual directors. These new Templars claimed to guard and serve the Grail of the racially pure blood and the Thule mysteries of the ancient Aryan root race.‘ Thus, the old god Cerannus would have had to be propitiated with blood rites, upon which pagan renewal was always based. Hitler, when he came to power, often had himself pictured in Grail regalia, and set up some of his forces as ‗orders‘ of knights. It then becomes possible to hypothesize that perhaps the ritual murders which took place in the German concentration camps were seen, not figuratively as they are by some historians, but literally as blood sacrifice…‖ That Baptists lay claim to the theological ancestors of Freemasonry, Nazism and the neo-Cathar Church makes an enormous statement which betrays the true origin of the Baptist denomination. Based on the voluminous works of KJV-Only and other Baptists testifying to the identity of their ancestors, we should take them at their word. The Cathar heritage of the KJV-Only movement certainly explains the Gnostic direction it is now taking under the direction of Gail Riplinger. CHAPTER XIV BAPTIST SUCCESSIONISM CONTEND FOR THE FAITH: THE TEXTUS RECEPTUS http://watch-unto-prayer.org/TR-0-intro.html WATCH UNTO PRAYER taho@watch-unto-prayer.org http://watch-unto-prayer.org
181
CHAPTER XIV BAPTIST SUCCESSIONISM The devious strategy of associating the Received Text with the aforementioned medieval sects, which are alleged to have descended in an unbroken succession from the New Testament Church, has its roots in a larger movement known as ―Baptist Successionism‖ or ―Landmarkism.‖ This movement is based on a misapplication of Proverbs 22:28 which is removed from its context and applied to Baptist ecclesiology. In its context of Proverbs 22, ―Remove not the ancient landmark, which thy fathers have set‖ was a prohibition against removing ancient markers, usually stones, which identified the established boundaries of a piece of land. The Baptist Successonists claim that the ―ancient landmark‖ of their movement is not the Protestant Reformation but the New Testament Church, and that their founder was John the Baptist. Landmark Baptists reject, not only identification of Baptists with other Protestant denominations, they deny the existence of a universal Church and recognize only Baptists as having a direct succession from the apostles. The pseudo history of Baptist Successionism is today preached by Fundamentalist Baptist KJV-Only preachers such as David Cloud: ―We have now seen that the Baptists, who were formerly called Anabaptists...were the original Waldenses, and have long in the history of the Church received the honor of that origin. On this account, the Baptists may be considered the only Christian community which has stood since the apostles, and as a Christian society which has preserved pure the doctrines of the Gospel through all ages.‖ (David Cloud, Way of Life Encyclopedia, Roman Catholic Dominion 5001500 A.D.) The Landmark teaching was first introduced in the U.S. around 1850 but was popularized in J.M. Carroll‘s book, Trail of Blood, published in 1931. It is worth mentioning that the brother of J.M. Carroll, B.H. Carroll, was not only a prominent Southern Baptist minister and a leader of the Baptist Landmark movement, but he was also a Freemason: “B.H. Carroll (1843-1914), first president of Southwestern seminary, was a member of Waco Lodge No. 92 and Herring Lodge No. 1224, both located in Waco, Texas.5 Carroll was instrumental in the creation of the Department of Evangelism of the Home Mission Board in 1906. Carroll was the author of more than 20 books, including The Bible Doctrine of Repentance (1897), Baptists and Their Doctrines (1913), and Evangelistic Sermons (1913). It is said that his favourite causes were evangelism, prohibition, home missions, and Christian education… f.5. D.D. Tidwell, ‗Dr. George W. Truett,‘ The Texas Grand Lodge Magazine, March 1960, p. 113, and letter from James D. Ward of Waco, Texas, December 9, 1992.‖ (Famous Baptists Who Were Freemasons) James Edward McGoldrick has written a well-documented and very readable refutation of Landmarkism in his book, Baptist Successionism: A Crucial Question in Baptist History. The origins and history of Landmarkism are briefly summarized by Professor McGoldrick: ―Landmarkism originated in the nineteenth century, J.R. Graves (1820-93) and J.M. Pendleton (1811-91) being its two most influential early leaders. Graves, editor of the Tennessee Baptist, in 1851 called a conference to discuss the Baptist position on relations with other churches. The conference met at Cotton Grove, Tennessee, and its ecclesiological declaration became known as the Cotton Grove Resolutions. This was the first formal statement of Landmarkism. ―Pendleton, a pastor in Bowling Green, Kentucky, was coeditor of the Tennessee Baptist. In 1854 he published An Old Landmark Reset, in which he expounded upon the matters raised in the Cotton Grove Resolutions, contending that Baptist Churches alone qualify as New 182
Testament assemblies, so Baptist clergymen are the only true ministers of the Gospel. There should be no formal fraternal relations between Baptist Churches and other religious societies, which have called themselves churches illegitimately. ―In order to fortify the argument that Baptists alone are entitled to recognition as members of the true church, Graves reprinted Orchard‘s History of the Baptists, thousands of copies of which have circulated among Baptist readers ever since… Orchard‘s work, and later The Trail of Blood by J.M. Carroll, have had a terrific influence in popularizing Landmark teachings. ―Graves became prominent in disputes within the Southern Baptist convention and was excommunicated eventually... ―Landmarkism became a powerful force among Baptists of the southern United States especially, although its influence has in no way been restricted to that region. The Landmark view of the church has had its exponents in many agencies of the Southern Baptist Convention at various times, and it has been able to spread its message through publications of that body. Learned theologians and historians in Southern Baptist colleges and seminaries have, nevertheless, rejected it almost unanimously, and the twentieth century has seen a recession of Landmark beliefs within the Southern Baptist Convention... Although the Southern Baptist Convention never adopted Landmarkism officially, other denominations have done so, and they now maintain organized efforts to promote successionism as indispensable for the preservation of the true church. The American Baptist Association…and the Baptist Missionary Association of America…are the major Landmark bodies of the present. Many congregations within other Baptist associations continue to adhere to successionism in one of more of its tenets, as do countless unaffiliated congregations. ―As indicated above, genuine scholars have perceived the faulty methodology that has characterized successionist efforts to reconstruct Baptist history. Substantial refutations have, prior to the present work, however, been relatively few… Among the most vigorous exponents of this teaching are pastors who lack an understanding of historical theology and critical historiography. To such pastors, and to all students of the Baptist heritage, the present volume is offered in an effort to answer some crucial questions in Baptist history.‖ (Baptist Successionism, pp. 147-49) The main criterion for inclusion in the ―apostolic succession‖ of Landmark Baptists seems to be aggressive opposition to the Roman Catholic Church, whose clerical abuses fill endless lists published by Landmarkists. However, the central doctrine of the Albigenses, Cathari, Bogomils and other Manicheans – the divinity of man – would require that their fundamental controversy with the Catholic Church was the deity of Jesus Christ, which the Catholic Church upheld but the radical dualists rejected. McGoldrick identified this doctrine as the point of contention as well: ―Because the person and work of Christ constitute the heart of Christianity, the teaching of any sect on Christology is the test by which its claims must be measured. Applying this test to the Albigenses and other Cathars reveals that they should not be regarded as Christians at all. They rejected the Trinity and with it the eternity and deity of Christ. Most Cathars believed that Christ was a perfect creature, a spiritual being, who came to the earth in the guise of flesh in order to liberate human souls from their imprisonment in fleshly bodies. Christ did not redeem men by his death; his mission was that of a teacher who had come to proclaim the true way of salvation, and only those who became Cathars would enjoy the benefits of his work. When he appeared for his public ministry, Christ was opposed by John the Baptist with his water baptism, a material ablution which Christ abhorred. Radical dualist Cathars taught that the death of Christ was without suffering because his celestial body could not experience physical pain.‖ (Baptist Successionism, pp. 62-3) “LANDMARKS” OF FREEMASONRY We think it is most interesting that the concept of ―Landmarks‖ is found in Freemasonry, also with reference to Proverbs 22:28, and in Rosicrucianism as the ―Manifestos and Secret Symbols of that Order.‖ Masons are told 183
that ―Landmarkism‖ refers to the obligation to preserve the teachings and customs of Freemasonry that have passed down through the generations. These so-called ―Landmarks of Freemasonry‖ were enumerated by Albert G. Mackey (1807-81), who was Secretary General of the Supreme Council of the Ancient and Accepted Rite for the Southern Jurisdiction of the United States. According to the Grand Lodge of British Columbia and Yukon: ―The term ‗Landmark‘ is found in Proverbs 22:28: ‗Remove not the ancient landmark which thy fathers have set.‘ In ancient times, it was customary to mark the boundaries of land by means of stone pillars. Removal of these would cause much confusion, men having no other guide than these pillars by which to distinguish the limits of their property. Therefore to remove them was considered a heinous crime. Jewish law says ‗Thou shalt not remove thy neighbours‘ landmark, which they of old time have set in thine inheritance.‘ Hence landmarks are those peculiar marks by which we are able to designate our inheritance. They define what is being passed on to us. In the case of freemasonry, they are called the landmarks of the order. ―‗The Landmarks are those essentials of Freemasonry without any one of which it would no longer be Freemasonry,‘ said MW Bro. Melvin M. Johnson, Past Grand Master of Massachusetts in 1923. In 1720 the Grand Master of England compiled the General Regulations, which were approved by the Grand Lodge of England and published in 1723. One Regulation reads ‗Every Annual Grand Lodge has an inherent power and Authority to make new Regulations or to alter these, for the real benefits of this Ancient Fraternity; provided always that the old Land-Marks be carefully preserved.‘ The Landmarks were not defined. ―Until 1858 no attempt had been by any Masonic writer to write out the landmarks. In that year, Albert Mackey made the first attempt, when he published ‗The Foundation of Masonic Law‘ in a Masonic review, where he laid out twenty-five landmarks. He subsequently published the list in a book entitled Text Book of Masonic Jurisprudence. These twenty-five were generally accepted by the American Freemasons of the day. Since then his list of twenty-five has been adopted by a number of North American Grand Lodges.‖ (―The Landmarks of Freemasonry‖) The fact that there seems to be little agreement about the ―Landmarks‖ of Freemasonry suggests there may be an esoteric meaning for this term to which so much importance is attached. Since Freemasonry is based upon Talmudic Judaism, is it possible the term ―landmark‖ retains the literal meaning of Proverbs 22:28? This Old Testament command refers to the ancient boundaries of Israel which God established when He promised the land to Abraham, those boundaries being defined in Gen. 15:18. ―In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates. The land of the Kenites, Kenizites, Kadmonites; the Chitties, Perizites, Refaim; the Emorites, Canaanites, Gigashites and Yevusites.‖ (Gen. 15:18) God repeated the promise to Moses: ―Every place whereon the soles of your feet shall tread shall be yours: from the wilderness and Lebanon, from the river, the river Euphrates, even unto the uttermost sea shall your coast be.‖ (Deut. 11:24) And to Joshua: ―Every place that the sole of your foot shall tread upon, that have I given unto you, as I said unto Moses. From the wilderness and this Lebanon even unto the great river, the river Euphrates, all the land of the Hittites, and unto the great sea toward the going down of the sun, shall be your coast.‖ (Joshua 1:4) When today‘s Zionists refer to ―Eretz Israel‖ or ―Greater Israel,‖ they have in mind the original boundaries of the Promised Land which God gave as an inheritance to Abraham. Today, ―Eretz Israel‖ includes all of modernday Israel as well as the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights, Jordan, and Lebanon, much of Syria, Iraq, and Kuwait, as well as parts of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Turkey. This explains the U.S. war against Iraq and why it will continue until the entire Middle East is fully under Israeli control.
184
―It is clear that the preparations to attack Iraq are part of a series of attacks prepared for nations of the region including Syria, Iran, Egypt and Sudan. The aim of the Crusaders‘ campaign is to prepare the atmosphere for the establishment of the so-called greater Israel state, which includes great parts of Iraq, Egypt, Syria, Jordan and large portions of (Saudi Arabia).‖ – Osama bin Laden, February 2003 (―Eretz Israel HaShlema / Greater Israel‖) There is yet more evidence of a connection between Landmarkism in Freemasonry and Greater Israel. On the Great Seal of the United States, the unfinished pyramid is, in fact, a structural symbol of ―Eretz Israel‖ which extends from the Nile to the Euphrates.
Source: Tim LaHaye Prophecy Study Bible KJV, p. 891 (Christian Konnections)
―The Masonic Foundations of the United States‖ reveals that the secret agenda of the Judeo-Freemasons has been to use the United States for the conquest of Israel and the regathering of world Jewry to Greater Israel where the False Messiah will inaugurate his New Order of the Ages. See also: ―The Death of the Phoenix: Final Act for the USA‖. Interestingly, the Landmark Baptists trace their spiritual lineage back to John the Baptist, the patron saint of Freemasonry, which celebrates his feast day on June 24, the Summer Solstice:
185
―The literature produced by Successionists abounds with denials that Baptists are Protestants, and even authors who admit that no unbroken line of true churches from Apostolic times to the present can be verified sometimes concur with that judgment… S.E. Anderson acknowledged that no uninterrupted continuity of baptistic churches can be discerned in history, but he contended, nevertheless that Baptists should claim John the Baptist as their founder. (ff. The First Baptist)… Holliday contended that the ‗first Baptist (John) was beheaded for preaching separation from sin and self to Christ. The next Baptist to die was Jesus Christ. (ff. Baptist Heritage)‖ (Baptist Successionism, p. 123) ―Landmarkers believe that there has been a succession of essentially pure Baptists from the days of John the Baptist until now, and that during all this period they have ‗suffered violence,‘ not only from the hand of their enemies, but, as now, from their professed friends. They believe that visible churches of Baptists have existed through all these centuries, though they do not profess to be able, as yet, to demonstrate the fact. They believe that Christ declared a succession would be preserved.‖ (J.R. Graves, The Baptist, Jan. 29, 1876) ―…Free-Masonry, vulgarly imagined to have begun with the Dionysian Architects or the German Stone-workers, adopted Saint John the Evangelist as one of its patrons, associating with him, in order not to arouse the suspicions of Rome, Saint John the Baptist…‖ – Albert Pike, Morals & Dogma By taking Baptist successionism back to John the Baptist instead of Jesus Christ, Landmarkist cofounder J.R. Graves was misdirecting Christians into the Old Covenant Law and the Kingdom promises which God gave to Israel, rather than into the new Covenant which Jesus Christ gave to His Church. For John the Baptist was a prophet under the Old Covenant and his baptism of repentance was replaced in the New Testament by baptism into Jesus Christ: ―And as they departed, Jesus began to say unto the multitudes concerning John, What went ye out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken with the wind? But what went ye out for to see? A man clothed in soft raiment? behold, they that wear soft clothing are in kings' houses. But what went ye out for to see? A prophet? yea, I say unto you, and more than a prophet. For this is he, of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee. Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.‖ (Matt. 11:7-11) ―God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds…‖ (Heb. 1:1-2) However, the problems with the Landmarkist patronage of John the Baptist are even more serious. All Grand Masters of the Prieuré de Sion are given the title ―Jean‖ (I, II, III…), which is the French variant of ―John,‖ and at least one of their more illustrious Grand Masters regarded John the Baptist as the ―Christ‖: ―It has been alleged that Hughes de Payens, first Grand Master of the Knights Templar, had been inducted into the Johannites, a sect which chose John the Baptist as their prophet. According to the Dossiers Secrets, each of the alleged Grand Masters of the Prieure de Sion took the name Jean in succession (supposedly influencing the name chosen by Pope John XXIII). One of the Grand Masters on the list, Leonardo da Vinci, displayed a strong interest in John the Baptist… ―The only surviving sculpture that involved Leonardo in its making is the statue of John the Baptist in the Baptistry in Florence, on which he collaborated with the utmost secrecy with Giovan Francesco Rustici, a known necromancer and alchemist. And Leonardo‘s last painting was ‗John the Baptist‘, showing him with the same half-smile as ‗The Mona Lisa‘, and pointing 186
straight upwards with the index finger of his right hand. This in Leonardo‘s work is a sign always associated with John: in the ‗Adoration of the Magi‘ a person stands by the elevated roots of a carob tree – John‘s tree, symbol of sacrifical blood – while making this gesture. In his famous cartoon of St. Anne the subject also does this, warning an oblivious Virgin...The disciple whose face is perhaps accusingly close to Jesus‘ in ‗The Last Supper‘ is also making this gesture. All these gestures are saying ‗remember John‘.‖ – Lynn Picknett & Clive Prince, Turin Shroud – In Whose Image? The Shocking Truth Unveiled (Prieuré de Sion) Leonardo Da Vinci‘s famous painting of John the Baptist was funded by Medici Pope Leo X during the years 1513-16, that is, immediately preceding the Protestant Reformation which began in 1517. Note in Da Vinci‘s painting the upraised forefinger of John the Baptist, and also that John has an effeminate look which is typical of Da Vinci‘s many portrayals of John the Baptist. The upraised finger signifies ―The One,‖ an esoteric allusion to the Messiah whom the Rosicrucians believe will be androgynous, two sexes combined in ―one.‖ Merovingian literature portrays John the Baptist as an Essene monk, an ascetic of the Qumran Community that was built on the ruins of ancient Gomorrah. The Essenes worshipped the bisexual goddess, Diana, whose male component was Jana or Janus, the Roman god. ―Janus‖ anglicized is ―John‖, therefore the Templar‘s Church of St. John or ―Johannite Church‖ clandestinely worshipped the bisexual god, Diana/Janus, not John the Baptist. The hidden agenda of the Knights Templar was revealed in Albert Pike‘s Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry: : ―The Templars, like all other Secret Orders and Associations, had two doctrines, one concealed and reserved for the Masters, which was Johannism; the other public, which was the Roman Catholic. Thus they deceived the adversaries whom they sought to supplant. Hence Free-Masonry, vulgarly imagined to have begun with the Dionysian Architects or the German Stone-workers, adopted Saint John the Evangelist as one of its patrons, associating with him, in order not to arouse the suspicions of Rome, Saint John the Baptist, and thus covertly proclaiming itself the child of the Kabalah and Essenism together. ―[For the Johannism of the Adepts was the Kabalah of the earlier Gnostics, degenerating afterward into those heretical forms which Gnosticism developed, so that even Manes had his followers among them...] ―The better to succeed and win partisans, the Templars sympathized with regrets for dethroned creeds and encouraged the hopes of new worships, promising to all liberty of conscience and a new orthodoxy that should be the synthesis of all the persecuted creeds.‖ (Morals & Dogma, Chapter XXX) Some Kabbalists have reported discovering ―Bible codes‖ in the King James Version which associate John the Baptist with Leonardo Da Vinci, Mary Magdalene and the Knights Templar. Chapter 4 of this report documented how one Kabbalist ―decoded‖ Francis Bacon‘s message in the KJV that Jesus is the ―Antichrist,‖ and it seems another Kabbalist discovered yet another coded message that John the Baptist is the ―Christ.‖ Found on The English King James Version Bible Code website are the portions of Scripture which Kabbalists claim divulge that Christians have been wrong about the identity of the Christ. According to them, it was John the Baptist who rose from the dead! ―This next matrix is at Proverbs 4:10 – Jeremiah 48:2, and it contains: -- DA VINCI (ELS=-24932) -- CODE -- SECRET -- TREASURE (the Templar treasure?) -- JOHN (as in John the Baptist) (…) ―Next is a New Testament matrix at Matthew 27:57 – Mark 6:26, and it contains: -- DA VINCI (ELS=2288) -- CODE 187
-- JOHN -- BAPTIST -- MARY MAGDALENE -- JESUS ―And also: -- SUPPER (as in ―The Last Supper‖, the Da Vinci painting where there is much debate on this subject) -- JOHN WHOM I BEHEADED HE IS RISEN FROM THE DEAD (John the Baptist) (…) ―The next matrix on the Knights Templar is in the New Testament at Mark 13:1 – Luke 3:22, and it contains: -- TEMPLAR (ELS=-3800) -- ITALY -- CODE -- JESUS -- CHRIST -- MARY MAGDALENE And note that before I resized this matrix it was 666x604 pixels (666 being the number of the Antichrist).‖ Of course, such mystical Bible codes can only be deciphered using a computer software program and the King James Version (of which not one word, syllable or letter can be altered without ―grave consequences‖) and this is precisely Gail Riplinger‘s recommended method of mining the ―deep and secret‖ treasures the KJV: ―[F]or there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed‘ (Matt. 10:26. The ‗deep and secret things‘ he has not concealed (Dan. 2:22). ‗But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God‘ (I Cor. 2:10)… This is the first book to unveil treasures in the word of God, using tools from the new field of computational linguistics… The ‗miraculous‘ phenomena documented in this book are found in every line of the KJV… ―…The new field of computational linguistics, with research from the nation‘s leading universities, such as Stanford and MIT, has confirmed letter meanings as seen in the book of Genesis. Just as the electron microscope allowed scientists to see things that had always existed at the molecular level, so computer technology and computational linguistics allow linguists to see and uncover a pattern of meanings for letters that have always been there.‖ – Gail Riplinger (In Awe of Thy Word, pp. 6, 16) When David Bay ―defended‖ the 1611 King James Version by claiming that King James gave the final draft to the Rosicrucians for one year, to our knowledge not one of the many veteran ―KJV-Only defenders‖ published a rebuttal of his spurious claims. Surely, as ―scholars,‖ they would be in possession of historical evidence that would have exposed David Bay‘s deception, yet not a word of protest was heard from the leadership of the ―KJV-Only‖ camp. Moreover, prior to David Bay‘s foray into Bible criticism, not one of these ―scholars‖ refuted Gail Riplinger‘s Kabbalistic and historically inaccurate book, except for a short critique by David Cloud who used the occasion to promote the corrupt Old Latin translations, of which more will be said later. Where are the KJV-Only defenders at this critical point in the battle for the Bible? NOT ONLY “KJV-ONLY” BAPTISTS The false teaching that the Cathars, Albigenses, Bogomils, Waldenses, etc., were the ―true Christians‖ of the Middle Ages is not found in the KJV-Only camp alone. Cutting Edge Ministries is hardly ―King James Only,‖ yet David Bay has posted several articles on his website which also reimage these Gnostic predecessors of the Landmark Baptists: 188
―WHY DOES THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH CONSISTENTLY GO AGAINST GOD'S WORD, WHEN IT IS BY HIS VERY WORD WE WILL ALL BE JUDGED ON THAT LAST DAY?‖... ―Becky Sexton, Former Catholics For Christ… ―29. Rome not only has killed her enemies, but has granted ‗indulgences‘ (time out of purgatory) for the murder of ‗heretics‘. ‗At the Council of Siena, in 1425, a plenary indulgence was offered to those who took arms against the Hussites...Waldenes...Albigenses....‘ (Catholic Dictionary, 442)‖ ―ROMAN CATHOLIC POPE DECLARED TO BE TOP RELIGIOUS LEADER IN KINGDOM OF ANTICHRIST!‖ ―Former Catholics For Christ… ―…during the crusades they promised plenary (full) indulgence for killing ‗heretics‘! ―The period of the crusade marks a turning point in the history of indulgences, for they were given more and more freely from that time onward... For example at the council of Siena, in 1425, a plenary indulgence was offered to those who took arms against the Hussites; while wars against the Waldenes, Albigenses, Moors, and Turks were stimulated by the same means‘ (Catholic Dictionary, 442).‖ ―ANSWERS TO ROME'S 25-QUESTION TRACT WHICH TRIES TO REFUTE THE 'BIBLE-ONLY THEORY‖ ―Becky Sexton, Former Catholics For Christ… ―When was the New Testament placed under one cover? ―The true Bible was placed under one cover no later than 145A.D., and was known as the Syrian Peshitto. The ‗Old Latin Vulgate‘ was the next Bible to be compiled by the year 157 A.D. The corrupted Latin version of Jerome, translated by order of Constantine, was published in about 380 A.D. The RCC chose the name "Vulgate" or "Common" for Jerome‘s translation in an attempt to deceive loyal Christians into thinking that it was the true common Bible of the people. It was rejected by real Christians such as the Waldenses, Gauls, Celts, Albigenses, and other groups throughout Europe who held doctrinal purity dear to their hearts. According to Dr. Bill Grady, in his book Final Authority, page 34: ―‗For the Syrian people dwelling northeast of Palestine, there were at least four major versions: the Peshitta (A.D. 145); the Old Syriac (AD. 400); the Palestinian Syriac (A.D. 450); and the Philoxenian (A.D. 508), which was revised by Thomas of Harkel in A.D. 616 and henceforth known as the Harclean Syriac. True to the meaning of its name (straight or rule), the Peshitta set the standard because of its early composition and strong agreement with the Greek text underlying the King James Bible.‖ ―Dave Hunt‘s A Woman Rides the Beast‖ ―Pagan Rome made sport of throwing to the lions, burning and otherwise killing thousands of Christians and not a few Jews. Yet ‗Christian‘ Rome slaughtered many times that number of both Christians and Jews. Beside those victims of the Inquisition, there were Huguenots, Albigenses, Waldenses, and other Christians who were massacred, tortured, and burned at the stake by the hundreds of thousands simply because they refused to align themselves with the Roman Catholic Church and its corruption and heretical dogmas and practices. Out of conscience they tried to follow the teachings of Christ and the apostles independent of Rome, and for that crime they were maligned, hunted, imprisoned, tortured, and slain.‖ In his other best-seller, What Love Is This? Calvinism’s Misrepresentation of God (2002, 2004), Dave Hunt also portrays the Albigensians, the Waldensians, the Donatists and the Hussites as the ―true Christians‖ who were persecuted by Rome: ―The fourth century Donatists believed the church should be a pure communion of true believers who demonstrated the truth of the gospel in their lives. They abhorred the apostasy 189
that had come into the church when Constantine wedded Christianity to paganism in order to unify the empire. To the Donatists, the church was a ‗small body of saved surrounded by the unregenerate mass.‘ This is, of course, the Biblical view. ―…Augustine identified the Donatists as heretics… ―…the Donatists…concerned for purity of the faith, separated from the official state churches, rejected their ordinances, and insisted on rebaptizing clergy who had repented after having denied the faith during the persecutions that arose when the Emperor Diocletian demanded that he be worshipped as a god. ―Frend explains. ‗In the spring of 327, he [Constantine] followed up his decision by publishing a ‗most severe‘ edict against the Donatists, confiscating their property and exiling their leaders…‘ ‗While Augustine and the clergy emphasized the unity of the church, the Donatists insisted upon the purity of the church and rebaptized all those who came to them from the Catholic Church—considering the Catholics corrupt… ―Luther himself said, ‗We are not the first to declare the papacy to be the Kingdom of Antichrist, since for so many years before us so many and so great men…have undertaken to express the same thing so clearly.‘ For example… The Waldensians identified the Pope as the Antichrist in an A.D. 1100 treatise titled ‗The Noble Lesson.‘ In 1206, an Albigensian conference in Montreal, France indicted the Vatican as ‗the woman drunk with the blood of the martyrs‘… Jumping ahead… In 1429, Pope Martin V commanded the King of Poland to exterminate the Hussites.‖ (What Love Is This?, pp. 52-3, 68-9, 212) The Donatists, like the later medieval heretics, believed themselves to be the ―pure ones‖ and regarded orthodox Christians as nonbelievers. They were separatists in the extreme, not unlike the Fundamental Baptists who claim them as their spiritual ancestors. The issues over which the Donatists separated from other Christians have no basis in Scripture. For example, they did not recognize baptism by any church group other than their own since they alone were ―pure‖ enough to administer the ordinances: ―John Owen, the learned Puritan writer, said of the English Baptists in Volume 13, page 184, of his works: ―The Donatists rebaptized those who came to their societies (churches) because they professed themselves to believe that all administration of the ordinances not in their assemblies was null, and that they were looked upon as no such thing. Our English Anabaptists do the same thing.‖ (―Resetting an Old Landmark,‖ Tom Ross) According to the Columbia Encyclopedia and other sources, the Donatists descended from the hyperCharismatic ascetics and heretics of the 2nd century, the Montanists, and later merged with the Novations, another ―puritistic‖ sect that were the original ―Cathari‖ which meant ―the pure.‖ Descendants of the Montanists also included the medieval Cathari, as well as the 18th and 19th century ecstatic cults of Emmanuel Swedenborg and Edward Irving: ―[Montanism] arose in Phrygia [c.172] under the leadership of a certain Montanus and two female prophets, Prisca and Maximillia, whose entranced utterances were deemed oracles of the Holy Spirit. They had an immediate expectation of Judgment Day, and they encouraged ecstatic prophesying and strict asceticism... [T]he movement...died [c.220] as a sect, except in isolated areas of Phrygia, where it continued to the 7th cent. But the puristic anti-intellectual movement had many descendants – Novations, the Donatists, the Cathari and even Emanuel Swedenborg and Edward Irving… ―After 325 the sect [of Novatian] was merged with that of Donatism.‖ (Columbia Ency., (Columbia Ency., ―Montanism, p. 1817; ―Novatians,‖ p. 1976) ―Novatians…spread through Europe, through Africa, and Asia. In the mountains of Armenia they still lingered, till the name Donatists was lost in Montenses and Paulicians. In the recesses of the Alps the Novatians (called from the first Puritans) were persecuted as Paterines and Waldenses. Up through the darkness we have traced their crimsoned footprints. We have found 190
them here, in the third century, contending for a pure and independent church, baptized on a profession of faith, and persecuted as Anabaptists. The people called Novatians were Baptists.‖ (Reformed Reader) ―The Novations were the followers of Novatus, in the third century. They assumed to themselves the title of Cathari, or the pure.‖ – Lactantius, Divine Institutes, Vol. 7, p. 133, n.9 (341:133) ANABAPTISTS After documenting the heresies of the medieval sects in Baptist Successionism, James McGoldrick concluded that modern Baptists have more in common with the Roman Catholic Church than they have with the radically heretical cults acclaimed to be their predecessors by Baptist successionists. He wrote, ―Baptists arose in the seventeenth century in Holland and England. They are Protestants, heirs of the Reformers… A careful examination of Baptist history shows…that Baptists are Protestants.‖ (Baptist Successionism, pp. 2, 141) According to McGoldrick, the Baptists were an offshoot of the Puritans, who were Calvinists: ―The Baptist movement grew out of English Puritanism/Separatism… These ‗Separatists‘ shared the Anabaptist conviction that the true church would restore the doctrine and government of the New Testament, which, it appeared, the Anglicans had no intention of doing. Separatists sought to establish free churches with a congregational form of government, but, unlike the Anabaptists, most of them retained the Protestant/Calvinist view of salvation, and all of them practiced infant baptism…‖ (Baptist Successionism, pp. 124-5) Professor McGoldrick has admirably documented the history and heresies of the various Gnostic cults which the Baptist successionists claim as their spiritual ancestors. However, his conclusion that ―Baptists are Protestants‖ does not therefore make their spiritual ancestors Christians, for the Protestant movement quickly became the breeding ground of heretics and revolutionaries. Norman Cohn‘s book, The Pursuit of the Millennium, aptly subtitled ―Revolutionary Millenarians and Mystical Anarchists of the Middle Ages,‖ describes the madness and mayhem to which the town of Munster, Germany, fell victim at the hands of the Anabaptist prophets from the Netherlands: ―During February 1534, the power of the Anabaptists in Munster increased rapidly… ―From Antwerp a scholar could write to Erasmus of Rotterdam: ‗We in these parts are living in wretched anxiety because of the way the revolt of the Anabaptists has flared up. For it really did spring up like fire. There is, I think, scarcely a village or town where the torch is not glowing in secret. They preach community of goods, with the result that all those who have nothing come flocking.‘ How seriously the authorities took the threat is shown by the repressive measures which they adopted. Anabaptism was made a capital offense not only throughout the diocese of Munster but in the neighboring principalities… During the months of the siege countless men and women in the towns were beheaded, drowned, burnt or broken on the wheel. ―By then end of March Matthys had established an absolute dictatorship; but a few days later he was dead… This event gave an opening to Matthys‘s young disciple, Jan Bockelson, who so far had played no great part but who was in every was fitted to seize such a chance and use it to the full… ―Bockelson‘s first important act was – characteristically – at once a religious and a political one. Early in May he ran naked through the town in a frenzy and then fell into a silent ecstasy which lasted three days. When speech returned to him he called the population together and announced that God had revealed to him that the old constitution of the town, being the work of men, must be replaced by a new one which would be the work of God. The burgomasters and Council were deprived of their functions. In their place Bockelson set himself and – on the model of Ancient Israel – twelve Elders… This new government was given authority in all matters, public and private, spiritual and material, and power of life and death over all 191
inhabitants of the town. A new legal code was drawn up, aimed partly at carrying still further the process of socialization and partly at imposing a severely puritanical morality. A strict direction of labour was introduced… At the same time the new code made capital offenses not only of murder and theft but also of lying, slander, avarice and quarreling. But above all it was an absolutely authoritarian code; death was to be the punishment of every kind of insubordination – of the young against their parents, of a wife against her husband, of anyone against God and God‘s representative, the government of Munster…‖ (The Pursuit of the Millennium, Chap. 13) MONOPHYSITE ANABAPTISTS The Anabaptists were not only revolutionaries but heretics as well, whose Christology constituted a revival of the ancient heresies, as did the Cathars, Albigenses, Donatists, etc. before them. McGoldrick states, ―a large majority of Anabaptists…were quite unorthodox in their perceptions of the Incarnation,‖ citing as examples Thomas Muntzer, Melchior Hoffman and a leader of the Munster Anabaptists who also denied that Christ received His human flesh from Mary. This false teaching was a revival of the ancient Monophysite heresy that Christ had only one nature: ―Bernard Rothman (c. 1495-1535), an Anabaptist prominent in the ill-fated attempt to build New Jerusalem at Munster in Westphalia, wrote: ‗If it had been Mary‘s flesh [that is, Christ born of Mary] that died for us, my God, what comfort and courage could we derive from that? That would be like paying for one sin with another and to wash and cleanse one uncleanness with another.‖ (Baptist Successionism, p. 102) Another Anabaptist leader who taught Monophysitism was Menno Simons, a disciple of Melchior Hoffman and the founder of the Mennonites. Menno Simon‘s view of the Incarnation is described in Harold O.J. Brown‘s book, Heresies: ―…Menno Simons (1496-1561)…advocated the concept of a heavenly flesh of Christ in order to spare the deity contact with our sinful human flesh. Menno spoke of Jesus as born ‗in‘ Mary‘s body, but not of it; as a ray of light passes through a glass of water and is refracted by it but does not take on substance from it, so the heavenly flesh of Jesus passed through Mary‘s body without taking anything from it… ―The most influential of those who taught the doctrine of the Heavenly Flesh, and the one whose name is most likely to be recognized today, was Menno Simons. Menno has earned an honorable place in Christian history by his leadership in gathering the shattered and dispersed Anabaptists following the disastrous end of the Anabaptist ‗Kingdom of God‘ at Münster in 1534-35… Menno succeeded in rallying a large number of the Anabaptists, in winning them away from the extreme, eschatologically colored fantasies of the Munsterites, and in instituting a system of congregational discipline that rapidly won the respect of the more traditional Christians. Menno retained the distinctive view of the Heavenly Flesh he had learned from Melchior Hoffmann. ‗For Christ Jesus, as to his origin, is no earthly man, that is, fruit of the flesh and blood of Adam. He is a heavenly fruit or man. For his beginning or origin is of the Father [John 16:28], like unto the first Adam, sin excepted.‘ [ff. Menno Simons, Complete Writings, ed. Harold S. Bender,…1956) p. 863]… ―…Menno and his followers represent a Reformation-era revival of monophysitism. The heritage of Menno Simons is perpetuated and honored in Mennonite communities scattered throughout North America, and existing to a lesser extent in Europe, the Soviet Union, and South America.‖ (Heresies, pp. 328-30)
192
The writings of David Cloud abound with erroneous information about the Anabaptists, the Cathars, Albigenses, and other medieval heretics, all of whom are portrayed as the ―true Christians‖ who preserved the Textus Receptus. In the Way of Life Encyclopedia, David Cloud identifies the Mennonite Brethren as Anabaptists, and therefore in the Baptist succession from the New Testament Church. Describing their doctrine, Cloud refers to articles of the 1632 Dutch Mennonite Confession; however, there is no mention of the ―celestial flesh‖ heresy of Menno Simons: ―Simons, a converted Roman Catholic priest, organized so many Anabaptist congregations that his name became identified with the movement. Because they rejected infant baptism and statism, the Mennonites were persecuted by the Protestant Reformers as well as by the Roman Catholic Church. Many crossed over to England at the invitation of Henry VIII, but they met bitter persecution there as they had in Germany, Holland, and Switzerland. In 1683 the first Mennonite families settled in America, and Mennonite immigrants quickly spread across Pennsylvania, Ohio, Virginia, Indiana, Illinois, as well as into Canada. The 18 articles of the Mennonite faith, signed in Dordrecht, Holland, in 1632, includes the belief in the fall of man, the deity of Christ, the necessity of repentance and regeneration for salvation, baptism as a public testimony of faith, Heaven, and Hell...‖ (Way of Life Encyclopedia) Article IV of the 1632 Dutch Mennonite Confession to which David Cloud refers incorporates the Monophysite heresy, that Jesus was conceived ―in‖ Mary, rather than ―of‖ Mary: ― ―We believe and confess further, that when the time of the promise, for which all the pious forefathers had so much longed and waited, had come and was fulfilled, this previously promised Messiah, Redeemer, and Savior, proceeded from God, was sent, and, according to the prediction of the prophets, and the testimony of the evangelists, came into the world, yea, into the flesh, was made manifest, and the Word, Himself became flesh and man; that He was conceived in the virgin Mary…‖ (Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia) In contrast, Luke 1:31 states specifically that Mary herself conceived Jesus, and was not merely a vessel ―through‖ which Jesus‘ ―heavenly flesh‖ was conceived by some other agency: ―And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God. And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.‖ (Luke 1:30-31 KJV) The heresy which Menno Simons taught the Anabaptist and Mennonite congregations was explicitly and frequently stated in his works: ―…I have shown and confessed to you the firm foundation of. the incarnation of the Lord, that he did not become flesh of Mary, but that he became flesh in Mary… Thus Christ Jesus remains the precious, blessed fruit of the womb of Mary, according to the words of Elizabeth, which was conceived not of her womb but in her womb wrought by the Holy Spirit through faith, of God the omnipotent Father, from high heaven, as we have frequently shown… ―They say and teach, without any Scripture, ‗That the Word has put on a whole man of Mary‘s flesh and seed;‘ and we say and teach, according to the plain testimony of John, That the Word was made flesh, not of Mary, but in Mary. They teach, ‗That there are two different persons and sons, one divine, the other human, in the one Christ,‘ without Scripture; and we say that there is but one undivided person and Son, according to the Scriptures.‖ (The Complete Writings of Menno Simons: Book 2, pp. 332-3, 397) (See also: The Confutation: Part Third) The ―heavenly flesh‖ doctrine was not a ―new revelation‖ to the Anabaptists and Mennonites, but a major heresy that had been refuted in every particular over a millennium earlier, at the Council of Chalcedon (451 AD).
193
―We confess, therefore, our Lord Jesus Christ, the Only Begotten Son of God, perfect God, and perfect Man of a reasonable soul and flesh consisting; begotten before the ages of the Father according to his Divinity, and in the last days, for us and for our salvation, of Mary the Virgin according to his humanity, of the same substance with his Father according to his Divinity, and of the same substance with us according to his humanity; for there became a union of two natures. Wherefore we confess one Christ, one Son, one Lord. According to this understanding of this unmixed union, we confess the holy Virgin to be Mother of God; because God the Word was incarnate and became Man, and from this conception he united the temple taken from her with himself.‖ (Council of Chalcedon Confession)
Mormon doctrine also contains the heavenly flesh heresy, with God the Father and Jesus Christ being the same person, as previously discussed in Chapter 2: ―Sabellianism...holds that the Son was the same person as the Father. The Book of Mormon even alludes to the heavenly flesh (the peculiar preserve of Anabaptists and equivalent to the Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation), since the Father of Heaven and Earth is said to come to earth and dwell in a tabernacle of clay... ―While much of the Christological discussion in the Book of Mormon has a Trinitarian ring to it, the text clearly favors a Sabellian, or Monophysite/Unitarian interpretation. The brother of Jared, sees the finger of God and then, on account of his great faith, the face of God. The God of the Old Testament, Jehovah, he discovers, is none other than Jesus Christ. As Steven Epperson argues, this is not the orthodox understanding. Jesus and Jehovah are not the same person in Christian theology. It is an ‗egregious error,‘ Epperson writes, and ‗we do violence and disrespect to the person of the Father.‘ Yet, in the Book of Mormon, at least, the Father is spirit and the Son is flesh, and, as Sabbelius taught, the two are one person in Jesus Christ.‖ (Equal Rites: The Book of Mormon, Masonry, Gender, and American Culture, Clyde R. Forsberg, Columbia Univ. Press, 2003, p. 169) This heresy borders on another false teaching: If Jesus had ―heavenly flesh,‖ the argument could be made that He was an angel, even Michael the Archangel as Jehovah‘s Witnesses believe. Even worse, the ―heavenly flesh‖ doctrine is allows for the mating of the human woman, Mary, with the ―strange flesh‖ of a fallen angel, as occurred in Genesis 6. ―There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.‖ (Gen. 6:4) ―And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities.‖ (Jude 6-7) The outcome of these unholy unions was a hybrid demonic race which God judged with a flood. Since the Nephilim are the acclaimed progenitors of the Merovingian bloodline, the false ―heavenly flesh‖ doctrine allows for the heretical interpretation that Jesus Christ was one of the Nephilim, an angel among the ancient gods who ruled the pre-flood world. This interpretation provides support for the claims of the popular Astrotheology movement which assigns Jesus Christ a place alongside the solar deities worshipped in ancient religions. (See: ―Comparative Mythology & Astrotheology‖) CHAPTER XV ANABAPTIST UNITARIANS 194
CONTEND FOR THE FAITH: THE TEXTUS RECEPTUS http://watch-unto-prayer.org/TR-0-intro.html WATCH UNTO PRAYER taho@watch-unto-prayer.org http://watch-unto-prayer.org
195
CHAPTER XVI ANABAPTIST UNITARIANS It seems there were a significant number of Anabaptists who did not believe the Monophysite heresy but embraced the other extreme of denying the deity of Christ altogether, and therefore the Trinity. These Anabaptists were Unitarians whose Antitrinitarian doctrines assigned to Christianity a human rather than divine origin. F.C. Conybeare identified the faith of the Anabaptists and ―Unitarian Christians‖ as Catharism: ―In the Reformation this Catharism comes once more to the surface, particularly among the so-called Anabaptists and Unitarian Christians between whom and the most primitive church ‗The Key of Truth‘ and the Cathar Ritual of Lyons supply us with the two great connecting links.‘‖ (The Key of Truth, p. x) Supporting Conybeare‘s statement, the neo-Cathar General Conference Cathar Church adheres to the Mennonite-Anabaptist ―Schleitheim Confession‖ of 1527. The GCCC also states: ―Our spiritual decendants include the Amish, Mennonite and Quakers.‖ (―Good Christians and Anti-semitism‖) ―Good Christians believe that all use of the oath is forbidden by the command of Jesus Christ. In this position we have been consistent with the tradition historically expressed by the Waldensians, the Anabaptists, Amish, many Brethren, Hutterites and Mennonites.‖ (―Good Christians and Oaths‖) Because they rejected the supernatural, Unitarian Anabaptists advocated human reason rather than Scripture as the means of ascertaining truth. Unitarian Anabaptists came to be called ―Socinians‖ after Faustus Socinus (1539-1604), an Italian theologian who unified and strongly influenced the Anabaptists of Poland and Italy. Socinus was funded by the Medici family which had also sponsored Leonardo da Vinci (Grand Master of the Prieuré de Sion, 1510-1519) in the early days of the Reformation. The Medici also supplied the Catholic Church with several popes, including Giovanni Medici (Leo X) whose egregious abuses and showdown with Martin Luther split Western Christendom. Socinus‘ uncle, Lelio Sozzini, had been a colleague of Michael Servetus, the Unitarian heretic whom John Calvin had burned at the stake. Servetus also taught that Jesus had ―heavenly flesh,‖ according to Reformed theologian, Harold O.J. Brown: ―The heritage of Menno Simons is perpetuated and honored in Mennonite communities scattered throughout North America, and existing to a lesser extent in Europe and the Soviet Union, and South America. A different fate awaited one of the most brilliant and eccentric advocates of a heavenly-flesh doctrine, the Spanish physician Michael Servetus. Servetus has gone down in church and secular history as a martyr to Calvinistic intolerance; his execution in Geneva represents a stain that Reformed Protestantism has never quite been able to efface. ―As a young man, Servetus propounded the distinctive views that ultimately led him the stake: his On the Errors of the Trinity appeared in 1531. He held God to be one Person only; this God was the literal, natural father of Jesus Christ, who was therefore God‘s natural Son. The body of Christ is the body of the godhead... divine and of the substance of deity. According to Servetus, when the Word became flesh, he brought his flesh down with him from heaven. Although Servetus denied the deity and preexistence of Christ…he was unable to conceive of him as a mere man, even as one adopted by God, but had to postulate a direct, natural relationship with God.‖ (Heresies; p. 330) Many Anabaptists who came to England, especially those from Holland, were arrested and executed because of their heresy and seditious activities. A History of Unitarianism by Earl Morse Wilbur presents 196
historical data from many different sources which document executions by King Henry VIII, Edward VI, Elizabeth I and King James I. The following lengthy but fascinating excerpt from Wilbur‘s 1925 book gives an overview of Tudor England up to the reign of James I, during which period the author notes, ―Arian and Anabaptist were used indiscriminately as equivalent names.‖ Note in the passage that Thomas Cranmer, the Archbishop of Canterbury for whom the Great Bible of 1539 was named, assisted King Edward to uncover and prosecute the Unitarian Anabaptists: ―In…1535,…during a bloody persecution of the Anabaptist followers of Jan van Geelen in their violent insurrection at Amsterdam, in the course of which van Geelen himself was killed, numerous companies of Anabaptists crossed over to England, where they established themselves chiefly in the eastern counties and in Kent… A number were found and abjured their errors, among which were denial of the Trinity and of the deity of Christ; in fact, at this period, Arian and Anabaptist were used indiscriminately as equivalent names. In the same year twenty-five Dutch men and women were examined in St. Paul‘s for denying Christ‘s humanity; and of these fourteen were condemned and burned, two in Smithfield, the rest in other towns. These measures were ineffectual, and Arianism is reported at this time to have been professed openly in Essex and Kent; and of the twenty-six burned under Henry VIII it is fair to presume that a good number suffered for denying the Trinity. ―With the accession of Edward VI in 1537 the prospects of carrying out a thorough reform of the Church became brighter. Henry VIII had never been more than half Protestant, and as he grew older he became lukewarm to the Reformation. But under Edward, a boy of but nine years, while the civil government was managed by the Privy Council, ecclesiastical matters were administered by Archbishop Cranmer, who was zealous for the Reformation and for strictness in doctrine. He began to root out those that were unsound in their views, and already in June 1548, John Assheton, priest of Shiltelington, was brought before him, accused of holding that the doctrine of the Trinity was first established by the Athanasian Creed; that the Holy Spirit is not God, but only a certain power of the Father; and that Jesus Christ, though a holy prophet, was not the true and living God. All these things he admitted, but now for fear of the stake he renounced and abjured these ‗errors, heresies and damnable opinions,‘ confessing the Trinity and the deity of Christ. Assheton was the first one in England to be arraigned on the charge of Antitrinitarianism. ―Throughout the reign of Edward VI there was much alarm in church circles over the rapid spread of ‗Arianism,‘ and Cranmer took every means to discover the sources of this and to stop them. Complaint was made to the Council, and six Bishops and some others were appointed a commission to search for and examine any Anabaptists or other heretics and either reclaim them or else if obstinate deliver them to the secular arm. Several thus discovered abjured… ―With the death of Queen Mary and the accession of Elizabeth in 1558, the Church of England again became Protestant…Though she favored the Reformation, she proceeded with caution, seeking to establish a national Church that should as far as possible be acceptable to all parties. Its doctrine was to be a compromise between Calvin and Luther, and its worship and ceremonial a compromise between Catholic and Protestant… ―Elizabeth reestablished the Strangers‘ Church in 1559, though now under the direct oversight of the Bishop of London, and besides the Dutch congregation already existing separate ones were gathered for Protestant refugees from France, Italy and Spain. She also at once abolished the laws for the burning of heretics, though within a year she was persuaded to order an investigation as to whether any heresies were being spread; when so many were discovered that in 1560 all Anabaptists were ordered to leave England, since they refused to join the worship of either the national Church or the Strangers‘ Church as Elizabeth‘s Act of Uniformity of the previous year required, but instead met secretly. Evidently persecutions of the Anabaptists followed, for in 1560 they petitioned the Bishop through Adriaen van Haemstede (Adrian Hamsted), one of the ministers of the Dutch church at Austin Friars, asking for toleration. Bishop Grindal regarded this as a request for toleration of heresy, and not only refused to grant it, but called van Haemstede before him, and when he refused to subscribe a recantation of the Anabaptist errors excommunicated him. An eminent Italian member of the church, Jacobus Acontius…, who 7
8
9
10
11
12
21
22
23
24
197
shared van Haemstede‘s views and openly defended him before the Bishop, was also excommunicated in the following year… ―Despite the measures taken against them, the Anabaptists continued to increase, so that in 1575 the Act De haeretica comburendo, after slumbering seventeen years, was reluctantly revived and enforced against them. On Easter of that year a little congregation of them, while privately worshiping in a house in Aldersgate Street, London, was surprised, and some thirty of them were arrested and imprisoned. Some recanted, some were flogged and banished, one died in prison, and two others, the poor and aged Jan Pieters (or Jan the Wheelwright) and Hendrik Terwoort, a goldsmith, who were charged with a heretical view concerning the incarnation, were burned alive at Smithfield, and ‗died in great horror, with crying and roaring,‘ as the historian relates. John Foxe, the martyrologist, addressed to the Queen an eloquent appeal in their behalf, but in vain. She excused her action by saying that it would ill become her to set free those that had dishonored God, when she had lately punished some that had been traitors to the State. The principal seat of Antitrinitarian views among the Anabaptists was in the county of Norfolk, where a number of victims were ferreted out by Bishop Scambler. Mention is also made of Matthew Hamont of Hethersett, a plowwright, who was burned in 1579 for denying that Christ was God; and of his followers John Lewes, and Peter Cole a tanner of Ipswich, who were burned in 1583 and 1587 respectively; and of the Rev. Francis Kett, a graduate of Cambridge, who for blasphemous opinions concerning Christ had his ears cut off, and was then burned near Norwich in 1589. All these were charged in vague but generally extravagant terms with unsound views as to the Trinity or Christ... ‖ (A History of Unitarianism, Chap. X: ―Precursors of Socinianism in England‖; see footnotes for sources) 28
29
30
31
In his book, Baptist Successionism: A Crucial Question in Baptist History, Prof. James McGoldrick confirms that the Anabaptists of England were expelled by King Henry VIII, banned by Edward VI, and Elizabeth I expelled or arrested those who spread heresy and/or disturbed the realm. The Baptists who returned to England from the Netherlands were not on good terms with King James I either: ―Henry VIII forbade the circulation of Anabaptist literature and commanded all adherents of that sect to leave England… In England, as in the continental states, Anabaptists were feared for being subversive as well as heretical, so the government proscribed their teachings. Under Edward VI (1547-53)…the ban against Anabaptists continued… Elizabeth I (1553-58) decreed that the Anabaptists would have to adhere to the Protestant Church of England or leave the realm. Those who did not comply were liable to arrest and banishment, and, in a few cases, such dissidents were executed… ―Those who would not be reconciled to the Anglican Church…were persecuted, and some fled to Holland, where they founded English Separatist congregations. Such bodies were often called ‗Brownist‘ churches because Robert Brown (1550-1636) was the pioneer of English Separatism… ―In 1607 another group of Brownist refugees arrived in Amsterdam, Holland. This one was led by John Smyth (c. 1565-1612), a former Anglican clergyman, who has been hailed by some as the first Baptist of modern times…[and] Thomas Helwys (c. 1570-c. 1615)…laid the foundation for the Baptist movement of modern times… Smyth‘s independent English church in the Netherlands was destined to become the mother church of the English General Baptists… Although Smyth endorsed the Anabaptist Christology with its concept of the ‗celestial flesh,‘ Helwys affirmed the orthodox teaching that Christ received his human flesh from the Virgin Mary. A perusal of the historic confessions of the Baptist faith will show that Helwys…deserved recognition as the pioneer Baptist of modern times. ―Early in 1611, Helwys decided that his congregation should return to England despite the prospect of persecution from the government of King James I (1603-25)... The returned exiles then formed the first Baptist church on English soil. This marks the birth of the General Baptist movement in English history. 198
―Helwys enjoyed a short tenure as a Baptist pastor in England. He was arrested and died while in prison, probably in 1614. John Murton…became the next pastor of the General Baptist Church…and proved to be a courageous spokesman for religious liberty. This first Baptist Church in England continued until near the end of the nineteenth century, but the General Baptist movement as a whole did not have great longevity… General Baptists…drifted into rationalism and Unitarianism…‖ (Baptist Successionism, pp. 124-126, 129) John Smyth was a Cambridge scholar and former clergyman; Thomas Helwys was an affluent English landowner who, in the opinion of McGoldrick and most Baptist historians, ―deserved recognition as the pioneer Baptist of modern times.‖ Helwys separated from Smyth after the latter sought affiliation with the Mennonites and adopted their false doctrine which denied the Incarnation. Upon his return to England, Thomas Helwys wrote A Short Declaration of the Mystery of Iniquity, an autographed copy of which he sent to King James I. Helwys advocated ―freedom of conscience,‖ the Masonic catchphrase for maximum tolerance of all religions, which naturally would have extended to witches, heretics and members of secret societies, some of whom the king had executed. (Hear audios: ―The Life and Times of King James I‖). In 1604, King James replied to the Puritans who were promoting ―Christian liberty‖ at the Hampton Court Conference that the term ―smelt very rankly of anabaptism.‖ Thomas Helwys boldly agitated against King James‘ oversight of the Church of England, claiming in his book that it was the ―second beast‖ of Revelation 13, the first being the Roman Catholic Church. Helwys, who established the first Baptist church in England, was imprisoned by King James in 1616 and died in prison. The General Baptist Church which he co-founded with Thomas Murton would become Unitarian. We include here another excerpt from Wilbur‘s History of Unitarianism which documents from several sources King James‘ policy of prosecuting and executing the Unitarian Anabaptists. ―… James came to the throne in 1603, bred a Strict Calvinist, thinking himself a competent judge of religious questions, and disposed to take quite seriously his title of Defender of the Faith. One of his first acts was to publish ‗Constitutions and Canons Ecclesiastical,‘ by which he asserted supreme authority over all matters of the Church, and outlawed all meetings outside the Church of England assuming to be those of lawful churches, thus striking at the Anabaptists. Also at the Hampton Court Conference in his first year, where he listened to the desires of both parties, he made it clear that the struggle between the Episcopalians, who wished to maintain the government and practices of the Church as they were, and the Presbyterians, who desired a more thorough reform and were beginning to be known as Puritans, his sympathies were all with the former. He also undertook to check the introduction of heresies from abroad. Thus in 1611 he ordered Vorst‘s Treatise on God and His Attributes to be burned at St. Paul‘s Cross and at both Universities; and in 1614 he caused to be burned the Latin edition of the Racovian Catechism, which the translator had dedicated to him. It was well on in James‘s reign that the last instances of burning for heresy in England took place in 1612, in the cases of Legate and Wightman, who died in the same month, and are usually spoken of together, but in almost every other respect were quite separate… Bartholomew Legate was a cloth merchant in the county of Essex, where he had business connections with Holland. He was a prominent Anabaptist, and his brother Thomas had already died in prison in 1608… The King was reluctant to proceed against him though he was under arrest as a heretic, and in private interviews he often sought to correct him…but as he boldly persisted in defending his opinions and refused to repent, he was finally excommunicated by the Bishop and condemned on thirteen blasphemous counts as an obdurate, contumacious and incorrigible heretic, and was sentenced to death. Refusing all offers of mercy and pardon offered even at the stake, he was burned on March 18, 1612, in the presence of a great concourse of spectators. ―Almost exactly contemporary with the case of Legate was that of Edward Wightman of the parish of Burton-upon-Trent, who has the distinction of being the last to be burned for heresy in England. We know little more of him than what the documents of his trial relate; but he was 32
33
34
36
199
evidently a man of disordered mind on matters of religion, for apart from denying the Trinity, the deity of Christ and of the Holy Spirit, and the Creeds, he considered himself a divinely appointed prophet foretold in Scripture, and that he himself was the Holy Spirit. Examined before the Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield, he was charged with holding the heresies of ten ancient heretics and of the Anabaptists, and was convicted on sixteen separate heads. He lay in prison for several months and was often exhorted to repent, but refused, and was finally sentenced to die… One other was sentenced to death under James, a Spanish ‗Arian‘ whose name has not been preserved; but he was permitted ‗to linger out a miserable life in Newgate rather than to awaken too far the compassions of the people.‘ Indeed, the King seems to have lost his faith in this method of discouraging heresy, seeing that heresy still survived nevertheless... He therefore ‗politicly preferred,‘ says the historian Fuller, ‗that heretics hereafter, though condemned, should silently and privately waste themselves away in the prison rather than to grace them, and amuse others, with the solemnity of a public execution, which in popular judgments usurped the honor of a persecution.‘ As time went on, the King‘s zeal for orthodoxy and conformity in religion somewhat relaxed, and he contented himself with the burning of heretical books… ―After the burning of Wightman there were no more executions for heresy in England… He had perhaps come to realize that heresy could not be successfully exterminated at the stake; while the Anabaptists doubtless learned the wisdom of being yet more secretive in their meetings… ―For well-nigh a generation before and after the death of James, therefore, there was no overt Antitrinitarianism, though the leaven was quietly working beneath the surface. For by this time many Socinian works in Latin for scholars were coming from the Raków press and were being eagerly read in private by persons of inquiring mind, and English translations of important works of Socinus and others were being clandestinely printed by Collegiants or Remonstrants in Holland, and were circulating widely among the common people in England... But though Socinian or Unitarian views were thus quietly spreading, no action was as yet taken against Socinianism save in the burning of the Racovian Catechism at James‘s instance in 1614.‖ (A History of Unitarianism, Chap. X: ―Precursors of Socinianism in England‖; see also footnotes) 37
The early history of the Baptist movement in England seems to be a chronicle of open rebellion against the monarchy and the Church of England, of which the British sovereign was the head. Although King James prosecuted witches and sorcerers as criminals, he permitted Roman Catholicism to continue to exist in England and Scotland, as well as Calvinism in Scotland and he allowed the growth of Puritanism in England. But there were political reasons King James was not equally tolerant of the Baptists, and he seemed to perceive them as more than religious heretics. James was probably aware, not only of their political subversion on the Continent, but also of their collusion with the English Rosicrucians who were behind Oliver Cromwell and plotted to overthrow the British crown. James McGoldrick stated, ―…the General Baptist movement as a whole did not have great longevity… Baptists were prominent in supporting the protectorate of Oliver Cromwell and served within the parliamentary army which fought the royalists in the civil war… General Baptists…drifted into rationalism and Unitarianism…‖ (pp. 129-30) The Anabaptist Network identifies these as General Baptists: ―Indeed, General Baptists were to play a significant part in the parliamentarian armies of the English Civil Wars in the 1640s and 1650s.‖ Thus, the General Baptist Church founded by John Smyth and Thomas Helwys did have longevity — after the General Baptists morphed into Unitarians, they would establish England as the ―Capital of Socinianism.‖
Unwavering in his defense of the Baptists, David Cloud described King James and six Translators of the 1611 KJV, including Lancelot Andrewes, as wolves in sheep's clothing: ―When Elizabeth died in 1603, James I (1566-1625) ascended the throne of England. He was the king who authorized the translation of that masterpiece of English Scripture, 200
the King James Bible, which appeared in 1611.... He also persecuted Baptists with a passion. They were imprisoned, their goods confiscated, and one was burned... ―...The last man burned alive in England for his religion was EDWARD WIGHTMAN, a Baptist, in Smithfield on April 11, 1612, under James I. (A month earlier, Bartholomew Legate had also been burned. It is said that he was an Arian, meaning that he denied the deity of Christ.)... ―Others died during the reign of James I, but not by burning. They died in prison. This was not because of the kindness of the king, but because of the outcry of the people against burnings... ―Historian Thomas Fuller notes, ‗King James politicly preferred that heretics hereafter, though condemned, should silently and privately waste themselves away in the prison, rather than to grace them, and amuse others, with the solemnity of a public execution, which in popular judgment usurped the honor of a persecution‘ (Fuller, The Church History of Britain). Thomas Crosby agrees: ‗King James chose therefore for the future only to seize their estates, and waste away their lives privately in nasty prisons, rather than honour them with such a publick martyrdom, which would unavoidably go under the name of persecution‘ (The History of the English Baptists, I, p. 110)... ―...At least six of the men involved in the translation of the King James Bible participated in persecution against Baptists and other separatists in the 1590s. ―Richard Bancroft, who drew up the instructions for the translation, had worked closely with Archbishop of Canterbury Whitgift ‗rooting out the Separatist congregations in London‖ (Adam Nicholson, God’s Secretaries, p. 86). Bancroft was aggressive in this activity, sending spies to search out the separatists. When Bancroft took over as Archbishop of Canterbury in Whitgift‘s place, he continued the work of persecution against all ‗nonconformists.‘ ―Lancelot Andrewes, sad to say, was involved in this sorry business. He was in charge of the interrogation of the separatists under Bancroft, and went down into the ‗noisome cells‘ himself in an attempt to find some heresy against the victims of the Anglican inquisition... It is not Christianly to persecute those who believe differently, to toss them into prison cells and to burn them...‘‖ (―The Protestant Persecutions‖) Before continuing, it should be noted that David Cloud has also written articles which praise Lancelot Andrewes as a devout Christian. For example, his ―Tribute to David Otis Fuller‖: ―I'll let the man speak for himself. Dr. Fuller's words always had the ring of sincerity, and of truth, and of God... ―‗It is little short of idiotic and insane to try and improve on the KJV. God Himself, I believe, was in the choosing of those great scholars of 1611. NEVER in all world history has any such a group of learned and tremendous geniuses ever gathered together. Any ONE of them could put the modern scholars in the shade. The Chairman of the 1611 committee, Lancelot Andrews, was fluent in 20 languages and spent 5 hours a day in prayer.‘ D.O. Fuller, February 7, 1986‖ (―A Tribute to David Otis Fuller: Some Jewels from His Correspondence‖) Returning to David Cloud‘s account of King James and the KJV Translators who persecuted the Baptists: ―...Barrows was put to death on April 6, 1593, after six years of imprisonment, and Andrewes talked to him again on the eve of his death. Barrows was put to death ‗for denying the authority of bishops, for denying the holiness of the English Church and its liturgy and denying the authority over it of the queen... ―Henry Savile was involved in these interrogations. He questioned Daniel Studley in Fleet Prison.
201
―Thomas Sparkes interrogated the 18-year-old Roger Waters, who was kept in prison for a year ‗in chains in the worst of the stinking pits of Newgate gaol, known as the Limbo‘ (Nicholson, God’s Secretaries, p. 88). ―Thomas Ravis took Bancroft‘s place as bishop of London and continued in his persecuting footsteps... ―George Abbot, who became Archbishop of Canterbury, was a persecutor. ‗He would not hesitate, later in his career, to use torture against miscreants, nor to execute Separatists‘ (Nicholson, p. 157)... ―CONCLUSION... We can preach against error. We can discipline church
members who sin. We can reject heretics. But we cannot lay hands on them and force them to believe as we do. That is the characteristic of a wolf, not a sheep.‖ (―The Protestant Persecutions‖) As it turned out, King James had good reason to use repressive measures against the Baptists. After his death in 1625, he was succeeded by his son, Charles, who became embroiled in controversy with a British Parliament which increasingly repudiated his authority. On November 22, 1641, Parliament passed the Grand Remonstrance, a bill of grievances against Charles I. Civil war broke out between the army of the king, who had fled to Scotland, and Cromwell‘s army which was funded by the House of Commons. Civil War ensued and, on ―January 17, 1648, England‘s Long Parliament passed the Vote of No Address, breaking off negotiations with King Charles I and thereby setting the scene for the second phase of the English Civil War.‖ (Wikipedia) In 1649, King Charles I was deposed and beheaded by Parliament, which also abolished the British monarchy and established the Commonwealth of England as a republic. In This Day in Baptist History II, David Cummins expressed pride in the fact that the top-ranking military officers in Cromwell‘s Army were Baptists. Even though Baptists had previously been banned in England, Cromwell welcomed them back into the fold. Moreover, Cummins boasted that these highranking Baptists were also on the High Court which condemned Charles I, the son of King James I: ―The Baptists, in the days of the English Commonwealth under Cromwell, were very evident in the military. ‗As early as 1644, William Packer was lieutenant-colonel, and was so efficient that he was expressly reinstated when dismissed by a Scot on the ground that he was a Baptist. That showed where Cromwell had a voice, ecclesiastical bigotry should not spoil a regiment. So, a very large proportion of Baptists were found in its ranks…‘ (W.T. Whiteley, A History of British Baptists…) ―Three top-ranking military leaders in England in Cromwell‘s Army were avowed Baptists. I refer to Colonel John Hutchinson…, General Thomas Harrison, and Admiral Richard Deane… During the days of the overthrow of the monarchy [Deane] had charge of the artillery at the battle of Naseby. That battle ingratiated him to Cromwell, for he did much to gain the victory over the army of King Charles I… ―Deane, Governor Gough, Hutchinson, and Harrison were members of the High Court of Justice that tried and condemned King Charles.‖ (This Day in Baptist History II, p. 301) It appears that the conspiracy to overthrow the British monarchy was funded by wealthy Jews in Holland, which was a base of operations for stirring up revolutions elsewhere on the Continent as well as the British Isles: ―When King Charles I was brought into disagreement with his Parliament a Jewish Money-Baron in Holland named Manasseh Ben Israel had his agents contact Oliver Cromwell. They offered him large sums of money if he would carry out their plan to overthrow the British Throne. Manasseh Ben Israel, and other German and French money-lenders financed Cromwell. Fernandez Carvajal of Portugal, often referred to in history as ‗The Great Jew,‘ became Cromwell‘s Chief Military Contractor. He reorganized the Round Heads into a model army. He provided them with the best arms and 202
equipment money could buy. Once the conspiracy was under way, hundreds of trained revolutionaries were smuggled into England and were absorbed into the Jewish Underground. The same thing is going on in America today. ―The head of the Jewish underground in England at that time was a Jew named De Souze. The Great Jew, Fernandez Carvajal, had used his influence to have De Souze appointed Portuguese Ambassador. It was in his house, protected by diplomatic immunity, that the leaders of the Jewish revolutionary underground remained hidden and worked out their plots and intrigue.‖ (Chronology of the International Conspiracy) In her book, Secret Societies and Subversive Movements, Nesta Webster wrote of Cromwell‘s dealings with Manasseh Ben Israel as the hidden hand and money power behind the English Revolution. It seems that in return for this monetary support, Cromwell allowed Jews from Europe to emigrate to England, reversing the ban on Jewry that had been enforced by every monarch since Edward I expelled them in 1290: ―The Jewish writer Bernard Lazare has declared that ‗there were Jews around the cradle of Freemasonry,‘ and if this statement is applied to the period preceding the institution of Grand Lodge in 1717 it certainly finds confirmation in fact. Thus it is said that in the preceding century the coat-of-arms now used by Grand Lodge had been designed by an Amsterdam Jew, Jacob Jehuda Leon Templo, colleague of Cromwell‘s friend the Cabalist, Manasseh ben Israel… ―…Continental writers again assert that Cromwell, the arch-opponent of the Catholic Church, was ‗a higher initiate of masonic mysteries,‘ and used the system for his own elevation to power… ―As to Cromwell, the only circumstance that lends any colour to the possibility of his connexion with Freemasonry is his known friendship for Manasseh ben Israel, the colleague of the Rabbi Templo who designed the coat-of-arms later adopted by Grand Lodge. If, therefore, the Jews of Amsterdam were a source of inspiration to the Freemasons of the seventeenth century, it is not impossible that Cromwell may have been the channel through which this influence first penetrated… ―It is thus that in the Great Rebellion we find them not amongst the Ironsides [Parliamentarian Army] of Cromwell or the members of his State Council, but furnishing money and information to the insurgents, acting as army contractors, loan-mongers, and super-spies—or to use the more euphonious term of Mr. Lucien Wolf, as ‗political intelligencers‘ of extraordinary efficiency. Thus Mr. Lucien Wolf, in referring to Carvajal, ‗the great Jew of the Commonwealth,‘ explains that ‗the wide ramifications of his commercial transactions and his relations with other CryptoJews all over the world placed him in an unrivalled position to obtain news of the enemies of the Commonwealth.‘ ―It is obvious that a ‗secret service‘ of this kind rendered the Jews a formidable hidden power, the more so since their very existence was frequently unknown to the rest of the population around them. This precaution was necessary because Jews were not supposed to exist at that date in England. In 1290 Edward I had expelled them all, and for three and a half centuries they had remained in exile… ―Now, just at this period the Messianic era was generally believed by the Jews to be approaching, and it appears to have occurred to them that Cromwell might be fitted to the part. Consequently emissaries were despatched to search the archives of Cambridge in order to discover whether the Protector could possibly be of Jewish descent. This quest proving fruitless, the Cabalist Rabbi of Amsterdam, Manasseh ben Israel, addressed a petition to Cromwell for the readmission of the Jews to England, in which he adroitly insisted on the retribution that overtakes those who afflict the people of Israel and the rewards that await those who ‗cherish‘ them. These arguments were not without effect on Cromwell, who entertained the same superstition, and although he is said to have declined the Jews‘ offer to buy St. Paul's Cathedral and the Bodleian Library because he considered the £500,000 they offered inadequate, he exerted every effort to obtain their readmission to the country. In this he encountered violent opposition, and it seems that Jews were not permitted to return in large numbers, or at any rate to enjoy full rights and 203
privileges, until after the accession of Charles II, who in his turn had enlisted their financial aid. Later, in 1688, the Jews of Amsterdam helped with their credit the expedition of William of Orange against James II; the former in return brought many Jews with him to England. So a Jewish writer is able to boast that ‗a Monarch reigned who was indebted to Hebrew gold for his royal diadem.‘‖ (Secret Societies and Subversive Movements, p. 125) To state the obvious, the Jews of Holland who bribed Cromwell for permission to return to England would have had a natural interest in promoting the Unitarian doctrines which undermined the Christian belief in the deity of Jesus Christ and the Triune God. It is most interesting that the heresiarch Arius was also Jew (see Maurice Pinay, The Plot Against the Church) and Michael Servetus was of Jewish descent. Were Bernard Rothman and Menno Simon also Jewish? It does seem that the apple never falls very far from the tree. Sometimes one needs only to follow the money trail to locate the source of teachings which deny the deity and humanity of Jesus Christ. For instance, the Medici political dynasty which funded Faustus Socinus‘ European travels to promulgate the Unitarian heresy also allowed the Jews expelled by the Pope to return to Florence, Italy. The Medici also sponsored the translation and study of the Kabbalah at their Platonic Academy in Florence, whose teachers became the Kabbalists and astrologers of the Popes. And the Medici popes gave favored treatment to the Jews, who infiltrated the Church and rose to its highest ranks. (See: ―Mystery Babylon: Catholic or Jewish?‖) From 1653 to 1659, Oliver Cromwell ruled the Commonwealth as a military dictatorship, along with his Parliamentarian Army in which many Baptists served. Under Cromwell, Parliament eliminated witch trials, allowed the Jews to return to England and revived the Rosicrucian Order as ―Freemasonry.‖ Earl Morse Wilbur wrote that, ―For a full generation after the burning of Legate and Wightman [under King James], though there were no further executions for heresy, the religious mind of England was being silently permeated by various influences that may well be traced to Socinian sources. The widest and deepest of these was the spirit of tolerance in matters of belief…‖ Without a monarch – formerly Britain‘s ―Defender of the Faith‖ – and under the tolerant government of Cromwell and a divided Parliament, the Unitarians enjoyed wide latitude to promote their heresy in England. ―…The Presbyterians in Parliament had some months before prepared a law for the punishment of heresies…and on May 2, 1648, there was passed, though not without strong opposition, ‗An Ordinance of the Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament, for punishing Blasphemies and Heresies,‘ which has been justly styled the ‗Draconic Ordinance.‘ This shocking law was the final effort of the Presbyterian party to suppress freedom of discussion by public law. It…provides with great particularity that ‗all persons that willingly, by preaching, teaching, printing or writing, maintain and publish that the Father is not God, the Son is not God, or that the Holy Ghost is not God, or that they three are not one eternal God, or that Christ is not God equal with the Father [besides seven other named heresies], shall be adjudged guilty of felony; and in case the party upon his trial shall not adjure his said error he shall suffer the pains of death, without benefit of clergy.‘ The ordinance also specifies sixteen less serious errors to be punished by imprisonment. But the fact is that though the ordinance was passed it was never enforced. Dissensions broke out among the members of the House of Commons, many of both privates and officers in the army were amenable to the law, and the Presbyterian power in Parliament was tottering to its fall before the rising Independents. The ordinance therefore remained a dead letter, and seven months later Pride‘s Purge gave it the coup de grace. ―It was fortunate for the Unitarian cause in England that this was so, for otherwise the first Englishman to avow Unitarian beliefs boldly and clearly, and to publish them fearlessly, undeterred by repeated imprisonments, must assuredly have fallen victim to the ordinance, which the guardians of orthodoxy were ready to invoke against him. His life and writings…constitute the effectual beginning of what was henceforth to be a continuous and connected historical movement. During the same period in which the attention of the Long Parliament and the Westminster Assembly was being drawn to dangerous outbreaks of Socinian heresy at Oxford and even in Parliament itself, and alarm against them was being stirred up by books from 19
204
guardians of the faith, similar trouble, independently of these, was brewing in another quarter at a distance from the capital. Its fountainhead was one John Biddle...‖ (A History of Unitarianism, Chap. XI: ―Socinianism Quietly Penetrates England‖; see also footnotes) John Biddle (1615–62) became the official founder of English Unitarianism. His Twelve Arguments Drawn Out of Scripture and A Twofold Catechism argued against the deity of Jesus Christ and the Trinity and this led to his imprisonment. However, Oliver Cromwell commuted his sentence to banishment to the Scilly Islands, after which Biddle returned to England in 1658, and taught and preached until 1662 when he was again put in prison, where he died. Through the political maneuvering of Oliver Cromwell and the opposition of the ―Independents‖ (Puritans and Baptists) in Parliament to legislation proscribing heresy, Biddle became the ―Father of English Unitarianism‖ and England became the ―Capital of Socinianism.‖ ―After the death of Charles I in the first month of 1649, and the rising of the Westminster Assembly a month later, and the rise of Cromwell to commanding influence, with his clear leaning toward reasonable toleration, the situation of Biddle in custody seems to have been somewhat relieved… Early in 1651/2 Cromwell secured the passage of an Act of Oblivion which set free (with a few exceptions) all that stood accused of any crime. Biddle, being thus restored to liberty, at once improved it by gathering a little congregation of his friends, who met every Sunday for worship and the study of the Scriptures. These meetings, freely discussing doctrinal questions in the light of Scripture teachings, came to a number of fresh conclusions… went a good way beyond merely the doctrine of the Trinity and the deity of Christ. The group were at first known as Biddellians or Socinians, and their meetings became so well known as to give offence to the London ministers, though there was no law under which they could be suppressed… ―Toward the end of 1653 Cromwell was made Protector of the Commonwealth, and his first official act was to set forth an Instrument of Government in forty-two articles, which he took oath faithfully to observe. In the three articles relating to religion, freedom of worship was guaranteed to all professing Christians, and protection of all in the exercize of their religion was promised to all professing the fundamentals of Christianity. These fundamentals indeed were not specified, and a committee was named to determine the matter; but before their report was adopted Parliament was dissolved, and nothing more was heard of it. As Cromwell was known to be a friend of religious freedom, Biddle took fresh courage and renewed his activities. After the middle of the year, therefore, he published A Twofold Catechism: the One simply called a Scripture-Catechism: the Other, a brief Scripture-Catechism for Children… Apart from its…rejecting the doctrine of the Trinity and of the deity of Christ, perhaps its most striking feature, and the one that invited the sharpest criticism was its literal acceptance of scripture references to God, whom it took to be a visible, tangible person, in form like a man, inhabiting a certain place, having human parts and passions, and limited in knowledge — in short, the crudest anthropomorphism. ―The reaction of foreign theologians was prompt and decisive. Nicolaus Arnold, a Polish scholar who had come to fame as Professor at the University of Franeker…issued [a work] to counteract the influence in Holland of books then so easily brought over from England, which might otherwise add strength to the spreading Socinianism and Anabaptism... In the same summer with Arnold‘s earlier work appeared the second volume of a work by Samuel Maresius (Des Marets), Professor at Groningen, in the preface to which he utters a lament as to ‗this sad time, when the Socinian plague, deservedly called the culmination of all wickedness, seems now to have established its capital in England...whence there has just been brought over a Two-fold Catechism in English, published in London, which seems to be snatching the palm from that of Raków.‘ He then goes on to fill a whole page with the dreadful errors with which this deadly book teems. Among other things…the new book has appended a catalogue of Socinian books to be had in English, thus indicating that Socinus himself seems now to be in high esteem with the English people.‖ (A History of Unitarianism, Chap. XI: ―Socinianism Quietly Penetrates England‖; see also footnotes) 41
51
56
205
I have quoted large portions of Wilbur‘s History of Unitarianism and other sources because they provide evidence that (1) Anabaptists/Baptists did not defend the Christian faith but promoted major heresies, (2) Anabaptists/Baptists were revolutionaries who conspired to overthrow governments and (3) Anabaptists/Baptists, which the KJV-Only defenders claim as their spiritual forefathers, were the archenemies of King James I, who executed their chief heretics and conspirators for the same reasons the Roman Catholic Church established the Inquisition. These historical facts have been collectively suppressed by the revisers of Baptist history, but are readily available outside of the propaganda published by the controlled opposition network which hypocritically calls itself ―King James Only.‖ There are yet other strange bedfellows lurking in the annals of Baptist history. MEROVINGIAN BAPTISTS David Cloud sells materials published by the Baptist World Mission. D.A. Waite‘s Dean Burgon Society also endorses the Baptist World Mission as a society that requires its missionaries to use the King James Version. David L. Cummins, who is Deputation Director of the Baptist World Mission, wrote a 3-volume series titled This Day in Baptist History, a pseudo-devotional which chronicles Baptist history while giving tribute to Baptists of historical note. Volume II of this series begins with the founding of the first Baptist church in Scotland by Sir William Sinclair, a member of the highest ranking Merovingian bloodline: ―…There is evidence of Baptist efforts at evangelism in Scotland during the days of the British Commonwealth and the rule of Oliver Cromwell, the Protector. Baptist soldiers were in Scotland at that time, but apparently the thrust of the Baptists waned with the departure of the British troops and the Baptists among them. However, Baptist principles can never be completely forgotten, for they are New Testament principles. It was only a matter of time before thinking men of spiritual character rediscovered the New Testament principles and sought to harmonize their practices with Scripture. ―Thus it was that after a period of approximately ninety years with no significant Baptist influence, northern Scotland saw the founding of a Baptist church. Sir William Sinclair, who had gained Baptist convictions in the south, returned to his hometown of Keiss, one of the northernmost spots in the Scottish mainland, and planted a Baptist church on New Years‘ Day in 1750. Sinclair was dubbed ‗the Preaching Knight‘ by the bishop of the diocese, who accused him of ‗taking up that odd way of strolling about preaching without commission or appointment by any man,‘ Interestingly, that church was established within the walls of an ancient castle and is considered the oldest in Scotland, but it failed to affect the nation as it should have.‖ (This Day in Baptist History, Vol. II, David L. Cummins and E. Wayne Thompson, BJU Press, 2001, p. 1) Sir William Sinclair, the founder and pastor of the first Baptist Church in Scotland, was a direct descendant of the Sir William Saint Clair who had established and directed Freemasonry in Scotland three centuries earlier. In 1446, Sir William Saint Clair built the Rosslyn Chapel at Edinburgh, a large temple modeled after Solomon‘s Temple and filled with stone images having Masonic and other occult symbolism. In his Encyclopedia of Freemasonry, Albert Mackey wrote of the prominent role of the Saint Clair family in the preservation of Scottish Rite Freemasonry, and what appears to be King James‘ royal rebuff of that occult society: ―SAINT CLAIR, WILLIAM. The Saint Clairs of Roslin, or, as it is often spelled Rosslyn, held for more than three hundred years, an intimate connection with the history of Freemasonry in Scotland. William Saint Clair, Earl of Orkney and Caithness, was, in 1441, appointed by King James II the Patron and Protector of the Freemasons of Scotland, and the office was made hereditary in his family. Charles Mackie says of him… ‗He was considered one of the best and greatest Masons of the age.‘ He planned the 206
construction of the most magnificent collegiate church at his palace of Roslin…After his death, which occurred about 1480, his office of hereditary Patron was transmitted to his descendants who…‗held their principal annual meetings at Kilwinning.‘ ―The prerogative of nominating the office-bearers of the Craft, which had always been exercised by the kings of Scotland, appears to have been neglected by James VI after his accession to the throne of England. Hence the Freemasons, finding themselves embarrassed for want of a Protector, about the year 1600, if that be the real date of the first of the Saint Clair Manuscripts, appointed William Saint Clair of Roslin, for himself and his heirs, their ‗Patrons and Judges.‘ After presiding over the Order for many years, says Lawrie, William Saint Clair went to Ireland, and in 1630 a second Charter was issued, granting to his son, Sir William Saint Clair, the same power with which his father had been invested. This Charter having been signed by the Masters and Wardens of the principal Lodges of Scotland, Sir William Saint Clair assumed the active administration of the affairs of the Craft, and appointed his Deputies and Wardens, as had been customary with his ancestors. For more than a century after this renewal of the compact between the Laird of Roslin and the Freemasons of Scotland, the Craft continued to flourish under the successive heads of the family.‖ (pp. 898-9) The Saint Clair Clan members who relocated northern Scotland became ―Sinclairs,‖ and they appear to have been a bloody lot. ―It was at this time [c. 1476] that the Caithness branch of the family began to spell their name Sinclair, although the Rosslyn branch continued with St Clair. The 2nd Earl of Caithness fought and died at the Battle of Flodden with 600 Highland Sinclairs. His descendants thereafter were of a wild disposition, the 4th Earl imprisoning and starving to death his own son for making peace with Clan Moray without his approval. George, 6th Earl of Caithness…died childless in 1676, whereupon the Caithness title eventually passed to George Sinclair of Keiss… ―Keiss Castle, Keiss, Caithness. Remnants of a small 16th century tower can be seen here. The 19th century castle nearby was the home of Sir William Sinclair, Founder and Pastor of the first Baptist Church in Scotland.‖ (Scots Connection) ―In the dungeon the 4th Earl imprisoned for six years his son who had plotted his death. The prisoner also managed to strangle his brother who came to visit him. He was later starved to death. His son, who succeeded his grandfather to the title, became known as the ‗Wicked Earl.‘ He killed the two jailers responsible for the death of his father. In 1623, when the king ordered his arrest, he fortified Ackergill Tower around the bay, then escaped to Orkney where, after surrendering keys of his castles into the hands of Lord Berriedale, he ended his days peaceably. ―Keiss strikes a new note in this bloodthirsty tale. Its castle, new in 1750, had the first Baptist chapel in Scotland, its pastor, Sir William Sinclair.‖ (Sinclairs of Caithness) George Sinclair, the 4th Earl of Caithness, who murdered his own son, had also chaired the jury which acquitted the Earl of Bothwell, the man who had murdered Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley, the father of King James VI of Scotland (later James I of England). Within a few weeks, Bothwell became the third husband of King James‘ mother, Mary, Queen of Scots, whose letters to Bothwell implicated her in the murder plot. Among those acquitted as accomplices in the murder were Sir James Balfour and his brother, Gilbert Balfour, who were ancestors of Arthur Balfour, who became Prime Minister of England. Arthur Balfour was a member of the Cambridge Apostles Club and collaborated with Westcott and Hort in Spiritualist and political intrigues. (See: ―The 19th Century Occult Revival‖) In 1917, Arthur Balfour, a Jew, issued the Balfour Declaration, addressed to Lord Rothschild, informing him of Great Britain‘s support for the establishment of Palestine as homeland for the Jews.
207
The Scottish Clan Saint Clair, to which the first Baptist pastor in Scotland belonged, is one of two remaining direct lines of the Merovingian dynasty, which claims to be the Messianic bloodline of the Jews. Best sellers such as Holy Blood, Holy Grail and The Da Vinci Code identify the Sinclair family as the founders and directors of the Prieuré de Sion, the founders and hereditary Grand Masters of Scottish Rite Freemasonry and the Merovingian lineage from which the Antichrist will come: ―Their domain [the Sinclair family—Scottish branch of the Norman Saint-Clair Gisors family] at Rosslyn was only a few miles from the former Scottish headquarters of the Knights Templar, and the chapel at Rosslyn—built between 1446 and 1486—has long been associated with both Freemasonry and the Rose-Croix. In a charter believed to date from 1601, moreover, the Sinclairs are recognized as ‗hereditary‘ grand masters of Scottish Masonry.‘ This is the earliest specifically Masonic document on record. According to Masonic sources, however, the hereditary grand mastership was conferred on the Sinclairs by James II, who ruled between 1437 and 1460—the age of René d‘Anjou… ―There are at least a dozen families in Britain and Europe today—with numerous collateral branches—who are of Merovingian lineage. These include the houses of Hapsburg-Lorraine (present titular dukes of Lorraine and kings of Jerusalem), Plantard, Luxembourg, Montpezat, Montesquiou, and various others. According to the ‗Prieuré documents,‘ the SINCLAIR family in Britain is also allied to the bloodline, as are various branches of the Stuarts...‖ – Holy Blood, Holy Grail (31:183, 409-10) ―The modern Priory of Sion has a momentous duty. Theirs is a threefold charge. The brotherhood must protect the Sangreal documents. They must protect the tomb of Mary Magdalene. And, of course, they must nurture and protect the bloodline of Christ–those few members of the royal Merovingian bloodline who have survived into modern times… ―Only two direct lines of Merovingians remain. Their family names are Plantard and Saint-Clair. Both families live in hiding, probably protected by the Priory… ―…Marie told the story of Sophie‘s late parents. Incredibly, both had been from Merovingian families—direct descendants of Mary Magdalene and Jesus Christ. Sophie‘s parents and ancestors, for protection, had changed their family names of Plantard and Saint-Clair. Their children represented the most direct surviving royal bloodline and therefore were carefully guarded by the Priory. When Sophie's parents were killed in a car accident whose cause could not be determined, the Priory feared the identity of the royal line had been discovered.‖ – The Da Vinci Code (935:258, 260) ―Through marriage the family of Marie Levis St. Claire was connected to the de Gisors, the family from which the first and third grand masters of the Prieuré de Sion came. Without question, Prieuré de Sion was created and run by individuals related to the St. Claires.‖ – The Lost Treasure of the Knights Templar (281:178) The Baptist World Mission, of which David L. Cummins is Deputation Director, was incorporated on January 17, 1963. (Concordia Historical Institute) The source for this information is the Almanac of the Christian Church by William D. Blake (Bethany House, 1987) which reads: ―January 17…1963 – The Baptist World Mission was incorporated in Chicago, Illinois. This independent and fundamentalist organization of Baptist tradition is engaged primarily in evangelism, church planting and education in 17 countries.‖ (p. 28) The Baptist World Mission had been founded in 1961 as World Conservative Baptist Mission by the extreme Fundamentalist wing of the Conservative Baptist Fellowship.
208
―Some of the fundamentalist leaders requested a special meeting of the Conservative Baptist Fellowship in order to discuss the situation within the movement. This historic meeting was called by the President of CBF, Dr. Earle Matteson, and was held in Chicago in September of 1961. After considerable prayer and discussion, the board of CBF voted unanimously to organize the World Conservative Baptist Mission (WCBM). It was formed to be a consistent fundamentalist and separatist mission agency without any compromise with new evangelicalism. In June of 1966, the name was changed to ‗BAPTIST WORLD MISSION.‘ It became apparent that Baptist World Mission (BWM) and the Conservative Baptists were going in different directions, and all ties with that movement were severed.‖ (Baptist World Mission) The Fundamentalist Baptists who incorporated the Baptist World Mission on January 17, 1963 were the predecessors of the Fundamentalist Baptists who now lead the KJV-Only movement. The Baptist World Mission claims to have the same heretical forefathers as the KJV-Only Baptists, according to David L. Cummins: ―The coming of the so-called Reformation brought great joy to our Baptist forefathers. The three groups most easily identified as bearing Baptist distinctives during that period were known as the Donatists, Waldenses, and Anabaptists. During the dark ages, these heroes of the faith had persisted, but it had been most difficult for them. Entire volumes have been written to describe their plight. They were fugitives, vagabonds, strangers, and pilgrims… To be sure, these were doctrinal people… Long lost writings have come to light, and it is apparent that the Anabaptists were New Testament theologians.‖ (David L Cummins, A Brief History of Baptist Missions, Victory Press, 1998, pp. 5-6) On page 69 of A Brief History of Baptist Missions David Cummins wrote, ―I thank God for the day of the birth of the new society!‖ — ―the day‖ being January 17. The traditional day on which the Prieuré de Sion convenes to elect Grand Masters is 17 January, which corresponds to 17 Nisan – the 17th day of the first month on the Hebrew calendar. On this day, the Israelites crossed the Red Sea (Exod. 14); it is also the Feast of First Fruits (Lev. 23) and the day on which Jesus Christ rose from the dead, three days and three nights after Passover on 14 Nisan (John 13:1; I Cor. 15:20-23). We believe the election of Grand Masters of the Prieuré de Sion on January 17 – 17 Nisan on the Hebrew calendar – is a cryptic statement of the Merovingian Jews‘ presumed entitlement to the Messianic birthright. (See: (See: ―Heeding Bible Prophecy‖: Secret Societies: January 17 and New Israel: Zionism) In and of itself, the founding of the Baptist World Mission on January 17, the day on which the Prieuré de Sion convenes to elect Grand Masters, would not be reason enough to suspect the KJV-Only Baptists of being Merovingians. However, the overwhelming evidence of their relationship to the medieval Gnostics, the Kabbalist Rosicrucians, Freemasonry and the Merovingian bloodline make it difficult to resist the suspicion that the leadership of the KJV-Only movement are, in fact, Merovingians. It becomes apparent that Baptist Successionists have done a thorough work of sanitizing Baptist history so as to obfuscate the true origins of their denomination in heretical sects and subversive movements. They have also concealed their subsequent activities and affiliations, such as the collaboration in the 19th century of the American Bible Union and the 1901 American Standard Version Committee with Westcott and Hort on the translation of the English Revised Version. Thomas Armitage, who was the second president of the American Bible Union, documented their collaboration with the English Revision Committee in his book, A History of the Baptists: Traced by their Vital Principles and Practices, from the Time of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to the Year 1886. Note that most of the members and directors of the American Bible Union were Baptists: ―On the 10th of June, 1850, a very large meeting was held at the Baptist Tabernacle in Mulberry Street, New York, at which the American Bible Union was organized, under a constitution which was then adopted, and an address explaining its purposes was given to 209
the public. Dr. Cone was elected president of the Union, Wm. H. Wyckoff, Corresponding Secretary; Deacon Colgate, Treasurer; E.S. Whitney, Recording Secretary, and Sylvester Pier, Auditor, together with a board of twenty-four managers. The second article of the constitution defined the object of the Union thus: ―Its object shall be to procure and circulate the most faithful versions of the sacred Scriptures in all languages throughout the world.‘... ―Although the American Bible Union had always disclaimed that it was a Baptist Society, yet, a large majority of its life members and dirtors being Baptists, in harmony with the expressed wish of the denomination to do the Bible work of Baptists through the Missionary Union and the Publication Society, the Bible Union disposed of all its bookstock and plates to the Publication Society, on condition that its versions should be published according to demand. The American and Foreign Bible Society did the same, and now, in the English tongue, the Publication Society is circulating, according to demand, the issues of the Bible Union, the commonly received version and the Canterbury revision, with the emendations recommended by the American corps of scholars incorporated into the text; and so it has come to pass that the denomination which refused to touch the English revision in 1850 came, in less than a quarter of a century, to put its imprint upon two, to pronounce them fit for use amongst Baptists, and to circulate them cheerfully.‖ (Armitage, pp. 907, 912-13) (See: ―The Unauthorized History of English Bible Revision‖) Fundamental Baptists may present themselves as the true successors of the Apostles and loyal defenders of the Bible, however, Christians should know that it was Baptists who established the Bible societies which removed the Translators‘ Preface from King James Bibles in the early 19th century; it was Baptists who pioneered the revision of the King James Version before Westcott and Hort even began to work on their New Greek Text; it is Baptists who are now claiming the 1611 King James Bible is a Rosicrucian work while KJV-Only Baptists remain silent; it is Baptists who are leading the King James-Only movement into the modern version camp by promoting hybrid translations like the Syriac Peshitta; and it is Baptists who are leading the KJV-Only camp into Jewish Kabbalism by way of Gail Riplinger. So when Baptists claim that their ancestors were the Cathars, Albigenses, Bogomils, Anabaptists, etc, etc. – medieval heretics all – we have every reason to believe them. CHAPTER XVI THE OLD LATIN VERSIONS CONTEND FOR THE FAITH: THE TEXTUS RECEPTUS http://watch-unto-prayer.org/TR-0-intro.html WATCH UNTO PRAYER taho@watch-unto-prayer.org http://watch-unto-prayer.org
210
CHAPTER XVI THE OLD LATIN & GOTHIC VERSIONS OLD LATIN VERSIONS In their various books and articles, King James-Only leaders confer legitimacy not only on heretical sects but also translations of Scripture based on corrupt manuscripts. We can be sure that the Cathars, Albigenses, Bogomils, etc – medieval heretics who denied the divinity of Jesus Christ and substituted the ―divinity of man‖ in their creed – used versions of the Scriptures that supported the Gnostic heresy. Their bibles were comparable to the ―modern versions‖ of our day, which omit words and verses which testify that Jesus Christ was God manifest in the flesh. Versions such as the Syriac Peshitta and Old Latin are misrepresented by KJV-Only advocates as being the earliest bibles ―based on the Traditional text.‖ These bibles, however, were not ―pure texts‖ but hybrid texts, that is, a blend of Traditional and Alexandrian manuscripts. The term ―Old Latin Bible‖ is a misnomer for there was never a complete Latin translation in common use before the Latin Vulgate translated by Jerome. Of the Old Latin, there were ―a multiplicity of translations differing from one another, and there was none possessed of commanding authority to which appeal might be made in case of necessity.‖ (ISBE) The Translators of the 1611 King James Version attested to the corruption of these manifold Latin translations: ―There were also within a few hundred years after CHRIST, translations many into the Latin tongue: for this tongue also was very fit to convey the Law and the Gospel by, because in those times very many Countries of the West, yea of the South, East and North, spake or understood Latin, being made Provinces to the Romans. But now the Latin Translations were too many to be all good, for they were infinite (Latini Interprets nullo modo numerari possunt, saith S. Augustine.) [S. Augustin. de doctr. Christ. lib 2 cap II]. Again they were not out of the Hebrew fountain (we speak of the Latin Translations of the Old Testament) but out of the Greek stream, therefore the Greek being not altogether clear, the Latin derived from it must needs be muddy. This moved S. Jerome a most learned father, and the best linguist without controversy, of his age, or of any that went before him, to undertake the translating of the Old Testament, out of the very fountain with that evidence of great learning, judgment, industry, and faithfulness, that he had forever bound the Church unto him, in a debt of special remembrance and thankfulness.‖ (Preface, 1611 KJV) The King James Translators considered the Roman Catholic monk, St. Jerome, ―a most learned father, and the best linguist without controversy, of his age.‖ They also regarded his Latin Vulgate to be a better translation than the ―muddy‖ Old Latin translations. One reason for the superiority of the Vulgate was that the multitude of Old Latin bibles had been translated by laymen who ―revised and modified‖ the text instead of translating in a scholarly manner. ―The term Old Latin denotes the Latin versions of the Bible predating the revisions and new translations by Jerome and others. Not only is there no complete OT text of the Old Latin versions, but its very transmission is spotty and fragmentary… ―The oldest evidence for the existence of the Old Latin version is in the authors from South Africa… The testimony…establishes the existence of the Old Latin version before A.D. 180…Available evidence suggests that at about the time of the first translation in North Africa, translation was beginning independently at several other places…
211
―…We have evidence that in the 3rd cent. several Old Latin versions circulated in Italy, in Gaul, and in Spain… The text was not yet regarded as official and unalterable, and countless hands were at work on the MSS, whether improving the popular Latin or bringing the texts closer to other forms, thus creating hybrid types and contributing to even wider diversification. Augustine (5th cent.) complained about the ‗infinite variety‘ of the Latin translations: ‗In the early days of the faith, every man who happened to gain possession of a Greek manuscript and who imagined that he had any faculty in both languages – however slight that may be – dared to make a translation.‘ By ‗translation‘ he meant revisions and modifications in the text.‖ (ISBE, Vol. IV, pp. 969-970) The Verbum Project to produce an edition of the Old Latin versions of the Gospel of John confirms that the ―Vetus Latina‖ or Old Latin translations were not formal equivalence translations produced by meticulous scholarship. Instead they were comparable to the dynamic equivalence versions or paraphrases that have become popular today: ―The first translations were made by individual Christians for use within their own community. These are known as the Old Latin or Vetus Latina... ―The Latin translations of John were neither translated nor diffused in a cultural vacuum. The relative importance of local communities, regional metropoleis, and larger centres, in particular, Rome, within Western Christianity, have been widely debated in earlier scholarship. The circulation of Scriptural translations is one index of how different centres and communities interacted with each other; as is the degree of freedom local scholars felt to adapt the texts they had received.‖ The ISBE confirms the Translators‘ criticism that the Old Latin translations were ―muddy,‖ the reason for this being that they were translated from the Greek Septuagint (LXX): ―…The Old Latin version is not written in the polished literary language of that time but in the didactic, vernacular idiom of the cult, often reflecting the dialect of the common people. This colloquial flavor is colored also by the Greek idiom, seen in its translation of Greek terms and occasionally even in syntax. This Greek influence indicates that the translation was based not on the Hebrew original but on the LXX, prevalent in Christian communities where the Greek idiom had first been used in the cult and where the LXX text was orally translated into Latin for those who could not understand Greek… The textual picture is equally colorful. The evidence in the historical and prophetic books manifests the Lucianic rescension of the LXX. Thus some have even concluded that the version originated in Syria. Since Lucian‘s text is later than the Old Latin version, the inference is that both have preserved the pre-Origenic renderings of the LXX.‖ (ISBE, Vol. IV, p. 970) The Septuagint was a Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament produced in the 3rd century B.C. by 70 Jewish rabbis who lived in Alexandria, Egypt. The Translators‘ Preface noted that these ―Seventy Interpreters‖ took great liberties with the Hebrew text that was originally inspired by God: ―It is certain, that that Translation was not so sound and so perfect, but it needed in many places correction; and who had been so sufficient for this work as the Apostles or Apostolic men?... it was commended generally, yet it did not fully content the learned, no not of the Jews…Yet for all that, as the Egyptians are said of the Prophet to be men and not God, and their horses flesh and not spirit [Isa 31:3]; so it is evident, (and Saint Jerome affirmeth as much) [S. Jerome. de optimo genere interpret.] that the Seventy were Interpreters, they were not Prophets; they did many things well, as learned men; but yet as men they stumbled and fell, one while through oversight, another while through ignorance, yea, sometimes they may be noted to add to the Original, and sometimes to take from it; which made the
212
Apostles to leave them many times, when they left the Hebrew, and to deliver the sense thereof according to the truth of the word, as the spirit gave them utterance. This may suffice touching the Greek Translations of the Old Testament.‖ (Preface, 1611 KJV) Jerome rejected the Septuagint and translated the Old Testament from the original Hebrew: ―His real contribution lies in the translation of the OT from its original tongue. He thus inaugurated a new era in the history of the Christian Bible by dethroning the LXX; but the reaction to this decision brought him much disappointment and bitterness.‖ (ISBE, Vol. IV, p. 972) As for the New Testament of the Old Latin version, it was ―marked by the boldest departures from the received text‖ due to the fact that it was not translated from the Byzantine (Eastern) manuscripts which would become the Received Text, but from the Alexandrian (Western) text which underlay the Westcott-Hort Greek Text of 1881. ―The textual complexion of the [Old Latin] version is marked by the boldest departures from the received text. It represents the Western type and goes along with the Codex Cantabrigiensis and the Old Syriac. The deviations vary in the different groups; the African branch displays the greater divergence and the European the lesser. It has also preserved a large number of readings from the Diatesseron, some Marcionite readings, and many apocryphal elements…‖ (ISBE, Vol. IV, pp. 969-970) The Old Latin New Testament was so corrupt that it resembled the New Testament of the heretic Marcion, who had been expelled from the church in Rome in 144 because of his ―gnostic-tinged heretical views.‖ Marcion excluded the Old Testament from his translation as the ―product of a God inferior to the God of Jesus (the Christian God)‖ and established a ―hyper-Paulinistic canon‖ which limited the New Testament to ten Pauline epistles and portions of Luke. (ISBE, Vol. I, p.604) The numerous modifications and the ―carelessness‖ of the language of the Old Latin N.T. are mentioned by the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia along with similarities to the hybrid Syriac versions: ―…The Old Latin version of the NT enjoys a better attestation… ―No less complicated is the relationship between Marcion‘s version of the Pauline Epistles and the origin of the Old Latin version. Attention has been drawn to the Marcionite prologues that appear in certain Vulgate MSS. The Marcionite corpus as translated into Latin must have had some corrections with the Latin tradition that ended in the Vulgate version… ―The earliest Latin translations of the NT, like those of the OT, show a multitude of adaptations and modifications. The same must be said about the language used, which generally bears the stamp of carelessness. Some elements that cannot be explained on the basis of the Greek original may justly be considered astounding. The only explanation is that the Latin must have had some affinities with the Syriac versions…‖ (ISBE, Vol. IV, pp. 970-971) The 1611 Translators, the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia and many other authoritative sources rebut the claims of KJV-Only advocates concerning the purity of the Old Latin. The internal evidence also proves the Old Latin to be corrupt. A few examples from the critical apparatus of the UBS Greek New Testament show that all 10 Old Latin manuscripts omitted ―Jesus‖ in Matt. 1:18, ―but after the spirit‖ in Romans 8:1, ―adulterers‖ in James 4:4, ―fasting and‖ in I Cor. 7:5, and changed ―God‖ to ―that which‖ in I Tim. 3:16. The doxology was omitted from the Lord‘s Prayer (Matt. 6:13) in 7 out of 11 Old Latin mss. In Luke 24:6, 7 of 11 Old Latin mss. omitted ―he is not here but was raised‖ and 8 of 11 Old Latin mss. omitted ―from the tomb‖ in Luke 24:8, to name just a few of the many corruptions in Old Latin versions. (Source: The Greek New Testament, UBS 3rd Ed., 1975)
213
So corrupt were the Old Latin versions that Jerome‘s Latin Vulgate was considered an improvement. The ISBE agrees with the 1611 Translators and both cite St. Augustine as evidence that the Latin translations were substandard: ―But now the Latin Translations were too many to be all good, for they were infinite (Latini Interprets nullo modo numerari possunt, saith S. Augustine.) [S. Augustin. de doctr. Christ. lib 2 cap II].‖ (Preface, 1611 KJV) ―It was the consideration of the chaotic condition of the existing translations, with their divergences and variations, which moved [Pope] Damascus to commission Jerome to his task and Jerome to undertake it. We learn particulars from the letter of Jerome in 383 transmitting to his patron the first installment of his revision, the Gospels… ―From Jerome‘s contemporary, Augustine, we obtain a similar picture. ‗Translators from Hebrew into Greek,‘ he says (De Doctrina Christiana, ii.11), ‗can be numbered, but Latin translators by no means. For whenever, in the first ages of the faith, a Greek manuscript came into the hands of anyone who had also a little skill in both languages, he made bold to translate it forthwith.‘ In the same context he mentions ‗an innumerable variety of Latin translators,‘ ‗a crowd of translators.‘ His advice to readers is to give a preference to the Itala, ‗which is more faithful in its renderings and more intelligible in its sense.‘ What the Itala is, has been greatly discussed. Formerly it was taken to be a summary designation of all the versions before Jerome‘s time. But Professor Burkitt (Texts and Studies, IV) strongly urges the view that by this term Augustine designates Jerome's Vulgate, which he might quite well have known and preferred to any of the earlier translations. However this may be, whereas before Jerome there were those numerous translations, of which he and Augustine complain, after Jerome there is the one preeminent and commanding work, produced by him, which in course of time drove all others out of the field, the great Vulgate edition, as it came to be called, of the complete Latin Bible.‖ (ISBE) In her typical hodgepodge of edited quotations – words and phrases taken out of their respective contexts and spliced together with falsehoods thrown in as facts – Gail Riplinger again forced her source, in this case the Translators‘ Preface, say the opposite of what the Translators actually stated. Regarding the pedigree of the Old Latin versions, Gail distorted the words of the Translators‘ to mean that Erasmus used and endorsed them! Gail Riplinger‘s ―private interpretation‖ of the Translators‘ Preface goes like this: ―Reference works used by the final ‗general committee,‘ according to Bois‘ notes, include the following and more:… ―The ‗old Latin versions‘ were an important witness to the most ancient text. (e.g., Romans 9:6, 1 Cor. 9:5). ‗Erasmus‘ Translation of the New Testament, [e.g. his old Latin] is so much different from the vulgar [Catholic Latin Vulgate]…‘ In the Translators to the Readers they write, ‗what varieties have they, and what alterations have they made…of their Latin translation.‘ ‗Erasmus…found fault with their vulgar translation…we produce their enemies [Erasmus] for witnesses against them.‘ (Translators)‖ (Awe, p. 534) To give this string of lies some authority, the paragraph on the Old Latin versions appears in a section titled ―Reference works used by the final ‗general committee,‘ according to Bois‘ notes,‖ even though this is not in John Bois‘ notes. A glance at the Translators‘ Preface shows they were not referring to an Old Latin translation endorsed by Erasmus but to the Greek New Testament translated by Erasmus: ―…Erasmus…found fault with their vulgar Translation, and consequently wished the same to be mended, or a new one to be made… But what will they say to this, that Pope Leo the Tenth
214
allowed Erasmus‘ Translation of the New Testament, so much different from the vulgar, by his Apostolic Letter and Bull…‖ (Translators‘ Preface) One more example in this fabric of KJV-Only lies and distortions – which passes for ―scholarship‖ because it is never investigated or exposed – is Peter Ruckman‘s spin on the Old Latin as cited by Jack Moorman in Forever Settled: ―Ruckman, quoting ISBE says, ‗The Albigenses continued to use the Old Latin long after Jerome‘s Vulgate came out and their preservation of this text is attributed (according to Burkitt) to the fact that they were ‗heretics‘.‘‖ (p. 86) What the ISBE actually states is that ―only among heretics isolated from the rest of Western Christianity‖ would the Old Latin continue to be used after the Latin Vulgate was commonly accepted: ―The emergence of the Vulgate could not immediately displace or swiftly change the position of the Old Latin… Not until the 9th century did the Old Latin capitulate to the Vulgate, and there are good witnesses that it lingered on in certain places even longer… (ISBE, Vol. IV, p. 971) ―When Jerome‘s revision took hold of the church, the Old Latin representatives for the most part dropped out of notice. Some of them, however, held their ground and continued to be copied down to the 12th and even the 13th century. Codex c is an example of this; it is a manuscript of the 12th century, but as Professor Burkitt has pointed out (Texts and Studies, IV, ‗Old Latin,‘ 11) ‗it came from Languedoc, the country of the Albigenses. Only among heretics isolated from the rest of Western Christianity could an Old Latin text have been written at so late a period.‘‖ (ISBE) In other words, it was the Merovingian heretics of the Languedoc in the South of France who preserved the Old Latin text—the same heretics who are falsely identified as ―fundamental Christians‖ by the KJV-Only defenders: ―The Old Latin Vulgate was used by the Christians in the churches of the Waldenses, Gauls, Celts, Albigenses, and other fundamental groups throughout Europe.‖ (Samuel Gipp, An Understandable History of the Bible, p. 67) ―The first Latin translation of the Bible is known as the ‗Old Latin‘ and was made no later than A.D. 157 for the young churches established throughout the Italian Alps… Also referred to as the Itala Bible, this venerable witness was also closely allied with the Textus Receptus… true Latin-speaking believers continued to perpetuate their beloved Itala through the centuries. These readings were eventually preserved through a translation into sixteenth-century Italian by the reformer Diodati becoming the official Bible of the Albigenses and Waldensian assemblies. Satan‘s wrath for this pure Alpine text was vividly confirmed by the blood which flowed through the otherwise peaceful valleys amidst repeated Catholic atrocities.‖ (William P. Grady, Final Authority, pp. 35-6) ―The ‘TRADITIONAL TEXT’ in Latin from A.D. 120 to 240 was the Old Latin of the Waldenses that matched the Syrian Greek Receptus of Antioch… ―You see, until Martin Luther‘s time, there was no European recognition of the correct Bible text. It was traveling by ‗underground railroad‘ through Europe, being propagated by Lollards, Waldenses, Albigenses, Picards, Lyonists, Petrobrusians, Henricians Berengarians, Bogomiles, Paulicians, Catharis, and ‗Montanists,‘ but they had the ‗dice loaded against them.‘‖ (Peter Ruckman, Christian Handbook of Biblical Scholarship, pp. 87, 103)
215
THE SYRIAC PESHITTA There is an affinity between the Old Latin translations and the Syriac Peshitta, produced in the 5th century at Antioch of Syria, which makes it plausible that the Old Latin originated in this early center for the propagation of heresy: ―It is clear from a comparison that the Western type of text has close affinity with the Syriac witnesses originating in the eastern provinces of the empire. The close textual relation disclosed between the Latin and the Syriac versions has led some authorities to believe that, after all, the earliest Latin version may have been made in the East, and possibly at Antioch.‖ (ISBE, ―Old Latin‖) ―Syria was also the source of several Christian heresies and schismatic movements, including Nestorianism and Monophysitism.‖ (ISBE, Vol. III, ―Syria,‖ p. 693) Ruckmanites like Samuel Gipp misinform readers when they write that the Syriac Peshitta and Old Latin were ―Bibles‖ based on the Traditional Text which were brought by Jewish Christians to preach the gospel in England and Europe. ―The Universal [Traditional] Text is that which travels north from Jerusalem to Antioch, the ‗gateway to Europe,‘ heading for England. Upon arrival in England it would be ready for translation into the language through which God has chosen to spread His Gospel – English. ―From Antioch...the Universal Text was sent up into Europe. From there it spread through Syria and Europe through its translation into the Syrian Peshitto version and the Old Latin Vulgate. There are still 350 copies of the Peshitto in existence today as a testimony to this widespread usage in the years since 150 A.D.‖ (An Understandable History of the Bible, p. 67) The original Peshitta not only contained the Apocrypha but omitted several books of the New Testament – 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude, and Revelation. These books were only added at a later date when the official canon of Scripture was established. Even Gail Riplinger acknowledged the corrupt nature of the Syriac Peshitta in the first printing of New Age Bible Versions, but this admission was omitted in subsequent printings: ―...the Peshitta or the Greek Septuagint, both of which contain numerous corruptions.‖ (NABV, 1st Printing, March 1993, p.100) (See Chapter 9) For a more complete treatment of the heretical origins and textual corruption of the Syriac Peshitta, see ―The Semitic New Testament‖ on this website. The following sections of the present report will cover other corrupt translations which the ―KJV-Defenders‖ misrepresent as being ―in complete agreement with the original Hebrew and Greek manuscripts.‖ The Old Latin translations were not only similar to the Syriac version but also the Aramaic Targums, which were not translations but Jewish interpretations of the Hebrew Scriptures: ―Remarkable points of contact between the Old Latin and the Aramaic Targums raise another problem important for the study of the former‘s origins…‖ (ISBE, Vol. IV, p. 970) We can only conclude that high on the agenda of the KJV-Only movement is the revival, not only of the medieval heresies, but of heretical translations based on the corrupt Greek Septuagint Old Testament and the corrupt Aramaic New Testament, the Syriac Peshitta. This explains why Judaizers in the Hebrew Roots and
216
Sacred Name movements have been claiming that the New Testament was originally written in Aramaic rather than Greek. (See: ―The Semitic New Testament‖) Mrs. Riplinger opens the door a little wider for such tampering with the sacred canon of the Greek New Testament by her assertion that the book of Romans was originally written in Old Italia and the book of Hebrews in the Hebrew language. To give this falsehood authority, it is inserted as a fact right in the midst of a spurious statement attributed to John Wycliffe: ―Weighty notes, such as this one from Wycliffe, a man God entrusted to publish the scriptures, tip the scale in today‘s debate – ‗You say it is heresy to speak of the Holy Scriptures in English… Do you know whom you blaspheme? Did not the Holy Ghost give the word of God at first in the mother-tongue of the nations to whom it was addressed? [e.g. the book of Romans first written in Old Italia; the book of Hebrews written in Hebrew, etc.]…to speak that word in all languages under heaven‘ (see Ch. 22).‖ (Awe, p. 36) The authenticity of the Canon of the New Testament is now being challenged by nonbelievers and it is noteworthy that ministerial students in some seminaries are now studying Aramaic instead of Greek. A popular translation is the late George Lamsa‘s ―Translation from the Aramaic of the Peshitta‖ which is promoted among Evangelical Christians in some circles. One promoter of Lamsa‘s translation of the Syriac Peshitta is Robert Reiland, who also teaches that God spoke in the Old Testament with a female voice! (The Fire & The Cloud) According to John P. Juedes writing for the Christian Research Institute Journal, George Lamsa denied the doctrine of the Trinity as well as the deity, atonement, resurrection, ascension and second coming of Jesus Christ. (―George M. Lamsa: Christian Scholar or Cultic Torchbearer?‖) Lamsa‘s student, Dr. Rocco Errico, a Near Eastern theologian and Aramaic expert, now uses his mentor's Peshitta translation to attack the Biblical doctrine of redemption. Seriously heretical statements were elicited from Dr. Errico during a CBS interview: ―Errico says he used the ancient Peshitta texts, known to be at least as old as the Greek, as well as other ancient manuscripts. But the real controversy comes in Errico's interpretations. He says Jesus was the son of man, the ‗Meshihah‘ (Messiah), a provincial prophet on a mission to teach God‘s word, that he was a spiritual genius mighty in word and deed but Jesus was our savior but not our redeemer by the cross, which some say presents a real blow to western Christian belief. In other words, says Errico, Jesus never ever spoke sacrificial language ‗first of all that word redemption and redeemer is incorrect, the Aramaic does not use that word.‘ Errico, in that refusal man crucified Jesus -- it was not God‘s plan. He says why would God be unwilling to sacrifice Abraham‘s son and then decide to sacrifice his own? Thus, Errico says the question is not who was Jesus but rather what was he about; what was his mission, "He didn't die for our sins, he died because of them...‘ ―Errico says that...[p]art of the problem is rooted in the fact that Jesus, after his crucifixion, was deified as Lord as a justification for his death; that Jesus didn't become Lord in a liturgical sense until about the 1st century A.D. Errico says Christians (mostly Jewish Christ followers) had to try and explain why the son of man or the son of God died in such a way. Old Hebrew tradition regularly used blood sacrifice and this would‘ve made sense as an explanation for Jesus‘ death for the atonement of our sins, but that Jesus never said that. ‗His message was not the cross. His message was the kingdom of God coming here and now.‘ Errico adds there is no heaven or hell in the Western sense of the two being specific places in the universe. Hell is an Aramaic idiom that means mental torment -- when you do something wrong you suffer for it... ―So the question becomes: how does one suffer for it? What then, is the great reward of being saved? Errico says: ‗The reward is here not when you die. God doesn't reward, God doesn‘t punish. He (Jesus) did save us, but he saved us by his teachings and if we don‘t follow his teachings you‘re not saved at all.‘‖ (―Aramaic-English Bible Translation Draws Criticism‖)
217
The 1968 edition of George M. Lamsa‘s Translation from the Aramaic of the Peshitta contains the following corrupt readings which undermine the doctrine of redemption: COLOSSIANS 1:14 SYRIAC PESHITTA: ―By whom we have obtained salvation and forgiveness of sins.‖ KJV: ―In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:‖ GREEK TEXTUS RECEPTUS: <1722> {IN} <3739> {WHOM} <2192> (5719) <3588> {WE HAVE} <629> {REDEMPTION} <1223> <3588> {THROUGH} <129> {BLOOD,} <846> {HIS} <3588> {THE} <859> <3588> {REMISSION} <266> {OF SINS;}
TITUS 2:14 SYRIAC PESHITTA: ―Who gave himself for us, that he might save us from all iniquity, and might purify us to be his own.‖ KJV: ―Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.‖ GREEK TEXTUS RECEPTUS: {WHO} <1325> (5656) {GAVE} <1438> {HIMSELF} <5228> {FOR} <2257> {US,} <2443> {THAT} <3084> (5672) {HE MIGHT REDEEM} <2248> {US} <575> {FROM} <3956> {ALL} <458> {LAWLESSNESS,} <2532> {AND} <2511> (5661) {MIGHT PURIFY} <1438> {TO HIMSELF} <2992> {A PEOPLE} <4041> {PECULIAR,} <2207> {ZEALOUS} <2570> {OF GOOD} <2041> {WORKS.}
A You Tube video takes full advantage of Dr. Errico‘s CBS interview to justify the false claims of Astrotheology, which equates the Son of God, Jesus Christ, as presented in the Greek New Testament and the KJV, with the Greek Sun god, Helios. (See also Chapter 2 for Astrotheologists‘ claim that ―Jehovah‖ in the KJV is the Sun god.) We must keep in mind that the endgame of the conspiracy is the total eradication of the Textus Receptus and all of its translations. To facilitate the transition from the Textus Receptus and its translations to corrupted manuscripts and versions, the conspirators are creating associations in the minds of Christians between the Old Latin, Syriac Peshitta, etc. and the Received Greek Text (Textus Receptus). These associations are opening the door ever so stealthily for the next phase of the deception, which will sneak these corrupt translations into the
218
Fundamentalist community. When the Textus Receptus and its translations are ultimately banned, the masses will freely accept hybrid versions that are essentially no better than modern versions. A broadside attack on the KJV and the Textus Receptus is, in fact, already underway. David Bay of Cutting Edge Ministries has launched a campaign of discrediting the King James Version as a ―Rosicrucian masterpiece edited by the Rosicrucian/Freemason Francis Bacon and his band of intellectuals known as the ‗Order of the Helmet‘.‖ Using their ―Secret Mysteries of America‖ video series, Cutting Edge appears to also be heading in the direction of introducing some ―proof‖ that Francis Bacon was the illegitimate son and legal heir of Queen Elizabeth of England, which would render King James I an illegal occupant of the British throne. This prospect was suggested by Peter Dawkins, a main speaker in the first ―Secret Mysteries‖ video, who stated that the surname of Elizabeth I ―Tudor‖ was an Anglicized word for ―Tribe of Judah.‖ (See audio series: Cutting Edge Ministries‘ Plot to Destroy the English Bible) A three-pronged attack has been mounted against the Textus Receptus using three factions – proponents of modern versions, King James-Only defenders who promote hybrid texts, and Messianic Jews who promote Aramaic translations of the New Testament. Ultimately, the KJV and all Bibles based on the Textus Receptus will be banned as ―Fundamentalist‖ hate propaganda (See: The House of God on Trial). When this sad state of affairs comes to pass, KJV-Onlyism‘s heavy promotion of the Wycliffe, Old Latin versions and Syriac Peshitta will allow these corrupt translations to fill the void. THE GOTHIC BIBLE As previously discussed, a good portion of In Awe of Thy Word is devoted to the promotion of corrupt translations as ―based on the original Hebrew and Greek texts.‖ A list of alleged ―English Bibles,‖ each a ―purification‖ of the previous one, is presented on page 33: ―The English Bible‘s seven purifications are covered, including, The Gothic The Anglo-Saxon The Pre-Wycliffe The Wycliffe The Tyndale/Coverdale/Great/Geneva The Bishop‘s The King James Bible The Tyndale Bible, Coverdale Bible, Great Bible, Geneva Bible, Bishops‘ Bible and the King James Bible were based on the Hebrew Masoretic Text and the Byzantine manuscripts which later became the Greek Textus Receptus. However, the Gothic, Anglo-Saxon, Pre-Wycliffe and Wycliffe are quite another story. Gail takes the King James Only deception to the next level of deception with several chapters promoting ancient translations that unfamiliar to most in the KJV-Only community. For example, she maintains that the pure Word of God was preserved in the Gothic translation. ―Gothic, the great great grandfather of English, was a major world language at the time of Christ and the apostles. Gothic benefited from this gift, by which the Holy Ghost superintended over the preaching of the ‗word…in all the world‘ (Col. 1:5,6) and the translation of the ‗scriptures…made known to all nations‘ (Rom. 16:26). The words of English are much older than most think. The earliest English sentence to be discovered appears on an old coin dated around A.D. 450. (It says, ‗This she-wolf is a reward to my kinsmen‘ (see The Mother Tongue: English and How it Got That Way by Bill Bryson).‖ (In Awe of Thy Word, p. 34)
219
―The Gothic Gospels, among the oldest of the vernacular versions, match the text of Erasmus and the King James Bible… ‗The original Greek manuscript or manuscripts, from which Ulfilas made his translation of the Gothic Gospels, belonged to the Byzantine group [KJV type]… As in the Gospels, the original Greek text in the epistles was of the Byzantine type…and differs very little from the fully developed Textus Receptus of the later period.‘ (Cambridge History of the Bible, vol. 2…)‖ (Ibid., pp. 968-9) In Final Authority, William P. Grady promotes the Gothic Bible as the first translation of the Syriac Peshitta into a European language. The following paragraph from Grady‘s book is also cited by Becky Sexton of Former Catholics For Christ writing for Cutting Edge Ministries, which is Baptist but not KJV-Only: ―‗For the Syrian people dwelling northeast of Palestine, there were at least four major versions: the Peshitta (A.D. 145); the Old Syriac (AD. 400); the Palestinian Syriac (A.D. 450); and the Philoxenian (A.D. 508), which was revised by Thomas of Harkel in A.D. 616 and henceforth known as the Harclean Syriac. True to the meaning of its name (straight or rule), the Peshitta set the standard because of its early composition and strong agreement with the Greek text underlying the King James Bible. Because of the obvious embarrassment caused by this document bearing witness to a text some two centuries older than either X [Codex Sinaiticus] or B [Codex Vaticanus], modern Nicolaitane scholarship has conveniently assigned the Peshitta‘s origin to A.D. 415. The first translation into a purely European tongue is known as the Gothic version. This work was prepared in 330 A.D. by the soul-winning missionary Ulfilas... Once again, the strength of this version is found in its age and agreement with the Textus Receptus. Edward Hills cites F.G. Kenyon‘s 1912 edition on New Testament criticism that, ‗The type of text represented in it is for the most part that which is found in the majority of Greek manuscripts. Thus, Ulfilas had access to King James Version readings a full two decades before Sinaiticus or Vaticanus were copied. An excellent example of his superior manuscripts is reflected by the Gothic inclusion of the traditional ending to ‗The Lord‘s Prayer‘ of Matthew 6:13. The familiar words, ‗for thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever. Amen‘, are conspicuously absent from both of the ‗two most ancient authorities.‘ There are only eight surviving manuscripts of the Gothic version.‖ (Final Authority, p. 36) ULFILAS: “A LITTLE ARIANISM” According to Gail Riplinger, the translator of the Gothic Bible, Ulfilas, was ―‗the apostle‘ to the Goths.‖ Selectively quoting the Encyclopedia Britannica, she writes, ―Philostorgius said Ulfilas‘ ‗grand-parents were Christians,‘ converts of those ‗dwellers in…Cappadocia‘ which received the gift of ‗other tongues‘ heard in Acts 2:9.‖ (Awe, pp. 622-3) The Encyclopedia Britannica actually states concerning Ulfilas (c. 311-383): ―The Arian historian Philostorgius (Hist. eccl. ii. 5) says that his grand-parents were Christian captives from Sadagolthina in Cappadocia…‖ Moreover, ―Ulfilas may therefore have been a convert to Christianity when he reached Constantinople. But it was here probably that he came into contact with the Arian doctrines which gave the form to his later teaching… This ordination of Ulfilas by the chiefs of the semi-Arian party is at once an indication of their determination to extend their influence by active missionary enterprise, and evidence that Ulfilas was now a declared adherent of the Arian or semi-Arian party. He was now thirty years of age, and his work as ‗bishop among the Goths‘ covered the remaining forty years of his life.‖
220
The Arian heresy was introduced in the 4th century by one Arius, a priest of Alexandria, Egypt who taught that Jesus Christ was a created being, rather than the Creator. So when the ―Arian historian Philostorgius‖ wrote that Ulfilas‘ grandparents were ―Christians‖ he would not have defined Christianity as it is presented in the (true) Scriptures or Jesus Christ as ―the only begotten Son of God,‖ but rather in terms of the Arian heresy which demoted Jesus to a created being. Gail is not only careful to omit mention of Philostorgius‘ Arianism but also Ulfilas‘ ordination by the Arians. However, it turns out that Ulfilas was not only an Arian bishop and missionary but the chief carrier of the Arian heresy throughout the Roman Empire following the Council of Constantinople in 381 A.D., which gave Christendom the version of the Nicene Creed we have today. Notably, it was to the Visigoths of Western Gaul that Ulfilas brought the Arian heresy in the 4th century, specifically to the South of France where the Merovingian heresy took root. ―‗The Visigoths were adherents of the Aryan heresy which denied the divinity of Jesus. Their descendants founded the Merovingian dynasty which ruled Gaul until the death of Dagobert II. The Merovingians were said to rule by right of their ‗royal blood‘ or ‗sang real‘. ‗Sangreal‘ has been traditionally interpreted as the ‗holy grail‘ which, according to legend, Mary Magdalene carried to the Jewish kingdom of southern Gaul (including Rennes-le-Chateau. It may have been believed by adherents of a secret tradition that Mary Magdalene was the wife of Jesus and that what she brought was not a vessel but the royal seed of David in her womb.‘ - Steve Mizrach, ‗The Mysteries of Rennes-le-Chateau and the Prieure du Sion‘‖ (OrdoTempli) The authors of Holy Blood, Holy Grail identify the Goths as the Merovingian Jews of the seventh century principality of Septimania, ―...an autonomous principality that existed in the south of France for a century and a half,‖ which would explain why the Goths were receptive to an heretical version of Christianity which denied the deity of Jesus Christ: ―[There exists] support for our hypothesis – that a bloodline descended from Jesus existed in the south of France, that this bloodline intermarried with the Merovingians, and that the Merovingians, in consequence, were partly Judaic....an autonomous principality that existed in the south of France for a century and a half, a principality whose most famous ruler was Guillem de Gellone... ―At the apex of his power Guillem de Gellone included among his domains northeastern Spain, the Pyrenees, and the region of southern France known as Septimania. This area had long contained a large Jewish population. During the sixth and seventh centuries this population enjoyed extremely cordial relations with its Visigothic overlords, who espoused Arian Christianity, so much so, in fact, that mixed marriages were common and the words ‗Goth‘ and ‗Jew‘ were often used interchangeably.‖ (Holy Blood, Holy Grail, pp. 389-91) History World chronicles the Arian heresy and the work of the missionary who insured that it would not die: Nicaea and orthodoxy: AD 325 More than 200 bishops, mainly from the eastern parts of the empire, arrive at Nicaea for the council. They meet in Constantine‘s palace, and the emperor himself presides over many of the discussions. His authority is purely political; though an undoubted supporter of Christianity, he has not yet been baptized. The alarming presence of the emperor helps the bishops to reach a conclusion more emphatic than is justified by the range of their opinions. The crack opened wide by Arius seems to be
221
firmly closed when it is announced at Nicaea that the Father and the Son are of the same substance (homo-ousios in Greek). Between two councils: AD 325-381 During the lifetime of those who gather at Nicaea in AD 325 Arianism remains a controversial issue. Before the end of Constantine‘s reign Arius himself is brought back from exile. By midcentury, under Constantius (one of Constantine‘s sons), Arianism is actively favoured, with most of the influential positions in the church held by Arian bishops. Over the years new middle ways are explored. Some suggest that the Son is ‗of similar substance‘ (homoi-ousios) to the Father; others that he is ‗like‘ Him (homoios). But eventually the debate runs out of steam - particularly when a pagan emperor, Julian the Apostate, concentrates the minds of the Christians by dismissing all their notions. By AD 381, with a new generation of bishops and a new emperor, Theodosius, who is antiArian, the council summoned to Constantinople is in no mood for compromise. It conclusively rejects the Arian heresy and formally adopts a slightly modified version of the statement of faith promulgated at Nicaea. This AD 381 version is the text which becomes known as the Nicene creed. And there the matter would seem, at first sight, to have ended. But it transpires that Arianism, like an irrepressible virus, has already spread elsewhere. The carrier is a remarkable man, Ulfilas, who in about 340 is appointed bishop to the barbarian Goths settled north of the Danube. Ulfilas and his alphabet: AD c.360 Ulfilas is the first man known to have undertaken an extraordinarily difficult intellectual task writing down, from scratch, a language which is as yet purely oral. He even devises a new alphabet to capture accurately the sounds of spoken Gothic, using a total of twenty-seven letters adapted from examples in the Greek and Roman alphabets. God‘s work is Ulfilas‘ purpose. He needs the alphabet for his translation of the Bible from Greek into the language of the Goths. It is not known how much he completes, but large sections of the Gospels and the Epistles survive in his version - dating from several years before Jerome begins work on his Latin text.‖ Notwithstanding the undisputed historical fact that Ulfilas spread the Arian heresy throughout the Roman Empire, Gail Riplinger maintains that there was not a trace of Arianism in his theology or his translation of Scripture. She cites Joseph Bosworth‘s The Gospels: Gothic, Anglo-Saxon, Wycliffe, and Tyndale Versions which claimed that Ulphilas‘ Bible was pure and uncontaminated, and presents a hodgepodge of excerpts from other sources (Cambridge History of the Bible, Friedrichsen‘s The Gothic Version of the Gospels and Epistles) to make her case that Ulphilas‘ bible differed a little from the Greek. ―Ulphilas drew the water of life from the pure fountain, and delivered it to his people uncontaminated. (The Gospels: Gothic, Anglo-Saxon, Wycliffe, and Tyndale Versions, ed. Joseph Bosworth, 4th Ed., London, 1907) ―‗Of the influence of the [corrupt] Vulgate there is no trace whatsoever‘ in the Gothic Bible. ‗We are certain of this, that so far as the translation of Ulphilas has been recovered, there is not a trace of Arianism to be found [the heresy that Jesus was a created being]. On the contrary, in
222
passages clearly unfavorable to the doctrine of Arius, Ulphilas has honestly and plainly given the literal meaning of the Greek.‘ (Freiderichsen, Gospels, p. 162; Bosworth, p. iv).‖ (Awe, p. 624) ―Cambridge History of the Bible: ‗The original Greek manuscript or manuscripts, from which Ulfilas made his translation of the Gothic Gospels, belong to the Byzantine group...As in the Gospels, the original Greek text in the epistles was of the Byzantine type...This text represents the mid-fourteenth stage in the development of the Byzantine text, and differs very little from the fully developed Textus Receptus of the later period...Having established a comparatively pure Byzantine text in the New Testament we should anticipate a relatively unmixed Byzantine text in the Old...Testament.‘‖ (Awe, p. 625) ―‗[T]he Goth is so extraordinarily faithful to the Greek.‘ ‗[T]he Byzantine Greek shines through the Gothic with almost undimmed lustre.‘ The Gothic Bible follows ‗The Wolfilian [Ulfilas means ‗little wolf‘] tradition and its fountain-head, the Graeca veritas [Greek true originals]...‘ ‗The Wulfilian Greek…presents the mid-fourth-century stage in the development of the a-text, and differs very little from the fully developed T.R. of the later period.‘ ‗[T]his was done into Gothic from a Byzantine text of the Chrysostomian type...‘ ‗[T]he basic Wulfilian Greek text is again Byzantine...and Chrysostom...a text essentially identical with the Textus Receptus as we know it‘‖ (Freiderichsen...) (Awe, p. 625) What Gail conveniently omitted were portions of the Cambridge History of the Bible which stated that the Goths embraced Arianism due to the influence of Ulfilas from Cappadocia. Also that Ulfilas‘ Gothic translation was influenced by the (corrupt) Old Latin versions: ―The Goths living in the Balkans came into contact with the Roman Empire at an early period; and there must have been Christians among them in the third century since a bishop represented them at Nicaea. In the fourth century there were some links with the church in Cappadocia, and Wulfila was ordained bishop by Eusebius of Nicomedia. Through the influence of this contact and other factors, the Goths at length embraced the Arian interpretation of Christianity, which may have appealed to unsophisticated minds. Wulfila has traditionally the role, unchallenged by later scholars, of translating the scriptures into the language of his own people… ―All the manuscripts we have of the [Gothic] version are products of the Western Gothic kingdoms, and it is clear that the Old Latin version, which they presumably found in Africa, has influenced the text of their version, and left its mark externally in the Western order of the gospels, Matthew, John, Luke, Mark which is found in the one complete copy, the Codex Argenteus, preserved in Stockholm.‖ (Cambridge History of the Bible, p. 369) ―Ulfilas was a definite, if moderate, Arian, and he spread the doctrines of Arius among his converts. About the end of the fourth century, Arianism disappeared from the East but in the course of their migration the Visigoths propagated it in the West, where it almost triumphed. Thanks to the zeal of the Visigoths, Arian Christianity also reached numerous Germanic tribes.‖ (Cambridge History of the Bible, Vol. II, p. 340) Gail also quoted Bruce Metzger as support for the authenticity of the Gothic bible. The problem with this source should be obvious to those who know that, in 1950, Metzger served on the committee that edited the NestleAland Text which was based on the Westcott-Hort New Greek Text.
223
―All investigators agree (e.g. Westcott and Hort, von Soden, Streitberg, Nestle, Streeter, Kenyon, Friedrichsen, et al.) that it [the Gothic Bible] is basically a Syrian Antiochian form of text… It is, therefore, the oldest extant representative of the Lucianic or Antiochian type of text… (Metzger, The Early Versions of the New Testament, pp. 384-385) ―The Gothic ‗Codex Argenteus represents a Byzantine text‘ and is the best existing exemplar of the Gothic text. Erasmus had easy access to it at the Abbey of Werden on the Ruhr River in Westphalia, just 80 miles from his back porch in Holland…Codex Carolinus would have been available to Erasmus at the Abbey of Weissenburg…‖ (Camb. History, Vol. 2, p. 341; Metzger, Early Versions, pp. 378-379) ―In the 4th and 5th centuries the Gothic language – using the term in its widest sense – must have spread over the greater part of Europe together with the north coast of Africa.‘ The Gothic Bible ‗must have been the vernacular Bible of a large portion of Europe.‘ ‗King Reccared of Spain, where the Visigoths had settled early in the 6th century, ordered…burned…the Gothic Bible…‘‖ (EB, s.v. Goths; Metzger, The Early Versions, p. 377;…) (Awe, pp. 626-7) Gail Riplinger argues that the Gothic bible is doctrinally correct, however, her very first example of its textual ‗purity‘ promotes the Arian heresy. (p. 629) Note that, in the Gothic translation of Ephesians 3:14, God the Father is the ―Lord of our Jesus Christ.‖ ―The following charts document the faithful preservation of the word of God. It was given to the Goths in the book of Acts and ‗endureth to all generations‘ (Ps. 110:5)... The ancient Gothic Bible accurately depicts Christian beliefs, unlike new versions which frequently deny that Jesus is the Christ and Lord of the Old and New Testament… (Awe, p. 628) “„For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.‟ Eph. 3:14 GOTHIC pre-A.D. 350
fraujins unsar Iesuis Xristaus Lord
of our Jesus Christ
KJV
of our Lord Jesus Christ
NIV, NASB
OMIT
NKJV note
OMIT
Jehovah Witness Version
OMIT
Catholic Version
OMIT
See errors in HCSB, ESV, NLT, NRSV, RSV, NCV, etc.
Please note what Gail Riplinger does in this table, which she prefaced with the remark, ―The ancient Gothic Bible accurately depicts Christian beliefs, unlike new versions which frequently deny that Jesus is the Christ and Lord of the Old and New Testament.‖ In the table, she then presents a verse from the Gothic bible which denies that Jesus is the Lord, the ―Father‖ being the ―Lord of our Jesus Christ‖!
224
Gail then misrepresents the New King James Version as ―omitting‖ the phrase ‗of our Lord Jesus Christ‘ but this is not true. In the NKJV, the phrase ‗of our Lord Jesus Christ‘ is in the main text of Eph. 3:14 however a footnote at the bottom of the page states: ―NU-Text omits of our Lord Jesus Christ.‖ Ephesians 3:14 in the NKJV reads: For this reason I bow my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,* (...) (...) *Eph. 3:14 NU-Text omits of our Lord Jesus Christ. In other words, a footnote way down the page says the Nestles-UBS Text omitted the important phrase, but the actual text of the New King James carries the Textus Receptus reading just as the King James Version does. In fact, the New King James Version almost consistently follows the Textus Receptus in the text, but is always made to appear corrupt in Riplinger‘s tables because she totally disregards the text of the NKJV and evaluates the NU reading in the footnotes instead. She does this repeatedly with the New King James Version, lumping it together with other modern versions that carry the NU corruptions right in the text. In the same tables she always conceals the textual agreement of the NKJV with the Textus Receptus and the KJV, but endorses translations with obvious textual corruptions – i.e., the Old Latin, Syriac Peshitta, Gothic, Wycliffe – as ―pure‖ and ―uncontaminated.‖ (See: Progression of New Testament Corruption) Like Ulfilas, a thoroughgoing Arian whose Gothic version promotes his heresy, Gail Riplinger denied the deity of Jesus Christ when she misinterpreted ―only begotten of the Father‖ as a reference to His Incarnation, instead of Christ‘s eternal existence, having been eternally begotten of the Father. The Only Begotten Son ―If, ‗He is antichrist...that denieth the Son,‘ durely the Jehovah Witnesses and new version editors, who have discharged ‗the Son‘ from John 1:18, are arch-antichrists. Recent printings of the NIV do likewise. J.W. TRANSLATION
NASB the only begotten the only begotten god God
KJV the only begotten Son
―Christians have held tenaciously to the doctrine that Christ is God and co-eternal with the Father. The term ‗begotten‘, in refererence to Christ, is introduced and interpreted in John 1:14. ―[T]he Word was made flesh and dwelt among us (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father...John 1:14 ―From this we gather that „begotten‟ is used in reference to the body of „flesh‟ „beheld‟ by mankind. Gabriel said to Mary (Luke 1:35): ―The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee, shall be called the Son of God.‖ (New Age Bible Versions, p. 337)
In this section, Gail stated, ―The term ‗begotten‘, in refererence to Christ, is introduced and interpreted in John 1:14.‖ Not so. The verse states ―and we beheld his glory,‖ NOT ―the body of „flesh‟‖, which Gail
225
proceeds to say was ‗begotten‘ at the Incarnation. ―Christ‘s glory‖ is interpreted in John 17:5 as eternally existing: ―And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.‖ (John 17:5) The Athanasian Creed was formulated to uphold the truth of God‘s Word against the Arianism brought by the Ostrogoths and Visigoths to Europe in the 5th century. The following articles of this historic confession expressed the Scriptural view of Jesus Christ‘s deity and humanity: 30. For the right faith is that we believe and confess that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and man. 31. God of the substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; and man of substance of His mother, born in the world. Gail Riplinger gets away with lies and distortions because few of her readers examine her tables, verify her sources or otherwise research her claims. Her mentor, Peter Ruckman, must acknowledge Ulfilas‘ Arianism because he teaches seminary students whose studies expose them to scholarly sources which state the truth about Ulfilas. Even so, Ruckman does the usual damage control...poor Ulfilas wasn‘t so much an Arian as ‗antiCatholic.‘ ―Ulfilas was born in 311 and was in Constantinople in 321. He studied Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, having already known Gothic. He picked up a little „Arianism,‟ as the term in those days was beginning to mean ‗anti-Catholic.‘ After 400, the term was applied to ALL BIBLEBELIEVERS who resisted Roman Catholic Fascism…‖ (Peter Ruckman, The Christian Handbook of Biblical Scholarship, p. 103) Which is it, Dr. Ruckman – ―a little Arianism‖ or Roman Catholic libel?? Ulfilas‘ ―little bit of Arianism‖ certainly went a long way in the Roman Empire, almost to the point where Arianism triumphed over the Biblical doctrine of the deity of Jesus Christ. CHAPTER XVII THE ANGLO-SAXON VERSION
CONTEND FOR THE FAITH: THE TEXTUS RECEPTUS http://watch-unto-prayer.org/TR-0-intro.html WATCH UNTO PRAYER taho@watch-unto-prayer.org http://watch-unto-prayer.org
226
CHAPTER XVII THE ANGLO-SAXON VERSION THE CELTIC CHURCH According to Gail Riplinger‟s “untold, underground hidden history of the Bible,” “countless...nameless Christians” received the language of the Celtic Britons at Pentecost and carried the gospel to the “isles of the sea” mentioned in Isaiah 24:25, which means Britain. “England was dominated by the Celtic Britons for at least 500 years before Christ. In marched the Romans in 55 B.C. carrying their laws, their language and building byways which in less than 100 years would carry the gospel of Jesus Christ to the natives of Britain. According to historians, Christ‟s command to „Go ye into all the world,‟ coupled with the new gift of tongues, carried countless Christians to „preach the gospel‟ in the first century to the „isle‟ which is today called England (Mark 16:15). The trail of blood which brought us our English Bible begins with those nameless Christians who received that tongue spoken by the „Bararians‟—Celtic Britons—living in the „isles of the sea‟ (Acts 2, Isa. 24:15)... “That the vernacular scriptures were received by „every nation under heaven‟ (Acts 2:5) assures us that the Angles and Saxons, who lived in Europe during the time of the apostles, were given the word of God in the first and second centuries.” (Awe, pp. 674, 687) Acts 2:5 states that on Pentecost “there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.” However, it is a non sequitur to assert “That the vernacular scriptures were received by „every nation under heaven‟ (Acts 2:5).” “1 And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. 2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. 3 And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. 5 And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven. 6 Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language. 7 And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans? 8 And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born? 9 Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, 10 Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, 11 Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.” (Acts 2:1-11)
Isaiah 24:15 is not a prophecy of the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost and the spread of the gospel to the world. It is Isaiah‟s prophecy of God‟s terrible judgment upon the world during the Tribulation period. “1 Behold, the LORD maketh the earth empty, and maketh it waste, and turneth it upside down, and scattereth abroad the inhabitants thereof. 2 And it shall be, as with the people, so with the priest; as with the servant, so with his master; as with the maid, so with her mistress; as with the buyer, so with the seller; as with the lender, so with the borrower; as
227
with the taker of usury, so with the giver of usury to him. 3 The land shall be utterly emptied, and utterly spoiled: for the LORD hath spoken this word. 4 The earth mourneth and fadeth away, the world languisheth and fadeth away, the haughty people of the earth do languish. 5 The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant. 6 Therefore hath the curse devoured the earth, and they that dwell therein are desolate: therefore the inhabitants of the earth are burned, and few men left. 7 The new wine mourneth, the vine languisheth, all the merryhearted do sigh. 8 The mirth of tabrets ceaseth, the noise of them that rejoice endeth, the joy of the harp ceaseth. 9They shall not drink wine with a song; strong drink shall be bitter to them that drink it. 10 The city of confusion is broken down: every house is shut up, that no man may come in. 11 There is a crying for wine in the streets; all joy is darkened, the mirth of the land is gone. In the city is left desolation, and the gate is smitten with destruction. When thus it shall be in the midst of the land among the people, there shall be as the shaking of an olive tree, and as the gleaning grapes when the vintage is done. 14 They shall lift up their voice, they shall sing for the majesty of the LORD, they shall cry aloud from the sea. 15 Wherefore glorify ye the LORD in the fires, even the name of the LORD God of Israel in the isles of the sea. 16 From the uttermost part of the earth have we heard songs, even glory to the righteous. But I said, My leanness, my leanness, woe unto me! the treacherous dealers have dealt treacherously; yea, the treacherous dealers have dealt very treacherously. 17 Fear, and the pit, and the snare, are upon thee, O inhabitant of the earth. 18 And it shall come to pass, that he who fleeth from the noise of the fear shall fall into the pit; and he that cometh up out of the midst of the pit shall be taken in the snare: for the windows from on high are open, and the foundations of the earth do shake. 19 The earth is utterly broken down, the earth is clean dissolved, the earth is moved exceedingly. 20 The earth shall reel to and fro like a drunkard, and shall be removed like a cottage; and the transgression thereof shall be heavy upon it; and it shall fall, and not rise again. 21 And it shall come to pass in that day, that the LORD shall punish the host of the high ones that are on high, and the kings of the earth upon the earth. 22 And they shall be gathered together, as prisoners are gathered in the pit, and shall be shut up in the prison, and after many days shall they be visited. 23 Then the moon shall be confounded, and the sun ashamed, when the LORD of hosts shall reign in mount Zion, and in Jerusalem, and before his ancients gloriously.” (Isaiah 24) The whole of chapter 24 of Isaiah clearly describes the judgments of the Tribulation period when “the earth is utterly broken down, the earth is clean dissolved, the earth is moved exceedingly. The earth shall reel to and fro like a drunkard... Then the moon shall be confounded, and the sun ashamed... ” (v. 19-20a) To put “the isles of the sea” (v 15) in the context of Acts 2 and claim that together these passages mean the gospel was carried to Britain after Pentecost is disingenuous in the extreme. However, Gail‟s misinterpretation does leave room for the Merovingian legend that Joseph of Arimathea brought the Holy Grail to Glastonbury following the crucifixion of Christ. The legend of King Arthur and his Knights of the Round Table is based on this legend—King Arthur, “the once and Future King,” being the descendant of Jesus Christ. “Jesus‟ brother, James the Just...is better known as Joseph of Arimathea... “Arthur‟s father, King Adean mac Gabran of Scots, became Pendragon... In this line, Aedan‟s mother, Lluan of Brecknock, was descended from Joseph of Arimathea... The Celtic Church accepted [Arthur‟s] mother, Ygerna del Acqs, as the true High Queen of the Celtic kingdoms. Her own mother (in the hereditary lineage of Jesus) was Viviane I, dynastic Queen of Avalon. The priests therefore anointed Arthur High King of the Britons following his father‟s ordination as King of Scots...
228
“On 26 March 1371, the Royal House of Stewart was founded by King Robert II. For the first time since the 6th-century Arthur mac Aedan of Dalriada, the key Grail successions of Britain and Europe had conjoined in Scots royalty, and the Stewarts‟ ancient legacy of kingship was fulfilled.” (Bloodline of the Holy Grail: The Hidden Lineage of Jesus Revealed, pp. 131, 192-3, 285) Gail‟s disingenuous interpretation of Acts 2 and Isaiah 24:15 coincides with interpretations found in Druidic publications such as The Welsh Question and Druidism by Elizabeth Griffith, who claims that Wales was the “emporium of learning” for other nations because the Welsh forefathers, the Druids, were the “Magi of the West.” “Again, in Isaiah xxiv. 14-16, we read, „They shall lift up their voice, they shall sing for the majesty of the Lord in the fires, even the name of the Lord God of Israel in the isles of the sea. From the uttermost part of the earth (Hyperboreans--Britons), have we heard songs (of the Bards and Druids), even glory to the righteous. “Isaiah prophesied about 750 B.C.--that is, about the time of the foundation of Rome. Unless these words refer to the Ancient Britons, to whom then could they refer? Britain, as the „Tin islands,‟ was known before this time, and the prophet speaks of the „uttermost parts of the earth,‟ being almost the identical words adopted by the ancients for the „Hyperboreans.‟ Here we have the Lord God of Israel worshipped, and no nation worshipped the God of Israel except the Israelites ; and here we find these worshippers in the „isles of the sea,‟ where they cry aloud unto the God of Israel ; it also shows that they are not people in captivity, for „they shall sing for the majesty of the Lord;‟ therefore the Lord had done great things for them ; and this majesty seems to point to the visible glory or majesty of their religion in the great works of Avebury and Stonehenge. And more emphatically still does it point to the Druidical worship, in the words, „Glorify ye the Lord in the fires.‟ “HYPERBOREANS. We are perfectly satisfied that the Hyperboreans of the ancients were the Ancient Britons. They had but a confused conception as to where these remarkable and peculiar people lived, because, as we have before explained, Dan and the kindred tribes kept their colonies a deep secret, hence their name CELTAE.” (Welsh Question and Druidism, p. 155) Although this Celtic/Druidic source misinterpreted Isaiah 24:15, the author did reveal that the Celts are the Israelite Tribe of Dan which, following the Assyrian invasion of northern Israel, migrated north and eventually settled in the British Isles. She also stated that the priests of the Celts, the Druids, built the megalithic monument, Stonehenge, where they practiced their religion which involved worshipping in the fires. The fires most likely refers the Druidic ritual of human sacrifice which took place at Stonehenge. Note that the Druids had an hereditary succession which is a strong indicator linking them with the Merovingian bloodline. Barry Dunford, author of The Holy Land of Scotland: Jesus in Scotland & the Gospel of the Grail, cited Francis Rolt-Wheeler who explains that Jesus entrusted Joseph of Arimathea with a secret doctrine apart from that which He taught to His apostles. “Identifying the roots of the Celtic Church with the medieval Grail mythos, Francis RoltWheeler says: „The Legend of the Holy Grail, in its origin and in its development, is essentially Christian.... It is agreed by all writers and keepers of holy legend that Joseph of Arimathea had naught to do with the apostles. The Christic teachings and certain particular rites, given him by Jesus in spirit-visitation, were exclusive. He was divinely ordered to leave Palestine immediately after his liberation, bearing with him the Holy Grail and holding in memory the Mysterious Words, rightly to fulfil his light-bearing mission on the border of the western world. Such a mission, mystic and spiritual, could not be realized in the Orient; to the present writer, this seems a point too often overlooked by commentators on the
229
Legends of the Grail. In order that the mysticism of the Holy Grail might flower and fruit, it was essential that Joseph escape all legalistic influences: as much the rabbinic jurisprudence of Jerusalem as the canonical jurisprudence of Rome. Neither among the Jewish nor the Latin peoples was such a mystic development possible; it needed the special nature of the Celtic race, whose soul is a harbourage of Mystery. It is often asked why the Holy Grail should have travelled so far, finally to home in Brittany; in the south-west of England, and in Wales. The answer is of the simplest. These are the countries of the Celtic race. Moreover, in these countries shone the light of the Celtic Church, as ancient as that of Rome, known as ‘The Church of the Holy Spirit’ and, later, ‘The Church of the Grail’…(Mystic Gleams from the Holy Grail, c.1940s)” Moving forward in Gail Riplinger‟s “untold, underground hidden history of the Bible” (which contradicts standard histories but agrees with Celtic/Druidic sources), the Celtic Church in Britain and Ireland was not only „Christian‟ but also preserved and spread the true Bible throughout England in the centuries before Augustine, the first Archbishop of Canterbury, arrived as a Roman Catholic missionary in 597 A.D. “Warning Bell: Most other histories of English Christianity, including those used in seminaries and even home schools, are at recess from the first century until Rome rings the bell in England in A.D. 597. Augustine calls them to class to hear fables of a 1001 mights, maybes, monks and monasteries, wrongly steering them along the polluted Latin Vulgate river, to the supposed „first‟ English Bible in A.D. 1382. „[T]here is nothing covered,‟ by the slight hand of man „that shall not be revealed‟ or time can leave sealed (Matt. 10:26). Contrary to the much repeated myth that „Augustine brought Christianity to Britain in A.D. 597,‟ the following primary source documentation proves that there were many Britons, „men of the Celtic race who were already Christians‟ carrying the scriptures throughout England during the first six centuries and in the years following (Peter Hunter Blair, AngloSaxon England, NY: Barnes & Noble, 1996 ed., p. 119, originally published by Cambridge University Press)” (Awe, p. 675) Gail scoffs at historical records which document Celtic monasticism as “fables of a 1001 mights, maybes, monks and monasteries” (Awe, p. 675). Yet her primary source, Peter Hunter Blair, stated that although Augustine of Canterbury and his fellow missionaries abandoned monasticism, the Celtic Church remained “largely monastic in it organization”: “…It is noticeable that those of the early missionaries who acknowledged the supremacy of Rome concentrated their activities almost wholly upon what had been centers of population in Roman Britain and that monasticism played little or no part in their lives. A monastery was founded at Canterbury during Augustine‟s lifetime, but although Augustine and his companions had formerly been monks, they lived in Canterbury as a bishop and his household serving the cathedral church and no longer bound by any monastic rule. It is probable that the churches in Rochester and London were served in a similar way. “The arrival of Aidan‟s mission at Lindisfarne and the subsequent spread of Irish missionaries beyond Northumbria into the midlands and the eastern countries introduced into much of England a conception of episcopacy which was fundamentally different than that of the Roman Church. The Celtic Church in the seventh century was largely monastic in its organization and a bishop in the Irish or Scottish Church at this time was invariably a monk, subject as such to the authority of his abbot. He exercised the spiritual functions conferred upon him by his office, preaching, baptizing, confirming and ordaining, but he remained under his abbot‟s authority and was in no way territorially limited by fixed diocesan boundaries.” (Blair, pp. 132-133) 1.
230
Contrary to Gail Riplinger‟s revisionist Church history, Peter Hunter Blair‟s Introduction to Anglo-Saxon England states that Augustine brought the “word of God” to Britain in 597. Blair‟s favorable account of Augustine‟s mission to England and the conversion of many Britons to Christianity is found in Chapter III titled “The Church: St. Augustine‟s Mission.” Portions of this book can be read at Amazon.com. (Search “Inside This Book” by typing “Chapter III” in the search box; to read successive pages click on “Continuous” in the “View” drop-down menu.) Gail frequently misquoted Blair, as she does her other sources, by stating that “„men of the Celtic race who were already Christians‟ carrying the scriptures throughout England during the first six centuries and in the years following.” In fact, Blair credited those „men of the Celtic race who were already Christians‟ to the evangelism of Augustine and the Roman mission to England. For the record, here is the relevant portion of Blair‟s Introduction to Anglo-Saxon England, which reveals how seriously Gail Riplinger has misrepresented yet another source: CHAPTER III THE CHURCH I. ST. AUGUSTINE‟S MISSION “A tradition current among the faithful of Northumbria in the seventeenth century told that when Benedict I was pope, that is between 574 and 578, Gregory heard of the presence in Rome of some young strangers of light skin and fair hair… Gregory questioned them about their homes and learnt that they were of English race from the kingdom of Deira which was then ruled by a king called Ælle. Greatly struck by their appearance and troubled that such men should be ignorant of the word of God, Gregory asked leave of Benedict to go and preach Christianity in their country. Permission was given and Gregory set out on his journey but after he had traveled for three days he was overtaken by messengers who brought him back to Rome… “Some twenty years after his supposed meeting with the Englishmen in Rome Gregory, then pope,…heard…that there were men among the English who wished to hear the word of God but were prevented from doing so by the timidity of the neighbouring priests, and by thus enlisting the help of a few young Englishmen who had found their way to Gaul, he may have hoped to ease the task of the missionary band which was soon to set out. As leader of this band he chose Augustine, then provost of the monastery of St. Andrew which Gregory himself had founded in Rome. Accompanied by several others from the same monastery, Augustine set out early in 596, but when he and his companions reached southern Gaul they were overcome by fears of the formidable task which lay ahead and Augustine went back to Rome to ask for release from their mission. Encouraged by Gregory and bearing with him letters of commendation to the civil and ecclesiastical powers through whose territories they might be expected to pass, Augustine rejoined his companions and the mission went on its way to make a successful landing in the Isle of Thanet early in 597. Thanet…lay within the territory of Æthelberht, king of Kent, and within a few days of their arrival Æthelberht went to meet them there, insisting, as Bede records, that the meeting should be held in the open air lest the strangers should practice sorcery upon him. Æthelberht, who must have already known something of Christianity since he was married to a Christian wife, listened to their preaching and gave them leave both to live and to preach in Canterbury itself. Before the year was out, and by later Canterbury tradition the date was June 1, Ætheberht himself was converted and the first and most important stage of the mission was completed. “A second mission from Rome reached England in 601, bearing with it letters from the pope and a pallium for Augustine, who was consecrated archbishop and established his seat in Canterbury. Three years later another see was established at Rochester with Justus as its bishop, and in the same year the king of Essex, a nephew of Ætheberht of Kent, was converted and Mellitus was consecrated bishop of the East Saxons with his seat in London, the East Saxon capital. The establishment of three bishoprics within less than a decade was an achievement which held out good hope of further rapid success, but
231
this early promise was not fulfilled. Augustine himself died in some unknown year between 604 and 609, having previously consecrated Lauentius as his successor at Canterbury, and thereafter the mission seemed to lack the driving force necessary to overcome the formidable obstacles presented by districts less exposed to Continental influences than Kent. An attempt was made to convert the East Angles and Rædwald their king was indeed baptized, but he remained divided in his loyalties. All depended on the attitude of the royal families, and both in Essex and in Kent the following generation turned away from the example which had been set by their fathers. The relapse in Essex was so serious that Mellitus was driven out of London and no further headway was made there for more than a generation. Even in Kent the Church came near to extinction after the death of Ætheberht in 616.” (Peter Hunter Blair, Introduction to Anglo-Saxon England, pp. 116-118)
Gail Riplinger‟s brief mention of the conversion of King Ætheberht (Awe, p. 686) makes no reference to Augustine or his meeting with the king of Kent, much less his extraordinary role in the king‟s conversion to Christ and the subsequent evangelization of Britain.
Peter Blair went on to state that “it may be conjectured that many of those who came to hear Paulinus preach, particularly so far north as Yeavering, were men of Celtic race who were already Christians.” However, Gail omitted most of the sentence so that Blair appears to state as a fact that “men of the Celtic race who were already Christians‟ carrying the scriptures throughout England during the first six centuries and in the years following”: “Contrary to the much repeated myth that „Augustine brought Christianity to Britain in A.D. 597,‟ the following primary source documentation proves that there were many Britons, „men of the Celtic race who were already Christians‟ carrying the scriptures throughout England during the first six centuries and in the years following (Peter Hunter Blair, AngloSaxon England...” (Gail Riplinger, Awe, p. 675) Compare... “These setbacks in the south-east were relieved by notable gains in the north, though in telling with such a wealth of detail a story which must have been dear to his heart it may be that Bede has exaggerated the importance of the Roman mission to Northumbria. The mission came about through the marriage of Edwin, king of Northumbria, to a daughter of Æthelberht of Kent. Edwin promised that his bride and her attendants should be free to practice their own religion and even that he himself would adopt it if his councilors thought fit that he should do so. Accordingly, Paulinis, one of those who had come to England in 601, was consecrated bishop in 625 and traveled north with the Kentish princess. Paulinus laboured for a year to support his companions in their faith and strove, though without success, to convert others to their way of thinking. In the following year, at Eastertide, an emissary from Wessex made an unsuccessful attempt to assassinate Edwin and in gratitude for his escape Edwin allowed the infant daughter who had been born to his wife that same Eastertide, to be baptized. She and eleven others of the royal household received baptism at Pentecost in 626. Edwin himself promised that he would follow their example if his expedition to punish the West Saxons for their conspiracy against him was successful. On his return he still hesitated until Paulinus reminded him of a previous escape from death during a period of exile at the East Anglian court. He then declared his readiness to be baptized, but only after the whole matter had been submitted to general discussion by his councilors. Bede‟s account of the debate which followed still has power to stir the emotions of those who read it. In the upshot Edwin was baptized on the eve of Easter Day 627 in a wooden
232
oratory in York, and many of his nobles followed him. From York Paulinus traveled north to a royal estate at Yeavering by the northern foothills of Cheviot and for thirty-six days, it was said, he never ceased instructing the people who came from the neighbouring villages to hear him, and baptizing them in the River Glen. Further south similar mass baptisms took place in the Swale near another royal estate at Catterick. “When even the very appearance of Paulinus was handed down to Bede‟s age, by Deda a priest who knew an old man who had been baptized by him, it would be a mistake to discredit this account of the early days of Christianity in Northumbria simply because it is told in the form of popular traditions which contrast strongly with the documentary evidence from which Bede learnt of the conversion of Kent. The readiness with which paganism was abandoned accords with the other evidence which suggests that its hold was much weaker in the north than it was in the south and it may be conjectured that many of those who came to hear Paulinus preach, particularly so far north as Yeavering, were men of Celtic race who were already Christians.” (Peter Hunter Blair, Introduction to Anglo-Saxon England, pp. 118-119)
As previously shown, the Celtic Church of Britain was, in the words of Peter Hunter Blair, “largely monastic in it organization” and he described the Celtic Church in Northumbria as such: “...A small company of monks led by Aidan came from Iona and established a monastery on the island of Lindisfarne whence there was access to the mainland at low tide. As time went by many more Scottish monks came from Iona and elsewhere to build churches, establish monasteries and give instruction in the discipline and observance of monastic life. During the next twenty years Christianity was firmly established throughout Northumbria. Following their missionary work with the fervour characteristic of Celtic Christianity at this time, the monks of Lindisfarne soon began to extend their activities beyond Northumbria. In 653 Peada, the son of Penda who still ruled in Merica, married into the Northumbrian royal family and received baptism at the hands of Finan, Aidan's successor at Lindisfarne. Penda himself remained heathen but he allowed a small mission, par English, part Celtic, to work in Mercia, and soon after his death, one of his band, an Irishman called Diuma, was consecrated bishop among the Mercians. Shortly afterwards, another of the band, an Englishman named Cedd, was sent by the Northumbrian king to the East Saxons whose bishop he became. Despite his race the Christianity he practiced was wholly Celtic in form.” (Blair, p. 125) John Marsden‟s The Illustrated Bede identifies the Irish preachers who converted the Picts as “monks” and Roman Catholic priests, a fact which Gail works hard to conceal by omitting every favorable reference to monks and priests: “It was though Irish ‘preaching that they adopted the Christian faith…long ago.‟ [before A.D. 565] (Marsden, p. 55)” (Gail Riplinger, In Awe of Thy Word, p. 683) “For those who came to preach were mostly monks. Bishop Aidan himself was a monk; he was sent from the island of Hii, whose monastery was for a long time chief among most of the northern Irish and all the Picts, exercising control over their peoples. This island belongs to Britain, being separated from it by a narrow strait, but was long ago given to Irish monks by the Picts who inhabit that part of Britain, because it was through the monks’ preaching that they adopted the Christian faith.
233
“In the year of our Lord 565...there came to Britain from Ireland a priest and abbot named Columba, a true monk in his life and in his habit, to preach the Word of God to the kingdom of the northern Picts... The southern Picts...are said to have given up the errors of idolatry long before this and received the true faith through the preaching of the word by Bishop Ninian, a most reverend and holy man of British race, who had received orthodox instruction at Rome in the mysteries of the true faith.” (John Marsden, The Illustrated Bede, pp. 54-5) In his Introduction to The Illustrated Bede, Marsden credited Augustine with introducing Christianity to southern England: “If we disregard the legends of Joseph of Arimathea at Glastonbury, it was only in 597 -the year of Columba‟s death -- when Pope Gregory’s emissary, Augustine, came to Kent that Christianity reached the southern kingdoms of Anglo-Saxon England.” (Marsden, p. 15) Mrs. Riplinger, however, credited the Celtic missionaries with the conversion of England and the destruction of pagan temples: “Cambridge Professor Peter Blair writes of „The readiness with which paganism was abandoned...‟ He states that there were few if any places in England „which had not been visited by a missionary.‟ “Bede has left a vivid account of the destruction of a Northumbrian heathen temple... Coifi, the heathen high-priest, displayed his zeal for the new faith by remarking that none was more fitted than himself to initiate and overthrow the old ways.. [He] was the first to profane the old idols and altars which he himself had consecrated‟ (Blair, pp. 117, 118, 119, 120, 121)” (Awe, pp. 681, 685-6) To the contrary, it was a direct result of the evangelistic initiatives of the Roman Catholic Church that paganism was abandoned in Britain, that no “southern” English lands had not been visited by a missionary, and that it was at the directive of the popes that the heathen temples and idols were destroyed. Here is what Peter Blair actually wrote: “At about the same time as the Church suffered this setback in Northumbria, a third, and this time successful attempt, was made to convert the East Angles. Sigeberht, the brother of Eorpwald, had been converted in Gaul, where he was living in exile during his brother's reign. On his return to England he sought help from Archbishop Honorius who sent him a Burgundain called Felix, already consecrated a bishop in Gail. He was given a seat at Dommoc, probably the site of the lost Saxon Shore fort near Felixstowe and during his episcopacy the conversion of the East Angles was completed. Meanwhile, a certain Birinus reached Wessex. He appears to have worked in complete independence of Canterbury, but little is known about him, except that he came to England intending to preach in the midlands, but finding that the West Saxons on whose shores he landed were still heathen, he remained with them and after converting their king, Cynegils, in 635, he established a bishopric at Dorchester on Thames. With the introduction of Christianity into Wessex in this way, only Sussex and the Isle of Wight remained of the southern English lands which had not been visited by a missionary.
2. ANGLO-SAXON HEATHENISM “Mellitus, who reached England with the second mission in 601, brought with him a letter from Gregory giving instructions about the attitude which the missionaries were to adopt towards heathenism. He was to tell Augustine that heathen temples were not to be
234
destroyed, but only the idols which they housed. The buildings themselves were to be purified and altered to make them fit for the service of God. Sacrifices of animals might be allowed to continue, but only as a means of providing good cheer for days of Christian festival with which they were to be associated. Thus supplied with outward comforts the people might the more readily be persuaded to accept spiritual teaching. But to the newly baptized Ætheberht, Gregory wrote more sternly, bidding him to overthrow the temple buildings and set his face against the worship of idols. Such also was the bidding of Pope Boniface to Edwin of Northumbria a generation later. No structural remains of any Anglo-Saxon heathen temples have yet bee discovered, but there are some indications that Augustine and his successors followed the policy of attempting to assimilate as much of the old ways as was consistent with the Christian faith. There was a Canterbury tradition that the church of St Pancras was built within the precincts of what had formerly been a heathen sanctuary, but perhaps the most remarkable application of this policy was the retention of the name of a heathen goddess, Eostre, and its use for the greatest of Christian festivals. Bede has left a vivid account of the destruction of a Northumbrian heathen temple at Goodmanham in the East Riding of Yorkshire. Coifi, the heathen highpriest, displayed his zeal for the new faith by remarking that none was more fitted than himself to initiate and overthrow the old ways. Arming himself and mounting a stallion fitted with harness, actions which had been forbidden by the priestly caste, he rode away from the assembly which had been debating the matter and was the first to profane the old idols and altars which he himself had consecrated.‟” (Blair, pp. 120-121)
The following paragraph from In Awe of Thy Word is typical of Gail‟s “cut and paste” method of cooking the data: “Much of what we know about Christians in England between A.D. 597 and A.D. 731 is from Bede. He assures us that „the reading of the scriptures is in general use among them all‟ (Marsden, p. 33).” (Awe, p. 688) To say that Bede wrote that „the reading of the scriptures is in general use among them all‟ without the rest of the sentence is ungrammatical and misleading. Removed from its context, the reader is given the impression that the Scriptures were in general use among the English, which is not at all what Bede wrote. “At the present time, corresponding to the number of the books containing the divine law, Britain uses the languages of five peoples to study and profess the one undivided knowledge of the supreme truth and true sublimity. These five are the languages of the English, the Britons, the Irish, the Picts, and the Latin language, the last of which through the reading of the scriptures is in general use among them all.” (Marsden, pp. 32-33) The full context of Bede‟s sentence was that „the Latin language...is in general use among them all‟ -- the English, the Britons, the Irish, the Picts -- because the Latin scriptures were read by monks and priests. Blair wrote that the English converts to Christianity were illiterate and credited the Irish monks with teaching Latin to the English monks at Lindisfarne: “There are no native English records from these times and it may be supposed that during the first half of the seventh century the Roman missionaries in south-eastern England were so heavily engaged in their fight against deeply rooted paganism that the teaching of letters to their converts was beyond their power. Anglo-Saxon handwriting of the eighth century plainly reveals its descent from the Irish form of the Latin alphabet, not from the seventhcentury Italian hand, and it is to the Irish monks who came to England in large numbers,
235
beginning with the settlement of Aidan at Lindisfarne in 635, that much of the credit for teaching letters to the English must be ascribed. Lindisfarne was only one of several monasteries founded in Northumbria at this time and as the century passed monks found their way into most of the English kingdoms. The reputation of Irish learning stood high in England and in the second half of the second century many Englishmen, especially from Northumbria, went to study in monasteries. The zeal of the Irish for learning and teaching was undoubtedly great, but it should not be forgotten that the Englishmen whom they attracted to their schools were men whose fathers had been ignorant of the very existence of the Latin alphabet.” (Blair, pp. 312-313) ST. PATRICK According to Gail Riplinger, the conversion of Ireland was due to the missionary work of Patrick two hundred years before Augustine: “Secular historians admit, „Christianity also arrived there [Ireland], indeed considerably earlier than the annals of the church suggest… [T]he Celtic church flourishing in the island was older than both Irish apostles [Patrick and Palladius] and different from what the pope desired… How it could have started we cannot tell… Christianity seems to have advanced by the power of persuasion alone. (Gerhard Herm, The Celts)” (Awe, p. 683) The reader is assured that Patrick‟s faith was in Jesus Christ, yet there seems to be no evidence of this in his personal writings, at least not in the one obscure source quoted as evidence: “Patrick records his conversion to saving faith in Jesus Christ in the 400s… Patrick writes, „The Lord opened to me the sense of my unbelief that I might remember my sins and that I might return with my whole heart to the Lord, my God…I was like a stone lying in the mire, but he who is able came. He raised me up in his mercy.‟ (as cited by Duane Russell, „The Real St. Patrick,‟ The Day Spring (2001, No. 1), Banbridge, Co. Down, No. Ireland: G. Edgerton, pp. 3-5)” (Awe, p. 683-684) Who was Patrick, if he even existed? Some have speculated that he was Palladius. In his book, The Top 13 Illuminati Bloodlines, Fritz Sprinmeier stated that and that “Patrick” was the Anglicized form of the Egyptian god, Ptah-rekh, which may have been a title: “...Gerald Massey‟s A Book of the Beginnings...shows in detail how the inhabitants of the British Isles came originally from Egypt. This is important because...the Druidism of the British Isles was simply a Satanic witchcraft/magic of Ancient Egypt. They Egyptian word Makhaut (clan or family) became the Irish Maccu and the Maccu of the Donalds (clan of Donalds) now reflected in the name MacDonald. The sacred keepers of the Clan-Stone in Arran, were also known by the family name of Clan-Chattons. another word for clan is Mack and the Clan-Chattons were also known as Mack-Intosh. Ptah-rekh the name of the
Egyptian god Ptah was passed down to us by the Druids adopting the name Patrick, which sounded similar. St. Patrick‟s day then is a Christianized form of a druidic holiday which originally had its origins in Egypt.” (Springmeier, p. 229) In his Book of the Beginnings, Gerald Massey explained that many of the saints were fictional characters whose names reflected pagan deities. It seems that “Patrick” (Ptah-rekh) was a Druidic title for the “priests of Ptah”:
236
“One part of the process in converting the Irish was to take their ancient deities, the devil included, and transform them into Christian saints, and as saints they have figured in the calendar ever since. Thus the mythical Patrick appears to be identifiable with the god Ptah not but that there may have been a priest of Ptah named Patrick. The rekh (Eg.) is the mage, wise man, priest, and there may have been one or many Ptah-rekhi, the priests of Ptah. Patrick, or Ptah-rekh is probably the hard form of the Paterah known as a Druidical title. Attius Paterah, the friend of Ausonius, was a Druidical Paterah or Patrekh in this sense; he who was said to have been „stirpe satus druiden gentis armoricae,‟ and the companion of Dyved.” (A Book of the Beginnings, Chap. 10) ST. COLUMBA
In order to remove all references to St. Columba‟s monasticism, Gail splices together partial sentences from Venerable Bede‟s Ecclesiastical History of the English People: “Bede asserts, „In the year of our Lord 565...there came to Britain from Ireland...Columba...to preach the word of God to the kingdoms of the northern Picts...The southern Picts are said to have given up the errors of idolatry long before this [565] and received true faith through the preaching of the word... Now Columba came to Britain...and converted the people to the Christian faith by his word and his example... [T]hey diligently practiced those works of devotion and purity which they could learn from the writings of the prophets, evangelists and apostles‟ (Marsden, pp. 55, 57).” (Awe, p. 685) The unadulterated paragraph from John Marsden‟s The Illustrated Bede states that Columba established numerous monasteries: “Now Columba came to Britain in the ninth year of the reign of Bruide, son of Maelchon, a Pictish king of great power, and converted the people to the Christian faith by his word and his example; and because of this they gave him possession of the island mentioned above to build a monastery... Before coming to Britain he had built a noble monastery in Ireland, called Dearmach in the Irish language, meaning the field of the oaks, after the many oak trees that stand there. His disciples from both of these monasteries went on to found many more monasteries in Britain and Ireland, over all of which the island monastery, where his body lies at rest, held pre-eminence." (Marsden, The Illustrated Bede, pp. 55. 57) The Columbia Encyclopedia entry for Saint Columba also describes him as a monk and the founder of a monastic order: “Almost as a matter of course, under such circumstances, he embraced the monastic life. He was ordained deacon while at Moville, and afterwards, when about thirty years of age, was raised to the priesthood. During his residence in Ireland he founded, in addition to a number of churches, two famous monasteries, one named Daire Calgaich (Derry) on the banks of Lough Foyle, the other Dair-magh (Durrow) in King‟s county... Columba established himself on the island of Hy or Iona, where he erected a church and a monastery... The precise details, except in a few cases, are unknown, or obscured by exaggeration and fiction; but it is certain that the whole of northern Scotland was converted by the labours of Columba, and his disciples and the religious instruction of the people provided for by the erection of numerous monasteries. The monastery of Iona was reverenced as the mother house of all these foundations, and its abbots were obeyed as the chief ecclesiastical rulers of the whole nation of the northern Picts. There were then neither dioceses nor parishes in Ireland and Celtic Scotland; and by the Columbite rule the bishops themselves, although
237
they ordained the clergy, were subject to the jurisdiction of the abbots of Iona, who, like the founder of the order, were only presbyters. In matters of ritual they agreed with the Western Church on the continent, save in a few particulars such as the precise time of keeping Easter and manner of tonsure.” The Celtic Church has always maintained its pedigree as the “true Christianity” and, in our own day, propaganda on “Celtic Christianity” fills the bookshelves of popular bookstores like Barnes & Noble, Borders and Amazon.com. For example, The Forgotten Monarchy of Scotland, by Prince Michael Stewart portrays the Celtic Church the true Christian Church that was persecuted by the Roman Catholic Church. The “Christian message” according to Stewart was the body of heretical doctrine preserved by Nestorius, who denied the union of the two natures of God and man in the person of Christ. Merovingian propaganda also reveals that St. Columba is revered because he crowned and anointed the father of King Arthur, Uther Pendragon, i.e. the Celtic Dragon King: “St. Columba had brought the original Christian message (preserved by the Syrian bishop Nestorius) into Ireland and Scotland from the Middle East, so that both the Old and New Testaments received equal status within the Celtic Church. In deed it was Columba who, in 574, had crowned and anointed King Aedan mac Garan of Dalraida (Celtic Pendragon and father of King Arthur) - the first British monarch to be installed by priestly ordination - and this greatly upset the Church of Rome. Following Columba‟s death in 597, the Pope sent St Augustine to dismantle the Celtic Church in Britain, but although he became England‟s new Catholic Archbishop of Canterbury, his mission failed in Scotland, Ireland and Wales, where the Celtic Church prevailed.” (Stewart, The Forgotten Monarchy of Scotland, pp. 29-30) The Messianic Legacy acknowledges various heretics who were the founding fathers of Celtic Christianity and posits that Saint Columba disseminated their heretical works in Ireland: "If Celtic Christianity drew heavily on Egypt, it also drew heavily on the more explicitly heretical traditions of Syria, Asia Minor and Mesopotamia. We have already discussed how Nestorian thought served as a repository for certain Nazarean traditions. As early as 430 the time of Saint Patrick - a book explaining the teachings of Nestorius was being circulated in the West. Nestorius himself had studied at the theological school of Antioch, where his mentor was a man known as Theodore of Mopsuestia. At the Fifth Ecumenical Council in 553, Theodore and all his works were officially anathematised and declared heretical. In consequence, most of his teachings have long since vanquished. And yet much of what we know of him today comes from Ireland. One of his major scriptural commentaries survives only in an old Irish manuscript. Additional material from Theodore turns up in other Irish manuscripts, dating from the eighth century, the ninth century and, in one case, from the late tenth century - more than four hundred years after Theodore was condemned. It has been suggested that Theodore's works were translated and brought to Ireland by no less a figure than Saint Columba... In its organization, then, in its use of certain texts, in many of its outward aspects, the Celtic Church circumvented the Church of Rome and functioned as a repository for elements of Nazarean tradition transmitted from Egypt, Syria, and Asia Minor.” (The Messianic Legacy, Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh & Henry Lincoln, pp. 119120) Laurence Gardiner, author of Bloodline of the Holy Grail is also the “Prior of the Celtic Church‟s Sacred Kindred of Saint Columba.” [A prior is “„a superior officer of a religious house or order,‟ 1093, from L. prior „former, superior‟” (Online Etymology Dictionary) Gardner describes Celtic Christianity as Torah observant, in other words, Jewish. Celtic spirituality is frequently characterized by the term "Nazarene" - a name also given to the Essene Community at Qumran:
238
“A unique and indigenous culture thus developed in the form of Celtic Christianity. It derived primarily from Egypt, Syria and Mesopotamia, and its precepts were distinctly Nazarene. The liturgy was largely Alexandrian and, because Jesus's own teachings formed the basis of the faith, the Mosaic content of the Old Testament was duly retained. The old Jewish marriage laws were observed, together with the celebration of the Sabbath and Passover, while the divinity of Jesus and the Roman dogma of the Trinity played no part in the doctrine. The Celtic Church had no diocesan bishops but was essentially under the direction of abbots (monastic elders). The whole was organized on a clan structure, with its activities focused on scholarship and learning.” (Bloodline of the Holy Grail, p. 189) “Laurence Gardner, Prior of the Celtic Church's Sacred Kindred of Saint Columba, is an internationally known sovereign and chivalric genealogist. Distinguished as the Chevalier Labhran de Saint Germain, he is Presidential Attaché to the European Council of Princes -- a constitutional advisory body established in 1946. He is formally attached to the noble household guard of the Royal House of Stewart, founded at St Germain-en-Laye in 1692, and is the Jacobite Historiographer Royal.” (Bloodline of the Holy Grail, back cover) ST. GILDAS Chapter 19 of In Awe of Thy Word promises to present the reader with “primary source documentation [which] proves that there were many Britons, „men of the Celtic race who were already Christians‟ carrying the scriptures throughout England during the first six centuries and in the years following...” (Awe, p. 675) The “primary source documentation” which Gail presents, however, can hardly be considered impartial, objective history. Gail Riplinger sneers at “Most other histories of English Christianity, including those used in seminaries and even home schools” as presenting “fables of a 1001 mights, maybes, monks and monasteries” in the Celtic Church. Yet the “primary source documentation” offered by Gail is for the most part from Celtic monks and Masons. For example, a “primary source” used to document “„men of the Celtic race who were already Christians‟ carrying the scriptures throughout England” is The Story of Our English Bible by Sir Walter Scott, who was a Freemason and chairman of the Celtic Society of Edinburgh. Another “primary source” is William of Malmesbury, a monk at Malmesbury Abbey, a Benedictine monastery in England. Another primary source, Venerable Bede, was a Benedictine monk at the Northumbrian monastery of Saint Peter at Monkwearmouth. Another “primary source” for this deception was St. Gildas. According to the Legend of King Arthur “Gildas Bandonicus, a Celtic monk, lived in the 6th century from about 494 AD to 570 AD.” The Encyclopaedia of the Celts also associates St. Gildas with King Arthur, the legend of Joseph of Arimathea and Glastonbury: GLASTONBURY “# 156: A small town in Somerset, the site of a medieval abbey, which was variously said to have been founded by Deruvian and Phagan, missionaries sent by the Pope to the British king, Lucius, and by Saint Patrick before his mission to the Irish. There is in fact no real evidence for an abbey there before the seventh century. In the romance PERLESVAUS, Glastonbury is identified with Avalon. Saint Joseph of Arimathea was thought to have founded the old Church there. In the Middle Ages, bones, which were identified by their discoverers as those of Arthur and Guinevere, were discovered there. Although most authorities regard the find as a hoax, this is not necessarily the case. According to a story found in the LIFE OF GILDAS, Melvas (Meleagaunce) abducted Guinevere and took her to Glastonbury, but Gildas mediated between him and Arthur. See: GILDAS, SAINT.”
239
In Arthurian lore, the Lord of the Underworld resides in Glastonbury, a mythical Isle of Glass, and this is the alleged location of the Holy Grail. “When mist, like sea, surrounds the Tor [of Glastonbury], it rises from the Levels like a magical island of ancient lore. Indeed in Celtic times it was known as the Isle of the Dead the threshold of the spirit world where wisdom and knowledge were revealed. Its Celtic name was Ynys Witrin; it is the faery Isle of Glass where the Lord of the Underworld resides. Most famously, legend knows Glastonbury as the Isle of Avalon. Literally meaning „The Place of Apples‟, Avalon was a legendary paradise associated with the Celtic Otherworld - the Summerland Annwn. In Romance, Avalon is where Arthur‟s great sword Excalibur was forged; it is where Arthur went to heal his wounds and where his sister Morgan Le Fay had her magical stronghold. The Life of St Gildas tells of Arthur‟s deeds at Glastonbury; the abbey’s chronicles know him as a major benefactor of Glastonbury’s early church. Christian legend knows the Vale of Avalon as the place where Joseph of Arimathea landed with the Holy Grail...” - 831 The Life of Gildas, reveals that Gail Riplinger‟s “primary source” was an ascetic at Glastonbury at the time of King Arthur: “St. Gildas...was received with much welcome by the abbot of Glastonia, and taught the brethren and the scattered people, sowing the precious seed of heavenly doctrine. It was there that he wrote the history of the kings of Britain. Glastonia, that is, the glassy city, which took its name from glass, is a city that had its name originally in the British tongue. It was besieged by the tyrant Arthur with a countless multitude on account of his wife Gwenhwyfar, whom the aforesaid wicked king had violated and carried off, and brought there for protection, owing to the asylum afforded by the invulnerable position due to the fortifications of thickets of reed, river, and marsh. The rebellious king had searched for the queen throughout the course of one year, and at last heard that she remained there. Thereupon he roused the armies of the whole of Cornubia and Dibneria; war was prepared between the enemies. “When he saw this, the abbot of Glastonia, attended by the clergy and Gildas the Wise, stepped in between the contending armies, and in a peaceable manner advised his king, Melvas, to restore the ravished lady. Accordingly, she who was to be restored, was restored in peace and good will. When these things were done, the two kings gave the abbot a gift of many domains; and they came to visit the temple of St. Mary and to pray, while the abbot confirmed the beloved brotherhood in return for peace they enjoyed and the benefits which they conferred, and were more abundantly about to confer. Then the kings reconciled, promising reverently to obey the most venerable abbot of Glastonia, and never violate the most sacred place nor even the districts adjoining the chief's seat. “When he had obtained permission from the abbot of Glastonia and his clergy and people, the most devout Gildas desired to live a hermit's life upon the bank of a river close to Glastonia, and he actually accomplished his object. He built a church there in the name of the holy and indivisible Trinity, in which he fasted and prayed assiduously, clad in goat's hair, giving to all an irreproachable example of a good religious life. Holy men used to visit him from distant parts of Britain, and when advised, returned and cherished with delight the encouragements and counsels they had heard from him.” According to the author of The Merovingian Infiltration of the Christian World Through Monasticism, the Merovingians established monasteries to infiltrate the Church in order to destroy it from within. “Like most Merovingian monasteries Glastonbury became a Benedictine Monastery. And the purpose of Merovingian monasteries was 'infiltration' based on the belief that the best
240
way to crush the Church was from 'within.'... There is no doubt in my mind that [the Grail legend] would have been the work of the Cistercians, founded by Benedictine monks as 'the ratchet' for the structural organization of [the Prieuré de] Sion. Joseph of Arimathea is alone associated with the Grail legend and the Quest of the Grail legends, which per Colliers Encyclopedia, are dominated by the mystical symbolism of Cistercians... “More than any heretical Merovingian organizations, the Cistercians personified the banality of evil at its finest. The name Cistercian and of their first monastery, Citeaux derive from Cistus, of the Cistaceae or Rockrose family resembling the wild rose and cultivated in the Mediterranean. The Myrrh with which Mary Magdalene anointed the Body of Jesus also comes from the Cistus family. And they had chosen the Magdalene...assigning her the symbol of the Rose and Cross in memory of the Brotherhood of the Sun founded by Akhenaten who had taken as its symbol the Rose and Cross (Lewis). Cistercians were Rosicrucians. And this Rosicrucian order of monks would triumph in its infiltration of the Church.” (550) CELTIC CHURCH TODAY The present day Celtic Church is far afield from Biblical Christianity in its doctrine and practice. The Celtic Synod, which is displays the Celtic Cross as its logo, prequires that “All clergy members of this Synod shall be members of the Military and Religious Order of Culdees.” The Ancient Order of the Culdees of Iona states that “Culdee” means “Chaldea,” as in ancient Babylonia: “Origin of the word Culdee. The name Culdee comes from Chaldee, (Chaldeans pronounce the word Chaldee as Kaldee or Culdee), in the sense that it alludes to Abraham the Chaldee, who left his home, worldly wealth, kindred and idol making to find the Promised Land.” The 1611 King James Version used the word “Caldees” with reference to the Babylonians or “Chaldeans,” which was the updated spelling in later editions. Verse(s) Genesis xv. 7 2 Kings xxv. 4, 5, 10, 13, 24, 25, 26 2 Chronicles xxxvi. 17 Nehemiah ix. 7
Reading of the Authorized Bible Caldees (Chaldees, ch. xi. 31) Caldees
Variation of later editions Chaldees, 1629
Caldees
Chaldees, 1638
Caldees
Chaldees, 1638
Chaldees, 1744
James Bonwick wrote of the Jewish and Druidical traditions and hereditary priesthood of the Culdees in Irish Druids And Old Irish Religions. “An old statistical work says, „the Druids undoubtedly possessed Iona before the introduction of Christianity.‟ It must be admitted that the Culdees wore a white dress, as did the Druids, [and the Essenes] and that they occupied places which had a Druidical reputation. They used the Asiatic cross, now called that of St. Andrew‟s.‟ Notably, in an Irish version of the gospel of St. Matthew, the phrase „there came wise men from the east‟ is rendered „the Druids came from the east.‟ [fn. James Bonwick‟s Irish Druids and Old Irish Religions] In like manner, in the Old Testament, Exodus vii. II, the „magicians of Egypt‟ are made „Druids of Egypt.‟ [fn. Rev. John Williams Ab Ithel, The Traditionary Annals of the Cymri, 1867, p.166.]… “In Tirechan's Life of St Patrick, Cele-de came from Briton to Ireland in 919; but in 811 some were said to have been miraculously conveyed across the sea. Bede, who opposed them, whether from Ireland or Scotland, was shocked at their holding his religion „in no
241
account at all,‟ nor communicating with his faithful „in anything more than with pagans.‟ He banished those who came to his quarter. He found these Irish, Welsh, and Scotch Christians to have, in addition to many heresies, the Jewish and Druidical system of hereditary priesthood. Property of the Church even descended from father to son; and, says Dr. Reeves, „was practically entailed to members of certain families.‟ He adds that they were understood in the 12th century as „a religious order of clerks who lived in Societies, under a Superior, within a common enclosure, but in detached cells; associated in a sort of collegiate rather than œnobical brotherhood.‟ Giraldus, as well as Bede, complained of their hereditary priesthood. The same principle prevailed in the Druidical region of Brittany, and only yielded to the force of the Council of Tours in 1127.” (Irish Druids & Old Irish Religions, pp. 280-1, 285) The Celtic Synod of the present day locates its origins in the Holy Grail (Joseph of Arimathea) heresy and Messianic Judaism, defines itself as monastic, accepts the Apocrypha and believes in Apostolic Succession: THE HOLY CELTIC CHURCH / note the Triskele symbol “The Celtic Church probably developed its monastic characteristics through Coptic Orthodoxy influence and, as all of early Christianity for the first hundred years, was influenced by its Messianic Jewish origin. It should be noted that the “Galatians” referred to in scripture by the Apostle Paul and with whom he visited were Celts that had migrated into what is now Turkey. Traces of Celtic influence can still be found in that area.” “Historical evidence indicates the Church founders were followers of our Lord Jesus Christ, led by Joseph of Arimathea, dating from before the crucifixion and the dispersion of Jesus’ followers after Pentecost. These founders traveled from the Holy Land and ultimately settled in the British Isles by way of Gaul. The Celtic Church established at Glastonbury in Britain is accepted as the first above ground Christian Church. Because of its autonomy and geographical isolation, the Celtic Church remained uniquely uncorrupted by Hellenistic Greek philosophy or Roman jurisprudence.” “The H.C.C. firmly believes the Holy Bible to be the infallible and divinely inspired Word of God and that it contains all of the teachings which constitute the basis of our faith. These teachings are to be believed and followed in their entirety. We consider the alteration, revision or gross reinterpretation of scripture to be a major heresy. We accept the books contained in the Apocrypha as fully legitimate scripture and affirm their validity. These books were contained in the early Jewish texts prior to the Birth of Our Lord and were referred to but considered holy books of lesser importance. The early church accepted them and quoted from them numerous times. The frivolous accusations made against them during the Reformation period were invalid and unjust. The H.C.C. believes with firm conviction that the church, the sole guardian and teacher of the revealed will of God, was personally instituted by the real and historically verifiable Jesus of Nazareth, the Messiah, when he lived among us; and that the church is built upon the solid rock and cornerstone, being Our Savior Himself. And we believe that He instituted the Apostolic Succession to ensure continual existence of divinely appointed authority, and to a lesser degree a visible mark of purity of doctrine.” (Article 8) According to Prince Michael Stewart, the traditions of Judaism given by God in the Old Testament have also been faithfully preserved by the Celtic Church:
242
“Early Celtic Christianity was the closest of all religious teachings to the original doctrines of Jesus, and it had emerged within a few years of the Crucifixion as the foremost Church of the Christian world. Christians of the Celtic Church were recorded in Ireland in the latter reign of Emperor Tiberius (AD 14-37), long before St Peter went to Rome. Given that Jesus' own teachings formed the basis of the faith, the Mosaic structure of the Old Testament was duly incorporated. Judaic marriage laws were observed, together with the celebrations of the Sabbath and Passover, while Easter was correctly held as the traditional feast-day of the Spring goddess, Eostre, long before the Roman Church foisted a new significance on the old Celtic festival at the Synod of Whitby in 644. “Contrary to traditional belief, Emperor Constantine the Great (AD 274-337) did not embrace Christianity as the religion of Rome; he adapted Christianity into a new form which was implemented as the religion of Rome. Constantine‟s reign as Emperor was actually related to the Syrian Sol Invictus cult of sun worship, but he determined to create a purposebuilt religion to divert Christianity from its Judaic origins. He redefined Jesus' birthday to comply with the Sun Festival on 25 December, and substituted the sacred Sabbath (Saturday) with the Sun-day. Indeed by a series of such manoevres, the high-points of Judaic Christianity were conveniently merged with the pagan tradition, and the Persian cult of Mithras, which stressed the concept of final judgement, was also partially enveloped. “The outcome, from a purely political base, was the uniquely contrived and controllable State „hybrid‟ of the Roman Church. On being formalized at the Councils of Nicaea and Constantinople, the new Roman doctrine proclaimed all alternative faiths heretical, all except for the Celtic Church, which was too well-established to provoke. Any such attempt would have been tantamount to a declaration of war, particularly against Ireland; and at that time Rome did not have the military capability to confront the fierce troops of the Irish kings.” (The Forgotten Monarchy of Scotland, p. 30) This is the same Celtic Church that is promoted in KJV-Only propaganda as the “true Christian Church” which preserved the pure text of the Holy Bible. The Celtic Church is also promoted throughout the apostate Christian community by false prophets and teachers such Peter Wagner, Chuck Pierce, Cindy Jacobs, Dutch Sheetz, to name a few who are well-known for teaching sorcery and witchcraft in the false Charismatic revival. (See: “The Transformation of America: Strategic Level Sorcery”) Now one of their number, Kathie Walters, is leading Celtic Pilgrim Tours to sacred sites of the Celtic Church in Ireland. Walters is the author of many books such as The Visitation, Celtic Flames and Columba - The Celtic Dove, whose promos reveal the mystical religion of the Celtic Church and its spiritual leaders, Sts. Patrick and Columba: “Kathie has had two major visitations from the Lord. The first one - she was lifted into heaven every day for seven days and the second one - she was lifted into heaven every day for 3 ½ weeks.” (The Visitation) “Accounts of the supernatural ministries of Patrick, Brigid, Cuthbert, Brendan, Kieran etc. Read how these Celtic Christians in the 4th-5th-6th centuries demonstrated the power of God and won the hearts of the people for the Lord. For example, Patrick converted Dublin by raising the king‟s two children from the dead. (Celtic Flames) “The early Celtic Christians had an incredible anointing. They confronted the Druids with the supernatural power of God, raised the dead, healed the sick. This book contains eyewitness accounts of the ministry of Columba of Iona.” (Columba - The Celtic Dove) “Kathie shows that according to the scripture, angels are meant to be a normal part of the life of the believer. She tells how the angels of God are sent to minister to us and help us in our own lives and ministries. There are many stories of her own encounters with God‟s angels.”
243
(Angels - Watching Over You) “Kathie believes the realm of the Spirit, the supernatural realm, the angels and heavenly visitations etc are meant to be a normal part of your life - most people are robbed because of religious mindsets.” (Living in the Supernatural) ANGLO-SAXON VERSION Outside of the controlled network of a pseudo-Christian propagandists, scholars and Celtic writers concur that the “scripture” of the Celtic Church was not the Traditional Text of the Bible, but a range of corrupt and even heretical texts: “The original British churches lived within the Roman empire, so they could make intelligent use of the Latin Bible, which from the 4th cent. on meant Jerome’s translation, the Latin Vulgate. With the barbarian invasions, however, a new situation arose. Whereas the Vulgate could be studied, used, and copied in the circles of Celtic monasticism, the newcomers, who had first to be evangelized, brought with them no background of Latin language and culture. The need for translation into the vernacular arose, therefore, with the extensive evangelization and the growth of the Anglo-Saxon Church in the 6th century...” (Geoffrey W. Bromiley, Ed., International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 2, "English Versions," p. 83) “The Bible most popular with Christians of the Celtic lands was the Old Latin. It is called the Itala... J.F. Kenney observed that... „the Irish were the most important of the agents who have transmitted to us the Old Latin texts...‟” (The Celtic Church in Britain, Leslie Hardinge, p. 31) “As we have noted, the Celtic Church drew upon a broad spectrum of texts beyond Rome‟s sphere of influence - Nazarean texts, Nestorian texts, Priscillianist texts, Gnostic and Manichean texts, books of both Judaic and „Christian‟ apocrypha. In one instance, the Book of Cerne, a prayer is found ultimately deriving from a work in the corpus found at Nag Hammadi.” (Messianic Legacy, p. 124) To fabricate a case that Bede translated the Greek New Testament into Saxon, the vernacular language of his day, Riplinger did the usual “cut and paste” trick of stringing together snippets from numerous sources: “Wycliffe, in the 1300s, states in his Bible‟s preface that Bede had translated the Bible into Saxon... Bede‟s Saxon Bible is attested to by Dore who brings this fact to his readers in the 1800s affirming „he translated the Bible into the vulgar tongue of his day...‟ (Dore, 1st ed. p. 4) The 1611 KJV translators of the scriptures, note that Bede „turned a great part of them into Saxon‟ (“The Translators to the Reader‟ as cited in Dore, 2nd ed. p. 364). Others, like Skeat,...mention only a part of Bede‟s work, noting that Bede made a 'translation of the Gospel of St. John...‟ Bosworth admits this proves „the three preceding [Matthew, Mark, and Luke] had most likely been previously translated... ‟ (The Gospels: Gothic, Anglo-Saxon, Wycliffe, and Tyndale Versions...) „The Anglo-Saxon Gospels were translated in 735 or before...‟ (Bosworth, p. ii) Bede had access to the Greek text of the book of Acts and perhaps the rest of the Greek New Testament because there were many „well equipped libraries in England by c. 700 or a little later‟ (Blair, pp. 314, 315, 324)” (Awe, pp. 693-694) In the first place, „well equipped libraries in England by c. 700 or a little later‟ is a truncated portion of a sentence which goes on to state that historians do not know what these libraries contained. The paragraph in
244
Blair‟s book from which this excerpt was severed also mentions that Bede “made great use of the writings of the Christian Fathers, especially Ambrose, Jerome, Augustine and Gregory”: “Most of Bede‟s library was undoubtedly composed of theological works. He was of course deeply familiar with the Bible and he made great use of the writings of the Christian Fathers, especially Ambrose, Jerome, Augustine and Gregory. It is though that there was a Greek text of the Acts at Jarrow in Bede‟s time,1 but it is doubtful whether the other parts of the Greek New Testament were there. Bede occasionally used Greek authorities, but he seems only to have done so in Latin translations. Greek was certainly taught in the school established in Canterbury by Theodore and Hadrian, and according to Bede there were some pupils of the school still alive in his own day who were as familiar with both Latin and Greek as they were with their own tongue. There were certainly other well equipped libraries in England by c. 700 or a little later, but we have not the means of learning in such detail what books they contained...‟ 1 It closely resembled MS Cod. Laudianus Graecus 35” The fact is that the Bible which Bede translated into the Saxon language was Jerome‟s Latin Vulgate. In her essay “Bede, the Bible, and the North,” Benedicta Ward, Reader in the History of Christian Spirituality in the University of Oxford, described Venerable Bede as a thoroughgoing Roman Catholic: “Bede received the full tradition of the teaching of the Fathers on Scripture and he made it flower in his own life in three ways: firstly, by his work on the text of the Scriptures themselves; secondly, by his transmission of the tradition of patristic commentary to the English monks, clergy and people, and thirdly, by the way in which he looked at the early history of the English people as part of the whole work of God in creation and redemption. “There is one book which illustrates all Bede‟s concerns. He was involved in the creation of a remarkable manuscript, a codex of the Scriptures, that is, the Codex Amiatinus, the oldest extant version of Jerome’s Biblia Vulgata, which, apart from its value as a work of supreme scholarship, has a right to be called the most beautiful book in the world... “The Codex Amiatinus is now kept in the Laurentian Library in Florence, a huge book of 1,030 folios (2,060 pages) of calf skin, each made from one calf... The whole book mirrors Bede’s concern for a sound biblical text, a patristic interpretation of it, a focus on Jerusalem, and above all an interest in making the text of the Bible both accurate and useable. This magnificent book was only one of three, all produced in the scriptorium at Wearmouth/Jarrow under Ceolfrith and in Bede‟s lifetime. In his History of the Abbots, Bede described the making of three such codexes: “He (Ceolfrith) added three copies of the new translation of the Bible to the one copy of the old translation which he had brought back from Rome. One of these he took with him when he went back to Rome in his old age and the other two he bequeathed to his monasteries. ... “Ceolfrith never reached Rome; he died at Langres and the codex disappeared. It lay in the library of the monastery at Amati, where it was known as the earliest codex of Jerome’s Latin Vulgate...” (“Bede, the Bible, and the North,” What is It That the Scriptures Say?, pp. 158, 162) The 1611 Translators allowed that Bede “turned” portions of the Scriptures into Saxon. However, this does not mean that Bede translated from the Byzantine manuscripts, for the Translators included Ulfilas, who translated from Arian texts, and Jerome, who translated the New Testament from the corrupt stream of Alexandrian manuscripts.
245
THE TRANSLATING OF THE SCRIPTURE INTO THE VULGAR TONGUES “...The same Jerome elsewhere affirmeth that he, the time was, had set forth the translation of the Seventy suae linguae hominibus, i.e., for his countrymen of Dalmatia [S. Jerome. Sophronio.] Which words not only Erasmus doth understand to purport, that S. Jerome translated the Scripture into the Dalmatian tongue, but also Sixtus Senensis [Six. Sen. lib 4], and Alphonsus a` Castro [Alphon. lb 1 ca 23] (that we speak of no more) men not to be excepted against by them of Rome, do ingenuously confess as much. So, S. Chrysostom that lived in S. Jerome’s time, giveth evidence with him: „The doctrine of S. John [saith he] did not in such sort [as the Philosophers’ did] vanish away: but the Syrians, Egyptians, Indians, Persians, Ethiopians, and infinite other nations being barbarous people translated it into their [mother] tongue, and have learned to be [true] Philosophers,’ he meaneth Christians. [S. Chrysost. in Johan. cap.I. hom.I.] To this may be added Theodoret, as next unto him, both for antiquity, and for learning. His words be these, "Every Country that is under the Sun, is full of these words (of the Apostles and Prophets) and the Hebrew tongue [he meaneth the Scriptures in the Hebrew tongue] is turned not only into the Language of the Grecians, but also of the Romans, and Egyptians, and Persians, and Indians, and Armenians, and Scythians, and Sauromatians, and briefly into all the Languages that any Nation useth. [Theodor. 5. Therapeut.] So he. In like manner, Ulfilas is reported by Paulus Diaconus and Isidor (and before them by Sozomen) to have translated the Scriptures into the Gothic tongue: [P. Diacon. li. 12.] John Bishop of Sevil by Vasseus, to have turned them into Arabic, about the year of our Lord 717; [Vaseus in Chron. Hispan.] Bede by Cistertiensis, to have turned a great part of them into Saxon: Efnard by Trithemius, to have abridged the French Psalter, as Bede had done the Hebrew, about the year 800: King Alfred by the said Cistertiensis, to have turned the Psalter into Saxon: [Polydor. Virg. 5 histor.]” (“The Translators to the Reader”)
Chapter 20 of In Awe of Thy Word presents many charts which demonstrate the agreement between the Anglo-Saxon translation and the King James Version. As previously noted, in Riplinger‟s charts, the Anglo-Saxon translation need not follow the Greek Textus Receptus, but only the KJV. For example, charts for Mark 10:30, Matt. 28:20 and Luke 1:70 dispense with the Textus Receptus reading which, in these verses, is the Greek word “aeon”, which means “age.” As per usual, the corruption started with the Wycliffe translation: A new earth or a new age? “...and in the world to come eternal life.” Mark 10:30 etc. ANGLO-SAXON pre-A.D. 700 worulde world WYCLIFFE 1389 worlde TYNDALE 1526-1534 world GENEVA 1560-1599 BISHOPS' 1568 worlde world KJV age NIV, TNIV, NASB age NKJV age Catholic Version See errors in HCSB, ESV, NRSV, RSV, NCV, etc.
246
NOTES 1. Gail Riplinger‟s source for her citations of Peter Hunter Blair is the 1996 edition of Blair‟s Anglo-Saxon England (NY: Barnes & Noble, 1996 ed., p. 119, originally published by Cambridge University Press.) Cambridge University Press published Peter Hunter Blair‟s Introduction to Anglo-Saxon England in three editions, 1956, 1977 and 2003. Blair edited some of the books in a series titled Anglo-Saxon England which was also published by Cambridge University Press in various years. The third edition Blair‟s Introduction to Anglo-Saxon England which we have cited is the text of the second edition written five years before the author‟s death: “Peter Hunter Blair, Emeritus Reader in Anglo-Saxon History, in the University of Cambridge, and Life Fellow of Emmanuel College, died on 9 September 1982, five years after the publication of the second edition of An Introduction to Anglo-Saxon England... The text here remains that of the second edition (1977)...” (Introduction to Anglo-Saxon England) CHAPTER XVIII THE WYCLIFFE BIBLE CONTEND FOR THE FAITH: THE TEXTUS RECEPTUS http://watch-unto-prayer.org/TR-0-intro.html WATCH UNTO PRAYER taho@watch-unto-prayer.org http://watch-unto-prayer.org
247
CHAPTER XVIII THE WYCLIFFE TRANSLATION According to Gail Riplinger, the Wycliffe Bible was not translated from the Latin Vulgate and the title page which states ―Made from the Latin Vulgate‖ was added 500 years after its original publication: ―The verse comparison charts in this book dispel the myth that Wycliffe and his followers used a corrupt Bible translated from Jerome‘s Latin Vulgate… ―The myth that the Wycliffe bible came from this ‗Latin Vulgate‘ arose from the misleading statement – ‗made from the Latin Vulgate‘ – added to the frontice page of an 1850 printed edition of Wycliffe‘s Bible, edited by Frederic Madden and Josiah Forshall.‖ (Awe, pp. 788-790) A chapter on ―Wycliffe‘s Views‖ features spliced excerpts from the writings of John Wycliffe (13241384) and others as the basis for many false assertions to support her false premise that Wycliffe and his Lollard followers ―polished‖ English scriptures which were already in popular use and that were ―in complete agreement with the Traditional Text‖: ―The English scriptures had been passed down through the hands and hearts of faithful men. He and his associates merely ‗polished‘ the spelling and idiom and Anglicized the word order of the scriptures already existing in his time (i.e. Bede, Alfred, Athelstane, Richard Rolle et al.). In the last half of the 1300s, others, like John Trevisa, produced an English edition of ‗the entire Bible,‖ through the patronage of Lord Thomas de Berkeley… ―Wycliffe‘s Epistles, Acts, and Revelation were ‗polished‘ versions of already existing texts… ―There is no doubt that Wycliffe was involved with ‗polishing‘ the English Bible… ―…actual examination of the 200 or so extant editions makes it evident that the polishing was progressive, with mixed texts seen in numerous editions.‖ (Awe, p. 774, 776-7) The Translators of the 1611 King James Bible do not mention John Wycliffe or the Lollards as translators but simply state that John Trevisa (1342-1402) ―translated‖ the Scripture into English during the reign of King Richard II. ―THE TRANSLATING OF THE SCRIPTURE INTO THE VULGAR TONGUES… ―…Much about that time, even in our King Richard the second‘s days, John Trevisa translated them into English, and many English Bibles in written hand are yet to be seen with divers, translated as it is very probable, in that age.‖ (―The Translators to the Reader‖) Richard II was the king of England from 1377 to 1399 and the royal patron of John Wycliffe and his Lollard reform movement, so it seems quite extraordinary that the 1611 Translators‘ made no mention of John Wycliffe as a translator of the English Bible ―even in our King Richard the second‘s days,‖ or as the scholar who, as Gail avers, ―polished‖ and ―Anglicized‖ the English scriptures already in existence. The reason for this omission is that the manuscript evidence shows that a team of five Oxford scholars who were inspired by Wycliffe ―translated‖ the Latin Vulgate into English. Margaret Deansely, as Emeritus Professor of History of the University of London and the author of The Lollard Bible and Other Medieval Biblical Versions, elaborated on the internal evidence of the Wycliffite-Lollard Bible in a 1951 lecture:
248
―‗Lollard Bible‘ seems a fair name to apply to the Wycliffite translations, because manuscript evidence forbids us to believe that they were the work of Master John Wycliffe personally, and shows that they were the work of his followers. ‗Lollard Bible‘ does not imply that the English text itself had any partisan verbal translations, quite the contrary: it was a very good English translation of the Vulgate. Between the years 1380 and 1384 then, a notable academic feat was accomplished at Oxford, at the inspiration of Master John Wycliffe, and by the hands apparently of five of his followers. We have the original manuscript of the first part of the Wycliffite translation, down to Baruch iii. 20; written in five hands: and an early copy attributing it to Nicholas Hereford. The translators began at the beginning of Genesis and worked their way through the whole Bible, which to them, of course, included the Apocrypha. This complete translation of the [p.4] Vulgate was a great undertaking and no one had done such a thing before in England… ―…Nicholas Hereford, his most prominent follower, was responsible for one complete translation... And...the rights of authorship were not at the time associated with the making of a translation, and the name of any translator was not usually given in the manuscript. An explicit will run ‗Here endeth the gospels in Romance‘ (i.e., Old French): ‗Here endeth Vegetius‘ Art of War in English‘, without any mention of a translator‘s name, more often than not.‖ (―The Significance of the Lollard Bible‖) Evidence that Nicholas Hereford and other Lollards ―translated‖ the Wycliffe bible is available in Malcolm Lambert‘s Medieval Heresy which presents an illustration of a page from the Book of Baruch in the Early Version of the Lollard Bible as photographed by the Cambridge University Library. The caption states: ―‗The Lollard Bible‘ the Early Version breaking off at Baruch 3, 20 (cf. p. 234, n. 3 with the note of the break, ‗Here endeth…‘ 7 lines from the bottom in the right hand column in the illustration.)‖ Historian Lambert explained the break off as the point where the translation of Nicholas Hereford ended and translation by others began: ―Hereford, a man of academic caliber, an Oxford master of arts, was believed by Knighton to have been the first leader of Lollardy, and there is evidence that he played a significant part in the writing of the first Bible.3 … ―fn. Certain mss. Of EV break off at Baruch 3.20; Bodl. Ms. Douce 369, part 1 gives Hereford as translator to that point; Cambr. Univ. Lib. Ms Ec. i.10 (overleaf) notes, ‗Here endeth the translacioun of Her. And now bigynneth the translacioun of J. and of othere men‘ (spelling slightly modernized)…‖ (Medieval Heresy, pp. 234-35) There were two translations of the so-called Wycliffe Bible, the first being the Early Version of 1384, a very literal translation of the Latin Vulgate which preserved the Latin construction and even the word order of the Vulgate. Malcolm Lambert wrote of this translation: ―The first translation…was a painfully literal crib of the Vulgate, with past participles rendered direct into English and a Latin word-order imposed rigidly on the English sentence. It was not intended for indiscriminate dissemination; one purpose may well have been to aid preachers who, basing themselves on the Scriptural text on Wycliffite principles, would need to read out translations in their sermons. A translation of the whole Bible would give them a work of reference. Elements of Latin they might already possess; a crib to the Vulgate would be an ideal aid for them. More ambitiously, the translation could serve in a lord‘s household, where the newly literate upper-class might read the text and expound it to their subordinates. The literalness of the version expressed a continuing reverence for the Vulgate; if the written Scripture expressed God‘s Word, then it might be dangerous to make free with the word sequence. Moreover, a rigid
249
following of the Latin word-order facilitated the insertion of glosses phrase by phrase…‖ (Medieval Heresies, p. 231) The Later Version (c. 1394) was not a word-for-word, but ―meaning for meaning‖ or dynamic equivalence translation of the Vulgate. Although modern scholars attribute the Later Version to John Purvey, an Oxford scholar and follower of Wycliffe, the evidence of Purvey being the translator is weak. According to H.J. Wilkins, a former Vicar of Westbury on Trim, Wycliffe‘s church in Bristol, the Later Version of the misnamed Wycliffe Bible was translated by another of Wycliffe‘s followers, John Trevisa, as the 1611 Translators stated in their Preface. In his 1915 book, John De Trevisa: His Life & Work, Wilkins documented other historical records which credited Trevisa with the translation: ―Caxton in his Prohemye to his edition [printed in July 1482] of Trevisa‘s translation [1387] of Higden‘s [c. 1299-1363] Polychronicon, asserts: ‗Ranulphus monke of Chestre‘ to be the original author of the Polychronicon and that Trevisa ‗atte request of lord barkley translated this sayd book | the byble and bartylmew de proprietaribus reru out of latyn into englissh|.‘ ―From Caxton s time till the beginning of the nineteenth century, it was generally accepted by most writers, including Bale [1495-1563], Pits [1663-1735], Usher [15801656], Carew [1602], Fuller [1608-1661], that Trevisa did translate the Bible. ―Bale [1495 - 1563]1 delivers the learned labours of Trevisa more largely thus: ‗John Trevisa, a gentleman of Cornwall, was a priest and vicar of Berkeley, a man most famous for learning and eloquence, who especially above others laboured to adorn the English tongue, and to remove the old harshness thereof, whereby he became very dear unto many nobles of the land, but especially to his excellent Lord Thomas of Berkeley, and amongst other studies, which much delight the minds of men, histories and antiquities best pleased him, as from whence the best councils and examples of life might be drawn ; wherein he studiously laboured, he shewed himself harsh and biting towards monks and their professions, taxing their pride, riot and hypocrisy: as he saith, We read that Christ instituted Apostles and Priests, but never ordained Monks and begging Friars, with many other like taunts. Into the English tongue he likewise, at the request of the said Lord, translated the whole Bible, as well as the Old and the New Testament.‘ Balaus de Scriptor. Angl. Centur. 7, No. 18.‖ (John De Trevisa: His Life & Work, 1915, pp. 101102) 1
Given that John Trevisa translated the Later Version, why was the Bible named after John Wycliffe; and why have John Trevisa, as well as Nicholas Hereford, been largely ignored by modern historians? The answer seems to lie in the fact that both Trevisa and Hereford became disaffected with John Wycliffe and his ultra-radical and even violent Lollard movement, of which more will be said later. Both translators separated from the Lollard movement and Malcolm Lambert adds that Hereford ―not only recanted, but spoke against it.‖ (Medieval Heresies, p. 235) To address the questions above, H.J. Wilkins expressed the following opinion, which suggests that the Lollards hijacked the translations of Hereford and Trevisa and named them after Wycliffe in order to associate the translation with their radical movement. ―When did Trevisa break away from his support of Wycliffe? The answer may probably be thus given: At the time Wycliffe fell into heresy, generally supposed to be shortly after he proceeded to the degree of Doctor of Divinity at Oxford. ―Therein probably lurks the solution of the question as to the lack of knowledge of, or at any rate as to the failure to mention Trevisa‘s translation of the Bible by Wycliffe or Hereford.
250
―It is also quite certain that so devout and liberal a supporter of the Church as proved by his benefactions recorded by Smyth as Thomas, Lord Berkeley, would be little inclined to aid in the unauthorized circulation of the Scriptures, and especially considering the purpose they were, in part, put to: although he was glad to have a translation for pious use within Berkeley Castle. ―Therein, too, lies probably the answer to Dibdin s question (p. 104): ‗If he [Caxton] saw such a translation [by Trevisa], why did he not think it at least as deserving of publication as the Polychronicon?‘ The unauthorized publication of the Scriptures at that time was fraught with great danger, arising, not from under-valuation of the Scriptures for portions of them were undoubtedly in circulation in the vernacular from the earliest times but from the ‗practical politics‘ of those times: and Caxton (even if Trevisa and his Patron had been willing, which admits of very little doubt was not the case, for him to print Trevisa‘s translation) would have no wish to become involved in the hostility and odium shown to the heretical Wycliffe and his followers.‖ (John De Trevisa: His Life & Work, 1915, pp. 110-11) In her largely fictional book, In Awe of Thy Word, Gail Riplinger identified Nicholas Hereford as mere ―editor of part of the Old Testament,‖ whereas the manuscript evidence confirms ―the translation of the…greater part of the Old Testament being the work of Nicholas Hereford‖ (ISBE) as documented above. Riplinger also claims that there were not two editions of the Wycliffe translation, but only one, and that no Later Version was undertaken. Having suppressed important manuscript evidence that Oxford scholars other than Wycliffe in fact did ―translate‖ the Bible credited to Wycliffe, Gail Riplinger based her deceptive history of the translation on undocumented statements found in current books whose common agenda seems to be historical revisionism. On this foundation of sand, Riplinger argued that Wycliffe‘s name and the date of publication were expunged from all Wycliffe bibles due to widespread fear of persecution. This fabrication allows Riplinger to promote a fictitious history of the translation: ―Because of such ordinances, many Bible owners ‗erased his name from their pages out of fear‘ (Bobrick, p. 69) Dates on Bibles were omitted or removed because it was illegal to have a Bible with Wycliffe‘s name on it or one written with a date that might imply Wycliffe‘s involvement. His earliest editions are given dates between 1380 and 1384; the later editions are given dates between 1388 and 1395. These, however, may not be entirely accurate. Wycliffe‘s Bible evolved between 1380 and 1395. Some writers have tried to assign the changes to two separate ‗events,‘ but actual examination of the 200 or so extant editions makes it evident that polishing was progressive, with mixed texts seen in numerous editions. This somewhat thwarts the theory that John Purvey, Wycliffe‘s secretary, did the entire second edition after Wycliffe‘s death (see De Hamel or The Cambridge History of the Bible).‖ (In Awe of Thy Word, pp. 776-77) The first book cited as evidence for Gail‘s revised history of the Wycliffe bible was Benson Bobrick‘s Wide as the Waters: The Story of the English Bible and the Revolution It Inspired. Bobrick, who treats the English Bible as an instrument of political revolution, is also the author of Angel in the Whirlwhind and other books which glorify ―revolution‖— as if the Bible instructs Christians to overthrow secular governments. The very opposite is true for the Bible condemns those who ―resist the higher powers‖ and commands Christians to obey their secular rulers: ―Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. For
251
rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.‖ (Romans 13:1-5) In his first Inaugural speech, Pres. George W. Bush alluded to Benson Bobrick‘s Angel in the Whirlwhind as the ―Angel‖ who directed the ―Storm‖ of the American Revolution—a revolution that is not over, said Bush, but continues under his administration: ―After the Declaration of Independence was signed, Virginia statesman John Page wrote to Thomas Jefferson: ‗We know the Race is not to the swift nor the Battle to the Strong. Do you not think an Angel rides in the Whirlwind and directs this Storm?‘…This work continues. The story goes on. And an angel still rides in the whirlwind and directs this storm.‖ (Bush Inaugural Speech) Benson Bobrick also wrote The Fated Sky: Astrology in History which promotes astrology, another evil condemned by God. ―MADE FROM THE LATIN VULGATE‖ Louis Israel Newman noted in Jewish Influence on Christian Reform Movements that the Lollard translators did not have access to the Hebrew manuscripts and therefore made no corrections within the text, but rather placed glosses in marginal notes. Moreover, they used the (pagan) commentaries of Jewish rabbis (who were Kabbalists): ―…Nicholas of Lyra and Paul of Burgos, two great Hebraists of the fourteenth and fifteenth [centuries], are said to have visited England during their lifetime… The several translations of the Bible into English which appeared during this period [the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries] contributed to the spread of Hebrew scholarship. To a discussion of them we may for a moment give our attention, viewing them particularly in the light of their dependence on the Hebrew original, the aid of Jewish teachers, and their employment of Rabbinical commentaries. ―…John Wycliffe…did not seem, with his collaborators, Hereford and Purvey, to have had access to the Hebrew original of the Old Testament. The translators were aware that the Vulgate did not faithfully represent the Hebrew, but this information was gathered secondhand, chiefly from the commentaries of Nicholas of Lyra. They did not therefore venture to correct the errors, but contented themselves with notes in the margin; Purvey, the curate, an intimate and friend of Wycliffe and a leader of the Lollards, remarked in the Prologue to the work which he completed (about 1388-90), after Wycliffe‘s death: ―‗Where the Ebrue, by witness of Jerome, or Lire and other expositouris discourdeth from our Latyn biblis, I have set in the margin, bi maner of a glose, what the Ebrue hath, and how it is understood in the same place; and I dide this most in the Sauter, that of all oure bokis discourdith most fro Ebru.‘‖ (NY: Columbia University Press, 1925, p. 92) That neither Wycliffe nor his Lollard colleagues had access to the Hebrew manuscripts is generally understood by Bible scholars. Notwithstanding the irrefutable fact that the translation was of the Latin
252
Vulgate, Chapter 22 of In Awe of Thy Word, titled ―Wycliffe‘s Views,‖ claims that John Wycliffe had the Hebrew Old Testament manuscripts which, along with the Greek exemplar, he used to ―correct the Vulgate‖, which brought his ―translation‖ into ―complete agreement with the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts‖: ―The myth that Wycliffe had no access to the original languages is discounted by Wycliffe himself who said that he had access to Hebrew Old Testament manuscripts which were in complete agreement with the Old Latin text he followed. He adds, ―[T]he Jews were dispersed among the nations, taking with them their Hebrew manuscripts. Now this happened…that we might have recourse to their manuscripts as witnesses to the fact that there is no difference in the sense found in our Latin books and those Hebrew ones.‘ (Truth, p. 157) ―He also makes reference to manuscripts being ‗corrected according to the Greek exemplar.‘ Once Jerome‘s text was corrected, there was ‗complete agreement of his translation [Wycliffe‘s] with the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts.‘ (Truth, pp. 143, 157 et al.)‖ (Awe, p. 788) For the record, here is what Wycliffe really wrote on page 157 of his book, On the Truth of Holy Scripture: ―Regarding Jerome‘s translation, it seems fitting that it be approved as much by the sanctity of his life, which Augustine recounts in his letter On the Holiness of Jerome, as by his expertise in the Hebrew language and the complete agreement of his translation with the Hebrew and the Greek manuscripts.‖ (On the Truth of Holy Scripture) And so, according to John Wycliffe, it was Jerome‘s Vulgate that was in ―complete agreement with the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts.‖ However, Gail Riplinger inserted ―[Wycliffe‘s]‖ into this partial citation to make it mean something else entirely, namely, that Wycliffe’s translation was in complete agreement with the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts after he corrected Jerome‘s Vulgate! In his very Catholic book, Wycliffe continued to praise ―St. Jerome‖: ―For as he recounts in the prologue to Chronicles, the New Testament cites many Scriptures from the Old which are lacking in the Septuagint translation, inasmuch as they hid many mysteries of their faith from the Egyptian infidels. As such, it is no wonder if St. Jerome suffered the reproach of those filled with envy. Yet his efforts in toiling for the sake of the Church‘s edification only brought him glory, as Augustine testifies, though he too had once piously grappled with him in scholarly matters.‖ Gail‘s quotation from Wycliffe‘s book, On the Truth of Holy Scripture, is from a translation by Ian Christopher Levy who is Assistant Professor of Theology at the Episcopal Lexington Theological Seminary. Levy is a life-long member of the Episcopal Church and also a member of the Lollard Society. 1. Gail distanced herself from this translator because his Advisory Board was comprised of Roman Catholic priests. To shield herself from criticism (her carefully selected sentences and fragments crafted to say what Gail wanted them to say, not what Wycliffe said), the following disclaimer is made: ―Levy‘s translation…misrepresents Wycliffe‘s words on page after page. It omits entirely some 800 pages of the original which defy distortion. Only those snippets of Levy‘s translation which are entirely accurate are cited in this book.‖ (Awe, p. 794)
253
If ―Levy‘s translation misrepresents Wycliffe‘s words on page after page,‖ why did Gail use it? How did she separate truth from error in this ―highly distorted‖ translation? It seems that only those words and phrases which could be lifted out of context and used to support her fraudulent case were deemed ―entirely accurate,‖ while those that contradicted her case were ―distortions.‖ Obviously Gail must distance herself from Levy‘s translation because it presents a far different picture of John Wycliffe than the rabidly anti-Catholic reformer she portrays. Throughout On the Truth of Holy Scripture, written in 1378, only six years before his death, it is apparent that John Wycliffe was a devoted student of St. Augustine of Hippo (354-430 A.D.) whose principles ―on the truth of Holy Scripture‖ informed Wycliffe‘s views and were the basis of his book. In fact, De Verite Sacrae Scripturae is virtually a defense of St. Augustine‘s theological writings. Also evident is Wycliffe‘s great admiration of St. Jerome. At the outset of his work Wycliffe declared his veneration of these and other Catholic theologians: ―We ought to accept the statements of Augustine on these three counts especially: first, due to the testimony of Scripture; second, the strength of his reason; and third his reputation for sanctity attested by the church. ―(38) […] With one voice the Church sings his praises. For here in St. Augustine God has provided his Church with a catholic doctor to elucidate the mysteries of Holy Scripture… ―(39) […] In every case I am in conformity with both the logic and the metaphysics of Augustine, which are all the more excellent for belonging to Holy Scripture, the very first rule of all human perfection. Hence, it surely seems to me the height of presumption and blind pride for children such as ourselves, ignorant as we are in logic and metaphysics, to condemn or repudiate the knowledge of such a saint without affirmative evidence. ―The same applies, to a certain extent, when considering Ambrose, Jerome, Gregory, Bernard and other similar saints, especially in matters of logic and the meaning of Scripture. For we ought to listen to those who so assiduously beseeched God that they might come to comprehend his sense.‖ (On the Truth of Holy Scripture, pp. 62-3) A Catholic priest to the end of his life, Wycliffe repeatedly referred to the ―Catholic faith,‖ ―Holy Catholic Church‖ and ―Holy Mother Church‖ as well as to the pope as the ―Vicar of Christ‖ and ―Vicar of St. Peter‖ in the most reverent terms. Wycliffe believed that ―every decretal letter is the creation of some pope, the Vicar of Christ together with his subordinates…for the sake of correcting the errors which might arise in the Church.‖ (On the Truth, p. 209) He often referenced the works of Pope Gregory the Great, calling him ―St. Gregory‖ and ―the Vicar of Christ.‖ Throughout On The Truth of Holy Scripture, Wycliffe repeatedly referred to the writings of the ―Four Holy Doctors‖ of the Church: St. Augustine, St. Ambrose, St. Jerome and St. Gregory. (Truth, pp. 206, 221, 247-8 et al) Wycliffe also believed in Catholic doctrines such as ―the repose of those asleep in purgatory‖ (Truth, p. 323), ―mortal sin‖ (Ibid. p. 357), the ―sacerdotal offices‖ of prelates and priests (p. 293), most ―canon law‖ is ―divine law‖ (p. 304) and ―there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church.‖ (p. 164) Wycliffe never repudiated the Catholic Church per se or its doctrines, except for transubstantiation which he believed to be ‗consubstantiation,‘ i.e. the ―Real Presence of Christ‖ without the mediation of a priest. The fact is that Wycliffe was ever a devout Catholic: ―Hence, it is not sufficient for someone to believe every truth in general, though he must not disbelieve any article of the Catholic faith in the particular, but should instead believe in the first article. For those other adults, just as some Christians, to whom God has given inspiration and the light of understanding for this purpose, it is appropriate for them to believe explicitly in God at the very least, and together with this, to believe in the Holy
254
Catholic Church, and thirdly, that they would hope they were members of the Church. Yet if, along with these gifts, a person dies before acquiring the three theological virtues, these articles of faith, and all the others, then he will not find salvation in the ark. (244)‖ (On the Truth of Holy Scripture, p. 164) Wycliffe‘s career as a reformer consisted of a steady stream of criticism of ecclesiastical benefices (stipends) and clerical negligence, yet throughout this period Wycliffe himself was provided multiple benefices by the Catholic popes. In his book, Was John Wycliffe a Negligent Pluralist?, H.J. Wilkins listed Wycliffe‘s clerical positions in various Catholic churches: ―This outstanding fact is clear : that Wycliffe was a pluralist. His record is : ―1361. Incumbent of Fillingham .... Prebendary of Aust . 1362 ―[1365. Warden of Canterbury Hall, Oxford] ―1368. Incumbent of Ludgershall .... Held it undoubtedly till 1375 ―1374. Rector of Lutterworth \ And most probably till ―1384. Died at Lutterworth / his death in 1384‖ (p. 40) Having received these clerical endowments and prebends (administrative posts), Wycliffe was found to be negligent in fulfilling his duties to these churches. From the Vatican Archives: ―1362, 24 November, Avignon. Petitions to Urban V from the University of Oxford for provision to be made to John de Wyclif, priest, M.A., of a canonry and prebend and a dignity of York, notwithstanding that he holds the church of Filingham, 1 value thirty marks. Granted in Westbury, 2 Reg. Supplic. (Urban V), xxxiv, f. 207.‖ (Was John Wycliffe a Negligent Pluralist?, H.J. Wilkins, D.D., p. 4) ―1373; 26 December, Avignon. Grant by Gregory XI to John Wiclif, M.A., S.T.M., rector of Lugdgersale, 3 that he may retain his canonry and prebend of [Aust in] Westburi, even after he obtains possession of a canonry and prebend of Lincoln ; notwithstanding the clause to the contrary in the provision lately made by the pope of a canonry of Lincoln, with expectation of a prebend, soon after which provision he became licenciate and then master of theology. Reg. Vat. (Greg. XI) cclxxxiv, f….‖ (Was John Wycliffe a Negligent Pluralist?, H.J. Wilkins, D.D., p. 5) ―Therefore, on the 6th November, 1375, Wycliffe obtained from the King a ratification of the prebend of Aust, to which he had been ‗provided‘ by the Pope in December, 1362, and to which he was personally inducted by the Dean of Westbury, and which prebend the Pope gave him permission to retain in 1373… ―From the 6th November, 1375 (the day on which Wycliffe secured the ratification of his prebend of Aust) till the 3ist December, 1384 (the day of Wycliffe‘s death), there are but two recorded changes among the five canons and prebendaries of Westbury, and those are in connection with the prebend of Hembury viz. Hulton succeeded Hunt on 15 November, 1375 [Reg: Wakefield, f. 2], and Baddeby succeeds Hunt on 22 June, 1380 [ibid., f. 2id].‖ (Was John Wycliffe a Negligent Pluralist?, H.J. Wilkins, D.D., p. 37) Rev. H.J. Wilkins properly noted Wycliffe‘s double standard in accepting a plurality of churches with endowments during the years he was loudly condemning clerical endowments: ―Men can only be judged fairly by the standard of their own times; but it is the fact that Wycliffe denounced abuses, that make so many anxious to clear his fair fame of the charge of pluralism. Waddington wrote: Wycliffe ‗objected to the possession of any fixed
255
property by the clergy and maintained‘ [but erroneously] ‗that the ecclesiastical endowments were in their origin, eleemosynary and that they remained at the disposal of the secular government‘... yet ‗Wyclif held the Divinity Professorship at Oxford, a prebendal stall, and the Rectory of Lutterworth. He thought it was excusable, no doubt, to conform to the system, which he found established, and his enemies at the time thought it no crime in him that he did so; yet he would have stood higher with posterity had he disdained the plausible excuse and placed the unequivocal seal of private disinterestedness and generosity upon his public principles.‖ (Was John Wycliffe a Negligent Pluralist?, H.J. Wilkins, D.D., pp. 49-50) Returning to the Bible named after John Wycliffe, Gail edited portions of the Prologue to the Later Version, which was not written by Wycliffe (who was by then deceased), which she then presented as ―evidence‖ that Wycliffe rejected the Latin Vulgate in preference for the Old Latin. Gail wrote: ―The true original Prologue to the ‗Wycliffe Bible‘ warns of such corrupt Latin bibles, which themselves needed correction and were not used by true Christians. ―‗…he shall find full many bibles in Latin full false, if he look many, namely new; and the common Latin bible has more need to be corrected, as many as I have seen in my life, than the English bible late translated…‘ (Prologue, p. 58) ―Therefore, Wycliffe and his associates relied, not on the Latin as a final authority, but on copies of it, corrected by the Greek, Hebrew, and English. The Prologue adds, ‗…[T]he church readeth not the Psalms by the last translation of Jerome out of Hebrew into Latin, but another translation of other men…‘ ―The Prologue says further that in ‗few‘ places, good Bibles read as the ‗originals of Jerome.‘ ‗Jerome was not so holy as the apostles and evangelists…neither had he so high gifts of the Holy Ghost as they had; and much more the LXX translators were not so holy as Moses and the prophets…[There were] heretics, that did away many mysteries of Jesus Christ by guileful [lying] translations…‘ (Prologue, p. 58)‖ (Awe, p. 789-90) What was actually stated in the Prologue is precisely the opposite of this amalgamation of excerpts, key portions of which were excised by Gail Riplinger. The relevant section of the Prologue is reprinted below followed by an updated version in modern English. The reader will see that the author did not use the singular ―common Latin bible‖ (meaning the Vulgate) but the plural ―common Latin bibles‖ (which would refer to the Old Latin bibles) as those which ―have more need to be corrected.‖ Riplinger also omitted the author‘s high praise of Jerome for his knowledge and holiness, (instead she has Wycliffe naming Jerome one of the ―heretics‖ who produced ―guileful translations‖): ―At the bigynnyng I purposide, with Goddis helpe, to make the sentence as trewe and open in English as it is in Latyn, either more trewe and more open than it is in Latyn; and I preie, for charite and for comoun profyt of cristene soulis, that if ony wiys man fynde ony defaute of the truthe of translacioun, let him sette in the trewe
256
sentence and opin of holi writ, but loke that he examyne truli his Latyn bible, for no doute he shal fynde ful manye biblis in Latyn ful false, if he loke manie, nameli newe; and the comune Latyn biblis han more nede to be correctid, as manie as I haue seen in my lif, than hath the English bible late translatid; and where the Ebru, bi witnesse of Jerom, of Lire, and othere expositouris discordith fro oure Latyn biblis, I haue set in the margyn, bi maner of a glose, what the Ebru hath, and hou it is vndurstondun in sum place; and I dide this most in the Sauter, that of alle oure bokis discordith most fro Ebru; for the chirche redith not the Sauter bi the laste translacioun of Jerom out of Ebru into Latyn, but another translacioun of othere men, that hadden myche lasse kunnyng and holynesse than Jerom hadde; and in ful fewe bokis the chirche redith the translacioun of Jerom, as it mai be preuid bi the propre origynals of Jerom, whiche he gloside… ―…Ferthermore holi chirche appreueth, not oneli the trewe translacioun of meene cristene men, stidefast in cristene feith, but also of open eretikis, that diden awei manie mysteries of Jhesu Crist bi gileful translacioun, as Jerom witnessith in oo prolog on Job, and in the prolog of Daniel.‖ ―At the beginning I resolved, with God's help, to make the meaning as accurate and plain in English as it is in Latin, or more accurate and more plain than the Latin; and I ask, for the sake of love and the common benefit of Christian souls, that if any learned man find any fault in the translation, let him substitute a better interpretation of the Latin himself. But he should first of all see to it that his Latin text is correct, for he will find that many of the Latin copies are often incorrect if he examine many of them, especially the newer ones. The Latin Bibles commonly in use (of which I have examined many) have even more need of correction than the English Bible set forth here. Our Latin Bibles often disagree with the Hebrew of the Old Testament, as one may see from the commentaries of Jerome and Nicolas of Lyra and other expositors. In such places I have made a note in the margin, giving the true sense of the Hebrew, and how it is interpreted by these commentators. This is most necessary in the Psalter, which of all our books discords most from the Hebrew, because the church does not use the Psalter as it was accurately translated from the Hebrew by Jerome, but it uses another translation made by men who had much less knowledge (and holiness) than Jerome… ‖…Furthermore, the church has in the past approved not only the true translations done by humble Christian men who were steadfast in the faith, but also those done by heretics, who by clever translations obscured many mysteries of Christ, as Jerome testifies in his prologues to Job and Daniel.‖ (Prologue) The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia identifies the ―other translation of other men‖ used by the Catholic Church as the Septuagint. ―Jerome was involved in violent quarrels with the clergy, the more so because he was unpopular in higher ecclesiastical quarters; he also had to blame his sharp tongue. The mass of church people, who were suspicious of innovations, naturally preferred the ancient text. When one reads the introductions written by Jerome for the various books, one can guess from his own words into what kind of a whirlwind he sent his version. Trouble even occurred in the churches when the new version was used liturgically… ―Jerome‘s version met with difficulties also among learned circles…. The most frequent charge was the version‘s unlawful innovation, even sacrilege, in daring to degrade the LXX. Augustine expressed what was troubling many: that Jerome, by choosing the Hebrew OT as the basis of the version, cast doubts upon the divine
257
inspiration of the LXX, which had been the accepted Bible of Christendom from the beginning…‖ (ISBE, p. 973) Thus the opposition of the Catholic churches to Jerome‘s translation of the Psalms was due to his rejection, not of the Old Latin, but of the corrupt Septuagint (LXX), which the Catholic Church believed to be ―divinely inspired‖! EPISTLE TO THE LAODICEANS The misnamed Wycliffe translation followed the Vulgate in its inclusion of the Apocrypha. A modern edition of the Wycliffe translation edited by W.R. Cooper is titled The Wycliffe New Testament (1388), an edition in modern spelling. Cooper's edition omits the Apocrypha but includes ―The Epistle of the Laodiceans,‖ a psuedoepigraphical book, that is, a falsely attributed book whose claimed authorship is unfounded but gives it legitimacy. Cooper maintains that this epistle is the letter mentioned by Paul in Colossians 4:16: ―And when this epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the church of the Laodiceans; and that ye likewise read the epistle from Laodicea.‖ ―In…the Lollard Bible…among the disordered books will be seen an interloper in the form of the supposed letter of Paul of the Laodiceans that is common to several copies of the Later Version, but which is entirely unknown in modern translations and versions. The Lollards commonly regarded the Epistle as genuine, even though fully aware that it was omitted from the canon and certainly from some of the Latin manuscripts of their day.‖ (Introduction, Wycliffe New Testament (1388), an edition in modern spelling with an introduction, the original prologues and the Epistle to the Laodiceans, edited by the Tyndale Society by W.R. Cooper, p. xiii) Jerome wrote of the epistles in Lives of Illustrious Men, ―Some read one also to the Laodiceans, but it is rejected by everyone.‖ Jerome was referring to scholars who rejected it because it appeared in no Greek texts. Undeterred by this detail, translators of many Old Latin versions included it. ―The text was almost unanimously considered pseudopigraphal when Biblical canon was decided upon, and does not appear in any Greek copies of the Bible at all, nor is it known in Syriac or other versions. Jerome wrote in the 4th century, ‗it is rejected by everyone.‘ [Jerome, Lives of Illustrious Men, Chap. 5] However, it evidently gained a certain degree of respect. It appeared in over 100 surviving early Latin copies of the Bible.‖ (Wikipedia) In his Commentary on Colossians, J.B. Lightfoot called the Epistle to the Laodiceans ―quite harmless,‖ but is it? The text is obviously not the ―epistle from Laodicea‖ mentioned by Paul in Col. 4:16, but a forged epistle from Paul ―to Laodicea.‖ Furthermore, this counterfeit epistle praises the lukewarm Church which Jesus Christ severely admonished and warned of eternal damnation should the members not repent. Contrast Paul‘s words of praise in the pseudopigraphal Epistle to the Laodiceans with Jesus‘ harsh criticism of this church in the Book of Revelation: ―Paul, an apostle not of men and not through man, but through Jesus Christ, to the brethren who are in Laodicea: Grace to you and peace from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. I thank Christ in all my prayer that you are steadfast in him and persevering in his works, in expectation of the promise for the day of judgment… For it is God who works in you. And do without hesitation what you do…‖ (―Epistle to the Laodiceans‖) ―And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God; I know thy works, that
258
thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth. Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked: I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see. As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.‖ (Revelation 3:14-19) Importantly, the pseudopigraphal Epistle to the Laodicean had no Greek original, but was known only in Latin, specifically the Old Latin translations used by the heretical sects before the Vulgate and the Lollard translation included it. An analysis of the content and transmission of the Epistle of the Laodiceans was written by Glenn Davis, who found the forged epistle in Albigensian, Bohemian and Anglo-Saxon versions: ―Composed perhaps at the close of the 3rd century, by the 4th century Jerome reports that ‗some read the Epistle to the Laodiceans, but it is rejected by everyone‘ (De viris ill. 5). Of all the spurious pieces produced in the early Church, this is one of the most feeble. It is mystifying how it could have commanded so much respect in the Western Church for period of 1000 years. Comprising only 20 verses, the epistle is a pedestrian patchwork of phrases and sentences plagiarized from the genuine Pauline Epistles, particularly Philippians. After the author has expressed his joy at the faith and virtue of the Laodiceans, he warns them against heretics, and exhorts them to remain faithful to Christian doctrines and the Christian pattern of life. The epistle purports to have been written from prison. ―There is no evidence of a Greek text. The epistle appears in more than 100 manuscripts of the Latin Vulgate (including the oldest, the celebrated codex Fuldensis, 546 CE), as well as in manuscripts of early Albigensian, Bohemian, English, and Flemish versions. At the close of the 10th century Aelfric, a monk in Dorset, wrote a treatise in Anglo-Saxon on the Old and New Testaments, in which he states that the apostle Paul wrote 15 Epistles. In his enumeration of them he place Laodiceans after Philemon. About 1165 CE John of Salisbury, writing about the canon to Henry count of Champagne (Epist. 209), acknowledges that ‗it is the common, indeed almost universal, opinion that there are only 14 Epistles of Paul ... But the 15th is that which is written to the church of the Laodiceans‘.‖ (―Development of the Canon of the New Testament‖) W.R. Cooper‘s Wycliffe New Testament (1388) is ―an edition in modern spelling with an introduction, the original prologues and the Epistle to the Laodiceans, edited for the Tyndale Society.‖ One wonder what purpose would be served by publishing a modern spelling of Wycliffe‘s translation. It makes little sense, for anyone interested enough in an old English Bible would prefer the original language and spelling of the text. One explanation for popularizing this modern spelling Wycliffe New Testament would be that the editor and publisher wished to introduce the pseudopigraphal ―Epistle to the Laodiceans‖ to the present Laodicean church which prefers smooth words that improve self-esteem rather than calls to repentance. Such exposure could lead to granting this pseudopigraphical epistle the validity it held among the Gnostic sects, which have been reimaged as the ―true Christians.‖ W.R. Cooper even seems to think the Epistle to the Laodiceans should be given another chance for inclusion in the canon of Scripture. ―At best we can say that it is possible that the letter to the Laodiceans, as preserved in the Wycliffe New Testament and the Latin Vulgate, is a translation, twice removed, of the letter referred to by Paul, and would, if it could be proven, be a most intriguing and valuable document of the apostolic era.‖ (Introduction, Wycliffe New Testament (1388), p. xiv)
259
Interestingly, an ―Epistle to the Laodiceans‖ was contained in the Biblical canon approved by the arch heretic Marcion, whose Manichean teachings were the doctrine of the Paulicians, Bogomils and Cathars, whose Old Latin versions also contained the pseudopigraphal Epistle to the Laodiceans. ―Marcion…restor[ed] the Pauline conception of the gospel, — Paul being, according to Marcion, the only apostle who had rightly understood the new message of salvation as delivered by Christ. Some ideas of Marcion's reappeared with Manichaean developments among the Bulgarian Bogomils of the 10th century and their Cathar heirs of southern France in the 13th century.‖ (Wikipedia) CHAPTER XIX THE LOLLARD MOVEMENT
NOTES 1. The website of the Lollard Society is revealing: the first recommendation on the ―Helpful Websites for Lollard Studies‖ page is the ―The Bogomilism Web Page,‖ a Cathar website which features articles expounding upon the dualistic themes found in John Wycliffe‘s translation. There is also an interesting article on the dualistic parallels between the Bogomil-Cathar heresy and Lollardism. On the ―Bogomilism Web Page,‖ there are many links to Cathar websites, such as: o
o o o o o o
The best site on Internet about Catharism created by Dr Jean Duvernoy jean.duvernoy.free.fr Here are his newest publications and rare Dualistic sources. The University "Bishop Constantin of Preslaw", Shumen, Bulgaria, awarded Mr. Jean Duvernoy, Toulouse, France, with the title Doctor honoris causa MMII for his outstanding scientific researches. Centre d'études cathares "René Nelli" en Carcassone www.cathares.org/cec "Heresis" Revue sémestrielle d'histoire des dissidences médievales, édition du Centre d'études cathares www.cathares.org/heresis/index.html Voyage virtuel en terres cathares http://www.cathares.org/catharisme.html also imaginarium.cathares.org "The Bogomils of Bulgaria and Bosnia (The Early Protestants of the East)" by L.P. Brockett, MD http://www.reformedreader.org/history/brockett/bogomils.htm Bogomil's memorial (Bosnia) www.geocities.com/Athens/Troy/9892/bogomil.html Cathar's sites in English supported by James McDonald: http://www.renneslechateaubooks.info/languedocdualism/ and http://www.cathar.info/dualism.htm
All of these Cathar sites are recommended by the Bogomil-Cathar website, which is recommended by the Lollard Society, whose membership includes Ian Christopher Levy, who translated Wycliffe‘s book, which Gail Riplinger referenced as evidence that the Wycliffe Bible was translated, not from the Vulgate, but from the Hebrew originals which were in ―complete agreement with the Old Latin.‖ Gail Riplinger says, ―Levy‘s translation…misrepresents Wycliffe‘s words on page after page‖ however, Gail herself has ―misrepresented Wycliffe‘s words on page after page‖ in her book, In Awe of Thy Word. CONTEND FOR THE FAITH: THE TEXTUS RECEPTUS http://watch-unto-prayer.org/TR-0-intro.html WATCH UNTO PRAYER taho@watch-unto-prayer.org http://watch-unto-prayer.org
260
CHAPTER XIX THE LOLLARD MOVEMENT The movement led by Wycliffe was known as the ―Lollards,‖ a pejorative term derived from the Latin lolium, which meant ―a wild weed or vetch (often translated as ‗tares‘) which can choke out wheat, as in the parable from Matthew 13:24-30.‖ (The Lollard Society) ―Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field: But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way… The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.‖ (Matt. 13:24-5; 38, 40) Gail Riplinger portrays the Lollards as ―Christian martyrs‖: ―Purvey said that the Catholic practice of ‗…auricular confession, or private penance, is a certain whispering, destroying the liberty of the gospel, to entangle the consciences of men in sin, and draw their souls into hell.‘ For such outspoken views and for their work on the Wycliffe Bible, both Purvey and Nicholas Hereford, editor of part of the Old Testament, were imprisoned and tortured. (Foxe, vol. 3, pp. 287, 286, 289) ―A prison (called Lollard‘s Prison in Lambeth Palace in London) was built to detain Christians. It can still be seen today with the prisoner‘s iron rings next to writing on the wall which reads, ‗Jesus amor meus (Jesus is my love)‘‘ (The Indestructible Book, 1996, p. 80.). Purvey and Hereford were joined there by the ‗street preachers‘ of the day. In 1382, a statute which forbade preaching, was directed at Wycliffe and other Christians.‖ (Awe, pp. 777-8, 791) Recall that the Oxford scholars who translated the Vulgate into English ultimately repudiated Lollardy, a reaction which historian Malcolm Lambert attributed to their mature rejection of the extremist character of the movement: ―A small group of academically trained men—we may call them ‗proto-Lollards‘— mediated the master‘s late, radical ideas to a popular audience. Of these the best known are Nicholas Hereford, Philip Repton, John Aston and John Purvey, Wycliffe‘s secretary in his last years. The first three had been attracted to Wycliffe‘s ideas in Oxford… Repton was an Auston canon; the others were secular clerks. Their position was a little equivocal, for all at one time or another recanted or submitted to ecclesiastical censure, and two (Hereford and Repton) finally abandoned support of Lollardy for ever. …they were men who desired reform, and had been swept away by Wycliffite ideas; counterargument, more mature reflection and, perhaps, realization of the consequences of persistence in heresy detached them from their new beliefs… Hereford…not only recanted, but spoke against Lollardy… Repton…recanted before Hereford, and rose to be abbot of his house and finally bishop of Lincoln where he had to pursue the Lollards… Purvey recanted in 1401… Yet, even so,…he was considerately treated, and put on probation by being given the benefice of West Hythe, conveniently near the archbishop‘s castle at Saltwood…‖ (Medieval Heresies, p. 234)
261
The Lollards appear to have been a politically-motivated landed gentry which exploited the lower classes in order to overthrow the established Church and eventually the monarchy. Lollards were behind the Peasants‘ Revolt of 1381 protesting excessive taxation for ecclesiastical endowments; their violence led to the murder of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Simon Sudbury, who had summoned John Wycliffe to stand trial at Lambeth Palace in 1378. (On the Truth, p. 218) A History of England by Goldwin Smith portrays the Lollard movement and their leader, John Wycliffe, as dominating the political scene of England and mobilizing the masses through Wycliffe‘s preaching that the Church should be poor and subject to the secular authorities, even an arm of the State. ―The spirit of anti-clericalism reached its climax in the teachings of John Wycliffe, born in Yorkshire about 1320… In the interests of the state Wycliffe continued to preach loudly against clerical ownership of property. The civil authority, Wycliffe argued, had the duty and the power to take away the property of all clerics who had betrayed their trust by failing in their duties, abusing their authority, or falling from grace. Many nobles saw an advantage in confiscating church property, particularly if some of it should fall into their hands. John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, gave Wycliffe strong support… ―Wycliffe was convinced that in all temporal matters the king was superior to the clergy… In all his writings Wycliffe exalted the state at the expense of the Church. Kings, he held, came from divine appointment: the church and state would cooperate with each other. Wycliffe foreshadowed Jean Bodin and Thomas Hobbes in his conception of a national church subordinate to a national state. …his writings were essentially aristocratic, in some respects an interesting combination of Plato‘s philosopher king and the judges of the Old Testament.‖ (A History of England, pp. 158-9) The Plantagenet dynasty which ruled England during Wycliffe‘s era was originally the Angevin dynasty of France which had conquered England in 1154. (According to Holy Blood, Holy Grail, ―…the lords of Anjou-Plantagenet family were thus allied to the Merovingian bloodline. And the name of Plantagenet may even have been intended to echo ‗Plant-ard‘ or Plantard.‖ (p. 302; see ―The Merovingian Dynasty‖) King Richard II (Plantagenet) employed leading Lollards as ‗knights of the crown‘ and these Chamber knights were among the principal supporters of John Wycliffe — who led the anticlerical movement which also had its origins in the south of France. The mother of Richard II, Joan Plantagenet (Joan of Kent), was among Wycliffe‘s chief advocates, intervening in his trial at Lambeth and securing his release before he could be formally sentenced. Notwithstanding Wycliffe‘s steady stream of invective against the Catholic clergy, the ―Morning Star of the Reformation‖ was never imprisoned or martyred, but lived in style quite securely and died peacefully in 1384. Attila Bárány described Lollardy as centered in these knights of the court of the Plantagenet dynasty which, it will be seen, was allied with England‘s enemies in France: ―These prominent supporters of Wyclif were a fairly discrete and closely knit group of men, an intimate association under the patronage of King Richard. The nucleus of the Lollards were chamber knights and had been in royal household service for 20-30 years, being thus closely attached to the court for a long time… ―Wyclif found employment and patronage in a wide spectrum of people in the highest political quarters. He was also a protégé of the King‘s mother, the Princess of Wales. Most of the noble and knightly strata, disillusioned with the papacy on political grounds and with the church on moral grounds, were susceptible to Wycliffism – but rather to a vague anticlerical sentiment than to the specific doctrines on the Eucharist, which might explain why they were tolerated in the 1390s and 1400s. In his later years the Duke of Lancaster vehemently rejected Wycliffite doctrines, which, nevertheless, did not keep
262
him from launching assaults on clerical wealth and pretensions. He took Wyclif‘s strictures on the clergy as possessors of goods as a convenient political weapon. Nonetheless, even after Gaunt changed sides, the apostles of heresy continued to enjoy protection in high places. Lollardy remained enormously popular among the lesser nobility and the gentry: at the local level Lollard knights spread and defended Wycliffism. Even in the 1390s, when the court was overtly waging war against heresy, it could not make its policies felt at the local level. ―Richard II, having grown up in a radical religious atmosphere, in the company of leading Lollard heretics – the three main personages among the Lollard chamber knights (Stury, Clanvowe and Clifford) were named executors of the Princess Mother‘s will – must have been sympathetic to these revolutionary issues. This might explain why the King, up to the 1390s, took no disciplinary action against the Lollard ‗knights of the crown‘. Richard was much more than merely lenient towards the prosecution of the Lollards; and he gave no assistance to the ecclesiastical arm in its fight against heresy. Some English historians argue that over and above the tolerant attitude in high circles Lollardy was actually a court-centred movement, with the King being deeply influenced by it at least in the 1380s. The church was left alone in its anti-heretical efforts; the Crown was silent…‖ (―The Crown and the Lollards in Later Medieval England‖) King Richard II was supplanted and executed by Henry IV (1367-1413) in the ―Revolution of 1399‖. Henry IV‘s father was John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, the third son of King Edward III (1312-77) who had reigned over England for 50 years. After the death of Richard II, the House of Plantagenet was replaced by that of Lancaster, which was a branch of the Plantagenets. ―Henry met with the exiled Thomas Arundel, former (and future) Archbishop of Canterbury, who had lost his position because of his involvement with the Lords Appellant, and Henry and Arundel returned to England while Richard was on a military campaign in Ireland… On Arundel‘s advice, Henry passed the De heretico comburendo and was thus the first English king to allow the burning of heretics, mainly to suppress the Lollard movement…‖ (Henry IV of England) Richard‘s mother and Wycliffe‘s patron, Joan of Kent, was burned at the stake as a Unitarian Anabaptist by Henry IV, who issued the writ De heretico comburendo in 1401, allegedly to suppress the Lollard movement. An interesting aspect of De heretico comburendo is that it remained English law for almost 300 years until it was abolished by Parliament during the reign of Charles II, the king who established the Royal Society which had formerly been the Invisible College of the Rosicrucians: ―…William Sawtrey (Sautre)…sometime priest at Lynn, who was convicted of heresy, publicly recanted, was condemned again and finally burned as a relapsed heretic at Smithfield, March 20, 1401, eight days before the passage of the fateful Act De haeretico comburendo, which condemned all convicted heretics to death at the stake and was not abolished until 1677. He was the first in England to suffer death for his religion.‖ (A History of Unitarianism) In Lollardy and the Gentry in the Later Middle Ages, Margaret Aston and Colin Richmond present compelling evidence that William Sawtrey was connected to a Lollard crime syndicate in London which was conspiring overthrow the monarchy. Also that Sawtrey‘s demeanor during his own trial was ―cheerful,‖ as if he had nothing to fear, and that this attitude was typical of the Lollards. Moreover, ―the statute De heretico comburendo has many unusual, even odd, features. Its language, diction, the somewhat confused circumstances of its passing, along with the record of
263
William Sawtrey‘s trial, all suggest that this was not a measured response to a theological problem; it was not the long-planned thank-you of Henry IV to Arundel for effecting the deposition of Richard II, which is sometimes claimed. Indeed, Arundel was to emerge as the scourge of the Lollards only later in his reign.‖ (p. 122) It is frequently alleged that De heretico comburendo was a decree that ―no man hereafter, by his own authority, may translate any text of Scripture into English or any other tongue by way of a book, pamphlet or treatise.‖ However, this prohibition is found nowhere in De haeretico comburendo. To the contrary, the English monarchs who enforced this statute did so sparingly and not only permitted, but encouraged, the translation of Scripture into the English language. The coronation of Henry IV took place on October 13, 1399, which would have been the 92nd anniversary of the purge of the Knights Templar on the Continent. The Hundred Years‘ War between England and France had been underway since 1337. Richard II, however, had maintained peaceful relations with France despite a formal appeal by the lords of the realm. The date of Henry‘s coronation may have been chosen to send a message to the Prieuré de Sion in France: ―…the Lords Appellant. The central tenet of their appeal was continued war with France against Richard‘s policy of peace… In 1397 Richard decided to rid himself of the Lords Appellant who were confining his power, on the pretext of an aristocratic plot. Richard had the Earl of Arundel executed and Warwick exiled, while Gloucester died in captivity. Finally able to exert his autocratic authority over the kingdom, he purged all those he saw as not totally committed to him, fulfilling his own idea of becoming God‘s chosen prince.‖ (Richard II of England) The Lollards plotted to overthrow Henry for some time after he executed Richard II. Sir John Oldcastle (d. 1419), a base character (‗Falstaff‘ in Shakespeare‘s Henry IV I&2) became the Lollard‘s military leader and led the knights in various failed coup d‘etat, after which the Lollards were ―persecuted‖ for their seditious activities: ―1413…Oldcastle now put himself at the head of a wide-spread Lollard conspiracy, which assumed a definite political character. The design was to seize the king and his brothers during a Twelfth-night mumming at Eltham, and perhaps, as was alleged, to establish some sort of commonwealth. Henry, forewarned of their intention, removed to London, and when the Lollards assembled in force in St Giles‘s Fields on January 10 they were easily dispersed…. Oldcastle was no doubt the instigator of the abortive Lollard plots of 1416, and appears to have intrigued with the Scots… His unpopular opinions and early friendship with Henry V created a traditional scandal which long continued…‖ (Sir John Oldcastle) ―Oldcastle escaped from the Tower of London and organized an insurrection, which included an attempted kidnapping of the king. The rebellion failed, and Oldcastle was executed. Oldcastle‘s revolt made Lollardy seem even more threatening to the state, and the persecution of Lollards became more severe.‖ (The Lollards) Here we see the early stages of a centuries-long plan—a series of seemingly unrelated plots by supposedly apolitical heretics—to overthrow the monarchy of England and establish a republican form of government, a Commonwealth. The Lollard plot to overthrow the monarchy would eventually succeed 200 years later, under the auspices of the Rosicrucians who beheaded King James‘ son, Charles I, installed Oliver Cromwell‘s Protectorate and established the English Commonwealth ruled by Parliament.
264
Hereafter, the powerless monarch of Great Britain was only a figurehead, and the British monarchy a mere tradition. THE AVIGNON PAPACY Gail Riplinger‘s deceptive treatment of Wycliffe‘s reform movement fails to mention a monumental event which radically alters the historical picture — the Avignon Papacy. For it was during Wycliffe‘s lifetime that the Roman curia and pope were forcibly removed to the Merovingian territory of South France, whence a Merovingian pope and papal court managed the Catholic Church for nearly 70 years. Appropriately called ―the Babylonian Captivity of the Church,‖ it was during this period that ―papal supremacy‖ was declared, indulgences were first sold and anti-clericalism was launched—not from Rome but by the Merovingian pope and papal curia in the Merovingian stronghold of South France. ―But when from 1305 to 1378 the papal curia was at Avignon and the cardinals were nearly all Frenchmen, Englishmen were offended: and from 1378 to 1418 the two popes, at Rome and Avignon, caused scandal to all… Dr. Walter Ullmann, in his recent notable book on Medieval Papalism, quotes the fourteenth century papalists as asserting that the pope, in the fulness of his power, was beyond the reach of any mortal, emperor, king or any other… The pope could do and say whatever he pleased to do and say in all and everything: he was above the law, whether natural (and, as it were divine) or whether humanly devised… ‗In the conception of the canonists,‘ Dr. Ullmann writes, ‗the pope was truly God on earth.‘… ―…A word then about Wycliffe‘s anti-clericalism, a factor now so much stressed as one of the causes of the sixteenth century Reformation. Anti-clericalism did not begin with Wycliffe or in England: it existed in France at the beginning of the fourteenth century. It spread from the south French university of Montpellier, a great law school, which trained most of the anti-clerical courtiers and ministers of Philip IV...‖ (Deanesly, The Significance of the Lollard Bible) The Avignon papacy in Wycliffe‘s lifetime and beyond seems to have been custom designed by the French Merovingians to agitate public opinion against the Church. It is also noteworthy that it was not the Church of Rome but the Avignon papacy in France which declared the ―Immaculate Conception‖ of Mary to be a dogma of the Church. A late date of 1854 is often assigned to this heretical teaching which became Catholic dogma by the decree of Pope Pius IX, Ineffabilis Deus. However, its early history is documented, not only in the Catholic Encyclopedia, but in historical accounts such as Henry Charles Lea‘s History of the Inquisition: ―Up to the twelfth century it was not questioned that the Virgin was conceived and born in sin… With the growth of Mariolotry, however, there came a popular tendency to regard the Virgin as free from all human corruption, and towards the middle of the twelfth century the church of Lyons ventured to place on the calendar a new feast in honor of the Conception of the Virgin…, the celebration of the Feast of the Conception gradually spread. Thomas Aquinas tells us that it was observed in many churches, though not in that of Rome, and that it was not forbidden, but he warns against the inference that because a feast is holy therefore the conception of Mary was holy. In fact, he denies the possibility of her immaculate conception… There is a tradition that…the University of Paris…in 1222…declared in its favor by a solemn decree… the Church of Narbonne commenced, in 1327, to celebrate the Feast of the Conception, and in 1328 the Council of London ordered its observance in all the churches of the Province of Canterbury, we see how rapidly the new dogma was spreading.‖ (Lea, A History of the Inquisition, Vol. 3, pp. 596-598)
265
Thomas Aquinas repudiated the false doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, which was apparently the work of Franciscan theologian, John Duns Scotus, who developed a systematic theology that led to its proclamation as Catholic dogma: ―Blessed John Duns Scotus (1265/66 – 8th November 1308), besides being known as the ‗Subtle Doctor‘, is also referred to as the ‗Marian Doctor‘. It was he who presented a systematic theology of the Marian privilege of the Immaculate Conception, which the Catholic Church officially proclaimed as a Dogma of Faith in the Apostolic Constitution Ineffabilis Deus of Pope Pius IX (8th December 1854), of which we are this year celebrating the 150th anniversary.‖ (―John Duns Scotus and His Defence of the Immaculate Conception‖) Interestingly, Christianity Today recently published an article promoting the theology of John Duns Scotus. On January 10, 2008, CT Editor, Philip Yancey, recommended that evangelicals reconsider the Catholic theology of Duns Scotus: ―More than two centuries before the Reformation, a theological debate broke out that pitted theologian Thomas Aquinas against an upstart from Britain, John Duns Scotus. In essence, the debate circled around the question, ‗Would Christmas have occurred if humanity had not sinned?‘ ―Whereas Aquinas viewed the Incarnation as God‘s remedy for a fallen planet, his contemporary saw much more at stake. For Duns Scotus, the Word becoming flesh as described in the prologue to John‘s Gospel must surely represent the Creator‘s primary design, not some kind of afterthought or Plan B. Aquinas pointed to passages emphasizing the Cross as God‘s redemptive response to a broken relationship. Duns Scotus cited passages from Ephesians and Colossians on the cosmic Christ, in whom all things have their origin, hold together, and move toward consummation... ―...Though most theologians tended to follow Aquinas, in recent years prominent Catholics such as Karl Rahner have taken a closer look at Duns Scotus. Perhaps evangelicals should, too.‖ (―Ongoing Incarnation‖) Duns Scotus taught at the University of Paris from 1293 through 1297, when he was expelled, allegedly for siding with the pope in his feud with King Philip IV of France. From Paris, the ‗Marian Doctor‘ removed to the University of Oxford. According to Louis Israel Newman, author of Jewish Influence on Christian Reform Movements, ―The scholarly relationship between the Universities of Paris and Oxford for a long period was very close; it was first interrupted by the controversies during the time of Wycliffe and afterwards broken off by the wars in France and the civil wars in England.‖ (p. 90) Lea‘s History of the Inquisition stated that the Church in England was among the first to follow suit after the French declared the dogma of the Immaculate Conception. The Avignonese Popes, all Merovingians who worshipped the Black Virgin, had devised a clever strategy to impose the pernicious doctrine of the Immaculate Conception on Christendom: ―…Juan de Moncon, a Dominican professor in the University of Paris, taught that the Virgin was conceived in sin. This aroused a great uproar, and he fled to Avignon from impending condemnation. Then, at Rouen, another Dominican preached similar doctrine, and, as we are told, was generally ridiculed. The University sent to Avignon a deputation headed by Pierre d‘Ailly, who claimed that the papal decision had been in their favor... The Dominicans were expelled from all positions in the Sorbonne, and the Avignonese
266
Clement VII. was too dependent upon France to refuse a bull proclaiming as heretics Juan and all who held with him. Charles VI. was persuaded not only to force the Dominicans of Paris to celebrate every year the Feast of the Conception, but to order the arrest of all within the kingdom who denied the Immaculate Conception, that they might be brought to Paris and obliged to recant before the University… ―The University of Paris was the stronghold of the new doctrine… The belief…continued to spread… In 1438 the clergy and magistrates of Madrid…made a vow thereafter to observe the Feast of the Conception. The next year the Council of Basle…came to a decision in favor of the Immaculate Conception, forbade all assertions to the contrary, and ordered the feast to be everywhere celebrated on December 8, with due indulgences for attendance… ―A new article could not be introduced without creating a new heresy. Here was one on which the Church was divided, and the adherents on each side denounced the other as heretics and persecuted them as far as they dared where they had the power. In this the Dominicans were decidedly at a disadvantage, and their antagonists had greatly the preponderance and were daily growing in strength. In 1457, the Council of Avignon, presided over by a papal legate, the Cardinal de Foix, who was a Franciscan, confirmed the decree of Basle, and ordered under pain of excommunication that no one should teach to the contrary…‖ (Lea, A History of the Inquisition, pp. 599-600) Cardinal de Foix would have been a Merovingian since the Counts of Foix were descendants of the Merovingian dynasty through Eudes, the Duke of Aquitaine. The entire region of South France had long been a stronghold of Mariolatry, being worshippers of the Black Virgin, who was the Egyptian Isis ‗Christianized‘ as Mary Magdalene. The forcible introduction of Mary-worship into the Catholic Church, which formerly held no such doctrine, was a veritable tour de force of the Merovingian papacy at Avignon. For over a century the Avignon papacy was diligently at work transforming the Church doctrinally and also setting in motion the events which would divide and conquer Christendom. This major turning point in Church history, which is known as the Great Western Schism, began in 1378 with two events: the death of Pope Gregory XI and the prohibition of passing judgment against John Wycliffe on the order of the Queen of England, Joan Plantagenet. The corruption of the Avignon Papacy was not limited to Catholic doctrine; the financial and administrative corruption of the Papal Court was so flagrant that in retrospect it seems to have been deliberate in order to provoke the popular revolt which inevitably followed. ―Popes, Cardinals, and officials of the Chancery and Apostolic Camera appointed bishops, collected taxes, and imposed disreputable political interdicts and excommunications throughout much of Christendom with greater abandon than ever before. They did so in tight association with countless princes and other representatives of the late medieval Establishment. Bankers were particularly welcome in their entourage. As Alvaro Pelayo, himself a fervent supporter of the Holy See, noted in De planctu ecclesiae, ‗Whenever I entered the chambers of the ecclesiastics of the Papal Court, I found brokers and clergy engaged in weighing and reckoning the money which lay in heaps before them.‘ (Pastor, I, 72). / was this the Templar treasure? ―A myriad of astonishing abuses, many of them the product of exceedingly pro-papal canonists influenced heavily by Roman Law and purely utilitarian power considerations, became associated with the Avignon administration. Charitable covers for raking in illicit funds were multiplied. Sees were left vacant or filled in ways that furthered the increase of gross curial muscle and wealth. Legal cases were painfully delayed so as to milk more
267
loot from long-suffering plaintiffs and defendants. And, once again, all this was done in dangerous cahoots with locally important political and banker hacks. ―Even more destructive was the treatment of diocesan matters as property rather than pastoral questions. Bishoprics were assigned either to curial officials—to provide, from their endowments, salaries the Papacy could not otherwise pay—or to friends of political allies whose cooperative behavior needed to be rewarded. Since it was impossible for papal employees to leave their governmental positions in Avignon to tend to even one diocese—much less the two or more often entrusted to their misuse—episcopal charges inevitably entailed the same absenteeism already practiced by the pope himself. Perhaps the most bizarre long term development from such unfortunate policies was to be the creation of nominal ‗bishops‘ who were often not even priests. Lay ‗bishops‘ got the revenues from their ‗property‘, and then employed some hireling to do the episcopal tasks they themselves could not legitimately perform. ―...Avignon‘s abuses merely confirmed the convictions of those who already thought of the Church and her mission as a blasphemous work of Satan. This was the major reason why her scandals were so detested by orthodox believers.‖ (―The Great Western Schism‖) The outrageous conduct of the Avignon papacy marked the beginning of the decline of the Roman Catholic papacy. ―…The kings‘ increasing ability to claim the loyalty of the local clergy and to collect church taxes helped create several quasi-national churches that officially were part of the Roman Catholic Church but were increasingly under royal control. The Babylonian Captivity, along with the Hundred Years War then going on, also triggered challenges to papal authority from two other directions: church councils and popular heresies.‖ (―Schism & heresies in late medieval Europe‖) Another factor in the decline of the papacy was the spectacle of warring popes during the Great Schism. At one point the Church had three popes who excommunicated one another!! This chaotic state of affairs divided all of Europe and permanently damaged the authority of the pope: The Great Schism and Conciliar movement ―The resentment that the Babylonian Captivity aroused against the Church grew worse when the popes tried to move back to Rome. By the 1370‘s, the turmoil of the Hundred Years War was making life at Avignon increasingly dangerous. The capture and ransoming of Pope Innocent VI by a company of English mercenaries (who had little use for a French pope, anyway) convinced Pope Gregory XI to move to Rome. However, at this time, Rome was a more dangerous place to live in during times of ‗peace‘ than France was during war. It took Gregory three attempts to get into Rome, and once he got in, he quickly decided he wanted to leave and return to Avignon. Unfortunately, Gregory died before he could get out. ―For the first time in 70 years, Rome was the scene of a papal election, and the Roman mob clamored outside for an Italian pope. Under such pressure, the College of Cardinals elected an Italian, Urban VI, as the next pope. Unfortunately, Urban was something of a violent and bigoted man whose actions drove all but three cardinals back to Avignon where they elected a second pope. Thus began the Great Schism, a period of turmoil when the Church was divided in its loyalty between two lines of popes, one French and one Italian. To no one‘s surprise, each pope refused to recognize the other and even excommunicated him and his followers. This led to enormous anxiety among devout
268
Christians, who found themselves supposedly excommunicated by one pope or the other. With neither pope willing to resign, something had to be done. ―The most popular suggestion was a general church council such as the ones summoned to solve major disputes in the past. There were several problems with this solution. First of all, popes traditionally called such councils, and neither pope was willing to call such a council. This made the legality of such a council questionable if not called by at least one pope. Second, different rulers in Europe supported particular popes, largely for political reasons. Such political divisions made it almost impossible to get people to agree on the site of a council, not to mention the deeper issues involved. Finally, the whole issue of a Church council raised the question: if a council could depose the pope, who was the real head of the Church? This was a question that lingered on long after the Great Schism had faded away. ―At last, a council was called at Pisa, Italy in 1409. It deposed the two rival popes and elected a third. Unfortunately, neither original pope recognized the council‘s power to depose a pope, so now the Church had three popes. However, by this time, people were committed to the idea of a church council, and another one was called at Constance, Switzerland. All three popes were deposed, and a fourth, Martin V, was elected. Although one of the deposed popes held on in Avignon until 1429, the Great Schism ended here. Its effects did not, because it caused people all over Western Europe to question the authority of the pope in the Church. Although a single pope once again ruled the Church, his reputation and authority were permanently undermined.‖ (―Schism & heresies in late medieval Europe‖) ―The Merovingian Infiltration of the Christian Church Through Monasticism,‖ of anonymous authorship, makes a compelling case that the Avignon Papacy was a planned conspiracy executed by the French monarch, Philip le Bel, who was a Merovingian. This accords with statements in Merovingian sources that the Templar Purge was orchestrated for the purpose of ―downsizing‖ and relocating the Order to Scotland where they would enjoy the protection of the Saint Clair family and freedom they did not have on the Continent. In the British Isles, the Templars, under the protection and leadership of Henry Sinclair, would be at liberty establish the Order of the Rose Croix, Freemasonry, Unitarianism and Baptist churches. (See: ―Anabaptist Unitarians‖). ―Merovingian king, Philip IV (la Belle), who arrested the Templars on Oct. 13, 1307 and who placed his cousin, Clement V, on the Chair of Peter as his accomplice, then insisted that the pope remain in France, rather than Rome. This began what is named the Babylonian Captivity of the Church, a 68 year period in which the Church was forced to remain in Avignon France. The next successive 6 popes would be French and Merovingian, the second of whom, Clement VI, began formulating the doctrine of indulgences, which later became the spark of the Protestant Reformation as planned! The majority of Templars who escaped the arrest in 1307 went to Scotland which was the first to break from the Church through the Declaration of Arbroath, the document on which the 1776 U.S. Declaration was based. One signatory of the letter to Pope John XXII April 4, 1320 (date NATO was later formed) was the grandfather of Henry Sinclair, Earl of Orkney and Shetland Islands for Norway who lived in Roslin Castle, Scotland. It was he who brought Templar treasure to Nova Scotia in 1398, 94 years pre-Columbus. The Sinclairs were bishops of Ross and hereditary Grand Masters of Freemasonry.‖ (―The Merovingian Infiltration of the Christian Church Through Monasticism‖)
269
WYCLIFFE/LOLLARD BELIEFS According to W.R. Cooper, editor of The Wycliffe New Testament (1388), Lollard beliefs included the Gnostic rejection of marriage and baptism ceremonies as well as all intermediaries. Intermediaries would include not only priests but elders who administer the ordinances commanded in the New Testament, such as baptism and communion: ―Although Lollard beliefs varied from place to place, and could include a dislike of all images (including the crucifix), and of all ceremonies (including marriage and baptism), one fundamental tenet of the Lollard faith was always present: the belief in a simple, direct contact between the communicant and God, without intermediaries. This belief survived through the underground artisan reading circles until the English Reformation of the sixteenth century, when the jurisdiction of the Roman Catholic Church was removed totally.‖ (Introduction, Wycliffe New Testament (1388), edition in modern spelling with an introduction, the original prologues and the Epistle to the Laodiceans, edited for the Tyndale Society by W.R. Cooper, pp. vii-viii) Although Wycliffe denounced the Roman Catholic doctrine of Transubstantiation – that the bread and wine were changed into the literal flesh and blood of Jesus Christ by a priest, he never questioned ‗The real Presence‘ of Christ – called ―Consubstantiation‖ – that Christ is actually present in the bread and wine. For Wycliffe the elements physically remained what they were, but spiritually they were the Lord‘s body and blood. Wycliffe wrote: ―The truth and faith of the Church is that Christ is at once God and man, so the Sacrament is at once the body of Christ and bread – bread and wine naturally, the body and blood sacramentally.‖ ―Thus saith the Scripture, Matt, xxvi., ‗And as they were eating Jesus took bread,‘ &c. and the same in Mark xiv.; Luke xxii.; and I Cor. xi Accordingly our church uses this form at the consecration of the host Qui pridie pateretur, &c. Corpus mettm, &c. In all these places the meaning is the same, though there is a slight difference in the terms employed. From a faith so authoritatively promulgated, I would argue as follows with heretics :—Christ, who cannot lie, said—that the bread he took in his hands was really his body ; in this he did not err, he did not assert what was false, accordingly it was truly so.‖ (Tracts & Treatises of John de Wycliffe, “On the Eucharist,‖ p. 134) Wycliffe‘s controversy was always with the Catholic priesthood, and his attack was not on the ―Real Presence‖ of Christ in the Eucharist, but on the role of the priest as a mediator who changed the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ. According to Goldwin Smith, ―Wycliffe said that Christ was really present in the sacrament of the Eucharist, but not as a result of any words or action of the priest.‖ (A History of England, p. 160) There were, among John Wycliffe‘s intimate circle of Lollard knights of the Court and scholars at Oxford University, certain Unitarians. It was previously mentioned that Wycliffe was a protégé of the mother of Richard II, Joan (Plantagenet) of Kent, who was executed as a Unitarian Anabaptist. A History of Unitarianism by Earle Morse Wilbur, maintained that the aforementioned Sir William Sawtrey, the London chaplain, follower of Wycliffe and the first Lollard ―martyr,‖ as well as Wycliffe himself, were Unitarians: ―Leaving these early instances, we come nearer to the beginnings of an integrated movement when we reach John Wyclif, whose translation of the Bible into English late in the fourteenth century opened the Scriptures for the common layman to read and judge for himself. Using this freedom his Lollard followers inevitably tended to stray more or
270
less beyond the close fold of traditional belief, and thus came to be charged with sundry heresies. Some of them are said to have been tinged with Antitrinitarianism; indeed, William Sawtrey just mentioned was said to be a Lollard. It is however less because he was a pioneer of Unitarian views than because he burst the stifling bonds of the traditional doctrinal system, and encouraged a broader freedom of belief in general (itself one of the prime characteristics of the Unitarian movement), that Wyclif deserves to be included in this reckoning. For independent study of the Bible must be regarded as the most fundamental of all the influences that combined in shaping the Unitarian movement. The leaven continued thus to work and spread, despite manifold persecutions, for a century and a half until Henry VIII, in declaring England‘s independence of the Pope in 1534, established the English Reformation, and thus opened the door to many on the Continent who were suffering from religious persecution and looked to England as a haven of refuge; for by the new law, passed in 1534, a sentence passed against a heretic might not be executed without the King‘s warrant, the right to deal with heretics being thus taken from the Church and lodged with the civil authorities.‖ (A History of Unitarianism) Whether or not Wycliffe was Unitarian in his beliefs, Unitarians claim him as the spiritual father of their movement. Malcolm Lambert notes in Medieval Heresy, ―The doctrinal relation of Lollardy to Wyclif is complicated. … Wyclif was…used as a figurehead for a movement that had grown away from him.‖ (p. 246-7) Wycliffe‘s theology may or may not have been heretical, but Wycliffe‘s theology is not the main issue, despite a full chapter devoted to ―Wycliffe‘s Views‖ by Gail Riplinger. For Wycliffe was not the translator of the ―Wycliffe Bible‖ and the real issue is the theological views of the Lollard scholars/ translators at Oxford University, a number of whom were heterodox and politically subversive. Contrary to popular belief, the net effect of their translation was not to put the Bible into the hands of the ploughman but to give dissenters – even heretics – the authority of the Word of God to launch a subversive movement. ―To sum up, then: Wycliffe‘s translation of the whole Bible was an undertaking with a political side: the lay party could use it against the clericals: disendowment was in the air. But the spiritual side of Wycliffe‘s intention was much the stronger. He desired to put the clock back: to restore the Church to her poor and primitive state. He had no realisation that in destroying the institutions of the Church of his day he might be endangering the Christian religion itself...‖ (Margaret Deanesly, The Significance of the Lollard Bible) The general belief is that Wycliffe translated the Scriptures so that the common man could own and read the Bible. Historical accounts tell us, however, that the common man of the 14th century was illiterate. Margaret Deanesly made a convincing case that the Lollard translation, inspired but not translated by Wycliffe, could have been read only by scholars and the educated elite but was inaccessible to the illiterate masses. The Early Version was slavishly literal and incomprehensible to all but scholars and the Later Version was not a literal translation at all, but a ―dynamic equivalence‖ version: ―Wycliffe‘s intention in carrying through this complete translation can scarcely have been to render the Bible directly accessible to the masses. The manner of translation he selected was not one suited to pastoral work in general. The first Wycliffite version was a construe, and the decision to use such a method cannot have been accidental… ‗Word for word or meaning for meaning‘: there was quite a controversy about it going on in Wycliffe‘s day, which was an age of translations: and he chose that his translation should be made word for word.
271
―A version ‗meaning for meaning‘ would have been more suited for popular use. Two centuries earlier Peter Waldo at Lyons had had translations of the Sunday gospels made in this manner, and his followers learned them by heart from a teacher, committing long portions to memory. In Wycliffe‘s day, by far the larger part of the population was illiterate (and with the excellent, unspoilt memories of the illiterate): all classes of lay people up to the social grade of knights and lords and ladies would be illiterate: and their only chance of profiting by an English Bible would be by committing passages to memory. Now a construe is not easy to commit to memory: and even the Bible-reading lords and ladies would have found a translation ‗meaning for meaning‘ more understandable, it would seem. But no: the Wycliffite translation was made from letter to letter word for word. ―These two facts: the translation of the whole Vulgate, and the choice to translate from word to word, rule out, it seems to me, the explanation of the translators‘ intention, to make the scriptures easily accessible to all men for devotional purposes. Not many people owned an English Bible, for the cost of a Latin or English Bible written on parchment was quite prohibitive. Even parish priests, as examination of contemporary wills show, could not afford one: only the higher clergy, bishops, deans, archdeacons, bequeathed a Vulgate in their wills, and that very rarely. An English Bible would have been as expensive. In 1222 the council of Oxford laid down that the stipends of vicars ought to be at least five marks a year, except in Wales, ‗where vicars are content with less, by reason of the poverty of their churches‘. A Vulgate in those days might cost as much as the vicar‘s annual stipend. And in Wycliffe‘s days, not much less: how then could the parishioners be expected to buy such a book? ―The method of learning scriptural passages by heart was the only possible way for the villagers, and was in fact the one practised by the later Lollards, for whom a second translation, from meaning to meaning, had to be made, and was made by 1395. Even then, the records of Lollard trials show them oftener as learning from ‗a book called James‘, ‗a book called Luke‘, a single book in fact, than from a whole New Testament. If popular use by the masses had been the translators‘ main intention, it is difficult to see why the first version was not made ‗from meaning to meaning‘.‖ (The Significance of the Lollard Bible) That the Wycliffite-Lollard translation was available only to scholars, many of whom were heretics or conspirators, is never disclosed by those who perpetuate the false notion that the ―common man,‖ thanks to John Wycliffe, now possessed his very own Bible which he could read for himself. According to the Unitarian version of this fiction, the outcome was that the ―common man,‖ having read the Wycliffe Bible, then decided in favor of the Unitarian heresy! ―The roots of the Unitarian movement in England began with John Wycliffe, a professor of theology at Oxford, who championed the cause of an English translation of the Bible. Sometimes called ‗the Morningstar of the Reformation,‘ Wycliffe was well ahead of his time, foreshadowing the views men like Luther and Calvin would espouse two centuries later. Having a Bible in English allowed many folk uneducated in Latin to read and interpret it for themselves, and because of this opportunity many later reached the conclusion that belief in the Trinity is not supported by the scriptures. Of course, it was also the reaction to Wycliffe‘s apparent heresy that led to the passage of laws allowing for the burning of heretics, a common form of punishment in continental Europe but unprecedented in Britain. This leads us to another important date—March 20th, 1401, when the first such burning occurred on British soil, when one William Sawtrey was burned at the stake in the city of Smithfield.‖ (Unitarian Universalist Congregation)
272
It would be more accurate to say that, having a Bible in English allowed many heretics to promote the false teaching that the Trinity is not supported by the scriptures. For using the Bible as a higher authority than the Church gave religious respectability to a powerful aristocracy that planned to overthrow the established Church as well as the government of England. JOHN WYCLIFFE Several entries in Tragers‘ People’s Chronology reveal the political nature of Wycliffe‘s work, his position within the highest echelon of government, his close relationships with the rich and powerful, chiefly the Plantagenet Dynasty which ruled England, and his negotiations with representatives of Pope Gregory XI regarding the payment of English tribute to the Papacy. If Wycliffe did not translate the Bible, what role did the Reformer play in the turbulent events of his century? ―It was not as a teacher or preacher that Wycliffe gained his position in history; this came from his activities in ecclesiastical politics, in which he engaged about the mid-1370s, when his reformatory work also began. In 1374 he was among the English delegates at a peace congress at Bruges. He may have been given this position because of the spirited and patriotic behavior with which in the year 1366 he sought the interests of his country against the demands of the papacy. It seems he had a reputation as a patriot and reformer; this suggests the answer to the question how he came to his reformatory ideas.‖ (Greatsite.com) Is it possible that Wycliffe, who founded and led the Lollard movement, intended to use an English translation of the Vulgate as a political tool? Surely, a political conspiracy could be greatly enhanced by a version of the Bible in the vernacular language. With English translation in hand, the Lollard preachers were able to mobilize the illiterate masses to rebel against the Church. The question is whether or not Wycliffe himself was an agent provocateur whose mission was to foment rebellion against the Avignon Papacy, a Merovingian front doing their best to destroy public confidence in the Church. According to historian Margaret Deanesly, the anticlerical movement began, not in England with Wycliffe, but in southern France: ―A word then about Wycliffe‘s anti-clericalism, a factor now so much stressed as one of the causes of the sixteenth century Reformation. Anti-clericalism did not begin with Wycliffe or in England: it existed in France at the beginning of the fourteenth century. It spread from the south French university of Montpellier, a great law school, which trained most of the anti-clerical courtiers and ministers of Philip IV.‖ (The Significance of the Lollard Bible) Surely the enormities of the Avignon papacy demanded reform of the Church, yet few anticipated that disendowment of the papacy and the clergy would not purge Christendom of the recent heresies, but would instead jeopardize the fundamental doctrines of Christianity, even the deity of Jesus Christ and the doctrine of the Trinity. For the central confession of the Christian faith is that Jesus Christ is God come in the flesh, and it was this doctrine, rather than Mariolotry or papal infallibility, that would be undermined by the plethora of Anti-Trinitarian sects unleashed by the pre-Reformation. History proves that revolutions do not necessary improve conditions; for the ―powers that be‖ are ordained by God and no one can predict (except the conspirators) what type of ―new order‖ will supplant the old. There are always unforeseen consequences and the rampant spread of heresy during the Reformation, of which Wycliffe is said to be the ―Morning Star,‖ undermined the Faith itself. Deanesly perceived this threat:
273
―To sum up, then: Wycliffe‘s translation of the whole Bible was an undertaking with a political side: the lay party could use it against the clericals: disendowment was in the air. … He had no realisation that in destroying the institutions of the Church of his day he might be endangering the Christian religion itself...‖ (The Significance of the Lollard Bible) The purge of the Knights Templar occurred from 1307 to 1314, the very years the Pope and his curia were setting up their new headquarters in Avignon. John Wycliffe was born in 1327 and entered the political scene around 1376, at the close of the Avignon Papacy and onset of the Great Schism. Is this sequence of events mere coincidence or is there evidence that Wycliffe may have been an agent of the network of the secret societies that Henry Saint Clair had established on the British Isles? For this information we turn to a blueblood of the Merovingian ―Royal House of Stewart‖— Prince Michael Stewart, President of the European Council of Princes, said to be a constitutional advisory body to the European Union. Prince Michael is also the Knight Grand Commander of the Chivalric Military Order of the Temple of Jerusalem (Knights Templar), the Head of the Celtic Church of The Sacred Kindred of Saint Columba and ―Fifty-seventh Archpriest and Temporal Head of Scotland‘s Ancient Druidic-Christian Church of the Culdees.‖ (The Forgotten Monarchy of Scotland, pp. 2, 308) According to Prince Michael, following the Templar purge on the Continent, the Celtic Church of Scotland welcomed the refugee Knights Templar who then formed the Order of the Rosy Cross. And the first order of business of the Knights of the Rosy Cross was...to meet with the Pope at Avignon!! ―The established Roman Church may have betrayed the Templars, but in Scotland they found something far more trustworthy and tangible: a sacred royal house, and a Priest-King of the Celtic Church succession. ...the Knights became part of the Scottish Government as the appointed Royal Bodyguard, with the Order established as ‗Guardian of the King of Scots by day and by night‘... A new order was then formed, called the Elder Brothers of the Order of the Rosy Cross, and several of the Rosy Cross Knights then sailed to France for a meeting with Pope John XXII at Avignon. ―Many historians have presumed therefore that the Knights Templars must have been disbanded in Scotland, but this was not the case; it was simply that [Robert the] Bruce had contrived the secret Order to become even more secretive. Indeed, the Order of the Knights of the Rosy Cross...was a very successful cover.‖ (The Forgotten Monarchy of Scotland, p. 65) So having formed the secretive Order of the Rosy Cross in Scotland, the Templars sent a contingent of Rosy Cross Knights to France for a meeting with the Pope at Avignon. This is documented with a footnote: ―The Vatican Archives, Rome‖ What would prompt the persecuted Templars to return to the very headquarters of the Catholic Church which had slaughtered many knights of their Order? Prince Michael offers this feeble excuse: ―...this new Order was not apparently Templar to outsiders, and since the Pope held the international reins of Chivalric Orders, a meeting was necessary for registration.‖ Furthermore, ―…the Pope agreed to issue a Charter so long as his own nephew, Jacques de Via, became the operative Grand Master.‖ (Stewart, p. 65) Surely this high-level meeting between the fugitive Templars and the Avignon Pope reeks of collusion. The Templars‘ newly-formed Order of the Rosy Cross had been absorbed into the Celtic Church of Scotland, and it is with the Celtic Church of Scotland that a connection to John Wycliffe is found. On the website of The Bible Museum, Inc., a source for rare and antique Bibles, is a chronological history of the
274
English Bible. A section of this history, titled ―The Pre-Reformation History of the Bible,‖ states that a secret society known as the Culdees ―chose John Wycliffe to lead the world out of the Dark Ages.‖ ―On the Scottish Island of Iona, in 563 AD, a man named Columba started a Bible College. For the next 700 years, this was the source of much of the non-Catholic, evangelical Bible teaching through those centuries of the Dark and Middle Ages. The students of this college were called ‗Culdees‘, which means ‗certain stranger‘. The Culdees were a secret society, and the remnant of the true Christian faith was kept alive by these men during the many centuries that led up to the Protestant Reformation… ―In the late 1300’s, the secret society of Culdees chose John Wycliffe to lead the world out of the Dark Ages. Wycliffe has been called the ‗Morning Star of the Reformation‘… ―…It was not as a teacher or preacher that Wycliffe gained his position in history; this came from his activities in ecclesiastical politics, in which he engaged about the mid-1370s, when his reformatory work also began. In 1374 he was among the English delegates at a peace congress at Bruges. He may have been given this position because of the spirited and patriotic behavior with which in the year 1366 he sought the interests of his country against the demands of the papacy. It seems he had a reputation as a patriot and reformer; this suggests the answer to the question how he came to his reformatory ideas.‖ (Greatsite.com) According to The Bible Museum, Inc., the name ―Culdee‖ means ―certain stranger,‖ however, according to the Ancient Order of the Culdees of Iona, the word means ―Chaldea,‖ as in ancient Babylonia: ―Origin of the word Culdee. The name Culdee comes from Chaldee, (Chaldeans pronounce the word Chaldee as Kaldee or Culdee), in the sense that it alludes to Abraham the Chaldee, who left his home, worldly wealth, kindred and idol making to find the Promised Land.‖ The 1611 King James Version used the word ―Caldees‖ with reference to the Babylonians or ―Chaldeans,‖ which was the updated spelling in later editions.
Verse(s) Genesis xv. 7 2 Kings xxv. 4, 5, 10, 13, 24, 25, 26 2 Chronicles xxxvi. 17 Nehemiah ix. 7
Reading of the Authorized Bible Caldees (Chaldees, ch. xi. 31) Caldees
Variation of later editions Chaldees, 1629 Chaldees, 1744
Caldees Caldees
Chaldees, 1638 Chaldees, 1638
Although the Bible Museum identifies the Culdees as a ―secret society‖ which kept alive the Christian faith, the truth is that the Culdees were the remnants of the pagan Druids. James Bonwick wrote of their pagan origins and ways in Irish Druids And Old Irish Religions: ―An old statistical work says, ‗the Druids undoubtedly possessed Iona before the introduction of Christianity.‘ It must be admitted that the Culdees wore a white dress, as did the Druids, [and the Essenes] and that they occupied places which had a Druidical reputation. They used the Asiatic cross, now called that of St. Andrew‘s.‘ Notably, in an Irish version of the gospel of St. Matthew, the phrase ‗there came wise men from the east‘ is rendered ‗the Druids came from the east.‘ [fn. James Bonwick‘s Irish Druids and Old Irish Religions] In like manner, in the Old Testament, Exodus vii. II, the ‗magicians of Egypt‘ are made ‗Druids of Egypt.‘ [fn. Rev. John Williams Ab Ithel, The Traditionary Annals of the Cymri, 1867, p.166.]…
275
―In Tirechan's Life of St Patrick, Cele-de came from Briton to Ireland in 919; but in 811 some were said to have been miraculously conveyed across the sea. Bede, who opposed them, whether from Ireland or Scotland, was shocked at their holding his religion ‗in no account at all,‘ nor communicating with his faithful ‗in anything more than with pagans.‘ He banished those who came to his quarter. He found these Irish, Welsh, and Scotch Christians to have, in addition to many heresies, the Jewish and Druidical system of hereditary priesthood. Property of the Church even descended from father to son; and, says Dr. Reeves, ‗was practically entailed to members of certain families.‘ He adds that they were understood in the 12th century as ‗a religious order of clerks who lived in Societies, under a Superior, within a common enclosure, but in detached cells; associated in a sort of collegiate rather than œnobical brotherhood.‘ Giraldus, as well as Bede, complained of their hereditary priesthood. The same principle prevailed in the Druidical region of Brittany, and only yielded to the force of the Council of Tours in 1127.‖ (Irish Druids & Old Irish Religions, pp. 280-1, 285) In ancient times, the priests of Baal in the land of Canaan were called Druids: ―The beliefs, rituals and practices of the Druids have a great deal in common with those of the early Hebrew prophets and certain esoteric groups in biblical Israel.‖ (Tim Wallace-Murphy, Rosslyn, p. 43) ―Now therefore send, and gather to me all Israel unto mount Carmel, and the prophets of Baal four hundred and fifty, and the prophets of the groves four hundred, which eat at Jezebel's table. So Ahab sent unto all the children of Israel, and gathered the prophets together unto mount Carmel. And Elijah came unto all the people, and said, How long halt ye between two opinions? if the LORD be God, follow him: but if Baal, then follow him. And the people answered him not a word. Then said Elijah unto the people, I, even I only, remain a prophet of the LORD; but Baal‘s prophets are four hundred and fifty men. Let them therefore give us two bullocks; and let them choose one bullock for themselves, and cut it in pieces, and lay it on wood, and put no fire under: and I will dress the other bullock, and lay it on wood, and put no fire under: And call ye on the name of your gods, and I will call on the name of the LORD: and the God that answereth by fire, let him be God. And all the people answered and said, It is well spoken. And Elijah said unto the prophets of Baal, Choose you one bullock for yourselves, and dress it first; for ye are many; and call on the name of your gods, but put no fire under. And they took the bullock which was given them, and they dressed it, and called on the name of Baal from morning even until noon, saying, O Baal, hear us. But there was no voice, nor any that answered. And they leaped upon the altar which was made.‖ (1 Kings 18:19-26) In the Middle Ages, the Druids were the high priests of Baal who officiated in the pagan rites of the early ―Celtic Church‖: ―By Celtic reckoning, the actual Beltaine celebration begins on sundown of the preceding day, April 30, because the Celts always figured their day from sundown to sundown. And sundown was the proper time for Druids to kindle the great Bel-fires on the tops of the nearest beacon hill (such as Tara Hill, Co. Meath, in Ireland)...‖ (Pagan Alliance: Beltaine Ritual) Barry Dunford traces the Druid/Culdee tradition in Celtic Britain to the Druid and Essene monks who claimed that their messiah was St. John the Divine, who, they say, was an Essene monk. From The Holy Land of Scotland: Jesus in Scotland & the Gospel of the Grail:
276
―Can we trace any specific links between the Druid/Culdee tradition in Celtic Britain, particularly Scotland and Ireland, and the Essenes and other monastic traditions of the Middle East and Egypt, such as the Egyptian Coptic Christian Church? The monastic Culdees appear to have had their origin in the roots of Celtic Christianity in the British Isles dating back to the early centuries A.D., with possible apostolic connections. Indeed, the Culdees appear in some respects to have carried forward elements of an earlier pre-Christian Druidic tradition, and they have been called ‗Christian heirs of the Druids‘. [fn. Ward Rutherford, Celtic Lore: the History of the Druids and their Timeless Traditions, 1993, p.114.] ―Many of their monastic sites and settlements overlaid earlier pre-Christian Druidic sites of worship, Iona being a prime example, which was known anciently as the ‗Druid‘s Isle‘. Moreover, the Culdees claimed that the tenets of their teaching derived directly from the disciples of St. John, who would have come either directly, or indirectly, from the Middle East. ―The Essene-Culdee connection is confirmed by the researches of the 19th century antiquary, Godfrey Higgins, who in his erudite work The Celtic Druids (1829) states: ‗The result of all the inquiries which I have made into the history of the Culdees is, that they were the last remains of the Druids, who had been converted to Christianity, before the Roman Church got any footing in Britain. They were Pythagorean Druidical monks, probably Essenes.... …The fact of the Culdees having succeeded by hereditary descent, is extremely important. It is so very different from the practice under the Christian religion, that it tends strongly to confirm the suspicion that these people were Druids. It is nowhere to be found except where the Druids have been.‘‖ (Celtic History) Note that the Druids had a hereditary succession, which is a strong indicator of Merovingian lineage. In fact, Dunford‘s history reveals that the Celtic Church was a front for the Merovingians to spread their heresy under the guise of ―Johannite Christianity‖ whose patron saint allegedly received from Jesus esoteric revelation not imparted to the other apostles. This ―secret doctrine‖ is said to have been preserved in a secret Grail text, the ―Book of St. John the Apostle‖ which was a central feature in the spiritual worship of the Cathars. ―Identifying the roots of the Celtic Church with the medieval Grail mythos, Francis RoltWheeler says: ‗The Legend of the Holy Grail, in its origin and in its development, is essentially Christian.... It is agreed by all writers and keepers of holy legend that Joseph of Arimathea had naught to do with the apostles. The Christic teachings and certain particular rites, given him by Jesus in spirit-visitation, were exclusive. He was divinely ordered to leave Palestine immediately after his liberation, bearing with him the Holy Grail and holding in memory the Mysterious Words, rightly to fulfil his light-bearing mission on the border of the western world. Such a mission, mystic and spiritual, could not be realized in the Orient; to the present writer, this seems a point too often overlooked by commentators on the Legends of the Grail. In order that the mysticism of the Holy Grail might flower and fruit, it was essential that Joseph escape all legalistic influences: as much the rabbinic jurisprudence of Jerusalem as the canonical jurisprudence of Rome. Neither among the Jewish nor the Latin peoples was such a mystic development possible; it needed the special nature of the Celtic race, whose soul is a harbourage of Mystery. It is often asked why the Holy Grail should have travelled so far, finally to home in Brittany; in the south-west of England, and in Wales. The answer is of the simplest. These are the countries of the Celtic race. Moreover, in these countries shone the light of the Celtic Church, as ancient as that of Rome, known as 'The Church of the
277
Holy Spirit' and, later, ‗The Church of the Grail‘…(Mystic Gleams from the Holy Grail, c.1940s)‖ ―Johannite Christianity‖ is a perversion of the true Church that is ―built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone.‖ (Eph. 2:20) ―Johannism‖ was the form of esoteric Christianity embraced by all of the heretical sects of the Middle Ages who found it expedient to cloak their pagan teachings and practices in Christian terminology. Francis Rolt-Wheeler noted the ―nexus between the Celtic Grail mythos and the Knights Templar.‖ In Morals & Dogma, Albert Pike revealed that Johannism was a Gnostic and Kabbalistic construct of the Templars designed to conceal their heresy and occultism from the Roman Catholic faithful: ―Thus the Order of the Knights of the Temple was at its very origin devoted to the cause of opposition to the tiara of Rome and the crowns of Kings, and the Apostolate of Kabalistic Gnosticism was vested in its chiefs. For Saint John himself was the Father of the Gnostics, and the current translation of his polemic against the heretical of his Sect and the pagans who denied that Christ was the Word, is throughout a misrepresentation, or misunderstanding at least, of the whole Spirit of that Evangel. ―The tendencies and tenets of the Order were enveloped in profound mystery, and it externally professed the most perfect orthodoxy. The Chiefs alone knew the aim of the Order: the Subalterns followed them without distrust. ―To acquire influence and wealth, then to intrigue, and at need to fight, to establish the Johannite or Gnostic and Kabalistic dogma, were the object and means proposed to the initiated Brethren. The Papacy and the rival monarchies, they said to them, are sold and bought in these days, become corrupt, and tomorrow, perhaps, will destroy each other. All that will become the heritage of the Temple: the World will soon come to us for its Sovereigns and Pontiffs. We shall constitute the equilibrium of the Universe, and be rulers and Masters of the World. ―The Templars, like all other Secret Orders and Associations, had two doctrines, one concealed and reserved for the Masters, which was Johannism; the other public, which was the Roman Catholic. Thus they deceived the adversaries whom the sought to supplant. Hence Free-Masonry, vulgarly imagined to have begun with the Dionysian Architects or the German Stone-workers, adopted Saint John the Evangelist as one of its patrons, associating with him, in order not to arouse the suspicions of Rome, Saint John the Baptist, and thus covertly proclaiming itself the child of the Kabalah and Essenism together.‖ CHAPTER XX ―CHRISTIAN ROSENKREUZ‖
CONTEND FOR THE FAITH: THE TEXTUS RECEPTUS http://watch-unto-prayer.org/TR-0-intro.html WATCH UNTO PRAYER taho@watch-unto-prayer.org http://watch-unto-prayer.org
278
CHAPTER II THE TETRAGRAMMATON ―For kabbalists, the letters of the Hebrew alphabet are the royal road to the sacred source within us. They make it possible to ascend to transcendence. ...the text of the Torah is the Great and Divine Name, and the tetratrammaton YHVH is at its core... All of the kabbalistic teachings stress the essential role of the names of God in order to attain the mystical state.‖ – Marc-Alain Ouaknin, Mysteries of the Kabbalah
In her book, In Awe of Thy Word, Gail Riplinger highly recommended books by Kabbalists ―for further study of this subject‖ of letter meanings. Mentioned in Chapter 1 of this report is Marc-Alain Ouaknin‘s book, Mysteries of the Alphabet. (Awe, p. 1182) Rabbi Ouaknin, who is director of the Center for Research and Jewish Studies in Paris and a professor at the University of Bar-Han in Israel, has written several other books such as Mysteries of the Kabbalah, The Mystery Of Numbers, Invitation au Talmud (Introduction to the Talmud), The Burned Book: Revealing the Talmud (Le livre brûlé, lire le Talmud), and Méditations érotiques (Erotic Meditations). Mysteries of the Kabbalah is an introduction to Kabbalah which teaches the secret doctrine of Kabbalah, the route to initiation, how to create and communicate with angels, the mystical significance of the Hebrew letters, gematria, astrology and the Tetragrammaton. The back cover of Mysteries of the Kabbalah describes its content: ―The Kabbalah has been transmitted orally from masters to disciples since the days of the prophets and recorded in such seminal works as the Book of Splendor (Sepher Ha Zohar) and the Book of Creation (Sepher Ha-Yetzira). Best-selling author and professor Marc-Alain Ouaknin has written a lively text that clearly introduces Kabbalah – the mystical and secret and often baffling tradition of Judaism. In Mysteries of the Kabbalah he explains the ancient myths and symbols that have so profoundly influenced both the Jewish and non-Jewish world. ―Among the fascinating topics the author presents are the hearing of angels’ voices; Chokmah (a form of transcendental wisdom); the four divine names and the five modalities of being; the light of infinity; as well as the significance of each of the 22 letters of the Hebrew alphabet. He also explores the vital influence of Kabbalah on art, literature, music, architecture, psychoanalysis, and health. The final chapter covers meditation and prayer. Supplementing the text are more than a hundred illustrations of letters, art, and sculpture.‖ The final section of Rabbi Ouaknin’s Mysteries of the Kabbalah delves into the ―Names of God‖ and ―Secrets of the Tetragrammaton.‖ The first chapter of this section is titled ―GOD IS THE TEXT‖ which echoes Margaret Magnus‘ Gods of the Word and Gail Riplinger‘s quotation, falsely attributed to Erasmus, that ―God is in every syllable‖ of the Bible. ―In the 1500s Erasmus said, ‗God is in every syllable‘‖ (Awe, pp. 16, 109, et al) Gail‘s reference for this Kabbalistic statement is The Bible Through the Ages published by Reader‘s Digest, which attributed it to Martin Luther: ―‗God in every syllable‘ Luther began with the New Testament using Erasmus‘ emended Greek text as his standard. He painstakingly labored over every detail in recognition that ‗God is in every syllable. No iota is in vain.‘‖ (The Bible Through the Ages, Reader‘s Digest Association, Inc, NY: 1996, p. 306)
13
The context in which Gail Riplinger referenced Marc-Alain Ouaknin‘s Mysteries of the Alphabet is Chapter 11, ―Jesus & Jehovah.‖ In this chapter, Gail interpreted the four-lettered Hebrew name of God, which Jewish Kabbalists call the ―Tetragrammaton‖ and the ―Ineffable Name,‖ using Rabbi Ouaknin‘s interpretation of the Hebrew letters. However, Ouaknin‘s ―letter meanings‖ are misquoted in order to make it appear that this Jewish occultist believes the Tetragrammaton was prophetic of Jesus Christ and his death on the Cross – an association no Jewish Kabbalist would ever make. Chapter 11 of In Awe of Thy Word begins:
הוהי
―The name of God is spelled with the Hebrew letters yod, heh, vav, and heh, read from right to left and then transliterated into English as JHVH (called the Tetragrammaton). In the KJV Old Testament it is translated JEHOVAH seven times (and rendered LORD the remaining times; see New Age Bible Versions, pp. 373-385). Each of the letters of the Hebrew alphabet paints a picture. The letters in the name of God illustrate the following: J = jod = י It suggests a ‗giving, extending hand‘ (Marc-Alain Ouaknin, Mysteries of the Alphabet, NY: Abbeville Press, 1999, p. 207.)
H = heh = ה It represents an ‗enclosure,‘ like heaven or a window (Mysteries, p. 191) V = vav = ו It symbolizes a nail (Mysteries, p. 168). A ‗v‘ in English is a pictogram of the chiseled end of a nail. H = heh = ה The H is repeated at the end of the name because ‗Jesus was risen‘ and ‗received up into heaven‘ again (Mark 16:19). “God reached his hand יout of the windows of heaven ה, and we put a nail וin it; having taken our punishment for sin, he has returned to heaven ה. The ‘nail’ ‘pierced’ ‘hands’ of Jesus were foretold in Ps. 22:16 and Isa. 22:23-25. ―Jesus is a transliteration of the Hebrew ‗Joshua,‘ meaning ‗JEHOVAH is salvation.‘ Jesus Christ is shown to be the J, the jod ‗יthe arm of the Lord‘ in Isaiah 53:1-12 and Isaiah 59:16, which says, ‗therefore his arm brought salvation.‘ Isaiah 63:2, 5 repeats this theme.
י
―The jod, is a picture of an arm and hand, drawn in a tiny and compact form. Professor Ouaknin traced the jod from pictograms of a praising upright arm and hand, to outstretched arms, as if on a cross, and finally to an arm and hand reaching down, like the
j
letter – reaching like Jesus – to rescue perishing mankind (Mysteries, pp. 200-207)… ―The Jews, who generally did not utter the name of God, had used, but ceased using the name JEHOVAH ‗centuries before the Christian era‘ notes the classic scholar‘s edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica. It affirms that, ‗…reading what actually stood in the text, they would inevitably pronounce the name Jehovah‘ (Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th edition…1910-11…s.v. Jehovah). The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia admits that in the ‗older system of transliteration, Jehovah‘ is the pronunciation. It states, ‗In the Masoretic text the usual form would give the pronunciation Yehowah [pronounced, Jehovah]‘… ―Thousands of years ago, perhaps 3,600, the name JEHOVAH was given by God to Moses. It is first seen in Genesis 2:4 in the Hebrew Old Testament and translated in Exodus 6:3 in the KJV…‖ (In Awe of Thy Word, pp. 414-15) (bold added)
14
This excerpt from In Awe of Thy Word is one of many in which Gail Riplinger has misquoted her sources, and thereby falsified evidence. Firstly, Ouaknin correctly identified the Hebrew letter יas ―yod‖– not ―jod‖. Gail‘s entire argument is based on the English transliteration of the Hebrew letter ―yod‖ into ―jod,‖ however, the letter ―J/j‖ is never used in the 1611 King James Version, but only the letter ―I/i‖. Although our current edition of the King James Version renders YHWH as ―JEHOVAH‖ in the seven verses mentioned above, the 1611 KJV did not render the Hebrew or Greek as ―JEHOVAH‖ and ―Jesus‖ but rather ―IEHOVAH‖ and ―Iesus.‖ The name ―JEHOVAH‖ did, however, find its way into later editions of the KJV. Remonstrating that God‘s name is ―JEHOVAH‖ not ―Yahweh,‖ Gail identified 19th century German Bible critics as the culprits who ―tried to refashion God‘s name, JEHOVAH. They asserted that the God of Israel‘s name should be pronounced Yahweh because, to them, he was nothing more than an offshoot of the pagan deity ‗Yaho.‘‖ (Awe, p. 415) However, the Hebrew letter יis not jod but yod, and the Hebrew name of God is ―YHWH‖ rather than ―JHVH‖ or ―Jehovah.‖ Gail claims that, ―Thousands of years ago, perhaps 3,600, the name JEHOVAH was given by God to Moses.‖ However, Jewish and other encyclopedias unanimously agree that ―JEHOVAH‖ is an ―error‖ which began with the insertion of vowels into YHWH. ―JEHOVAH is an erroneous pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton, a four lettered name of God made up of the Hebrew letters Yod He Vav He. The word ‗JEHOVAH‘ therefore is a misreading for which there is no warrant and which makes no sense in Hebrew.‖ (The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia) ―JEHOVAH is a mispronunciation of the Hebrew YHWH the name of God. This pronunciation is grammatically impossible. The form ‗Jehovah‘ is a philological impossibility.‖ (The Jewish Encyclopedia) ―It is clear that the word Jehovah is an artificial composite.‖ (The New Jewish Encyclopedia, 1962 ed., ―Jehovah‖) ―..the true pronunciation of the tetragrammaton YHWH was never lost. The name was pronounced Yahweh. It was regularly pronounced this way at least until 586 B.C., as is clear from the Lachish Letters written shortly before this date.‖ (Encyclopedia Judaica, Vol. 7, p. 680) ―JEHOVAH is an erroneous form of the name of the God of Israel.‖ (Encyclopedia Americana) ―The Masoretes who from the 6th to the 10th century worked to reproduce the original text of the Hebrew Bible replaced the vowels of the name YHWH with the vowel signs of Adonai or Elohim. Thus the artificial name Jehovah came into being.‖ (―Yahweh,‖ The New Encyclopedia Britannica, vol. 12, 1993 ed.) ―The pronunciation ‗Jehovah‘ is an error resulting among Christians from combining the consonants YHWH with the vowels of ADHONAY.‖ (Encyclopedia Britannica) The corruption of God‘s name appears to have begun with the apostasy of the southern kingdom of Judah prior to the Babylonian captivity. According to Ezekiel 8:14, Judah worshipped the Sun god, Tammuz, who was the Mesopotamian analogue of Adonis, the generic Sun god of the ancient mystery religions. The Hebrew cognate of Adonis is ―Adonai‖ which was derived from the Canaanite title ―Adon‖ meaning ―Lord.‖ Thus, apostate Jews incorporated the vowels of Adonai into YHWH to form ―Yehôvâh‖ which
15
began the process that led to its further corruption as Jehovah. According to a Masonic book, The Spirit of Masonry in Moral and Elucidatory Lectures, at the time of Christ the Jewish religious leaders, under the pretext of preventing blasphemy, referred to God as Adonai: ―‗The Sun was...worshipped by the House of Judah, under the name of Tamuz; for Tamus, saith Hierom, was Adonis, and Adonis is generally interpreted the Sun, from the Hebrew word Adon, signifying dominus, then as Bual or Moloch formerly did, the lord or prince of the planets. The month which we call June was by the Hebrews called Tamuz; and the entrance of the sun into the sign Cancer was in the Jews‘ astronomy termed Tekupha Tamuz, the revolution of Tamuz. About the time of our Savior, the Jews held it unlawful to pronounce that essential name of God Jehovah, and instead thereof read Adonai, to prevent the heathen blaspheming that holy name, by the adoption of the name of Jove, &c., to the idols. Concerning Adonis whom some ancient authors call Osiris...by the death or loss of Adonis, we are to understand the departure of the Sun...‖ (The Spirit of Masonry in Moral and Elucidatory Lectures, William Hutchinson, London: J. Wilke, 1775, p. 34) As will be seen as this report unfolds, Gail Riplinger is notorious for splicing together portions of sentences so that her sources are made to say the opposite of what they actually stated. In the above passage from In Awe of Thy Word, Gail claims that the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica states, ―the Jews…‗'reading what actually stood in the text...would inevitably pronounce the name Jehovah‘...‖ However, the 1911 Britannica actually states that ―Christian scholars‖ mispronounced God‘s name as ―Jehovah‖: ―‘Jehovah’ is a modern mispronunciation of the Hebrew name, resulting from combining the consonants of that name, Jhvh, with the vowels of the word Adonay, Lord,‘ which the Jews substituted for the proper name in reading the scriptures. In such cases of substitution the vowels of the word which is to be read are written in the Hebrew text with the consonants of the word which is not to be read. The consonants of the word to be substituted are ordinarily written in the margin; but inasmuch as Adonay was regularly read instead of the ineffable name Jhvh, it was deemed unnecessary to note the fact at every occurrence. When Christian scholars began to study the Old Testament in Hebrew, if they were ignorant of this rule or regarded the substitution as a piece of Jewish superstition, reading what actually stood in the text, they would inevitably pronounce the name Jehovah.‘‖ (1911 Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 15, p. 314) Riplinger also seriously misquoted The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia with a truncated quotation which conveniently omitted the part about Jehovah being an error involving Adonai and that the ―older system of translateration‖ which pronounced God‘s name Jehovah was the apostate kingdom of Judah which had inserted the vowel points of Adonai (the Sun god) into YHWH. The complete excerpt in the New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia is as follows: ―JEHOVAH je-hō’-va. An erroneous form of the divine name of the covenant God of Israel which first appears about 1520 A.D. The error arose from the fact that utterance of the divine name, in original quadrilateral form (the tetragrammaton) YHWH, became unlawful in Jewish usage as early as the third Christian century and probably much earlier, at least outside the sacred precincts (cf. Ex. xx.7; Lev. xxiv. 16. the Septuagint of which reads ‗name the name‘ instead of ‗blaspheme the name‘). Consequently, in reading the sacred text, ‗Adonai‘ (Heb. Adhonai, ‗my Lord‘) was pronounced instead of it (or ‗Elohim‘ in case the collocation Adhonai Yhwh occurred) and the consonants of Adhonai were often written in the margin of the manuscripts. When the vowel punctuation was added the vowels of Adhonai were written in the text with the Tetragrammaton,
16
which thus appeared to read Yehowah (rarely Yehowih), or, according to an older system of transliteration, Jehovah. (The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia) Gail also falsified the entry for ―YAHWEH‖ in The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia by changing the pronunciation from Yehowih to ―Jehovah‖: ―The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia admits that in the ‗older system of transliteration, Jehovah‘ is the pronunciation. It states, ‗In the Masoretic text the usual form would give the pronunciation Yehowah [pronounced, Jehovah]‖ (Awe, p. 415, full quote above) ―YAHWEH yü‘ wê… I. The Pronunciation. In the Masoretic text the usual form would give the pronunciation Yehowah, or Yehowih.‖ (The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia) Seemingly confident that few, if any, readers will check her sources, Gail Riplinger has audaciously misquoted each of them to make her case that ―Jesus Christ is shown to be the J, the jod…reaching down, like the letter j – reaching like Jesus – to rescue perishing mankind.‖ Not only is there no equivalent to the letter ―J‖ in the Hebrew alphabet, there is no ―J‖ equivalent in the Greek alphabet, the name ―Jesus‖ being a late English transliteration of the Greek word, ―Iesous‖ (Strong‘s #2424) which the 1611 KJV rendered ―Iesus.‖ Because Gail‘s statement that ―Jesus Christ is shown to be the J, the jod‖ is not true, her argument that the name of ―Jesus‖ is derived from the Tetragrammaton is fallacious. Where did she come up with this theory? THE ROSICRUCIANS Concerning the yod and the ―J,‖ Marc-Alain Ouaknin wrote: ―The yod is pronounced like the Y in year, joy, and mayonnaise. The Y (the Greek I) is an additional letter, which belongs to Ionian Greek. It was added in the time of Cicero (50 B.C.E.) As for the J, it split away from the I in the sixteenth century on the initiative of Petrus Ramus.‖ (Mysteries of the Alphabet, p. 205) The Encyclopedia Britannica confirms that the English letter ―J‖ was borrowed from the French through the agency of Petrus Ramus: ―The Humanistic scholar Pierre de la Ramée (d. 1572) was the first to make a distinction between I and J. Originally, both I and J were pronounced as [i], [i:], and [j]; but Romance languages developed new sounds (from former [j] and [g]) that came to be represented as I and J; therefore, English J (from French J) has a sound quite different from I.‖ (Encyclopedia Britannica) Petrus Ramus (Pierre de la Ramée, 1515-1572) was a French Huguenot, a Kabbalist and a close friend of John Dee, under whose leadership the Rosicrucian Enlightenment began in England. IRF Calder’s thesis, ―John Dee Studied as an English Neo-Platonist,‖ noted the close association between Petru Ramus and John Dee: ―The bare list of the few selected names Dee mentions as among the many who sought his acquaintance in Paris at this time and with whom he enjoyed some intimacy is impressive in its scope; there were he says some 40,000 ‗accounted students‘ at Paris and among these ‗very many of all estates and professions were desirous of my acquaintance and conference as…Petrus Ramus,… Johannes a Pena ‗&c.‘… Pena‘s views seem to
17
have been similar to Dee‘s own; he was one of the most promising pupils of Ramus, who wrote that he had devoted himself to the study of mathematics…‖ (The John Dee Society, http://www.johndee.org/calder/html/Calder4.html) The Columbia Encyclopedia entry on Petrus Ramus mentions his influence on Sir Francis Bacon and other Rosicrucians: ―Ramist logic was exceedingly influential in the 16th and early 17th century… From its English stronghold at Cambridge it markedly effected Francis Bacon, John Milton and others.‖ (Columbia Encyclopedia, p. 2362) There is today a revival of interest in Sir Francis Bacon whose literary accomplishments, his promoters claim, include the works traditionally attributed to William Shakespeare. Francis Bacon, who was Grand Master of the Ancient and Mystical Order of the Red Rose and the Golden Cross (A.M.O.R.C.), is also acclaimed as the re-creator of the English language, specifically the structure of the English alphabet and the King James Bible. One source of this propaganda is the Francis Bacon Research Trust whose founder and president, Peter Dawkins, confirmed that Bacon was involved in restructuring the English alphabet and insinuated that the linguistic restructuring of high level Rosicrucians John Dee and Francis Bacon extended to the King James Bible. ―The evidence within the [Shakespeare] plays shows that the author was… a primary enhancer and re-creator of the English language… Only one man fits this description— Sir Francis Bacon—and much evidence exists to confirm this, laid out in the form of a treasure hunt.‖ (Peter Dawkins, ―Bacon-Shakespeare,‖ http://www.fbrt.org.uk/pages/essays/essaybacon-shakespeare.html) ―Francis‘ mission, therefore, was to create, with the help of others suited to the task, a magnificent English language and culture…‖ (Peter Dawkins, ―Francis Bacon‘s Life,‖ http://www.fbrt.org.uk/pages/essays/essay-fb-life.html) ―Occult mathematics is the rational basis of all Gnosis, or Gnostic teaching, of whatever languages, culture or religious teaching. It is the foundation that underlies and holds together, for instance, the Hebrew, Greek and Latin Bibles. After John Dee‘s and Francis Bacon‘s work was completed, this was also true of the English Bible.‖ (Arcadia, Francis Bacon Research Trust, Journal I/5, p. 94) Peter Dawkins was a featured speaker in David Bay‘s video series, ―Secret Mysteries of America‘s Beginnings‖ In the aftermath of the uproar that followed the release of Volume I, David Bay announced... Horror of All Horrors! Original 1611 King James Version Shows Masonic Handshakes All Throughout The Genealogies ―...these pagan Rosicrucians and Freemasons led by Sir Francis Bacon had their hands all over the original 1611 King James Bible. They took perfectly good text and added page after page after page of Rosicrucian artwork, some of which tells a hidden story, while others are just symbols. These Masonic handshakes are very real and very telling, for they tell the story that Bacon and King James conspired to produce a Rosicrucian masterpiece when they published this Bible... ―...Queen Elizabeth I and King James placed the power of the British Throne upon Bacon‘s project to popularize the new Elizabethan English with a Bible which was covered with Satanic symbolism – it was a Bible meant to be a Rosicrucian masterpiece and undoubtedly meant to gradually move the entire population into the ‗Mystic Christianity‘ of Rosicrucianism.‖ (David Bay, ―Defending the KJV,‖ Cutting Edge Ministries, http://www.cuttingedge.org/defendingKJV.html)
18
If David Bay‘s allegations are true, we would expect to find God‘s name translated as ―JEHOVAH‖ instead of ―IEHOVAH‖ as it is rendered in the 1611 KJV. If David Bay‘s accusations were true, the alleged ―Rosicrucian artwork‖ would be unique to the 1611 KJV. However, identical artwork is found in every English Bible that precedes the 1611 KJV. (See: ―Reformation Bibles‖) If the clasped hands in the 1611 KJV genealogies are ―Masonic handshakes,‖ why do they link the names of husbands and their wives exclusively? The reason is that the emblem of clasped hands traditionally symbolizes marital union. ―Hands are found on many gravestones... Handshakes may be farewells to earthly existence or may be clasped hands of a couple to be reunited in death as they were in life, their devotion to each other not destroyed by death.‖ (Tombstone Rubbings, http://www.browncountytexasgenealogy.com/meaning_of_gravestone_symbols.dwt ) What about the husbands and wives in Scripture whose names are linked with purported ―Masonic handshakes‖ in the 1611 KJV. Was Adam a Freemason and Eve a member of the Eastern Star? What about the Patriarchs? Were Abraham, Sarah and Hagar Masons? Isaac and Rebecca? Jacob and his wives, Leah and Rebecca? Judah and Tamar? Joseph and Asenath? Moses and Zipporah? David, Michal, Abigail, and Bathsheba? Naomi and Elimelech? Boaz and Ruth? Hosea and Gomer? Perhaps Joseph and Mary were Freemasons... David Bay‘s allegation of ―Masonic handshakes‖ in the 1611 KJV is ludicrous. He can‘t be serious. Based on the preceding non-evidence, David Bay claimed, ―Queen Elizabeth I and King James placed the power of the British Throne upon Bacon‘s project to popularize the new Elizabethan English with a Bible which was covered with Satanic symbolism.‖ Well, if King James was a Satanist, David needs to explain why he prosecuted and executed occultists as criminals, wrote a treatise exposing the evils of witchcraft and singlehandedly pulled the rug out from under the Rosicrucian plot to take over the Continent. Historical information setting the record straight is available in our 4 part audio series, ―Did Francis Bacon Edit the King James Bible.‖ (http://watch-unto-prayer.org/cutting-edge.html) THE TETRAGRAMMATON We have not even addressed the issue of why Gail Riplinger devoted an entire chapter to the Tetragrammaton, which is the ―Sacred Name‖ that Jewish Kabbalists utter repetitively as a mantra and inscribe upon amulets for magical purposes. (Jewish Encyclopedia) Compounding the problem is Riplinger‘s recommendation of a work by yet another Jewish Kabbalist, in this instance to decipher the meaning of the so-called ―Ineffable Name,‖ the letters of which Kabbalists believe are ―God‖ Himself incarnating the text. (Rabbi Ouaknin’s Mysteries of the Kabbalah, Part 7: ―Names of God,‖ Chapter 38: ―God is the Text‖) In her book, The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today, Elizabeth Dilling exposed the Jewish Kabbalists‘ blasphemous perversion of God‘s name and their arrogant presumption to usurp His creative (and destructive) role. ―Letters Create the World - Not God‖ ―Note in Exhibit 285 herein that through the Cabala ‗one may thus easily make himself master of creation‘ – a Luciferian idea. Also wild animals can be slain and ‗terror diffused through the world.‘ Note in Exhibit 288 that letters of the alphabet, especially of the four-letter word for Jehova, the Tetragrammaton, have magic power, in fact that letters created the world! It is stated that this idea ‗seems to have originated in Chaldea‘ (Babylonia).‖ (The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today, Noontide Press. 1983, p. 50)
19
The Kabbalistic abuse of the name of God reveals the true power behind the ―terror diffused through the world‖ today, as wars are perpetrated in which the Kabbalists‘ use their enemies to destroy one another. ―The use of AMULETS to drive of Lilith, demoness of childbirth, and of the night, who collects ‗men‘s semen‘ to spawn demons (see Exh. 287 for picture), is part of current Pharisee demonology. By means of these demonistic gadgets one may cause ‗terror diffused throughout the world…one‘s enemies set to tearing each other to pieces…cause anyone to perish.‘ All this is part of the Cabala or demonology of the Pharisees called ‗the art of employing the knowledge of the hidden world in order to attain one‘s purpose… ONE MAY EASILY MAKE HIMSELF MASTER OF CREATION‘— See. Exh. 285, Jewish Ency. on ‗Amulet‘. For BIBICAL enlightenment.‖ (Ibid.) Behind the current promotion of the so-called ―Bible codes‖ are Jewish Kabbalists, many posing as converts to Christianity, whose agenda is to teach Christians the various and sundry ―names of God‖ and combinations of so-called divine letters contained therein, in order make of them, not only ―creator gods,‖ but also destroyer gods: ―Indeed, the ancient belief that God had created the world via combinations of letters was directly linked to the mysterious ideas concerning the various ‗names of God.‘ It was said, for example, that the Torah consists entirely of permutations of the names of God. And of Bezalel, the craftsman who constructed in the desert the movable Tabernacle that housed the Ark – containing within it the Tablets of the Law and the original Torah scrolls (following the escape from Egypt) – it was said, ‗he knew how to combine the letters of the Divine Names with which heaven and earth were created.‘‖ (Jeffrey Statinover, M.D. Cracking the Bible Code, Harper, 1998, p. 69) According to the teachings of the Kabbalah, those who prove worthy and are initiated into the secret doctrine are able to comprehend hidden teachings in the written Torah and through mystical techniques make direct contact with ―God.‖ Among these techniques are meditation on the 11 Sephiroth of the Tree of Life, which they believe to be emanations of God, and rapid recitation of the ―Holy Name of God‖ (YHVH/Tetragrammaton). Adepts and Masters have learned to use the 22 letters of the Hebrew alphabet as force-carrying energy patterns which serve as the building blocks of the cosmos. In their quest for forbidden knowledge (gnosis) and realization of their ―inner divinity,‖ Kabbalists become so deluded they believe they can transcend the space/time limitations of the physical world by reciting names of God, and especially by pronouncing the ‗sacred letters‘ of the Tetragrammaton properly: ―For kabbalists, the letters of the Hebrew alphabet are a royal road to the sacred source within us. They make it possible to ascend to transcendence. The nucleus of the Hebrew language is expressed in the various names of God, and essentially through the tetragrammaton YHVH, from which all other nouns and words flow. In relation to the basic ground plan of the Kabbalah, the names of God are in the intermediary world and make it possible for the light of the infinite to pass to the kalim, the vessels that are man and the cosmos as a whole. ...the text of the Torah is the Great and Divine Name, and the tetratrammaton YHVH is at its core... All of the kabbalistic teachings stress the essential role of the names of God in order to attain the mystical state.‖ (Marc-Alain Ouaknin, Mysteries of the Kabbalah, pp. 383-4) Global transformation is the covert mission of the Fraternity of the Rosy Cross in whose literature and symbolism ―Jehova‖ figures prominently. It was in Francis Bacon‘s era that the Rosicrucian Manifestos were published revealing the existence of the secret society that would bring about a universal reformation ―under the shadow of Jehova‘s wings‖– a peculiar mistranslation of Psalms 17:8 and 36:7
20
which do not contain the word ―Jehova.‖ ―Jehova‘s wings‖ were illustrated in the frontispiece of the first Rosicrucian Manifesto, The Fama Fraternatis or a Discovery of the Fraternity of the Most Noble Order of the Rosy Cross.
The Invisible College of the Rosicrucians, Theophilus Schweighardt Speculum sophicum rhodo-stauroticum, 1618 ―This print (frontispiece) shows a peculiar building above which is an inscription containing the words Collegium Fraternitatis and Fama, and is dated 1618. On the building, on either side of its door, there is a rose and a cross. We are therefore presumably now beholding a representation of the Invisible College of the R.C. Brothers. Another main Rosicrucian emblem is alluded to in the wings with Jehova’s Name, expressive of the words which seal the conclusion of the Fama, ‗Under the shadow of thy wings, Jehova‘.‖ (Frances Yates, The Rosicrucian Enlightenment, Routeledge, 1972, p. 94) ―Under the shadow of Jehova‘s wings‖ also appeared in The New Atlantis which was written by Francis Bacon and published in 1627. According to historian Frances Yates, Jehova presides over the Rosicrucian mission to accomplish the ―reformation of the whole wide world‖ and to establish a New Atlantis, that is, to revive the ancient pre-Flood civilization under the pretext of creating an evangelical Christian Utopia: ―New Atlantis...takes the form of an allegory, about the discovery by storm-tossed mariners of a new land, the New Atlantis. The inhabitants of New Atlantis had built there the perfect society, though remaining entirely unknown to the rest of the world. They were Christians...an evangelical Christianity which emphasized brotherly love...
21
―Before the travelers landed they were handed a scroll of instructions by an official from New Atlantis. The scroll was signed with a stamp of cherubim‘s wings, not spread, but hanging downward, and by them a cross exactly as the Rosicrucian Fama was sealed at the end with the motto ‗Under the shadow of Jehova‘s wings‘ and the wings, as we have seen, often appear as characteristic emblems in other Rosicrucian literature...‖ (Yates, pp. 124-5) See: ―Death of the Phoenix: Atlantis Rising‖ (http://watch-unto-prayer.org/atlantis-rising.html) Certainly God would not be presiding over the Rosicrucian project to restore the ancient civilization of Atlantis which He formerly condemned and destroyed in Genesis 6. And since the name ―Jehovah‖ is nowhere to be found in the original King James Bible, we must look elsewhere for the deity whom Francis Bacon and his Fraternity of Rosicrucians believed was guiding their enterprise. As Kabbalists, they would have believed in the magical use of the sacred and ineffable name of their god, ―Jehovah.‖ Invoking ―Jehovah‖ by means of rapid recitation of the Tetragrammaton ―JHVH‖ would have yielded something on the order of ―Jove‖, the Roman god who was also known as Jupiter, and Zeus in the Greek Pantheon. JEHOVAH = JOVE There is, in fact, a direct correlation between ―Jehovah‖ and ―Jove‖ in the New Age Dictionary: “Jehovah: ‗Incorrect reading of the proper name of Israel‘s deity, joining the consonants of YHWH to the vowels of Adonai. A medieval Christian invention, Jehovah became popular in some traditional English translations of the Bible. The four letters are not a word, but a sentence, which reads literally, ‗I AM WHAT IS‘. When you smooth it out, it reads, I AM (all) THAT IS. The name of the Roman god, Jove, is also derived from YHVH.‘‖ Rosicrucianism conceals its Jewish identity by creating fronts with Gentile names such as the ―New Age Movement‖ and Theosophy. The mother of the modern New Age Movement and founder of the Theosophical Society, Madame H.P. Blavatsky (née Helene Hahn von Rottenstern, 1831-91), was a Jewish Kabbalist. According to her memoirs, Blavatsky received orders from an Ascended Master, Mahatma M., to establish the Theosophical Society as a branch of Rosicrucianism: ―M .∙. brings orders to form a Society - a secret Society like the ‗Rosicrucian Lodge‘. He promises help.‖ (Personal Memoirs of H.P. Blavatsky, Quest Book, Vol. I, p. 212) Found in H.P. Blavatsky‘s book, The Secret Doctrine are numerous references to ―Jehovah‖ as being interchangeable with ―Jove‖:— SD INDEX Jupiter (god). See also Brihaspati, Jove, Zeus (…) Jve, Jave, Jehovah or, [Skinner] II 466 ―…If it be so, then in 1065 we have the famous Jehovah’s name, the Jve or Jave, or Jupiter, and by change of חto נor h to n, then ו י נor the Latin Jun or Juno, the base of the Chinese riddle, the key measuring numbers of Sni (Sinai) and Jehovah coming down on that mount,… This discovery connects Jehovah still more with all the other creative and generative gods, solar and lunar, and especially with ‗King‘ Soma, the Hindu Deus Lunus, the moon, because of the esoteric influence attributed to this planet in Occultism.‖ SD INDEX Jove-Juno, Tetragrammaton II 601
22
―Moreover, the Tetragrammaton, or Microprosopus, is ‗Jehovah‘ arrogating to himself very improperly the ‗Was, Is, Will be,‘ now translated into the ‗I am that I am,‘ and interpreted as referring to the highest abstract Deity, while esoterically and in plain truth, it means only periodically chaotic, turbulent, and eternal MATTER with all its potentialities. For the Tetragrammaton is one with Nature or Isis, and is the exoteric series of androgyne gods such as Osiris-Isis, Jove-Juno, Brahma-Vach, or the Kabalistic Jah-hovah; all malefemales.‖ According to the secret doctrine of the Kabbalists, ―Jah-hovah‖ is the male-female equivalent of the androgynous Roman god, Jove-Juno, which explains why ―J‖ – the 10th letter of the English alphabet – is so important to the Kabbalists. According to H.P. Blavatsky‘s Theosophical Glossary: ―...the Divine name Jah, the male side, or aspect, of the hermaphrodite being, or the malefemale Adam, of which hovah (Jah-hovah) is the female aspect. It is symbolized by a hand with bent fore-finger, to show its phallic signification. (Theosophical Glossary, Theosophy Co., p. 148) In The Secret Doctrine, Blavatsky states that the letter ―J‖ was substituted for the Hebrew yod יfor the precise reason that it pictured the procreative organ of the Greek god, Zeus, whose Roman analogue was Jove, the Hebrew analogue being Jehovah: ―Each letter of the ancient alphabets having had its philosophical meaning and raison d'etre, the number I signified with the Alexandrian Initiates a body erect, a living standing man, he being the only animal that has this privilege. And, by adding to the I a head, it was transformed into a P, a symbol of paternity, of the creative potency; while R signified a ‗moving man,‘ one on his way. Hence PATER ZEUS had nothing sexual or phallic either in its sound or form of letters; nor had [[pater Deus]] (vide Ragon). If we turn now to the Hebrew Alphabet, we shall find that while I or aleph, א, has a bull or an Ox for its symbol, 10, the perfect number, or One of the Kabala is a Yodh ( יy, i, or j); and means, as the first letter of Jehovah, the procreative organ, et seq.‖ (The Secret Doctrine, Vol. 2, Theosophical Publishing House, pp. 574) Jupiter/Jove, the supreme god of the Romans, was an omnisexual pederast whose counterpart in the Greek pantheon was Zeus. Jove reigned over the pre-flood world from Mount Olympus, the home of the twelve antediluvian gods. (See: ―The False Gospel in the Stars: Aquarius‖) In Roman mythology, Jupiter was depicted as an ―eagle,‖ based on ancient mythologies which depicted Lucifer as the eagle or the phoenix who was cast down from heaven in flames, but will rise again. In short, the ―Bird of Jove‖ or Jupiter, is a disguise for Lucifer. ―...the Egyptians and Phoenicians believed that the phoenix was the representation of a god who ‗rose to heaven in the form of a morning star, like Lucifer, after his fireimmolation of death and rebirth. One former witch explains: ―‗...Most occultists believe that the Phoenix is a symbol of Lucifer who was cast down in flames and who (they think) will one day rise triumphant.... ―The eagle (also called the Bird of Jove) is frequently identified with the phoenix. As is well known, the eagle is used extensively in Masonry. In a Masonic Bible was the question: ‗What is the symbolism of the Eagle in Freemasonry?‘ The answer given was: ‗The eagle has been a symbol among the different peoples of the world from time immemorial.
23
In Egypt, Greece, and Persia it was sacred to the sun; among pagans it was the emblem of Jupiter; among the Druids it was the symbol of their supreme god.‘‖ (Cathy Burns, Masonic and Occult Symbols Illustrated, pp. 122-24) The November 2006 issue of ―Prophecy in the News,‖ along with a video presentation by J.R. Church and Gary Stearman, analyze ―Four Occurrences of ‗Jehovah‘ in the KJV‖ – Exodus 6:2, Psalm 83:18, Isaiah 12:2,3 and Isaiah 26:4. Like Gail Riplinger, J.R. and Stearman began by misrepresenting the 1611 King James Bible as translating the Tetragrammaton ―Jehovah.‖ Their analysis concludes with the insight that ―Jehovah literally became Jesus.‖ ―Havah, from which ‗Jehovah‘ is formed, signified ‗to become‘…That‘s has got to be the incarnation. God who became man in the form of Jesus Christ… In Isaiah 12:2,3 Ya Jehovah is an intensified form of Jehovah, Jehovah ‗to the nth power.‘ There are three occurrences of the word ‗salvation‘ – three ‗Yeshuas‘ here: (1) ‗God is my salvation‘ means ‗Elohim is my Yeshua‘ (2) ‗Lord JEHOVAH also is become my salvation‘ which means ‗JEHOVAH also is become my Yeshua‘ (3) ‗Therefore with joy shall ye draw water out of the wells of salvation‘ means the Holy Spirit or ‗wells of Yeshua.‘… Jehovah literally became Jesus. You can‘t deny it; it‘s right here in black and white.‖ To shore up their ramshackle case, Gary Stearman quoted the noted Kabbalist, Rabbi Michael Munk, who wrote in The Wisdom in the Hebrew Alphabet that the Tetragrammaton YHVH (Hay Vav Hay Yod) can be arranged in three different ways: Hay Yod Hay, Hay Vav Hay, Hay Yod, Hay, Yod; and these three arrangements mean ―He was, He is, He will be‖ and the center arrangement (Hay Vav Hay) means ―‗He becomes‘… [i.e., JEHOVAH becomes Yeshua] ‗And all of these meanings are expressed in those four magnificent letters which the KJV translators expressed as ‗JEHOVAH.‘‖ Mormon doctrine also teaches that Jehovah is Jesus, although some Mormons maintain this is not historic Mormon doctrine: ―While much of the Christological discussion in the Book of Mormon has a Trinitarian ring to it, the text clearly favors a Sabellian, or Monophysite/ Unitarian interpretation. The brother of Jared, sees the finger of God and then, on account of his great faith, the face of God. The God of the Old Testament, Jehovah, he discovers, is none other than Jesus Christ. As Steven Epperson argues, this is not the orthodox understanding. Jesus and Jehovah are not the same person in Christian theology. It is an ‗egregious error,‘ Epperson writes, and ‗we do violence and disrespect to the person of the Father.‘ Yet, in the Book of Mormon, at least, the Father is spirit and the Son is flesh, and, as Sabbelius taught, the two are one person in Jesus Christ.‖ (Equal Rites: The Book of Mormon, Masonry, Gender, and American Culture, Clyde R. Forsberg, Columbia Univ. Press, 2003, p. 169) J.R. Church and Gary Stearman concluded their teaching with the declaration that ―Jehovah literally became Jesus. You can‘t deny it; it‘s right here in black and white!‖ Of course, the analogy breaks down if the initial letters of ―JEHOVAH‖ and ―Jesus‖ are not ―J‖ which is the first letter of ―JOVE.‖ And the KJV Translators never translated YHWH as ―JEHOVAH,‖ even though Petrus Ramus had by 1611 introduced the letter ―J‖ into the English alphabet. Considering the insertion of the letter ―J‖ into the English alphabet and the insertion of Masoretic vowel points into the Hebrew appellation of God, YHWH, we are confronted with the troubling prospect that the appellation ―JEHOVAH‖ was incorporated into a later printing of the King James Bible in order to supplant the LORD GOD of Scripture with ―JOVE‖ aka Jupiter, the ―King of Gods and Goddesses‖ in Roman mythology.
24
What could be the endgame of identifying God the Father and His Son, Jesus Christ, with Jove? There may be two agendas, the obvious one being to degrade the Christian faith to the low level of an ancient pagan myth. A second agenda would likely be to reintroduce Jupiter/Jove, the last king of Atlantis who will resume his reign over another Golden Age. A major deception in the endtime conspiracy to eradicate Christianity is a theory called ―Astrotheology.‖ According to Astrotheology, Christianity has its basis in the ancient worship of the Sun, and the New Testament should be interpreted as planetary fable. In other words, the Son of God really means the ―Sun‖ of God, the 12 disciples symbolize the 12 planets in our solar system and 12 signs of the Zodiac, and the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ is an allegory of the setting of the Sun each day and its rising each morning to ―save the world‖ from darkness and death. There are variations of this heresy, some debunking all religions as myths, as in the movie Zeitgeist, while others claim all religions worship the same ―Creator God‖ whose symbol is the Sun. Thomas Paine wrote in his Age of Reason, subtitled Being an Investigation of True and Fabulous Theology, that Christianity is a parody of the ancient sun worship, Jesus Christ being one of many mythical messiahs who represented the Sun: ―The Christian religion and Masonry have one and the same common origin, both are derived from the worship of the sun; the difference between their origin is, that the Christian religion is a parody on the worship of the sun, in which they put a man whom they call Christ in the place of the sun, and pay him the same adoration that was originally paid to the sun... ―As to the book called the Bible, it is blasphemy to call it the word of God. It is a book of lies and contradictions, and a history of bad times and bad men... The fable of Christ and his twelve apostles, which is a parody on the sun and the twelve signs of the Zodiac, copied from the ancient religions of the Eastern world is the least hurtful part... Every thing told of Christ has reference to the sun. His reported resurrection is at sunrise, and that on the first day of the week ; that is, on the day anciently dedicated to the sun, and from thence called Sunday ; in latin Dies Solis, the day of the sun ; as the next day, Monday, is Moon-day.‖ (Age of Reason, 1794, pp. 324, 382) Modern Astrotheologist, Acharya S, points to the false teaching that Jehovah = Jesus = Jove as support for her blasphemy in The Christ Conspiracy: The Greatest Story Ever Sold: ―Prior to being labeled Yahweh, the Israelite god was called ‗Baal.‘ signifying the sun in the Age of Taurus. When the sun passed into Aries, ‗the Lord‘s name was changed to the Egyptian Iao, which became YHWH, IEUE, Yahweh, Jahweh, Jehovah and Jah. This ancient name ‗IAO/Iao‘ represents the totality of ‗God,‘ as the ‗I‘ symbolizes unity, the ‗a‘ is the ‗alpha‘ or beginning, while the ‗o‘ is the ‗omega‘ or end. In fact, the name Yahweh, Iao, or any number of variants thereof can be found in several cultures: ―‗In Phoenicia the Sun was known as Adonis...identical with Iao, or, according to the Chinese faith, Yao (Jehovah), the Sun, who makes his appearance in the world ‗at midnight of the twenty-fourth day of the twelfth month.‘‘ ―YHWH/IEUE was additionally the Egyptian sun god Ra: Ra was the father in heaven, who has the title of ‗Huhi‘ the eternal, from which the Hebrews derived the name ‗Ihuh.‘ Thus, the tetragrammaton or sacred name of God IAO/IEUE/YHWH is very old, pre-Israelite, and can be etymologically linked to numerous gods, even to ‘Jesus,’ or ‘Yahushua,’ whose name means ‘salvation’ or ‘Iao/YHWH saves.‘ As Godfrey Higgins says in Anacalypsis:
25
―‗The pious Dr. Parkhurst...proves, from the authority of Diodorus Siculus, Varro, St. Augustin, etc., that the Iao, Jehovah, or ieue, or ie of the Jews, was the Jove of the Latins and Etruscans.... he allows that this ie was the name of Apollo... He then admits that this ieue Jehovah is Jesus Christ in the following sentences: ‗It would be almost endless to quote all the passages of scripture wherein the name... (ieue) is applied to Christ... they cannot miss of a scriptural demonstration that Jesus is Jehovah.‘ But we have seen it is admitted that Jehovah is Jove, Apollo, Sol, whence it follows that Jesus is Jove, etc.‘‖ (The Christ Conspiracy, Adventures Unlimited Press, 1999, p. 159) Revising the name of God from ―IEHOVAH‖ in 1611 KJV to ―JEHOVAH‖ in subsequent editions of the KJV was made possible by Petrus Ramus, a colleague of Francis Bacon and John Dee, who endeavored to conform the English alphabet to the French alphabet, which had adopted the Latin ―J.‖ Building on the work of the 16th century Rosicrucians are modern Kabbalists posing as Christians to whom God has revealed new insights and new methods of interpreting Scripture which He has saved for the Church in the last days. There seems to be no shortage in King James Onlyism of ―Christian Kabbalists‖ who are peddling lies which lend support to the Astrotheology deception. When Gail Riplinger sanctions the addition of ‗Adonai‘ to the Tetragrammaton (YHWH) to form the blasphemous name ‗JEHOVAH‘ she follows in the steps of the ―Christian Kabbalists‖ of the Renaissance and the Rosicrucian Enlightenment. From the false teaching of Gail Riplinger, J.R. Church and Gary Stearman – that the KJV Translators transliterated the Hebrew name of God as ―JHVH‖ or ―JEHOVAH,‖ the letters of which prove that JEHOVAH is JESUS – it is only a short step to the blasphemy of the Astro-Theologists that ―Jesus‖ is ―Jove.‖ ―For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision: Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre's sake. ...Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith; Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth.‖ (Titus 1:10-11, 13-14)
NOTES
1. Blavatsky states that the God of Israel was transformed into Baal-Adonis by the Masoretes‘ insertion of vowels into the Tetragrammaton: Jehovah: Theosophy Dictionary on Adonai, adonai Adonai ‗adonai (Hebrew) (from ‗adon lord) ―My Lords; through usage, Lord, a plural of excellence. Originally a sort of appeal or prayer to the hierarchical spiritual powers of the earth planetary chain, and more particularly of the planetary spirit of the earth itself; later it became a mere substitute for the unutterable name of God, usually for Tetragrammaton (YHVH). ―‗As the inner nature of YHVH is hidden; therefore He (YHVH) is only named with the Name of the Shekhinah, Adonai, i.e., Lord; therefore the Rabbins say (of the name YHVH); Not as I am written (i.e., YHVH) am I read. In this world My Name is written YHVH and read Adonai, but in the world to come, the same will be read as it is written, so that Mercy (represented by YHVH) shall be from all sides‘ (Zohar iii 320a). Adonai is rendered Lord in the Bible, although it means ‗my Lords‘; whereas ‗elohim is translated God in the English Authorized Version. ―In the Sephirothal scheme, the Divine Name of the Sephirah of Malchuth was ‗Adonai.‘ The Gnostics taught that Iurbo and Adonai were names of Iao-Jehovah, who is
26
an emanation of Ilda Baoth. According to Origen the Gnostics considered Adonai the genius of the sun. Blavatsky writes: ‗Both Aidoneus and Dionysius (Dionysus) are the bases of Adonai, or ‗Jurbo Adonai,‘ as Jehovah is called in Codex Nazaraeus... BaalAdonis of the sods or Mysteries of the pre-Babylonian Jews became the Adonai by the Massorah, the later-vowelled Jehovah’ (SD 1:463).‖ (Theosophy Dictionary, ―Adonai‖)
2. Specifically the next world war between Jews and Muslims and their destruction of Christianity as foretold by Albert Pike. In a letter dated 1871, Pike wrote to the Jewish leader of Italian Masonry, Giuseppe Mazzini, who with Karl Marx co-founded the First Communist International: ―The Third World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences caused by the ‗agentur‘ [agency] of the ‗Illuminati‘ between the political Zionists and the leaders of Islamic World. The war must be conducted in such a way that Islam (the Moslem Arabic World) and political Zionism (the State of Israel) mutually destroy each other. Meanwhile the other nations, once more divided on this issue will be constrained to fight to the point of complete physical, moral, spiritual and economical exhaustion…We shall unleash the Nihilists and the atheists, and we shall provoke a formidable social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to the nations the effect of absolute atheism, origin of savagery and of the most bloody turmoil. Then everywhere, the citizens, obliged to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries, will exterminate those destroyers of civilization, and the multitude, disillusioned with Christianity, whose deistic spirits will from that moment be without compass or direction, anxious for an ideal, but without knowing where to render its adoration, will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer, brought finally out in the public view. This manifestation will result from the general reactionary movement which will follow the destruction of Christianity and atheism, both conquered and exterminated at the same time.‖ 3. King James was no friend of occult societies and would not countenance Frederick and Elizabeth‘s usurpation of Bohemia‘s sovereignty. James‘ neutrality allowed the Catholic Hapsburg armies to defeat the Rosicrucians who were behind this enterprise. Frederick and Elizabeth took refuge in the Hague and the Thirty Years War ensued. The conspirators fled to England where they were organized into societies called ‗Christian Unions‘ ruled by an occult academia known as the ‗Invisible College.‘ After the demise of Cromwell‘s Protectorate in 1660, the Invisible College became the Royal Society, which rose to prominence during the reign of the later Stuart kings and is operative today. ―By James I‘s time, as we have seen, a lodge system had already been established within the guilds of ‗operative‘ stonemasonry and had begun to proliferate across Scotland. By the end of the Thirty Years War, a system had filtered down to England. In its general structure, it seems to have coincided most felicitously with that of Andrea‘s Christian Unions; and it proved more than ready to accommodate the influx of ‗Rosicrucian‘ thought. German refugees thus found a spiritual home in English masonry; and their input of ‗Rosicrucian ideas‘ was the final ingredient necessary for the emergence of modern ‗speculative‘ Freemasonry. ―In the years that followed, developments proceeded on two fronts. The lodge system consolidated itself and proliferated further, so that Freemasonry became an established and recognised institution. At the same time, certain of the individuals most active in it formed themselves into an English version of the ‘Invisible College' of the ‘Rosicrucians’ - a conclave of scientists, philosophers and ‗esotericists‘ in the vanguard of progressive ideas. During the English Civil War and Cromwell‘s Protectorate, the ‗Invisible College‘ - now including such luminaries as Robert Boyle and John Locke -
27
remained invisible. In 1660, however, with the restoration of the monarchy, the ‗Invisible College‘ became, under Stuart patronage, the Royal Society. For the next twenty-eight years, ‗Rosicrucianism‘, Freemasonry and the Royal Society were not just to overlap, but virtually to be indistinguishable from one another.‖ (Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh, The Temple & The Lodge, NY: Touchstone, Rockefeller Center, 1998, pp. 144-45) The first meetings of the Royal Society were held at Oxford University, according to Yates: ―...in the year 1648...the meetings at Oxford began which are stated by Thomas Sprat in his official history of the Royal Society... These Oxford meetings...ran from about 1648 to about 1659, when the group moved to London and formed the nucleus of the Royal Society, founded in 1660.‖ (Frances Yates, The Rosicrucian Enlightenment, Routeledge, 1972, pp. 184-85)
WATCH UNTO PRAYER http://watch-unto-prayer.org
28
CHAPTER XX ―CHRISTIAN ROSENCREUZ‖ It was during the Rosicrucian Enlightenment of the 17th century that the Rosicrucian Manifestos were published anonymously. These mysterious publications heralded a future ―reformation of the whole wide world‖ to be inaugurated by the Fraternity of the Rosy Cross. First there appeared the Fama Fraternitatis of the Meritorious Order of the Rosy Cross (1614), followed by the Confession of the Rosicrucian Fraternity (1615) and, lastly, The Chemical Wedding of Christian Rosencreutz (1616). The first two manifestos were published anonymously. There is speculation that Francis Bacon was the author, however, the manifestos have historically been attributed to Johann Valentin Andreae who was a German theologian, Lutheran minister and Grand Master of the Prieuré de Sion from 1637-1654. According to three Rosicrucian Manifestos published early in the 17th century, ―Christian Rosenkreuz‖ was the founder of the Rosicrucian Order or the Order of the Rose Cross. The first of these manifestos, the Fama Fraternitatis Rosae Crucis published in 1614 in Kassel, Germany, introduced the founder of the Rosicrucian Order only as ―Frater C.R.C.‖ The Fama was followed the next year by the Confessio Fraternitatis and, the following year, The Chymical Wedding of Christian Rosenkreutz, published in Strasbourg, disclosed the founder‘s name as Christian Rosenkreuz. The ―legend‖ of Christian Rosenkreuz is summarized in the Rose Croix Journal: ―The main part of the Fama related the life and death of Christian Rosenkreuz (‗Rosy Cross‘), a mythical figure described as the founder of the Order. According to the Confessio, Rosenkreuz was born in 1378 of a noble family in poor circumstances. At the age of four he was placed in a monastery. When still ‗in his growing years‘ the young man set out, accompanied by a monk, on a pilgrimage to Jerusalem. But the monk died in Cyprus, and Rosenkreuz studied in Damascus, where he became well known for his medical skill. Then he traveled to ‗Damkar‘ in Arabia, where he studied under a group of wise men ‗to whom Nature was discovered.‘ These wise men had been expecting Rosenkreuz. They taught him Arabic, physics, and mathematics, and introduced him to the Book M, which contained the secrets of the universe, and which he translated into Latin. ―Later, after studying botany and zoology in Egypt, and magic and the Cabala at Fez, Rosenkreuz was equipped to teach the learned of Europe how to ‗order all their studies on those sure and sound foundations.‘ He eventually returned to Germany, where he assembled seven disciples, and the group of eight founded the Fraternity of the Rosy Cross. It was determined that they would live in separate countries where they might influence learned people. ‗Before dispersing, they agreed to profess nothing but to cure the sick, without payment; not to distinguish themselves by any particular costume; to meet annually in Germany; to nominate their successors before dying; to adopt the initials R.C. as their seal; and to keep their fraternity secret for one hundred years.‘ ―The Fama also declared that Rosenkreuz died at the age of 106 [1484] and was buried in a hidden tomb. This tomb was later discovered in 1604 by the authors of the Fama. The tomb or vault lay behind a concealed door bearing the words ‗I shall open after 120 years.‘ Inside was a seven-sided vault lit by a mysterious luminary set in the roof. In the center stood an altar, beneath which they found the body of Rosenkreuz, ‗whole and unconsumed.‘ The tomb also contained a chest of mirrors and a copy of the Book T, ―our greatest treasure next to the Bible.‖ (Rosicrucian Digest)
279
―Christian Rosenkreuz‖ was born in 1378, the year in which the Great Schism began. It was also the year John Wycliffe stood trial before the Catholic bishops at Lambeth, only to be acquitted of heresy courtesy of the Queen Mother, Joan of Kent, who intervened in the proceedings. An account of that trial is recorded in David Fowler‘s book on The Life and Times of John Trevisa, Medieval Scholar: ―…Courtenay, as bishop of London procured the citation of Wyclif to appear before Archbishop Sudbury at St. Paul‘s in 1377… Later that same year, the lobbying of Benedictines in the papal court resulted in the promulgation of bulls by Gregory XI citing eighteen errors attributed to Wyclif, and requiring his arrest and examination. ―At the very time all this was going on, the government was seeking Wyclif‘s opinion on the legality of preventing its wealth from going abroad, even if the pope demanded it—and indeed he was doing so at that moment. Wyclif of course affirmed the legality of such a procedure in very strong language. Meanwhile, ecclesiastical efforts to have him arrested continued, and he finally appeared before Sudbury in 1378, protected by a prohibition by the king’s mother against any final judgment in the case [birth of Christian Rosenkreutz?], with the result that he was simply told not to express any opinions that might scandalize the laity. This year also marked the death of Gregory XI and the beginning of the beginning of the great schism, an event which no doubt further weakened the efforts of any pope to make his voice heard in national affairs. ―England itself was at this time experiencing a certain turbulence as a result of the collection of two burdensome subsidies inflicted on the disgruntled population by a Parliament controlled by John of Gaunt [Plantagenet]. The unpopularity of the poll taxes was destined to erupt in the riots of June 1381 in London and elsewhere, which were to shake the confidence of the entire nation (Covella, 1992, pp. 34-35). But whatever the forces that were at work nationally, Wyclif himself was now embarked on a course from which there was no turning back. By the time his De Eucharistica appeared in 1379, his few supporters that remained among the friars were alienated, and even his colleagues on the secular faculty were alarmed. The following year his old friend from Merton, William de Barton, now chancellor of the University, appointed a committee…to report on his teaching on the Eucharist. The adverse judgment of this group, by a vote of seven to five, we have already observed. Wyclif‘s reply to this judgment, The Confessio, was issued on 10 May 1381, but in its wake came accusations of complicity, the seculars accusing the regulars, in particular the friars, of causing the uprising, and the latter pointing an accusing finger at the heretical teachings of Wyclif condoned by the secular faculty. Considering that Wyclif‘s protection from prosecution was attributable to the power of John of Gaunt, the friars went so far as to address a letter to he duke [Gaunt], calling attention to the dangers represented by Wyclif and his followers at Oxford. This letter was dated 18 February 1382 and was delivered to Lancaster personally by the Carmelite Stephen Patrington. The friars were particularly anxious to do something about Nicholas Hereford, named in an early manuscript as a translator of the Bible, and a committed disciple of Wyclif‘s. The duke ignored the appeal of the friars, and on 23 February Hereford announced in a sermon that the religious should hereafter be barred from receiving degrees in the University. In March Wyclif himself published De Blasphemia, in which the denunciation of ecclesiastical abuses became even stronger, and in May he submitted a sharply worded petition to Parliament urging the rejection of any and all papal assessments, and the taxing of possessioners in England. Meanwhile, in Oxford on Ascension Day (15 May 1382), Hereford delivered a sermon in English designed to alienate nearly everyone except the most fanatical of Wyclif‘s followers.‖ (The Life and Times of John Trevisa, Medieval Scholar, David C. Fowler, University of Washington Press, 1995, pp. 76-78)
280
Clearly John Wycliffe‘s acquittal was the initial triumph of the Merovingian dynasty and the English nation over the previously impregnable citadel of the Roman Catholic Church. Which may explain why Wycliffe is honored as the ―Morning Star of the Reformation.‖ However, another event occurred in 1378 which sealed the fate of the Roman Catholic Church. The Great Schism began on September 20, 1378 (Wikipedia). ―There were, however, two events that sowed the seeds of his discontent with the papacy. The first was the total submission of the pope to the demands of the French, historically loathed by the English. The second was the spectacle of rival popes excommunicating each other during the Great Schism. These two episodes seemed to call into question both the pope's political authority and his infallibility.‖ (―John Wycliffe, Father of American Dissent‖) A little more than a century later, the Protestant Reformation would divide Christendom. Rosicrucian Jeff Nesbitt put it this way in ―Rosslyn Chapel Revisited‖: ―In one fell swoop, the Christian world was cleft in twain. No longer would Rome be able to raise great armies from its subject nations to crush heresies wherever the Papal finger pointed. There was no longer just one big boy on the block. Another had moved in. The mightiest church the world had ever known had been ‗divided‘ and ‗conquered‘.‖ Martin Luther‘s personal seal appeared on the third Rosicrucian Manifesto, The Chemical Wedding of Christian Rosenkreutz, which was authored by Johann Andrea who was Grand Master of the Prieuré de Sion from 1637-1654. ―Luther‘s crest with a black cross on a red heart upon a white rose…set beside an expansion on the letters, F. R. C., Futurae Reformatio Catholicae, signifying a hope for a future Universal Reformation, similar to that heralded by the first Rosicrucian texts from Tübingen.‖ (Da Vinci Code Rosicrucians)
―F.R.C. or Frater Rosae Crucis is the title awarded to advanced members of the Rosicrucian Order. This title is awarded specifically to advanced members of the AMORC or Ancient Mystical Order Rosæ Crucis. Through years of study the Rosicrucian who has progressed to this level is understood to be at the master level of understanding the teachings presented by this organization. For this reason, only those
281
who have been formally initiated into the 10th Degree of the order are allowed to attach F.R.C. to their name.‖ (Wikipedia) Christian Rosenkreuz, the mythical knight of the 15th century who is said to have launched the Rosicrucian movement in England, was born at Wartburg Castle. Martin Luther also resided at Wartburg Castle in 1521-22 after his excommunication by Pope Leo X following German Diet of Worms. There are other parallels between the Protestant Reformation and Christian Rosencreutz. ―Rosencreutz was born in 1378 - as indicated in the Confessio and cryptographically in the Chymische Hochzeit - and his tomb was 'discovered' in 1604 after 120 years, he died just about the time of Luther's birth in 1483 or 1484. The year 1604 was fraught with chiliastic significance: 'new stars' had appeared in the constellations Serpentarius and Cygnus, mentioned specifically in the Fama, which Kepler had written about in De stella nova in pede Serpentarii (1606); a heavenly portent in the form of a fiery triangle was observed that was thought to appear every 800 years, having heralded Charlemagne and Christ before him; the third age predicted by Joachim of Fiore was expected; and it was the year Studion completed his millenarian prophecy. The Fama was thus situated auspiciously.‖ (―Johann Valentin Andreae‘s utopian brotherhoods‖)
―1604-2004 – ―The 400th Anniversary of the Opening of the Rosicrucian Vault‖ The opening of the tomb of Christian Rosenkreuz was symbolic of the opening of the Rosicrucian Vault (pictured above) which refers to the announcement of the existence of the Invisible College by means of the Rosicrucian manifestos.
282
―Yates refers to this forgotten period of European history as the ‗Rosicrucian Enlightenment‘—an incredible time when an outburst of curious and obscure Hermetic and alchemical manifestos, along with other printed pamphlets, began to circulate across Europe.5 These publications announced the dawn of a ‗New Age,‘ and proclaimed a universal reform of science, religion, and society. The authors were members of an ‗invisible college‘ and confessed themselves disciples of ‗Christian Rosenkreuz.‘… ―Titled ‗The College of the Fraternity,‘ it [the accompanying illustration] appeared in a publication known as Speculum Sophicum Rhodo-Stauroticum, by Daniel Mögling, alias Theophilus Schweighardt. The illustration was drawn, if not published, around 1604, about ten years before the appearance of the Fama Fraternitatis—usually considered the first book to announce the presence of the Rosicrucians to the world.‖ (Rosicrucian Digest) The Fama, first of the Rosicrucian manifestos published in 1614, noted that in 1604, new supernovae, Cygnus & Serpentarius, were observed in the heavens signaling the opening of a door in Europe, according to the Journal of the Rose Croix: ―The heart of this article: the new stars that appeared in 1604, if the chronology of the story is calculated, give the same date at which the tomb of Christian Rosenkreuz is said to have been discovered. C.R.C. was born in 1378, lived to an age of 106, and lay undiscovered for 120 years. 1378 + 106 + 120 = 1604! Thus, the opening of the door of the vault symbolizes the opening of a door in Europe.‖ (Rosicrucian Digest) A curious statement in The Fama points to Martin Luther as an agent of the Rosicrucians: ―In this [Memorial] Table stuck a great naile somewhat strong, so that when it was with force drawn out it took with it an indifferent big stone out of the thin wall or plaistering of the hidden door, and so unlooked for uncovered the door, whereat we did with joy and longing throw down the rest of the wall and cleared the door, upon which was written in great letters – Post CXX Annos Patebo, with the year of the Lord under it... For like as our door was after so many years wonderfully discovered, also there shall be opened a door to Europe (when the wall is removed) which already doth begin to appear, and with great desire is expected of many.‖ (Fama) ―Post CXX Annos Patebo‖ - ―At the end of 120 years I will disclose myself.‖ ―According to Philip Melanchthon, writing in 1546, Luther nailed a copy of the 95 Theses to the door of the Castle Church in Wittenberg that same day — church doors acting as the bulletin boards of his time — an event now seen as sparking the Protestant Reformation, and celebrated every October 31 as Reformation Day.‖ (Wikipedia) For more information see: ―The Protestant Reformation: Rosicrucian Connections‖ WHO WAS CHRISTIAN ROSENCREUZ? Donald R. Dickson, a Reader for Renaissance Quarterly, interpreted the mystical concept of the ―Chemical Wedding of Christian Rosencreutz‖ as the union of the Lutheran Reformation and Christian Hermetism. ―Christian Rosencreutz (spelled with a k only in the title), presumably Andreae‘s own creation since the name, a symbol of the central idea of his Christian philosophy, does not appear anywhere before 1605. The rose-cross came from his family‘s coat of arms, which
283
derived from Luther‘s. Andreae‘s originality was in uniting the age-old symbols of the rose, the cross, and the wedding as a symbol of the union of the Lutheran reformation and Christian hermetism... ―All three Rosicrucian works are tied together through this imaginary hero Christian Rosencreutz, whose name brought to mind the shield of Luther and his own honored grandfather, Jacob Andreae. The creation of the name Christian Rosencreutz must be credited to Andreae; no one has discovered its use prior to 1605.‖ (―Johann Valentin Andreae's utopian brotherhoods,‖ Donald R. Dickson, Renaissance Quarterly, Vol. 49, No. 4, 1996, pp. 760-802) ―Christian Rosencreutz (spelled with a k only in the title), presumably Andreae‘s own creation since the name, a symbol of the central idea of his Christian philosophy, does not appear anywhere before 1605. The rose-cross came from his family‘s coat of arms, which derived from Luther‘s. Andreae‘s originality was in uniting the age-old symbols of the rose, the cross, and the wedding as a symbol of the union of the Lutheran reformation and Christian hermetism...‖ (―Johann Valentin Andreae's utopian brotherhoods,‖ Donald R. Dickson, Renaissance Quarterly, Vol. 49, No. 4, 1996, pp. 760-802) According to the SRIA, an English Masonic Order for Trinitarian Christians, Christian Rosencreutz was never a person but an intellectual movement which used the Reformation to effect a marriage of convenience between Rosicrucianism and Christianity: ―...according to Schuchard, ‗current scholarship suggests composite authorship by Andrae and his colleagues at Tubingen‘. Here we have an author who is very shrewd, he presents an appeasement (wedding), ie., a Marriage of Alchemy (Intelligentsia of Europe) with the new Protestantism of Europe for political acceptance of the Religious Brotherhood... ―...THE OFFSPRING, of the Manifestos, was the Rosicrucian philosophy that influenced Protestant Europe for the next several centuries... ―Hence, may we say that ‗Rosicrucians‘ were people who enjoyed the mystical and esoteric way of life which eventually led to the Church‘s reform. To overcome the Church‘s label of Heresy they enveiled their thoughts within the science of Alchemy. This concept (destruction of the total control of the Papacy) which began with Luther, included the 30-year War (1618-1648) and reached the public with the publication of the so-called ‗rosicrucian manifesto‘, The FAMA. ―CRC was NEVER a person, rather it was an Intellectual Movement (of 100 years) which roughly spanned 1517 (when Luther nailed his Theses to the Church door) to 1614 (production of the Fama).‖ - ―What is Christian Rosencreutz?‖ In 1605, the Constitution of the Society of Rosy Cross was published in ―The Restoration of the Decayed Temple of Pallas‖ and the Rosicrucian Enlightenment was underway. The Journal of the Rose Croix states that the Manifestos ―announced the dawn of a ‗New Age,‘ and proclaimed a universal reform of science, religion, and society.‖ However, there was one man who stood virtually alone against the plans of the Rosicrucian Order to inaugurate a ‗New Age.‘ Oxford historian Frances Yates described in her book, The Rosicrucian Enlightenment, how King James I of Great Britain single-handedly foiled the Rosicrucian plan. ―Prague…became a centre for alchemical, astrological, magico-scientific studies of all kinds… A Mecca for those interested in esoteric and scientific studies from all over Europe. Hither came John Dee and Edward Kelly, Giordano Bruno and Johannes Keppler. However strange the reputation of Prague in the time of Rudolph it was yet a relatively tolerant city. Jews might pursue their cabalistic studies undisturbed… The
284
Bohemian church, founded by John Huss, was the first of the reformed churches of Europe… ―Bohemia was now in a state of open rebellion against its Hapsburg sovereign. According to the rebels the crown of Bohemia was an elective crown, to be offered to whomever they elected, and not hereditary in the House of Hapsburg… ―On 26 August, 1619, the Bohemians decided to offer the crown of their country to Frederick, Elector Palatine… ―…to accept it was dangerous; it would amount to a declaration of war against the Hapsburg powers… ―On the day of the coronation…German verses were to be sung to a psalm tune… Wyclif came from England, they explain, from whom Huss took his teaching, alluding to Wyclif‘s influences on the Hussite reformation; and now a queen comes to us from England. Jacobus, her lord father dear, Through her has become Our mightiest patron and support; He will not desert us, Otherwise we would suffer great distress. ―Here we reach the heart of this great tragedy of misunderstanding. For James was not supporting his daughter and her husband; he was working for the other side in his frantic cult of Spanish friendship; he was even now, when this print was published, disowning all responsibility for his son-in-law’s Bohemian enterprise to every court in Europe. Not only had no military preparations been made in Britain for the support of this enterprise, but James‘s diplomacy was working against it, disowning it, counteracting it, making every effort to curry favor with the Hapsburg powers. James‘ attitude, of course, immeasurably weakened Frederick‘s position and caused his other friends to doubt him. It had been assumed James would be bound to support his daughter when the time of trial came. She was the hostage ensuring her father‘s good will. But when the time came it was revealed that James was perfectly willing to desert his daughter rather than incurring the Hapsburg anger. ―The whole question is extremely complicated, and the rights and wrongs of it are complicated. James stood for peace at all costs; he had wanted to achieve this by marrying his children to opposite sides in the great conflict. Frederick and his supporters had interpreted the marriage as full support for their side. Many of James‘s subjects also interpreted it in this way and welcomed it with enthusiasm as a continuation of Elizabethan tradition. But even Queen Elizabeth might not have entirely approved of Frederick; she had carefully avoided doing what he did, namely taking sovereignty of a country claimed by another power. She had firmly refused to take the sovereignty of the Netherlands, though she supported the cause. ―…the Thirty Years War which eventually whittled away the Hapsburg power.‖ (Yates, pp. 20-22) Had King James of England not withstood the Rosicrucian plot to establish a beachhead in Europe (which he did at the expense of his relationship with his own daughter whom he never saw again), the New Age would have come to pass in the 17th century. For more information, please listen to our audios on: The Life and Times of King James I Unfortunately, there has not been King James‘ equal on the world scene since, and Rosicrucian plan is coming to fruition 400 years later. We note the honorable mention given to John Wycliffe for his role in bringing to pass the sad state of affairs in England and Europe that would lead to a New Age! Can this be one reason Gail Riplinger has
285
written a book which gives Wycliffe a new image among KJV-Only Christians? If Wycliffe, the ―Morning Star of the Reformation,‖ was an agent of the Merovingian popes in Avignon, this would explain why Gail has written, for all intents and purposes, an attack on the Textus Receptus. And why she is teaching Kabbalism. CHRISTIAN HERMETICISM ―Christian Rosenkreutz‖ is an allegorical romance depicting Andreae‘s philosophy of ―Christian Cabalism.‖ The Rosicrucian Manifestos heralded the restoration of the ―true Christianity‖ based on a right understanding of the Holy Scripture which could be attained by means of the Jewish Cabala. The protagonist of the first and third Manifestos, a mythical knight of a German Cathar family named ―Christian Rosencreutz,‖ became an adept Cabalist in the course of his travels en route to Damascus. A portion of the second Rosicrucian Manifesto, The Confessio, is devoted to the Holy Bible, the ―characters and letters‖ of which are said to contain ―images‖ that are ―keys‖ to predicting the future of the Church and of understanding nature and science. ―Although that great book of nature stands open to all men, yet there are but few that can read and understand the same… ―These characters and letters, as God hath here and there incorporated them in the Holy Scriptures, the Bible, so hath he imprinted them in all beasts. So that like as the mathematician and astronomer can long before see and know the eclipses which are to come, so we may verily foreknow and foresee the darkness of obscurations of the Church, /Drosnin / and how long they shall last. From the which characters or letters we have borrowed our magic writing, and have found out, and made, a new language for ourselves, in the which withal is expressed and declared the nature of all things. So that it is no wonder that we are not so eloquent in other languages, the which we know that they are altogether disagreeing to the language of our forefathers, Adam and Enoch, and were through the Babylonical confusion wholly hidden. / angelic language ―…Wherefore we do admonish everyone for to read diligently and continually the Holy Bible, for he that taketh all his pleasures therein, he shall know that he prepared for himself an excellent way to come to our Fraternity. For as this is the whole sum and content of our rule, that every letter or character which is in the world ought to be learned and regarded well; so those are like unto us, and are very near allied unto us, who do make the Holy Bible a rule of their life, and an aim and end of all their studies: yea to let it be a compendium and content of the whole world. And not only to have it continually in the mouth, but to know how to apply and direct the true understanding of it to all times and ages of the world… ―…we do openly witness and acknowledge, that from the beginning of the world there hath not been given unto men a more worthy, a more excellent, and more admirable and wholesome Book than the Holy Bible. Blessed is he that hath the same, yet more blessed is he who reads it diligently, but most blessed of all is he that truly understandeth the same, for he is most like to God, and doth come most near to him.‖ (The Confessio) An interesting commentary on these paragraphs is found in The Impact of the Kabbalah in the Seventeenth Century. The editors of the Kabbala Denudata or ―Kabbalah Unveiled‖ (1677-1684) believed the Kabbala would be the key to attaining religious unity as well as a ―correct understanding‖ of the Bible, in contrast to Greek wisdom (e.g. Greek resources) which have ―muddied the waters of divine Hebrew wisdom‖: ―The frontispiece of the Kabbala Denudata shows the high expectations that Knorr and von Helmont had of the Kabbala in terms of religious peace and unity. It also reveals
286
their conviction that the Kabbala offered a key to understanding the natural world as well… [G]entile wisdom has clear limits—it does not reach to, or come from, heaven the way the Kabbala does… Knorr attributed the divisions among Christians to their misplaced dependence on Greek wisdom, which far from being the source of true wisdom had simply muddied the waters of divine Hebrew wisdom. ―…the Kabbalah alone is able to unlock the secrets of the Old and New Testaments… The…first volume of the Kabala denudata emphasizes the encyclopedic nature of the Kabbalah. Not only does it provide a theology that will unite Christians, Jews and pagans, but it offers a morality and ethic that calms the passions besetting the soul…‖ Kabbalists believe the Hebrew letters are a ―divine script‖ as well as ―images‖ that reveal by their ―shapes and sounds‖ the nature of things: ―The ‗topos‘ of the ‗Book of Nature‘ also appears in the Manifestos. Two books are available to mankind, nature and Scripture, the one mirroring the other. The dual nature of the divine script printed both in things and on the biblical page provides the rationale for the belief that the Hebrew letters are images of things and reveal by their shapes and sounds the nature of things… [quotes passage above from the Confessio] ―The notion that the Bible is the font of all knowledge, if it is understood correctly, which is so central to van Helmont and [Christian Knorr] van Rosenroth, is clearly stated in the Confessio. Indeed the following passage is similar to von Rosenroth‘s preface to the Alphabet of Nature… [quotes passage above from the Confessio]‖ (The Impact of the Kabbalah in the Seventeenth Century, p. 81) The Kabbalists‘ view of the Hebrew letters is essentially Gail Riplinger‘s teaching that the letters of Scripture were created/written personally by God and that the ―shape‖ and ―sound‖ of each letter should be analyzed to determine its meaning. ―God built the Bible, letter by letter. He gave each sound a sense… Just as God created the basic chemical elements to use as the building blocks to create different things, he also created letters, with significations they carry to create word meanings… Explore in the KJV what Harvard‘s Literary Guide to the Bible tells readers about the Bible‘s ‗sound-meaning interactions‘ (p. 276.) In the 1500s Erasmus said, ‗God is in every syllable‘ (The Bible Through the Ages, p. 306) (Awe, p. 16) ―The historical and current shape of each letter is a tremendous clue to its meaning… (Awe, p. 1115) ―Q. How do letters convey meaning? ―A. Words and letters often resemble their meaning…. Most words are a mix of these: · Pictorial, optical and geometrical: the shape of the letter… · Aural and acoustic: the sound of the letter; how its pronunciation reproduces the thought referred to… (Awe, p. 1159) ―Before anti-Semitic German ‗scholars,‘…linguists often traced words back to common Hebrew roots… English has been traced back to Hebrew… ‗In fact, it is our hypothesis that the phonetic alphabet, monotheism, and codified law were introduced for the first time to the Israelites by Moses at Mount Sinai in the form of the Ten Commandments‘… ‗The written letter replaced the graven image’ … God said the letters on the stone tablets were ones, ‗which I have written…the tables were the work of God and the writing was the writing of God, graven upon the tables.‘‖ (Awe, p. 1171)
287
A ROSICRUCIAN MASTERPIECE Is Gail Riplinger just dabbling in Kabbalah or is she a ―Christian Kabbalist‖ whose hidden agenda is to introduce Christians to the occult methods used by Jewish Kabbalists to interpret Scripture? If Mrs. Riplinger is, in fact, functioning as a ―Christian Kabbalist‖ in the Christian community, we would expect to find Rosicrucian symbols and concepts in her book. In fact, there are many Rosicrucian symbols, motifs and code words subtly incorporated throughout In Awe of Thy Word. The examples in the following pages are representative of numerous others in the book. Occult symbols from various other sources have been included for comparison purposes. But first, a word from David Bay, which seems more applicable to Gail Riplinger‘s book than the King James Bible: ―A former Satanist told me that all witches place great stock in symbols. They believe that, once a symbol is created, it begins to throb with occult energy from the demonic realm. Symbols literally are believed to be transfer points of great supernatural energy. It makes no difference whether the symbol is on the ground or the floor of a building – as it in with all rituals – or in a painting, or on a piece of paper. Once they are created, they begin to throb with enormous demonic power. ―Thus, it is of great significance that all these Satanic symbols were originally placed on the original 1611 KJV Bible. The Rosicrucians who created these symbols really and truly believed that they were creating ‗centers of occult power‘ which would throb with demonic power 24 hours per day, 7 days per week. I believe that Bacon and King James firmly intended to create a Rosicrucian Bible, filled with occult symbols which were ‗throbbing with Satanic power‘, designed to move the entire English-speaking peoples of the world into the ‗Mystic Christianity‘ called Rosicrucianism... ―As you continue to understand, these pagan Rosicrucians and Freemasons led by Sir Francis Bacon had their hands all over the original 1611 King James Bible. They took perfectly good text and added page after page after page of Rosicrucian artwork, some of which tells a hidden story, while others are just symbols. These Masonic handshakes are very real and very telling, for they tell the story that Bacon and King James conspired to produce a Rosicrucian masterpiece when they published this Bible.‖ (David Bay, ―Horror of All Horrors‖) In the Spring of 2006, David Bay published his case that the King James Bible was a ―Rosicrucian masterpiece‖ and that King James was himself a Rosicrucian who ―gave that manuscript to Sir Francis Bacon, who possessed it for about one year, until 1611, when he handed the manuscript back to the King, who promptly sent it to his official printer.‖ Cutting Edge Ministries‘ shocking (albeit unproven) revelations were not a quiet affair, but generated waves of protest and a full-blown controversy among Christians on the Internet. Watch Unto Prayer did a 4-part audio series exposing the deception of Cutting Edge Ministries. (See: ―Did Francis Bacon Edit the King James Bible?‖) Strangely, Gail Riplinger remained silent, offering no defense of King James or the King James Bible to counter the devastating accusations of David Bay. Why??? The extensive use of Rosicrucian symbolism in Gail Riplinger‘s book, In Awe of Thy Word, goes a long way toward explaining the strange phenomenon of the quintessential ―King James-Only defender‖ standing down, so to speak, while the King James Bible was viciously attacked as a ―Rosicrucian Bible, complete with masterful Luciferian artwork.‖ Even so, considering the multitude of Rosicrucian symbols in Mrs. Riplinger‘s book, the latter phrase is a better description of In Awe of Thy Word than the KJV.
288
In New Age Bible Versions, Gail Riplinger demonstrated her clear understanding that symbols are Satan‘s mode of communication since he must carry out his evil plan clandestinely. ―There are two ways of communication: 1.) direct and explicit (i.e., the word of
God and its doctrines) 2.) indirect and implicit (i.e., symbols and rituals). God uses the first method; Satan uses the second method.‖ (New Age Bible Versions, p. 101) Notwithstanding Mrs. Riplinger‘s firm grasp of this principle, In Awe of Thy Word is loaded with occult symbols...too many to give her the benefit of the doubt. Before proceeding to the evidence, a final word is in order from David Bay concerning the power of occult symbols which are concealed from the uninitiated: ―Occultists the world over believe that, once a symbol is created, it acquires power of its own, and more power is generated when such symbol(s) are created without the profane [uninitiated] knowing about it. And, the greatest power of all is created in the symbol(s) if the uninitiated NEVER discover that the symbol exists... The occultist firmly believes that a symbol or a set of symbols possesses inherent power once they are created. Therefore, occultic doctrine teaches that these Satanic symbols would act as a powerful electric-type grid once they were set in place. This power grid would constantly pulsate with Luciferic power 24 hours a day, seven days a week...‖ (David Bay, ―Masonic Symbols of Power‖)
APPENDIX I GRAIL RIPLINGER‘S ―ROSICRUCIAN MASTERPIECE‖
CONTEND FOR THE FAITH: THE TEXTUS RECEPTUS http://watch-unto-prayer.org/TR-0-intro.html WATCH UNTO PRAYER taho@watch-unto-prayer.org http://watch-unto-prayer.org
289
GRAIL RIPLINGER‘S ―ROSICRUCIAN MASTERPIECE‖ ―Of the books you read please do take heed... There are wolves who pretend, masquerade, make-believe, play the part, act the role, King James pose, wear sheep‘s clothes.‖ ―‗This she-wolf is a reward to my kinsmen.‘‖ (In Awe of Thy Word, pp. 34, 515) Is Gail Riplinger just dabbling in Kabbalah or is she a ―Christian Kabbalist‖ whose hidden agenda is to introduce Christians to the occult methods used by Jewish Kabbalists to interpret Scripture? If Mrs. Riplinger is, in fact, functioning as a ―Christian Kabbalist‖ in the Christian community, we would expect to find Rosicrucian symbols and concepts in her book. In fact, there are many Rosicrucian symbols, motifs and code words subtly incorporated throughout In Awe of Thy Word. The examples in the following pages are representative of numerous others in the book. Most of the occult symbols are cryptically embedded in the text and artwork of In Awe of Thy Word. Displaying some of these symbols will hopefully make Gail Riplinger‘s readers aware of her modus operandi. Occult symbols from various other sources have been included for comparison purposes. ―And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.‖ Eph. 5:11 HOLY GRAILS THE RED ROSE SCARLET THREAD SPIDER WEB PENTAGRAM ALL-SEEING EYES AS ABOVE, SO BELOW THE ROSE CROSS CABBALISTIC AMULETS PYRAMIDS, SQUARE & COMPASS MAGICAL AMULET ALCHEMICAL LIGHT YIN-YANG THE SOLAR LOGOS 290
THE HOLY GRAIL As shown in Chapter 1, many pages of In Awe of Thy Word have the text aligned in the shape of the Holy Grail. The ―G‖ and ―Z‖ pages of the appendix, ―THE KJV‘s ABCs,‖ show the text configured as a Grail:
Awe, p. 1129
Awe, p. 1153
The ―Z‖ page emphasizes ―Zion,‖ which the Grail bloodline is taking over through military means in order to enthrone their False Messiah in a rebuilt Temple of Solomon: ―...‗Z‘...has the active, pointed confrontational face, seen on zealots like Zelotes. ‗Zeal‘ pictures the busy zigzag sense of ‗z.‘ In Hebrew, the letter Zayin which looks like a club or hatchet and also means ‗weapon.‘ This is carried into Zion which means ‗fortress‘; Zebah which means ‗slaughter‘; Zabbai pictures its ‗roving about‘ zigzag nature.‖ (Awe, p. 1153) Looking at the shape of the letter ‗G‘ caused Gail to see God there: ―Gg The visually Grand, Great, and Gigantic letter ‘G’ frequently communicates what its size implies, and that is, greatness and grandeur.... God is seen in ‗God,‘ ‗Godhead,‘ ‗Holy Ghost,‘ ‗godliness, and ‗godly‘... The profile of G for ‘God’ gives a view of the throne C and the book ‗ ךAnd I saw in the right hand of him that sat on the throne a book...‘ Rev. 5:1.‖ (Awe, p. 1129) Freemasons also believe the ‗God‘ incarnated the Letter ―G‖ which is why ―G‖ is their ‗Great Letter,‘ just as it is Gail Riplinger‘s Great Letter: ―Thus, in the course of the degrees, the Great Letter has descended from heaven to earth, as if to show us the deep meaning of Masonry.. ...God becomes man that man may become God...meanings and much history are thus gathered into the Great Letter, some of it dim and lost to us now. In our Lodges, and in the thought of the craft today, the Letter ‗G‘ stands for Geometry, and also as the initial for our word for God. Now for one, now for the other, but nearly always for both, since all Masonry rests upon Geometry, and in all its lore Geometry is the way to God.‖ (Short Talks on Masonry, ―The Letter ‗G‘‖, pp. 2-3) 291
Visualizing God in the shapes and profiles of letters also borders on Margaret Magnus‘ Kabbalistic concept that gods indwell the letters, which may explain why God forbade His people from even thinking about Him in terms of the shape of any thing: ―Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.‖ (Exod. 20:4) ―Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man’s device.‖ (Acts 17:29) Eliphaz Levi mentioned among the various meanings of the Masonic Great Letter ―G, the ―Generative Principle‖: ―G which Freemasons place in the centre of the Burning Star signifies Gnosis and Generation, the two sacred words of the ancient Kabbalah.‖ Gail Riplinger includes ―generations‖ among the meanings of the Great Letter ―G‖ and illustrates the generative principle with a fertile womb: ———> ―Genesis 2 continues ‗g‘s grandiose sense with ‗grow,‘ ‗goeth,‘ ‗gold,‘ ‗generations,‘ and ‗ground‘ (the great big earth is round).‖ (Awe, p. 1129)
1129
According to the Quatuor Coronati Lodge, the Great Letter ―G‖ originally represented the Earth Goddess, ―Gaia,‖ whose worship involved ritual sex and cult prostitution: ―In its original form the letter G was held to be sacred by the Pythagoreans; it was the initial letter of the Earth Goddess Ge or Gaia in whose honour the Eleusinian mysteries were celebrated;...‖ (―The Letter G‖)
MORE HOLY GRAILS IN AWE OF THY WORD
102
138
1125
1177
293
431
493
648
725
795 292
870
437
563
521
780
585
561
1045
796
1131
292
616
894
588
What is the ‗Holy Grail‘? The Merovingian Mythos & the Mystery of Rennes-Le-Chateau By Tracy R. Twyman Chapter Seven: The Enigma Decoded ‡ 205 ―It seems that ‗the divine race of the celestial fish‘ would have to be the race descended from Satan, Cain, and the Atlanteans, who associated themselves with fish and, just as the passage states, the Sun as well. Also note the words ‗flood of wisdom‘, similar to the interpretation of Baphomet‘s name as ‗baptism of wisdom.‘ ―By far the most corroborative evidence for my theory is the articles in Vaincre, which I have already described in great detail. ―…in one of these issues [Vaincre], a reprinted letter from Pierre Plantard purported to reveal the Priory of Sion‘s main secret. Plantard wrote: ‘Our TREASURE, that of the PRIORY OF SION, is the SECRET of the BLACK ROCK (‘ROC NOIR’). Revered since remote antiquity by those who believed in its immense power, it was confused with the DEVIL, and even LABOUISSE-ROCHEFORTE wrote in a poem intended for the initiated: ‘The Angel of the bastard race, 293
In a tone at once dry and crazed, Keeps constant guard over This immense income’ “And only the initiated could understand that the treasure was not gold, but the considerable energy that the MASTER of the genie - he who knows the secret - has at his disposal. 206 ‡ Merovingian Mythos ―So in other words, Plantard was saying that that the ‘Devil’ is really a black stone that contains ‘energy’ or power, and that there is a ‘bastard race’ which descends from this stone. This is exactly what I submitted earlier regarding the Grail stone and its identity with Satan. I suggested that this stone might be buried at Rennes-le-Chateau, in an underground tomb or temple. The same was hinted at by Plantard, who wrote that the ‗Roc Noir‘ is in Rennes-le-Chateau.‘ Chapter Seven: The Enigma Decoded ‡ 207 ONLY FOR THE INITIATED ―Perhaps the most evocative lines in this new Vaincre article are the last two: ―‗In our own time the ARCH extends over a large part of the world It is from its summit that the heads of state will come to search for PEACE.‘ To me, this indicates that the Priory of Sion considers the ‗Holy Land‘ of Rennes-le-Chateau to be the foundation - point of an empire that not only existed in the past, but also one that will exist again in the future. The use of ‗Ab Urbe Condita‘ by the Priory, referring to the foundation of Rome, says to me that they are, as they have stated in their own documents, planning a resurrection of the Holy Roman Empire through the United States of Europe. But in order for this to occur, I assume, the treasures of Rennes-le-Chateau would have to be revealed to the world. This would no doubt have a shocking impact upon the collective psyche of mankind, for it would cause us to re-evaluate not only our understanding of history but our political, religious, and philosophical tenets as well. It would be especially shocking if it was proven that direct descendants of Satan are alive today, many of them in positions of power, using their positions to bring about a resurrection of the antediluvian golden age and the empire that ruled over that epoch. ―The thing most consistently said about the Holy Grail, whether it is depicted as a cup, a stone, a bloodline, a secret doctrine, or an ancient tomb, is that it contains the secret of earthly power, either for good or for evil. He who controls the Grail controls the world. He becomes the ‗Rex Mundi‘, the inheritor of Satan‘s title ‗the Lord of the Earth‘, and the embodiment of the Priory of Sion‘s ‗Grand Monarch‘ concept. It is no wonder, then, that groups like the Priory, the Templars, the Freemasons, the Nazis, the Vatican, MI5 and the CIA have struggled over the centuries to possess it. When the secret of the Grail is finally revealed, it will unleash a force as mighty as any the Earth has ever seen. The power of the Grail is, as we know, a boon to the elect, and a curse to the uninitiated. It is therefore not to be trifled with. The unveiling of the Grail could be the most glorious event in known history. It could also be one of the greatest disasters.‖
THE RED ROSE A red ―English Rose‖ is displayed under a Grail or inverted triangle which references the Song of Solomon 2:1 – ―I am the rose of Sharon...‖ with reference to the King James Bible along with the statement: ―Tyndale and Coverdale saw the opening of the petals of the prize English Rose.‖ The ―Red Rose‖ is a cryptic reference to the Order of the Rosy Cross and the Merovingian/ Dragon/ Serpent Bloodline. 294
Is Gail stealthily conveying the idea that the KJV is a Rosicrucian Bible?
The Rosicrucian Emblem
795
The Merovingian Mythos & the Mystery of Rennes-Le-Chateau By Tracy R. Twyman Chapter Six: The Hidden Stone ‡ 180 ―...another Priory document, Le Serpent Rouge. The setting of the poem clearly takes place in Rennes-le-Chateau, and the main character is a mysterious ‗friend‘ whom the author describes as ‗…like the pilot of the imperishable Ark…‘. As the poem continues, it makes two mysterious references to ‗the line of the Meridian‘ (the ‗Roseline‘). There is also a repeated use of the phrase ‗deliver me from the mire, so that I do not sink‘, another seeming reference to the Flood. Then, towards the end, the narrator states that the sky ‗opens its floodgates‘, a clear allusion to the biblical Deluge. The poem seems to be saying implicitly that Noah landed near Rennes-le-Chateau. This is a document written by the Priory of Sion itself! It is worth noting here the fact that one of the townships near Rennes-le-Chateau, spelled ‗Arques‘, is actually pronounced just like ‗ark.‘ Then there is that painting, The Shepherds of Arcadia, which depicts a mysterious tomb within the landscape of Rennes-le-Chateau. In it, the mountain of Cardou is featured prominently. 181 ‡ Merovingian Mythos ―Does this imply that Cardou is the ‗Arca-Dia‘—the Ark (vessel, prison, or tomb) of ‗God‘ (the lord Satan)? Notably the word ‗Cardou‘ can, like ‗Grail‘ (‗Gar-Al‘), be broken down into syllables that in certain languages mean ‗vessel‘ (‗Car‘) and ‗god‘ (‗dou‘, which sounds like ‗dieu‘, the French word for ‗god‘). And if Cardou is the location of the sacred tomb supposedly lit by an ‗inner sun" (the Grail Stone), which Rosicrucians symbolized as a ‗rose‘, this may explain why the meridian which purportedly passes through it is called the ‗Roseline.‘ 182 ‡ Merovingian Mythos ―Recall that in The Legends of the Jews, Louis Ginzberg described how Cain and his descendants purportedly wound up inside the ‗Arka‘, writing that ‗The earth opened her mouth and swallowed up the four generations spring from Cain -- Enoch, Irad, Mehujael, and Mathushael.‘ Five generations. Five kings of the Cainites. Five mountains in the pentagram at Rennes-leChateau. Are these things all coincidences? ―I submit that the five mountains of Rennes-le-Chateau contain the royal tombs of Cain and the four generations of kings that succeeded him. The tomb of Enoch also contains the tablet of Enoch, which was written on the stone from Heaven - the Holy Grail. It was believed that this stone 295
somehow contained the living essence of Cain’s ‘Grail cup’, the ‘Vessel of God’ (the true God, Satan). Because of the legend that Satan and the Cainites were imprisoned in the center of the Earth by the other ‗God‘, Jehovah, the ‗Arka‘ became remembered as a prison as well. ―The stone was believed to contain the wisdom of Enoch, and this is the source of the stories about the tombs of Hermes and Christian Rosenkreutz, both of which purportedly contained the treasure. The stone was associated this the alchemical ‗Philosopher‘s Stone‘, and thus the symbol of the ‗Black Sun‘, the ‗inner sun‘, or the ‗rose‘ came about - said to light the inner world of Agartha, the tomb of Osiris...‖
THE SCARLET THREAD The opening pages of Gail‘s book introduce a ―The Scarlet Line‖ of Bibles wherein are veiled ―mysteries‖ and the ―deep and secret things‖ which will be ―unveiled‖ to the reader through ―computational linguistics‖ as interpreted by various Kabbalists. Riplinger‘s ―word-for-word and letter by letter collation of ancient and early Bibles‖ (many out of the corrupt Alexandrian stream) reveal the ―untold, underground hidden history of the Bible‖ (which means there is no historical evidence for her claims). ―This is the first book to unveil treasures in the word of God, using tools from the new field of computational linguistics… ―This book is the first and only history of the Holy Bible based on a word-forword and letter by letter collation of ancient and early Bibles…This is the untold, underground hidden history of the Bible, written, not by this author, but by the Bibles, their translators, and the martyrs themselves – Christians who died rather than corrupt one word… A history of the Bible must come from the Bible itself.‖ (pp. 6, 7, emphasis in original) The many charts in the book also present, in the author‘s words, a ―scarlet line of letters,‖ which have nothing to do with the ―scarlet line‖ of redemption found in Joshua 2:18, 21, as she claims, and everything to do with the ―Rose Line‖ or ―Merovingian bloodline‖ of the Rosicrucians who were practitioners of Kabbalah. ―THE SCARLET LINE‖ OF BIBLES (...) ―The charts bound in this book are windows to the past. Like Rahab, they ‗bound the scarlet line in the window‘ to show the people of God the safe haven (Joshua 2:18,21) The charts‘ scarlet line of letters, like our Saviour‘s lifepreserving blood, binds the words of each successive Bible from the most ancient to the King James… Wycliffe said that to peel a thread from any word is to begin unraveling the entire holy garment of Scripture (On the Truth, p. 2)... ―The KJV weaves a tapestry with the scarlet thread. Instead, new versions ‗weave the spider‘s web...Their webs shall not become garments.‘ (Isa. 59:5,6).‖ (Awe, p.7-8) A sewn-in scarlet red satin ribbon page marker along with red highlighting throughout In Awe of Thy Word reinforces the scarlet thread theme.
296
In Awe of Thy Word, pp. 6-7 In the third Rosicrucian Manifesto, The Chymical Wedding of Christian Rosencreutz, Christian Rosencreutz, tied a ―Blood-red Ribbon bound-cross-ways over my Shoulder‖ – a red ribbon in the form of a cross – in preparation for the Sacred Marriage rite. The terms ―alchemical wedding‖ and ―sacred marriage‖ signified the union of Protestantism and Hermeticism, which will be the end result of Gail Riplinger‘s Kabbalistic teachings in the King James Only community, hence the blood-red ribbon and scarlet thread motif throughout her book. Gail identifies the scarlet line with Rahab, the harlot in Joshua 6, and associates the line of scarlet thread with ‗our Saviour‘s life-preserving blood.‘ However, a scarlet thread also appears in Genesis as a competing lineage for the messianic birthright. Chapter 38 gives the account of the birth of twins to Tamar, Er‘s widow, who was impregnated by her father-in-law, Judah: ―And it came to pass in the time of her travail, that, behold, twins were in her womb. And it came to pass, when she travailed, that the one put out his hand: and the midwife took and bound upon his hand a scarlet thread, saying, This came out first. And it came to pass, as he drew back his hand, that, behold, his brother came out: and she said, How hast thou broken forth? this breach be upon thee: therefore his name was called Pharez. And afterward came out his brother, that had the scarlet thread upon his hand: and his name was called Zarah.‖ (Gen. 38:24-30) As a matter of fact, the Merovingian tribe of Dan, which claims to have descended from Dardanus, the founder of Troy, whose father was Zarah, claims the messianic birthright from Judah through Zarah on whose hand the scarlet thread was bound. ―Dardanus Founder of Troy, son of Zarah, Proginator of the Zerahites and Electra, of the Pleiades, was born in Eygpt and from Crete, Greece, Samothrace 297
in the Aegean and died in 1449 B.C. in Dardania at the foot of Mount Ida.‖ (Ancestors of: Dardanus, Founder of Troy) American pop stars wear a red string bracelet as an amulet to ward off evil. Among these celebrity practitioners of Kabbalah are Madonna, Britney Spears, Lindsay Lohan, Paris Hilton, Demi Moore, Ashton Kutcher, and Olympics silver medalist, Sasha Cohen.
Love Amulet on Red Star of David Charm String on Red String Bracelet Amulets.com
―The key to making the amazing Red String Bendel work is to transfer part of your own energy
to the red string - transfer the feeling that you can ward off evil. The string is the talisman to make it happen. The Red String Bendel is as powerful as the individual who wears it. ‖ The Kabbalah Center promotes this pagan amulet/talisman by identifying it with Jacob‘s idolatrous wife, Rachel: Rachel and The Red String ―The Red String has been used as a tool of protection for centuries. The practice, developed by the sages, involves winding the red string around the tomb of the great Matriarch, Rachel located in the Land of Israel. The string is then cut it into pieces and worn on the left wrist. The left hand is considered by Kabbalah to be the receiving side for the body and soul. By wearing The Red String on our left wrist, we can receive a vital connection to the protective energies surrounding the tomb of Rachel. It also allows us to take Rachel‘s powerful protective energy with us and draw from it anytime. ―Kabbalists believe that by seeking the Light of holy persons, such as Rachel, we can use their powerful influence to assist us. According to Kabbalah, Rachel represents the physical world in which we live. Her greatest desire is to protect and defend all of her children from evil. When we tie The Red String to our left wrist, while reciting the 298
powerful Ana Be‘Co‘ach prayer on this card, we seal her powerful protective energy within as it intercepts negative influences intended to cause us harm.‖ The Kabbalah Center fails to inform their victims that Rachel‘s pagan idols brought a curse upon her: ―And Laban went to shear his sheep: and Rachel had stolen the images that were her father‘s… ―And Jacob answered and said to Laban, Because I was afraid: for I said, Peradventure thou wouldest take by force thy daughters from me. With whomsoever thou findest thy gods, let him not live: before our brethren discern thou what is thine with me, and take it to thee. For Jacob knew not that Rachel had stolen them. And Laban went into Jacob‘s tent, and into Leah‘s tent, and into the two maidservants‘ tents; but he found them not. Then went he out of Leah‘s tent, and entered into Rachel‘s tent. Now Rachel had taken the images, and put them in the camel‘s furniture, and sat upon them. And Laban searched all the tent, but found them not. And she said to her father, Let it not displease my lord that I cannot rise up before thee; for the custom of women is upon me. And he searched, but found not the images… ―And Rachel died, and was buried in the way to Ephrath, which is Bethlehem.‖ (Gen 31:19, 31-35, 35:19) In another instance of misappropriating a Biblical character to legitimize the Kabbalah, Madonna changed her name to ―Esther‖ to reflect her conversion from Roman Catholicism to Jewish Kabbalism. In the Old Testament, Esther was the Jewish queen of Persia (modern Iran) whose intercession led to the royal decree authorizing the Jews to slaughter their enemies throughout the Medo-Persian Empire. The name ―Esther‖ is an English transliteration of ―Ishtar,‖ the Persian Mother Goddess worshipped by Jewish Kabbalists whose mystery religion was adopted by their Jewish ancestors during their captivity in ancient Babylon. The Jews who chose not to return with Nehemiah to Israel but remained in Babylon, which was later conquered by the Medes and Persians, would be the carriers of the Babylonian mystery religion back to Israel.
SPIDER WEB PENTAGRAM A spider web in the shape of a pentagram is found on page 8 of In Awe of Thy Word:
299
PAGAN JEWELRY Spider Web Pendant
Spider Web Pentacle
―Man inscribed in a Pentagram, from Heinrich Cornelius Agrippa‘s Libri tres de occulta philosophia.‖
The Rosicrucian Emblem ―The Emblem of the Rose Cross is one of these divine symbols. The Western Mystery School (that of the Rosicrucian‘s) has as its Emblem the red roses (symbolic of the purification of the desire nature) on the cross (materiality), the golden five-pointed star (showing that the Christ is born within the disciple and radiates from the five points which represent the head and four limbs), and the blue background (symbolic of the Father)... ―The seven roses which garnish the Emblem and the five-pointed radiating star behind, are symbolical of the twelve Great Creative Hierarchies which have assisted the evolving human Spirit through the previous conditions, as mineral, plant, and animal, when it was devoid of consciousness and unable to care for itself in the slightest degree. Of these twelve hosts of Great Beings, three classes worked upon and with man of their own free will and without any obligation whatever. These are symbolized by the three points in the star upon the Emblem which point upward. Two more of the Great Hierarchies are upon the point of withdrawal, and they are pictured in the two points of the star which radiates downward from the center.‖ (―The Rosicrucian Emblem‖)
The Merovingian Mythos & the Mystery of Rennes-Le-Chateau By Tracy R. Twyman Chapter Six: The Hidden Stone ‡ 181 ―The pentagram has been a sacred symbol for ages, and was the central geometric figure of the Pythagorean mysteries. Its angles embody the Phi ratio and was the central geometric figure of the Pythagorean mysteries. Its angles embody the Phi ratio and golden mean geometry, and as such this figure appears a great deal in nature, including the human body, which is why the Priory of Sion Grand Master Leonardo da Vinci used it as symbol of the divine proportion in man. The planet Venus, called ‗the Morning Star‘ and associated with Lucifer, actually forms a perfect pentagram from the perspective of the Earth as it cycles through its orbit, the only planet in our 300
solar system to display such properties. Given its association with the Luciferian ‗Morming Star‘, and with the hidden mathematical mysteries of nature, we can understand how this symbol has become linked in the modern mind with Satanism. ―But recall that the pentagram can be traced back to ancient Sumeria, where it was called the ‗Ar‘, ‗the Plough Sign‘, and was linked back to the ‗Aryan‘ race spawned by Cain and Satan. Furthermore, recall that the word ‗Ar‘ also has the secondary meaning of ‗to shackle or imprison‘, which the word ‗Arca‘ in Latin came to mean as well. Then recall the legends of Satan being imprisoned underground by a pentagram, and the legend of Cain and his descendants were later jailed within an underground realm called ‗the Arka.‘ The word ‗ark‘ or ‗arca‘ also means ‗tomb.‘ This prefix is further linked to words regarding secrecy, and digging or hiding things underground... And Henry Lincoln has found that the tomb in the painting The Shepherds of Arcadia is set within an implied geometrical pentagram. Is the pentacle of mountains at Rennes-le-Chateau the one that imprisoned these figures, and entombed them, occulting their hidden wisdom, written on the stone from Heaven?... 182 ‡ Merovingian Mythos ―Recall that in The Legends of the Jews, Louis Ginzberg described how Cain and his descendants purportedly wound up inside the ‗Arka‘, writing that ‗The earth opened her mouth and swallowed up the four generations spring from Cain -- Enoch, Irad, Mehujael, and Mathushael.‘ Five generations. Five kings of the Cainites. Five mountains in the pentagram at Rennes-le-Chateau. Are these things all coincidences? ―I submit that the five mountains of Rennes-le-Chateau contain the royal tombs of Cain and the four generations of kings that succeeded him. The tomb of Enoch also contains the tablet of Enoch, which was written on the stone from Heaven - the Holy Grail. It was believed that this stone somehow contained the living essence of Cain’s ‘Grail cup’, the ‘Vessel of God’ (the true God, Satan). Because of the legend that Satan and the Cainites were imprisoned in the center of the Earth by the other ‗God‘, Jehovah, the ‗Arka‘ became remembered as a prison as well. ―The stone was believed to contain the wisdom of Enoch, and this is the source of the stories about the tombs of Hermes and Christian Rosenkreutz, both of which purportedly contained the treasure. The stone was associated this the alchemical ‗Philosopher‘s Stone‘, and thus the symbol of the ‗Black Sun‘, the ‗inner sun‘, or the ‗rose‘ came about - said to light the inner world of Agartha, the tomb of Osiris...‖
ALL-SEEING EYES In her ―KJV‘s ABCs‖, Gail Riplinger illustrated the letter ―E‖ with All-Seeing Eyes which she did not identify but rather legitimizes this occult symbol with her linguistic mind games.
301
The next page features a modified version of the All-Seeing Eye which illustrates the ―open‖ ―East‖ side of the letter ―e.‖ This All-Seeing Eye looks toward the East for its tradition of ancient wisdom:
It is rather humorous that an All-Seeing Eye is secretively positioned at the bottom of the title page of Chapter 14, ―Enemy Secrets: Lexicons & Private Interpretations‖:
―All-Seeing Eyes‖ are found on many other pages of In Awe of Thy Word, such as the following
Awe, pp. 50-51
302
Awe, pp. 52-53
Awe, pp. 56-57
Awe, pp. 56-57 303
The Merovingian Mythos & the Mystery of Rennes-Le-Chateau By Tracy R. Twyman Chapter Five: Descendants of the Devil ‡ 132 ―The symbol of the All-Seeing Eye was...adopted by Freemasons, who incorporated many Egyptian mysteries into their rituals. It was Freemasons who designed designed the Great Seal of the United States, in which the All-Seeing Eye replaces the capstone of the Egyptian Great Pyramid. This is supposed to symbolize the ideal political world order envisioned by Freemasons--one of autocratic global hegemony, a return to the world empire of the golden age of the gods.‖ Appendix B: Le Serpent Rouge Interpreted ‡ 223 ―...the Egyptian symbols of the Eye of Ra and the Eye of Horus represent the ‗Grail stone‘, the ‗stone that was rejected‘ and the ‗substitute‘ stone... ―The Eye of Horus is a representation of the Grail stone as the ‗All-Seeing Eye‘ of Satan, with which all of his direct descendants are able to see as well. This would have to be the ‗Third Eye‘ of Hinduisim, called the ‗Ajna‘ (which comes from ‗Az‘, a titled used by both Cain and Enoch).‖ ―RED All-Seeing Eye‖ symbols are used as bullets for eleven (11) of the KJV Translators. This
symbol seems very strange considering the occult meaning of the All-Seeing Eye. What esoteric message is Gail conveying with 11 Red All-Seeing Eyes next to 11 KJV Translators? (11 + 11 = 22) 11 and 22 are master occult numbers. Red is the color of the Dragon bloodline.
Dragon Circle/Red Eye Pewter Pendant Mystical Daze
Dragon Cufflink with Red Eye Stone Masonic Store 304
891
892
893
―AS ABOVE, SO BELOW‖ On page1126, the paragraph preceding the All-Seeing Eye discussed above is illustrated by a symbol for ―As Above, So Below.‖ Gail even uses the Hebrew word for the New Age term ―dawn‖ which, (she claims) Young‘s Concordance says transliterates as the ―eye lids of the day‖. However, this turn of phrase was found in a work by Sir Francis Bacon, The Spanish Armada, which was his account of the destruction of the Spanish fleet by a tempest which was alleged to have been conjured by John Dee. The phrase originally appeared in the provocatively anti-Semitic play, The Jew of Malta, by Christopher Marlowe whose works Baconian fans attribute to.....Sir Francis Bacon.
305
The Spanish Armada, Book III
The Jew of Malta
Secure they slept, nor woke till Morning fair With rosy fingers op’d the eyelids of the Day. The storm now past, through vanquishing of clouds. The golden Sun his glist‘ring head doth show; And from the woods ring forth sweet songs of birds — Melodious praises unto heaven bestow‘d.
BARABAS Farewell, my joy, and by my fingers take A kiss from him that sends it from his soul. [Exit Abigall above] Now, Phoebus, ope the eyelids of the day, And for the raven wake the morning lark, That I may hover with her in the air, Singing o‘er these, as she does o‘er her young [sings] Hermoso placer de los dineros. [beautiful pleasure of money]
The circle intersected by a horizontal line is often used to illustrate the occult concept of ―as above so below,‖ which means that Man is one with the Universe, the Macrocosm, of which he is a Microcosm or mini-universe. An illustration of this concept which resembles Gail Riplinger‘s image is found on a rock music album cover which features an All-Seeing-Eye intersected horizontally:
―In mysticism, [as above,, so below] means that the soul and God are one and the same. In magic, the principle is altogether more complicated. Man is the ‗microcosm,‘ whose symbol is a five-pointed star (or pentacle); the universe is the macrocosm, and its symbol is the six-pointed star (or two triangles interlaced–the symbol of Solomon). The occultists of the Middle Ages and the Reformation saw man and the universe connected by thousands of invisible bonds...the notion of an ‗intelligent universe‘ in which cosmic rays may carry coded information that can influence the genes... This, then, was the conception that underlay all the magic of the ‗hermetic century,‘ 1500 to 1600. Man is an organ in the body of the universe.‖ (Colin Wilson, The Occult: A History, p. 232) ―The whole universe is the great world, the macrocosm; its parts are small universes in themselves, microcosms. Such a microcosm is man, who is in himself an image of the universe and a perfect being. But the great universe is likewise a man, and as it is ‗god‘, God has a human form.‖ (Matthew Fox, Coming of the Cosmic Christ, p.213) The Hermetic axiom ―As Above, So Below‖ – Man‘s oneness with the Universe – is also expressed in the New Age belief in ―even balance,‖ which means that the energies of the Macrocosm can be tapped to balance the Microcosm. This occult concept is subtly illustrated in Chapter 10 of In Awe of Thy Word:
306
In Awe of Thy Word, p. 391 â&#x20AC;&#x2022;Healing occurs at the balance point of the Macrocosm meeting the Microcosm, it is the floor of understanding where we are when the Holy Spirit meets us in healing, the perfect balance point, the meeting of where the inner meets the outer meets the universal, the perfect place of uniting balance; this is why its the best place to be for healing, start here and heal the within and the outer; this is why there is no separation, the temple floor is planet earth, the grid of light forming is the healing grid developed from our thoughts our vibrations of interaction with the holy spirit and our balanced pivot point. The temple is the perfect dome of above combining the perfect inverted dome below (a bowl), forming a circle of healing around which is in fact a sphere (a three dimensional circle); it is a perfect balanced energy field of equal yin and yang, masculine and feminine, above and below, earth and cosmic, inner outer, physical spiritual, combined oneness with the holy spirit, (what a team). We create this bubble of light, The Temple with our altered state of good intent, natural healing capability available to all; we do this by transferring our lower ego state to our higher ego less state by invoking the greater good the divine good the divine plan (not our own personal will, but ego less), in all our healing. This is healing self less healing.â&#x20AC;&#x2013; (Fountain Int.)
307
This strange configuration in the ―Even Balance‖ chapter of Gail‘s book might be a scale, but it more closely resembles the ―celestial fish‖ represented by the Holy Grail. According to DragonKey Press, ―It seems that ‗the divine race of the celestial fish‘ would have to be the race descended from Satan, Cain, and the Atlanteans, who associated themselves with fish and, just as the passage states, the Sun as well.‖ Ancient Egyptians and the Constellations states that this fish stands for the Fisher-King, who will be God in the Age of Aquarius! ―The Water Bearer is the herald of the New Age of Aquarius. It is he who figuratively sheds the first drops of water of the New Age from his urn. However the Water Bearer is not of human form as is generally supposed. The Water Bearer is, quite logically, a fish. ―God in the Galactic Season of Eagle/Scorpio was a human headed leonine male with an Osiris beard, in the form of a Sphinx Super Giant in the heavens. He was Hu, the Celestial Sphinx. God in the Galactic Season of Leo was a Lion. God in the galactic Season of Taurus was a Bull, or Nermer/Osiris/Orion affecting the image of the Bull. God in the Age of Aquarius will be a Super Giant Fish; the Fisher King.”
AQUARIUS (See: ―The False Gospel in the Stars: Aquarius‖) This configuration also brought to mind the pagan tradition of balancing an egg three weeks before the Spring equinox.
409
―Author’s photo of an egg successfully balanced on end... three weeks before the vernal equinox!‖ (About.com) 308
―Many of the symbols of Ostara...are also common to Easter. Eggs have been a symbol of renewed life and fertility since the time of the ancient Egyptians and Persians. In fact, in both cultures people dyed eggs and at them in honor of the returning spring... ―A Wiccan celebration of Ostara, a Lesser Sabbat, includes boiled and decorated eggs. Some Wiccans even do egg hunts and eat chocolate bunnies. If you can celebrate at the exact moment of the vernal equinox, you can even balance a raw egg on one end because of the change in the Earth's tilt. In ritual, witches might bless seeds for future planting. This is also a good time of year for sweeping out negative energies.‖ (The Complete Idiot's Guide to Wicca and Witchcraft)
THE ROSY CROSS WHY THE DECORATIVE CROSS???
In Awe of Thy Word, p. 1106
309
The Rose Cross Symbol ―The Golden Dawn Rosy Cross symbol. This glyph was worn by on the breast by Golden Dawn members during ceremonies. The design is based on Rosicrucian legend, Kabbalah, and on the colour symbolism taught by S. L. MacGregor Mathers. The twentytwo petals of the Rose, each coloured differently, correspond to the twenty-two letters of the Hebrew alphabet - ‗three mothers, seven doubles and twelve simple‘ - and the twentytwo Paths of the Tree of Life. From these petals a geometrical figure representing any named spiritual force can be obtained; the name is first transliterated into Hebrew letters and then a figure is drawn which would connect up all the letters of that name if it were drawn upon the Rose. In the middle of the petals of the Rose is a Calvary Cross, symbolic of death and spiritual rebirth. The Rose itself lies upon the four-armed Cross of Nature, symbolic of the physical elements which the adept has to transmute into pure gold in the athanor of his heart. The pentagrams show the symbols of four physical elements plus the fifth or quintessence; the hexagram below the rose shows the moon and five planets, centred on the sun.‖ (Francis King, 1975, Magic - the Western Tradition, Art and Imagination series, ed. Jill Purce, Thames and Hudson, London) Whatever happened to the old rugged Cross???
CABALISTIC AMULET? Is Gail Riplinger doing witchcraft (casting spells) with the myriad of occult symbols in her Rosicrucian masterpiece? The title page of Gail‘s ―KJV‘s ABCs‖ consists of a double triangle configuration composed of the letters of the alphabet. This design bears an uneasy resemblance to ancient alchemy symbols consisting of letters arranged in triangular formations and used as Cabalistic charms.
310
Abracadabra: ―This is a Cabalistic charm with origins from Hebrew initials of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. This is an ancient alchemy symbol used for an antidote for illness and used to augment healing. This phrase was written on parchment and suspended from then neck by a thread in the triangular form seen here. In Awe of Thy Word, p. 1114 Ancient Alchemy Symbols ―Ancient Alchemy Symbols and their oft times cryptic meanings began out of necessity as alchemists disguised their practices from the hugely powerful European church. At the height of its practice, alchemy was considered heretical craft by the church, punishable by death (or worse, torture). The church body at the time viewed alchemy as a way for the practitioner to ascend to salvation outside of the ‗traditional‘ church methodology. ―Although ancient alchemy symbols were born out of this necessity, the foundation of alchemical practice is based on inner transformation and the achievement of that transformation. As a means for this transmutation, the alchemist utilized the changing properties of matter in addition to the philosophical meanings of the symbols themselves. ―The very act of turning base metals to gold is a symbol of (wo)mans ascension and achievement of enlightenment. All things, no matter how banal, hold deeper spiritual symbolic meaning to the alchemist in all of us. ―Below are some ancient alchemy symbols and their meanings. Encyclopedia of Spells Avada Kedavra (uh-VAH-duh kuh-DAH-vruh) ―Killing Curse‖ Aramaic: ―adhadda kedhabhra‖ - ―let the thing be destroyed‖. NOTE: Abracadabra is a cabbalistic charm in Judaic mythology that is supposed to bring healing powers. One of its sources is believed to be from Aramaic avada kedavra, another is the Phoenician alphabet (a-bra-ca-dabra). 311
Spells in Harry Potter ―Avada Kedavra, also known as the Killing Curse, kills a person instantaneously and without injury. There is no countercurse for it, and only two people, Harry Potter and Lord Voldemort, have ever survived it.‖
The Alphabetic Labyrinth, p. 67 The page is from Johanna Drucker‘s book, The Alphabetic Labyrinth: The Letters in History and Imagination. Note the triangular amulet which is used to cast spells. The author explains that the amulet consists of two pyramids, one of which is inverted in a magical arrangement, like the title page of Gail Riplinger‘s KJV‘s ABCs. ―This spell is the double figure of two pyramids of vowels, side by side. the first is structured with a single ‗A‘ at the top, followed by two ‗E's‘ and so forth until the final row of seven long ‗O‘s.‘ The second pyramid inverts this order, placing the ‗O‘s‘ at the top and diminishing to the point of the ‗A.‘ This sequence would in turn be incorporated into the actual prayer to invoke the aid of the demon helpmate.‖
312
PYRAMIDS, SQUARE & COMPASS... What’s this??? Mount Hermon/Sion or the Giza Pyramids? A Compass and a Square, or rather a Cube, next to an Obelisk?
In Awe of Thy Word, p. 389 Gail wrote that man achieves great art, literature, poetry, music, art, and architecture when his soul is in harmony with God. In the next paragraph she says in so many words that, unlike the artists, architects, musicians and literary minds of the 1600s, the modern artists are Luciferian followers of Blavatsky. ―Compare a building designed by Inigo Jones (A.D. 1573-1652), the architect of King James I of England with today‘s ‗award winning‘ architecture. Compare a painting done in the 1600s with a product of the Modern Art movement. (HPB: The Extraordinary Life and Influence of Helena Blavatsky documents that the artists of the modern movement were Luciferians and followers of occultist H. P. Blavatsky.) As if the New Age Movement started with Madame Blavatsky and the famous artists and architects in the 1600s were not occultists! In fact, many of the great minds of the English Renaissance were Luciferians who used Cabala, alchemy, and ―sacred geometry‖ to harmonize with the ―Great Architect of the Universe.‖ In her expose of the Occult Theocrasy, Lady Queensborough wrote of Inigo Jones‘ Rosicrucian affiliations: ―Nick Stone was one of the Seven of the Convention of Magdebourg. As an architect, belonging to the guild of the Freemasons, he had helped Inigo Jones, the grand-master of the English Lodges which, at this period, were nonsectarian. On the other hand, as a Rosicrucian he had grasped, in the Luciferian sense, the idea given by Faustus Socinius, and he had composed, for the nine grades of the fraternity, rituals which the chiefs declared remarkable. His ritual of the eighth degree (Magister Templi) was really Satanic.‖ (Occult Theocrasy, p. 155) The 17th century Rosicrucian Enlightenment also produced literary works by Rosicrucians who tried to mainstream knowledge gained by occult methods (gnosis) as legitimate arts and sciences. Among these were the Rosicrucian Manifestos and Sir Francis Bacon‘s The Proficience and Advancement of Learning: 313
―The Advancement of Learning, published in 1605, is a sober survey of the present state of knowledge, drawing attention to those areas of learning which are deficient, where more might be known if men would give their minds to research and experiment, particularly in natural philosophy, which Bacon finds deplorably deficient... ―‗Surely as nature createth brotherhood in families, and arts mechanical contract brotherhoods in communities, and the anointment of God superintendeth a brotherhood in kings and bishops, so in learning there cannot but be a fraternity in learning, relating to that paternity which is attributed to God, who is called the father of illumination or lights.‘ ―In reading this passage, after our exploration of this book, one is struck by the fact that Bacon here thinks of learning as ‗illumination‘, light descending from the Father of Lights, and that the brotherhood of learning which he desires would be a ‗fraternity in learning and illumination‘. These expressions should not be passed over as pious rhetoric; they are significant in the context of the times. ―Nine years later, in Germany, the Rosicrucian Fama was to present the Brothers R.C. as a fraternity of illuminati, as a band of learned men joined together in brotherly love; it was to urge that learned magicians and Cabalists should communicate their knowledge to one another; and it was to proclaim that the time was at hand of a great advance in knowledge of nature... ―Recent scholarship has made it abundantly clear that the old view of Bacon as a modern scientific observer and experimentalist emerging out a superstitious past is no longer valid. In his book on Bacon, Paolo Rossi has shown that it was out of the Hermetic tradition that Bacon emerged, out of the Magia and Cabala of the Renaissance as it had reached him via the natural magicians. Bacon‘s view of the future of science was not that of progress in a straight line. His ‗great instauration‘ of science was directed towards a return to the state of Adam before the Fall, as state of pure and sinless contact with nature and knowledge of her powers. This was the view of scientific progress...held by Cornelius Agrippa, the author of the influential Renaissance textbook on occult philosophy. And Bacon's science is still, in part, occult science. Amongest the subjecst he reviews in his survey of learning are natural magic, astrology, of which he seeks a reformed version, alchemy, by which he was profoundly influenced, fascination, the tool of the magician, and other themes which those interested in drawing out the modern side of Bacon have set aside as unimportant.‖ (The Rosicrucian Enlightenment, pp. 119-120)
ALCHEMICAL LIGHT
―‗Unto‘ means to be ‗into‘ or ‗in Christ‘ .‖ Awe, p. 248 Alchemical Symbol for Phosphorus
314
―Alchemists felt that light represented the spirit. The non-metallic element phosphorus was of interest because of its apparent ability to contain light, as evidenced by the characteristic glow-in-the-dark phosphorescence of phosphorus compounds. Pure phosphorus also has the ability to spontaneously burn in air, but the element was not isolated until 1669. Phosphorus was also an ancient name for the planet Venus, when seen before sunrise.‖ Word Origin: Greek: phosphoros: light-bearing, also, the ancient name given the planet Venus before sunrise. ―The elemental alchemy symbol phosphorus traps light, and thus it is reputed that the alchemy symbol for phosphorus represents spiritual illumination.‖ (―Elemental Alchemy Symbols‖) ―...the Light-bearer or Phosphor, of which the poets have made the false Lucifer of the legend.‖ (Albert Pike, Morals & Dogma, p. 102)
MAGIC AMULET
6. PMich inv. 6666 = PGM CXXX Egypt 3rd century A.D. Papyrus Text: [ia]rbath agrammê fiblô chnêmeô [a e]e êêê iiii ooooo uuuuuu ôôôôôô[ô] Lord Gods, heal Helena, daughter of [...] from every illness and every shivering and [fever], ephemeral, quotidian, tertian, quar[tan], iarbath agrammê fiblô chnêmeô aeêiouôôuoiêea eêiouôôuoiêe êiouôôuoiê iouôôuoi ouôôuo uôôu uuuuu ôô
Traditions of Magic in Ancient Antiquity Protective Magic Amulets and Gems
In Awe of Thy Word, p. 919
―This papyrus amulet, written in Greek, was folded (note the horizontal cracks), rolled, and carried by Helena in a small metallic tube, to protect her from the onslaught of fever. For the ‗iarbath‘ formula compare no. 17, and for the vowel-triangles -- a ‗squeezed‘ triangle on line 2 and a fully-developed one at the bottom -compare nos. 16 and 40. Note also the star and the lunar crescent on the right.‖ 315
YIN / YANG
673
294
736-737 323 The Yin-Yang symbol expresses the key doctrine of occultism, which is dualism. Gnostic dualism maintains that good and evil are two equal and opposite sides of the ―Force,‖ whose light and dark side is portrayed by the Yin-Yang symbol. In dualistic belief systems, since all things come from the same origin, there is good in evil and evil in good. Blurring the lines between evil and good teaches that good and evil are not very far apart. Nothing is pure, there is no right and wrong, no black and white, no absolute moral code. God has a good side and a bad side. All good has evil in it and everything evil has some good in it. Chapter 19 of In Awe of Thy Word introduces the Anglo-Saxon bible of the Celts with a modified YinYang symbol in the form of an open book. Chapter 20 displays this symbol at least once on nearly every page. The Celtic Church is as occult as the symbol which represents the Anglo-Saxon bible it produced. Chapter 19 on ―The Anglo-Saxon Bible‖ attempts to reimage St. Patrick of Ireland as a born-again Christian: ―…foreign invaders destroyed the Bibles held by the native Celtic Britons and Picts… The Picts and Scots ‗had long been Christian‘ before Augustine. (Blair, p. 124) It was though Irish ‗preaching that they adopted the Christian faith…long ago. Ireland. Secular historians admit, ‗Christianity also arrived there [Ireland], indeed considerably earlier than the annals of the church suggest… [T]he Celtic church flourishing in the island was older than both Irish apostles [Patrick and Palladius] and different from what the pope desired… How it could have started we cannot tell… Christianity seems to have advanced by the power of persuasion alone. (Gerhard Herm, The Celts)‖ (Awe, p. 683) 316
Here again, the ‗cut and paste‘ procedure was used to remove important information. Here is what Gail‘s source actually said about Sts. Patrick and Palladius: ―The late Nora Chadwick, one of the greatest experts on early Christian Britain and Ireland, believed that both Palladius and Patrick were less concerned to convert heathens than to get converts back into the ways of the Roman Church.‖ (Gerhard Herm, The Celts, p. 261) St. Patrick‘s conversion account sounds very ―iffy‖ as reported in an obscure Irish magazine: ―Patrick records his conversion to saving faith in Jesus Christ in the 400s… Patrick writes, ‗The Lord opened to me the sense of my unbelief that I might remember my sins and that I might return with my whole heart to the Lord, my God…I was like a stone lying in the mire, but he who is able came. He raised me up in his mercy.‘ (as cited by Duane Russell, ‗The Real St. Patrick,‘ The Day Spring (2001, No. 1), Banbridge, Co. Down, No. Ireland: G. Edgerton, pp. 3-5)‖ (Awe, pp. 683-4) Occultists of every persuasion believe they ―return to God‖...when they become enlightened and discover their inner divinity. There is no mention in Patrick‘s testimony of repentance for sin. For more information, see: Chapter 17:―The Anglo-Saxon Bible‖ The logo of D. A. Waite‘s KJV-Only ―Bible for Today‖ is also a variation of the Yin / Yang symbol:
317
THE SOLAR LOGOS
With help from Gail Riplinger, the sun is setting on the Word (Logos) of God, the Greek Textus Receptus, and the Solar Logos, Lucifer, is rising in its place. The rising sun in the East is a symbol of the New Age (of enlightenment), whereas the setting sun in the West is associated with death and darkness, i.e., the end of the old age, the so-called Dark Age. In occult cosmology, the Solar Logos is the superhuman Intelligence which inhabits the sun, in other words, the Sun god, Lucifer. ―Solar Logos: the being who governs the solar system and consciously holds the primary pattern of evolution for the solar system. Our Solar Logos is a being known as Helios and Vesta. Melchior, the Galactic Logos, has worked for eons through our Solar Logos, Helios and Vesta, who works through our Planetary Logos, Lord Buddha. The great entity incarnate as our solar system, the active, directing Intelligence Who is working with definite purpose through His Seven Centers. The planets in this Being's body represent its major ‗chakras.‘‖ (Glossary of Terms for the New Millennium) The cover of In Awe of Thy Word pictures a sunset, after which the sun will surely rise again. In Ancient Egypt, the Sun god was believed to die each evening and rise each morning. The Egyptian mystery religion forms the basis of Freemasonry, whose Sovereign Grand Commander revealed the identity of the Solar Logos, the Intelligence, who is believed by Freemasons to inhabit the Sun and direct the solar system. ―LUCIFER, the Light-Bearer! Strange and mysterious name to give to the Spirit of Darkness! Lucifer, the Son of the Morning! Is it he who bears the Light, and with its splendors intolerable blinds feeble, sensual or selfish Souls? Doubt it not!... ―The Sun was termed by the Greeks the Eye of Jupiter, and the Eye of the World; and his is the All-Seeing Eye in our Lodges. The oracle of Claros styled him the King of the Stars and of the Eternal Fire, that engenders the year and the seasons, dispenses rain and winds, and brings about daybreak and night. And Osiris was invoked as the God that resides in the Sun and is enveloped by its rays, the invisible and eternal force that modifies the sublunary world by means of the Sun.‖ (Albert Pike, Morals & Dogma, pp. 321, 477) 318
Will the Solar Logos, Lucifer, rise again after the Christian Bible has been destroyed? David Ovason wrote in The Secret Architecture of Our Nation's Capital that the Dark Age began in 1525 and ended in 1881, which commenced a New Age of the Sun or Golden Age: ―The Rosicrucian, Thomas Henry Burgoyne, one of the learned and perplexing esoteric writers working in 19th century America…had informed his readers that, in the more glorious days of human history, known now as the Golden Age, the satellite was distant from the Earth. However, in the latter Iron Age (through which civilization was now living) it was too close, so that its ‗dark shadows became more and more bewildering.‘ In the year 1881, Burgoyne promised, this Dark Age would begin to recede, its malevolent influence having passed its darkest culminating point. He was partly borrowing his ideas from the Roman poet Virgil, but few of his readers would realize that. Most of them endorsed his enthusiasm for this new Age of Gold which would begin in 1881. ―That is was to be an important year in the history of mankind was not doubted by the majority of people interested in arcane lore. In a rare book, which many occultists claim to have read, but few have even glanced at, Trithemius claimed that the era which had commenced in 1525, under the guidance of the planetary angel of the Moon, would come to an end in 1881. In this same year, a new era would begin under the control of the angel of the Sun, whom Trithemius named Michael. Far-reaching changes would result, for, in a previous age, the angel had been not only the institutor of many new arts, and the inventor of astronomy and astrology, but also of architecture—the very science in which Washington, D.C. had striven to excel from its foundation. ―Trithemius—and later is followers—insisted that under the rule of this planetary angel there would be inaugurated an exciting change of direction for mankind. The angel Michael was dedicated to the expansion of human consciousness, and freedom. Furthermore, it would be during the New Age of the Sun, which would begin in 1881, that the Jews would return to their homeland.‖ (Ovason, 512:376, 30) It seems significant that the Tyndale New Testament was published in 1525 and the English Revised Version of the New Testament was published in 1881. The Tyndale New Testament was the first English Bible translated from the Traditional Text which became the Greek Textus Receptus. Westcott and Hort compiled a New Greek Text for translation of the English Revised Version which was published in 1881. APPENDIX II GAIL RIPLINGER‘S MISREPRESENTATION OF THE NKJV
CONTEND FOR THE FAITH: THE TEXTUS RECEPTUS http://watch-unto-prayer.org/TR-0-intro.html WATCH UNTO PRAYER taho@watch-unto-prayer.org http://watch-unto-prayer.org
319
GAIL RIPLINGER‘S
Misrepresentation OF THE NKJV In her tract, ―New King James Errors & Omissions,‖ Gail Riplinger claims, ―The NKJV ignored the KJV Greek Textus Receptus over 1,200 times.‖ This impressive assertion is undocumented and careful investigation reveals the opposite to be the case — the NKJV normally follows the Textus Receptus and most of the alleged ―errors and omissions‖ represent accurate translations of the Greek Text. To make the New King James Version appear heretical, Gail isolates words and phrases in the NKJV from their verses and contexts and misrepresents them as departures from the Textus Receptus. Few realize that she always evaluates the NKJV in terms of its agreement with the KJV, rather than the Textus Receptus. This sleight of hand works because Gail has, in the above statement and in the minds of her readers, merged the KJV with the Textus Receptus as the ―KJV Greek Textus Receptus,‖ which creates the impression that the KJV is a word-for-word translation of the Greek Text, which it is not. The first chart in Gail‘s tract, ―New King James Errors & Omissions‖ states, ―The NKJV omits key Christian words.‖ Examples such as ―Lord,‖ ―God,‖ ―repent,‖ ―blood‖ and ―hell‖ are listed to convey the idea that the NKJV is light on doctrine. Because no specific verses are provided as evidence in her tract, we asked AV Publications for a list of the verses in the NKJV which omitted these ―key Christian words.‖ AVP responded with an offer to send us the NKJV tract which, obviously, we already had in hand. Our second request for specific verses received no response. We then commenced our own analysis of Gail‘s tract and appended our findings as additional columns to her charts. Other charts in the tract did provide specific verses, but these proved not that the NKJV ―ignored the Textus Receptus,‖ but that it is a very good translation of the Greek. For the most part, the readings of the KJV and the NKJV are valid translation options of the words in the Greek Received Text. However, there are some translation errors in both versions. This fact is simply confirmation of the 1611 Translators‘ judgment that no translation can be as perfect as the Greek and Hebrew originals. ―For whatever was perfect under the Sun, where Apostles or Apostolic men, that is, men endued with an extraordinary measure of God‘s spirit, and privileged with the privilege of infallibility, had not their hand?... So, by the story of Ezra, and the prophecy of Haggai it may be gathered, that the Temple built by Zerubbabel after the return from Babylon, was by no means to be compared to the former built by Solomon (for they that remembered the former, wept when they considered the latter) [Ezra 3:12] notwithstanding, might this latter either have been abhorred and forsaken by the Jews, or profaned by the Greeks? The like we are to think of Translations.‖ In the expanded charts below, the first two or three columns are those found in the tract, ―New King James Errors & Omissions,‖ which is also in Riplinger‘s book, The Language of the King James Bible. In the appended columns, the reader will find solid textual evidence for the NKJV readings based on the context of the verses and the various translation options of the Greek words in the Textus Receptus. Textual data is presented from the Jewish Study Bible [Hebrew Masoretic Text], George Ricker Berry‘s Interlinear Greek English New Testament (Stephens‘ Text, 1550) [TR], F.H.A. Scrivener‘s 1894 Textus Receptus (Beza‘s Text, 1598) [TR], Strong‘s Concordance and Wesley Perschbacher‘s New Analytical Greek Lexicon. George Ricker Berry‘s Interlinear is a word-for-word translation of the Stephens‘ Text with the King James Bible in the margin. ―Noble Bereans‖ who scrutinize Gail Riplinger‘s charts using Greek and Hebrew resources will understand why she is determined to suppress these Bible study helps.
*
*
*
ERRORS FOUND IN NEW BIBLE VERSIONS NEW KING JAMES ERRORS & OMISSIONS NKJV Verse Comparison Chart Why by does the NKJV omit key words critical to mankind’s salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ? Why has Gail “OMITTED” the specific verses in which the NKJV “omitted” these words so the reader could check each verse in the Greek Textus Receptus??? The NKJV Omits Key Christian Words:
Times Omitted
WHY OMITTED? ―Lord‖ (capital ―L‖) is used only in referring to God, not human beings.
"Lord"
"God"
"heaven"
"repent"
"blood"
66 times
51 times
50 times
44 times
23 times
―God‖ is not used in the NKJV when the word is not in the Textus Receptus. For example, in Matt. 2:12, ―God‖ is not in the Greek text and the KJV uses dynamic equivalence. When referring to the visible expanse of the sky, the NKJV correctly translated the Hebrew word shameh and the Greek word ouranos as ―the heavens‖ instead of ―heaven.‖ When referring to the abode of God, they are translated as ―heaven‖ in the NKJV. The NKJV uses ―relent‖ instead of ―repent‖ when referring to God changing His mind. e.g. Ex. 32:12,14, 1 Sam 15:29, 2 Sam. 24:16, 1 Chr. 21:15, Ps. 106:45, 110:4, Jer. 4:28, 15:5, 18:8,10, 20:16, 26:3,13,19, 42:10, Ezek. 24:14, Joel 2:13,14, Amos 7:3,6, Jon 3:9,10, Zech 8:14, Heb. 7:21, etc. Matt. 21:32 – ―relent‖ is incorrect translation When not referring to the ―blood of Jesus Christ,‖ the NKJV often uses words such as ―bloodline,‖ ―bloodshed,‖ ―bloodthirsty,‖ ―take the life‖ instead of ―blood‖ e.g. Ezek. 19:10, Exod. 22:2,3, Lev. 17:4, Deut. 17:8, 19:10, 22:8, 1 Sam. 25:26, 33, Heb. 12:4, etc.
NEW KING JAMES VERSION
KING JAMES VERSION
―So when evening had come, the owner of the vineyard said to his steward, ‗Call the laborers and give them their wages, beginning with the last to the first.‘‖ (Matt. 20:8) ―Then, being divinely warned in a dream that they should not return to Herod, they departed for their own country another way.‖ (Matt. 2:12)
―So when even was come, the lord of the vineyard saith unto his steward, Call the labourers, and give them their hire, beginning from the last unto the first.‖ (Matt. 20:8) ―And being warned of God in a dream that they should not return to Herod, they departed into their own country another way.‖ (Matt. 2:12)
TR – lord Strong‘s #2962 – kurios: he to whom a person or thing belongs…; master, lord Perschbacher #2962 – ―an owner, possessor, Matt. 20:8‖
―In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.‖ (Gen. 1:1)
―In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.‖ (Gen. 1:1)
―men‘s hearts failing them from fear and the expectation of those things which are coming on the earth, for the powers of the heavens will be shaken.‖ (Luke 21:26) ―Perhaps everyone will listen and turn from his evil way, that I may relent concerning the calamity which I purpose to bring on them because of the evil of their doings.‖ (Jer. 26:3)
―Men‘s hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.‖ (Luke 21:26)
"God is not a man, that He should lie, Nor a son of man, that He should repent;‖ (Num 23:19)
―God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent;‖ (Num. 23:19)
TR/MT – ―the heavens‖ Strong‘s #8064 –shameh: the sky, heavens, heaven Strong‘s #3772 – ouranos: the vaulted expanse of the sky with all things visible in it Perschbacher #3772: ―the heavens, the visible heavens and all their phenomena…the air, atmosphere, heaven as the…abode of God.‖ MT/TR – repent Strong‘s #5162 –nacham: to be sorry, console oneself, repent, regret, comfort, be comforted …be moved to pity, have compassion; Strong‘s #3338 – metamellomai: it is a care to one afterwards… to repent one‘s self Perschbacher #3338: ―to change one‘s mind and purpose, Heb. 7:21‖
―Your mother was like a vine in your bloodline,* Planted by the waters, Fruitful and full of branches Because of many waters.‖ (Ezek. 19:10) (Footnote: *Literally blood)
―Thy mother is like a vine in thy blood, planted by the waters: she was fruitful and full of branches by reason of many waters.‖ (Ezek. 19:10)
―You have not yet resisted to bloodshed,
―If so be they will hearken, and turn every man from his evil way, that I may repent me of the evil, which I purpose to do unto them because of the evil of their doings.‖ (Jer. 26:3)
―Ye have not yet resisted unto blood, striving against sin.‖ (Heb. 12:4)
GREEK TR / HEBREW MT
TR – divinely instructed Strong‘s #5537 – chrematizo: ―to be divinely commanded, admonished, instructed‖ Perschbacher #5537: ―to be divinely instructed, receive a revelation or warning from God‖
MT/TR – blood Strong‘s #1818 – dam: blood; #129 – aiúma: blood of man or animals, refers to the seat of life…blood shed, to be shed by violence, slay, murder Perschbacher #129 – bloodshed, color of blood, blood-guiltiness, natural descent
"hell"
"JEHOVAH"
"new testament"
"damnation"
"devils"
22 times
entirely
entirely
entirely
entirely
The KJV transliterated the Greek word ―hades‖ as ―hell.‖ The NKJV left ―hades‖ untranslated. ―Jehovah‖ is a corruption of the Hebrew name of God, YHWH. ―Jehovah‖ was not in the 1611 KJV but was added to later editions. (See Chapter 2) The NKJV translates the Hebrew name of God as ―YAH‖ or ―LORD.‖
The Greek word ―diatheke‖ can be translated as ―testament,‖ ―will,‖ ―compact‖ or ―covenant.‖ The word ―testament‖ does not have the same connotation as ―covenant‖ which conveys the idea of close relationship, whereas a ―testament‖ is a strictly legal term.
The NKJV translates the Greek word ―krima‖ [judgment] as ―condemnation‖ instead of ―damnation.‖ Damnation is the abbreviated form of ―condemnation‖ just as ―damned‖ is the abbreviated form of ―condemned.‖ The KJV transliterated the Greek word ―daimonion‖ as ―devil,‖ however, the NKJV correctly translated it as ―demon.‖
How the NKJV Demotes Jesus Christ NKJV
KJV
striving against sin.‖ (Heb. 12:4) ―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.‖ (Matt. 16:18) ―Sing to God, sing praises to His name; Extol Him who rides on the clouds, By His name YAH, And rejoice before Him.‖ (Ps. 68:4) ―Trust in the LORD forever, For in YAH, the LORD, is everlasting strength.‖ (Is. 26:4) ―…by so much more Jesus has become a surety of a better covenant.‖ (Heb. 7:22)
―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.‖ (Matt. 16:18) ―Sing unto God, sing praises to his name: extol him that rideth upon the heavens by his name JAH, and rejoice before him.‖ (Ps. 68:4) ―Trust ye in the LORD for ever: for in the LORD JEHOVAH is everlasting strength:‖ (Is. 26:4) ―By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament.‖ (Heb. 7:22)
The NKJV uses the word ―covenant‖ for God‘s covenant with the Jews and also His covenant with the Church. ―Covenant‖ implies a relational as well as legal bond, as in a marriage covenant. (Heb. 7:22, 9:15-17, 9:20) ―And why not say, ‗Let us do evil that good may come"?—as we are slanderously reported and as some affirm that we say. Their condemnation is just.‖ (Rom. 3:8)
The KJV uses ―testament‖ in most verses pertaining to the Church, but ―covenant‖ in verses pertaining to the Jews.‖ e.g. Heb. 9:20 – ―Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.‖ ―And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? whose damnation is just.‖ (Rom. 3:8)
―And when the demon was cast out, the mute spoke. And the multitudes marveled, saying, ‗It was never seen like this in Israel!‘‖ (Matt. 9:33)
―And when the devil was cast out, the dumb spake: and the multitudes marvelled, saying, It was never so seen in Israel.‖ (Matt. 9:33)
TR – hades Strong‘s #86 – aè – Hades Perschbacher #86: ―the invisible abode or mansion of the dead; the place of punishment, hell‖ MT – הוהי Strong‘s #3068 – הוהיYehovah
TR – new covenant Strong‘s #1242 – diatheke – a testament or will, a compact, a covenant Perschbacher #1242: a testamentary, disposition, will, a covenant, Heb. 9:16, 17, Gal. 3:15; in N.T. a covenant of God with men, Gal. 3:17; 4:24; Heb. 9:4; Matt. 26:28, et al…
TR – judgment Strong‘s #2917 – krima – a decree, judgments, judgment, condem-nation of wrong, decision…on faults of others Perschbacher #2917: judgment, a sentence, award, judicial sentence, an adverse sentence Matt. 23:14, Rom. 13:2… TR – demons Strong‘s #1140 – daimonion – evil spirits or the messengers and ministers of the devil Perschbacher #1140: in N.T., a demon, evil spirit
How the NKJV is a Correct Translation of the Greek Text TEXTUS RECEPTUS
NKJV
KING JAMES VERSION
GREEK / HEBREW RESOURCES CONTEXT: TITLE ―LORD‖ DOES NOT APPLY TO JESUS CHRIST IN THIS VERSE. ―Sir‖ used to address the human owner of a vineyard. CONTEXT: TITLE ―LORD‖ NOT USED TO ADDRESS JESUS CHRIST IN THIS VERSE. ―Master‖ used to address a human master.
Luke 13:8
Sir
Lord
Sir
But he answered and said to him, ―Sir, let it alone this year also, until I dig around it and fertilize it.
And he answering said unto him, Lord, let it alone this year also, till I shall dig about it, and dung it:
Matt. 18:26
fell down before him, saying, Master
and worshipped him, saying, Lord
did homage to him saying, Lord
The servant therefore fell down before him, saying, ―Master, have patience with me, and I will pay you all.‘
Matt. 20:20
kneeling down
worshipping him
doing homage
Then the mother of Zebedee‘s sons came to Him with her sons, kneeling down and asking something
The servant therefore fell down, and worshipped him, saying, Lord, have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. Then came to him the mother of Zebedee's children with her sons, worshipping him, and desiring a certain
Strong‘s #4352: proskuneÑw – to kiss the hand…in token of reverence …kneeling or prostration to do homage Perschbacher #4352 – to do
Matt. 26:64
right hand of the Power
right hand of power
right hand of power
from Him. And He said to her, "What do you wish?" She said to Him, "Grant that these two sons of mine may sit, one on Your right hand and the other on the left, in Your kingdom." Jesus said to him, ―It is as you said. Nevertheless, I say to you, hereafter you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.‖ (cf. Heb. 1:3) And Abraham said, ―My son, God will provide for Himself the lamb for a burnt offering.‖… Then Abraham lifted his eyes and looked, and there behind him was a ram caught in a thicket by its horns… And Abraham called the name of the place, The-LORD-WillProvide‖ Note: 22:14 – Hebrew YHWH Yireh that their hearts may be encouraged, being knit together in love, and attaining to all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the knowledge of the mystery of God, both of the Father and of Christ, Then a certain scribe came and said to Him, ―Teacher, I will follow You wherever You go.‖
thing of him. And he said unto her, What wilt thou? She saith unto him, Grant that these my two sons may sit, the one on thy right hand, and the other on the left, in thy kingdom. Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see THE SON OF MAN
And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? And they sent out unto him their disciples with the Herodians, saying, Master, we know that thou art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest thou for any man: for thou regardest not the person of men. But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are
Gen. 22:8
God will provide for himself the lamb
God will provide himself a lamb
God will provide himself a lamb
Col. 2:2
the mystery of God, both of the Father and of Christ,
the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ (Trinity)
the mystery of God and of [the] Father and of [the] Christ
Matt. 8:19 et al.
Teacher
Master
Teacher
Matt 19:16
Good Teacher
Good Master
good Teacher
―Good Teacher, what good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?‖
Matt. 22:16
Teacher
Master
Teacher
And they sent to Him their disciples with the Herodians, saying, ―Teacher, we know that You are true, and teach the way of God in truth; nor do You care about anyone, for You do not regard the person of men.
Matt. 23:8
One is your Teacher, the Christ
one is your Master, even Christ
one is your leader, the Christ
But you, do not be called ―Rabbi‘; for One is your Teacher, the Christ, and you are
SITTING ON THE RIGHT HAND OF POWER, AND COMING IN THE CLOUDS OF HEAVEN.
And Abraham said, My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering:... And Abraham lifted up his eyes, and looked, and behold behind him a ram caught in a thicket by his horns… And Abraham called the name of that place Jehovah jireh:
That their hearts might be comforted, being knit together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the acknowledgement of the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ; And a certain scribe came , and said unto him, Master, I will follow thee whithersoever thou goest.
reverence or homage by prostration, Matt. 2:2,8,11; 20:20 CONTEXT: The mother does not address Jesus as ―God‖ but as a subject asking a king for favor. (―thy kingdom‖) Strong‘s #1411: ―dunamis‖ – strength, power, ability Perschbacher #1411: ή δύνα omnipotence, Matt. 26:64; Luke 22:69 GREEK SYNTAX: definite article ―the‖ modifies ―power‖ not ―right hand‖ Jay P. Green‘s Interlinear: ―God will provide for Himself the lamb‖ CONTEXT: Gen. 22:8-14 As YHWH Yireh, God did provide a ram, a male sheep, for Abraham‘s sacrifice. This event foreshadowed God‘s sacrifice of His Son, but it was not that sacrifice in a literal sense. God the Father was not Himself the sacrifice, but gave His Son, Jesus Christ, as the Lamb to be sacrificed for the sins of the world. Strong‘s #2532 – kaið – and, also, even, indeed, but #2316 – Theos – God Perschbacher #2532 – …both …and; as a cumulative particle, also, too…emphatic, even, also GREEK: ―both‖ and ―even‖ are translation options. Theos (God) not literally translated as ―Holy Spirit‖ Strongs #1320 – ―Didaskale‖ –a teacher, in the NT one who teaches concerning the things of God, and the duties of man Perschbacher #1320 – a teacher, master, Rom. 2:20 et al; in N.T. as an equivalent to ραββί, John 1:39, et al. Strongs #1320 – ―Didaskale‖ –a teacher Perschbacher #1320 – a teacher, master… in N.T. as an equivalent to ραββί [rabbi] Strongs #1320 – ―Didaskale‖ –a teacher, in the NT one who teaches concerning the things of God, and the duties of man Perschbacher #1320 – a teacher, master… in N.T. as an equivalent to ραββί [rabbi]
Strongs‘ #4461 – r³Abbi – ―Rabbi, a title used by the Jews to address their teachers‖
Matt 23:10
And do not be called teachers; for One is your Teacher, the Christ
Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ
Neither be called leaders, for one is your leader, the Christ
all brethren.
brethren.
And do not be called teachers; for One is your Teacher, the Christ.
Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.
Perschbacher #4461 – Rabbi, my master, teacher, doctor (Matt. 23:7, 8; 26:25, 49, et. Al…) Strong‘s #2519 – kathegetes* – a guide, a master, teacher Perschbacher #2519 – a guide, a leader; in N.T. a teacher, instructor, Matt. 23:8,10
*The word ―catechism‖ comes from kathegetes: ―Katekisasi comes from the Greek words kathegetes. (teacher or educator) and Sidicomes from the Sanskerta word Sidi (bringing up). Both words Katekisasi Sidi thus mean: ‗to instruct a child in order to be brought up.‘‖ (Journal of Theology Dialogue, Fall 2002) How the NKJV Matches Jehovah Witness Version (NWT) Demotes Jesus Christ NKJV
How the NKJV Matches the Textus Receptus The NKJV Does Not “Demote” Jesus Christ
KJV
TEXTUS RECEPTUS
NKJV
KING JAMES VERSION
GREEK / HEBREW RESOURCES Strong‘s #3816 – paiÛv – a child, boy, girl, servant, slave Perschbacher #3816 – child, boy, girl, youth, servant, slave Cf. Messianic prophecies: Matt. 12:18 – ―Behold my servant (―paiÛv‖), whom I have chosen; my beloved, in whom my soul is well pleased: I will put my spirit upon him, and he shall shew judgment to the Gentiles.‖ (KJV) (See also Isa. 42:1, 43:10) Isaiah 52:13 – ―Behold, my servant shall deal prudently, he shall be exalted and extolled, and be very high. As many were astonied at thee; his visage was so marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men: So shall he sprinkle many nations; the kings shall shut their mouths at him: for that which had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had not heard shall they consider.‖ (KJV) Isaiah 53:11 – ―He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.‖ (KJV) Strong‘s #2937 – ktiðsiv – the act of founding, establishing, building etc., the act of creating, creation, i.e. thing created Perschbacher #2937 – in N.T. creation… a created thing, a creature…Col. 1:15 Strong‘s #846 – himself, herself, themselves, itself Perschbacher #846 – nominative, singular,
Acts 3:13
His Servant Jesus
his Son Jesus
his servant Jesus
The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God of our fathers, glorified His Servant Jesus whom you delivered up and denied in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let Him go.
The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus; whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let him go.
Acts 3:26
His Servant Jesus
his Son Jesus
his servant Jesus
Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.
Acts 4:27
holy Servant Jesus
holy child Jesus
holy servant Jesus
To you first, God, having raised up His Servant Jesus, sent Him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from your iniquities." For truly against Your holy Servant Jesus, whom You anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the people of Israel, were gathered together
Acts 4:30
holy Servant Jesus
holy child Jesus
holy servant Jesus
by stretching out Your hand to heal, and that signs and wonders may be done through the name of Your holy Servant Jesus."
For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together, By stretching forth thine hand to heal; and that signs and wonders may be done by the name of thy holy child Jesus.
Col. 1:15
the firstborn over all creation
the firstborn of every creature
firstborn of all creation
He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.
Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
Mark 2:15
OMIT “JESUS” OMITTED BECAUSE NOT IN
Jesus
he ―And it came to pass as he reclined [at table] in his
―Now it happened, as He was dining in Levi‘s house, that many tax collectors and sinners also sat
And it came to pass, that, as Jesus sat at meat in his house, many publicans and sinners sat also
GREEK TEXTUS RECEPTUS
Heb. 4:8
Acts 7:45
2 Thes. 3:5
Joshua
Joshua
patience of Christ
Jesus
Jesus
patient waiting for Christ (we are to be patient waiting for Christ)
Demotes the Trinity NKJV
house, that many taxgatherers and sinners were reclining with Jesus and his disciples; Jesus (i.e. Joshua)
Joshua
endurance of the Christ
together with Jesus and His disciples; for there were many, and they followed Him.‖
together with Jesus and his disciples: for there were many, and they followed him.
For if Joshua had given them rest, then He would not afterward have spoken of another day.
6 Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief:… 8 For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day. Which also our fathers that came after brought in with Jesus into the possession of the Gentiles, whom God drave out before the face of our fathers, unto the days of David;
which our fathers, having received it in turn, also brought with Joshua into the land possessed by the Gentiles, whom God drove out before the face of our fathers until the days of David, Now may the Lord direct your hearts into the love of God and into the patience of Christ.
masculine personal pronoun…a reflexive pronoun, self… of one‘s self GREEK TEXT: MARK 2:15a — ―‖ (―HE‖), NOT ―‖ (―JESUS‖)
CONTEXT: Heb. 4:6 ―and they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief.‖ CONTEXT: THESE VERSES ARE NOT ABOUT JESUS BUT JOSHUA Strong‘s #2424 – ―‖ – Jesus… Joshua was the famous captain of the Israelites Perschbacher #2424 – Joshua, Acts 7:45
And the Lord direct your hearts into the love of God, and into the patient waiting for Christ.
Strong‘s #5281 – steadfastness, constancy, endurance Perschbacher #5281 – endurance in adherence to an object, 1 Thes. 1:3, 2 Thes. 3:5
The KJV Demotes the Trinity KJV
TEXTUS RECEPTUS
NKJV
KING JAMES VERSION
GREEK / HEBREW RESOURCES CONTEXT: NOT TRINITY PROOF TEXT. Strong‘s #2304 – theios 1. a general name of deities or divinities as used by the Greeks, 2. spoken of the only and true God, trinity Perschbacher #2304 – divine, pertaining to God, the divine nature, divinity, Acts 17:29
Acts 17:29
Divine Nature
Godhead
...we ought not to think… that which [is] divine to be like …a graven thing of art and imagination of man
Therefore, since we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone, something shaped by art and man's devising.
Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.
Phil. 4:20
our God and Father
God and our Father
the God and Father of us
Now unto God and our Father be glory for ever and ever. Amen.
Rev. 1:6
His God and Father
God and his Father
His God and Father
Col. 3:17
God the Father through Him
God and the Father by him
God and [the] Father by him
John 14:16
Helper
Comforter
Paraclete
John 14:26
Helper
Comforter
Paraclete
Now to our God and Father be glory forever and ever. Amen. and has made us kings and priests to His God and Father, to Him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen. And whatever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through Him. And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may abide with you forever-But the Helper, the
And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen. And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him. And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; But the Comforter,
Strong‘s #2316 – Theos – Godhead #2532 – – and, also, even, indeed, but Perschbacher #2316 – God, the true God, Matt. 3:9 et al. #2532 – emphatic, even, also, Matt. 10:30, 1 Cor. 2:10 et al. (Gail claims ―God‖ in these verses refers to the Holy Ghost, however, ―Holy Ghost‖ agion #40 {Holy} pneuma #4151{Ghost} is not in the Greek text.) Strong‘s #3875: Gr. Parakletos – one who pleads another's cause before a judge, a pleader, counsel for defense, legal assistant, an advocate, 1b) one who pleads another's
Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you. John 15:26
Helper
Comforter
Paraclete
"But when the Helper comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me
John 16:7
Helper
Comforter
Paraclete
Nevertheless I tell you the truth. It is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send Him to you.
which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you 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: Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.
cause with one, an intercessor, … 1c) in the widest sense, a helper, succourer, aider, assistant, 1c1) of the Holy Spirit destined to take the place of Christ with the apostles (after his ascension to the Father), to lead them to a deeper knowledge of the gospel truth, and give them divine strength needed to enable them to undergo trials and persecutions on behalf of the divine kingdom Perschbacher #3875: genr. One present to render various service, and thus the Paraclete, whose influence and operation were to compensate for the departure of Christ himself, John 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7
KING JAMES VERSION
GREEK / HEBREW RESOURCES
Promotes Works / Progressive Salvation NKJV
KJV
TEXTUS RECEPTUS
NKJV
1 Cor. 11:1
Imitate Christ
followers...of Christ
Imitators of me be, according as I also [am] of Christ.
Imitate me, just as I also imitate Christ.
Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.
Rom. 3:3
faithfulness
faith
faith
For what if some did not believe? Will their unbelief make the faithfulness of God without effect?
For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?
Rom. 11:30, 32
disobedient... disobedience
not believed... unbelief
disobedient… disobedience
For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief: Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy. For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.
Rev. 19:8
righteous acts of saints
righteousness of
righteousnesses of (plural noun)
For as you were once disobedient to God, yet have now obtained mercy through their disobedience, even so these also have now been disobedient, that through the mercy shown you they also may obtain mercy. For God has committed them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all. And to her it was granted to be arrayed in fine linen, clean and bright, for the fine linen is the righteous acts of the saints.
And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints.
Strong‘s #3402: ―mimhtai‖ – an imitator MIME/MIMIC Perschbacher #3402: ―an imitator, follower‖ Strong‘s #4102: 1. conviction of the truth of anything, belief… 2. fidelity, faithfulness Perschbacher #4102: ―faithfulness, truthfulness, Rom. 3:3” Strong‘s #544 – apeitheo – 1) not to allow one‘s self to be persuaded, 1a) to refuse or withhold belief, 1b) to refuse belief and obedience, 2) not to comply with Perschbacher #544 – to be uncompliant; to refuse belief, disbelieve, John 3:36 et al.; to refuse belief and obedience, be contumacious, Rom. 10:21; 1 Pet. 3:20 et al.; to refuse conformity, Rom. 2:8 Strong‘s # 3588 – #1345 – – 1) that which has been deemed right so as to have force of law… 2) a righteous act or deed Perschbacher #1345 – a rightful act, act of justice…Rev. 15:4; in N.T. of acquittal, justification, Rom. 5:16…state of
1 Cor. 1:18
are being saved
are saved
are being saved
2 Cor 2:15
are being saved
are saved
being saved
Eph. 2:8
have been saved
are...saved
are saved
For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For we are to God the fragrance of Christ among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing.
For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God,
For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
For we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that perish:
righteousness, Rev. 19:8 {Rom. 8:4} Strong‘s #4982 – sozo (root) Perschbacher #4982 – dat. pl. m. pres. pass. part (1 Cor. 1:18; 2 Cor. 2:15) [present passive participle = are being saved] Strong‘s #4982 – sozo (root), to save, to keep safe and sound Perschbacher #– to be in the way of salvation, 1 Cor. 15:2; 2 Cor. 2:15 (compare, however, with this last passage, Luke 13:23; Acts 2:47) Strong‘s #4982 – sozo (root) Perschbacher #4562 – nom. Pl. m. perf. Pass. part. (Eph. 2:5,8… (4982) [perfect passive participle = completed action with continuing results = eternal security]
Progressive salvation is not works-based salvation. In the Textus Receptus, the Greek word is a present passive participle which mean completed action with continuing results. The proper translation of is ―being saved‖ as in the Interlinear Greek-English Textus Receptus and New King James Version. ―…in whom, though now ye see him not, yet believing, ye rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory: Receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls.‖ (1 Pet. 1:8a-9, KJV) How the NKJV Supports New Age Ideas: NKJV
KJV
TEXTUS RECEPTUS / MASORETIC TEXT
NKJV
KING JAMES VERSION
GREEK / HEBREW RESOURCES Strong‘s #2346 – thlibo – a compressed way, 2a) narrow, straitened, contracted, 3) metaph. to trouble, afflict, distress Perschbacher #2346 – to be compressed, narrow, Matt. 7:14 Strong‘s #4102 – pistis – fidelity, faithfulness, the character of one who can be relied on Perschbacher #4102 – good faith, honesty, integrity, Matt. 23:23, Gal. 5:22 Strong‘s #4100 – pisteuo – to think to be true, to be persuaded of, to credit, place confidence in Perschbacher #4100 – 2 pers. pl. pres. act. subj. / may continue = subjunctive
Works Salvation Matt. 7:14
difficult is the way
narrow is the way
straitened the way
Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.
Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
Gal. 5:22
faithfulness
faith
faith
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,
But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentle-ness, goodness, faith,
1 John 5:13
may continue to believe
may believe
may believe
These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.
Eccl. 5:20
God keeps him busy
God answereth him
―for God answereth him in the joy of his heart‖ (JPS 1917 Ed.) ―God keeps him busy enjoying
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. For he will not dwell unduly on the days of his life, because God keeps him busy with the joy of his heart.
For he shall not much remember the days of his life; because God answereth him in the joy of his heart.
Strong‘s #6031 – `anah – to be occupied, be busied with
himself.‖ (JPS 1985 Ed.)
Progressive Ages / Evolution NKJV Matt. 12:32
age to come
KJV world to come
TEXTUS RECEPTUS / MASORETIC TEXT neither in this age nor in the coming one
Matt. 13:39 et al.
end of the age
end of the world
the completion of the age
Acts 15:18
from eternity
from the beginning of the world
from eternity
1 Cor. 15:45
Adam became a living being
Adam was made a living soul
Adam became a living soul
NKJV Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come. The enemy who sowed them is the devil, the harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are the angels "Known to God from eternity are all His works. And so it is written, ―The first man Adam became a living being.‖ The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.
KING JAMES VERSION And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come. The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels. Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
GREEK / HEBREW RESOURCES
Strong‘s #165 – aion 1) for ever, an unbroken age, perpetuity of time, eternity 2) the worlds, universe 3) period of time, age Perschbacher #165 – a period of time of significant character, life; an era; an age or era; the present order of nature; the natural condition of man, the world;
Strong‘s #1096 – ginomai – 1) to become, i.e. to come into existence, begin to be, receive being Perschbacher #1096 – to come into existence; to be created, exist by creation…to come into a particular state or condition, to become…
Pantheism, Androgyny, Gender Equity NKJV Luke 7:19, 20
the Coming One
KJV
TEXTUS RECEPTUS / MASORETIC TEXT
he that should come
the coming [one]
Matt. 11:3
the Coming One
he that should come
the coming [one]
John 7:18 et at.
the One
he, his
he, him
John 4:24
God is Spirit
God is a Spirit
God is a spirit
2 Cor. 2:10
presence
person
person
NKJV And John, calling two of his disciples to him, sent them to Jesus, saying, ―Are You the Coming One, or do we look for another?‖ and said to Him, ―Are You the Coming One, or do we look for another?‖ He who speaks from himself seeks his own glory; but He who seeks the glory of the One who sent Him is true, and no unrighteousness is in Him. God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth. Now whom you forgive anything, I also forgive. For if indeed I have forgiven anything, I
KING JAMES VERSION And John calling unto him two of his disciples sent them to Jesus, saying, Art thou he that should come? or look we for another? And said unto him, Art thou he that should come, or do we look for another? He that speaketh of himself seeketh his own glory: but he that seeketh his glory that sent him, the same is true, and no unrighteousness is in him. God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your
GREEK / HEBREW RESOURCES
Strong‘s #2064 – Perschbacher #2064 – He who is coming, the expected Messiah, Matt. 11:3 et al.
Strong‘s – N/A Perschbacher, p. xiii – definite article tou, of the
Strong‘s #4151 – the God Definite article is before Theos, not pneuma (spirit) Strong‘s #1722 – in #4383 – the face Perschbacher #4383 – in presence of, 2 Cor. 2:10
Gen. 2:18
helper comparable to him
help meet for him
I will make him a help meet for him. (JPS 1917 Ed.) I will make a fitting helper for him. ‖ (JPS 1985 Ed.)
have forgiven that one for your sakes in the presence of Christ, And the LORD God said, ―It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper comparable to him.‖
sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ;
And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
Strong‘s #5828 – `ezer 1) help, succour
Self-Esteem ("The devil made me do it.") NKJV Phil. 3:21
lowly body
KJV vile body
TEXTUS RECEPTUS / MASORETIC TEXT body of humiliation
1 John 5:19
whole world lies under the sway of the wicked one
whole world lieth in wickedness
The whole world lies in the wicked [one]
Luke 11:4
deliver us from the evil one
deliver us from evil
deliver us from evil
Matt. 5:37
the evil one
of evil
from evil
2 Cor. 1:12
boasting
rejoicing
boasting
NKJV who will transform our lowly body that it may be conformed to His glorious body, according to the working by which He is able even to sub-due all things to Himself. 18 We know that whoever is born of God does not sin; but he who has been born of God keeps himself, and the wicked one does not touch him. 19 We know that we are of God, and the whole world lies under the sway of the wicked one. And forgive us our sins, For we also forgive everyone who is indebted to us. And do not lead us into temptation, But deliver us from the evil one. But let your ‗Yes‘ be ‗Yes,‘ and your ‗No,‘ ‗No.‘ For whatever is more than these is from the evil one. For our boasting is this: the testimony of our conscience that we conducted ourselves in the world in simplicity and godly sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom but by the grace of God, and more abundantly toward you.
KING JAMES VERSION
GREEK / HEBREW RESOURCES
Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself. 18 We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not. 19 And we know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness.‖
Strong‘s #5014 – tapeinosis – 1) lowness, low estate
And forgive us our sins; for we also forgive every one that is indebted to us. And lead us not into temptation; but deliver us from evil. But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil. For our rejoicing is this, the testimony of our conscience, that in simplicity and godly sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom, but by the grace of God, we have had our conversation in the world, and more abundantly to youward.
Perschbacher #5014 – depression, meanness, low estate, abject condition, … Phil. 3:21
Strong‘s #4190 – poneros ―The word is used in the nominative case in Mt. 6:13. This usually denotes a title in the Greek. Hence, Christ is saying, deliver us from ‗The Evil,‘ and is probably referring to Satan.‖ Matt. 6:13: ―And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.‖ Perschbacher #4190 – dat. sg. m. adj. {I John 5:19} adjective = wicked CONTEXT: 1 John 5:18 ―We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not.‖ (KJV) GREEK: v. 18 – ―wicked one‖ = poneros Strong‘s #2746 – kauchesis – the act of glorying Perschbacher #2746/2745 – a glorying, boasting, I Cor. 5:6; a ground or matter of glorying or boasting, Rom. 4:2; joy, exultation, Phil. 1:26
Religious Tolerance • One World NKJV Acts 24:14
sect
KJV heresy
TEXTUS RECEPTUS / MASORETIC TEXT sect
NKJV But this I confess to you, that according to the Way which
KING JAMES VERSION But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they
GREEK / HEBREW RESOURCES Strong‘s #139 – hairesis – a body of men following their own tenets (sect or
they call a sect, so I worship the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the Law and in the Prophets. Then Paul stood in the midst of the Areopagus and said, "Men of Athens, I perceive that in all things you are very religious;
call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:
Acts 17:22
very religious
too superstitious
very religious [lit. very reverent to demons]
Acts 4:25 et al.
nations
heathen
nations
who by the mouth of Your servant David have said: "Why did the nations rage, And the people plot vain things?
Who by the mouth of thy servant David hast said, Why did the heathen rage, and the people imagine vain things?
Acts 8:9
astonished
bewitched
was…amazing
But there was a certain man called Simon, who previously practiced sorcery in the city and astonished the people of Samaria, claiming that he was someone great,
Acts 25:19
religion
superstition
system of religion [lit., demon worship]
2 Cor. 10:5
casting down arguments
Casting down imaginations
overthrowing reasonings
but had some questions against him about their own religion and about a certain Jesus, who had died, whom Paul affirmed to be alive. casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ,
But there was a certain man, called Simon, which beforetime in the same city used sorcery, and bewitched the people of Samaria, giving out that himself was some great one: But had certain questions against him of their own superstition, and of one Jesus, which was dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive.
Titus 3:10
Reject a divisive man
an heretick... reject
A sectarian man… reject
Reject a divisive man after the first and second admonition,
Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious.
Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ; A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject;
party)… dissentions arising from diversity of opinions and aims Perschbacher #139 – strictly, a choice or option; hence, a sect, faction, by impl. discord, contention Strong‘s #1174 – deisidaimonesteros – reverencing god or the gods, pious, religious, superstitious Perschbacher #1174 – in N.T. careful and precise in the discharge of religious services, Acts 17:22 Strong‘s #1484 – ethnos – a race, nation, people group Perschbacher #1484 – pl. , from the Hebrew, nations or people as distinguished from the Jews, heathen, Gentiles, Matt. 4:15; 10:5; Luke 2:32 et al. Strong‘s #1839 – existemi – to amaze, to astonish, throw into wonderment Perschbacher #1839 – to put out of its place; to astonish, to amaze, Luke 24:22, Acts 8:9, 11 Strong‘s #1175 – deisidaimonia – superstitious, religious Perschbacher #1175 – fear of the gods;.. superstition; a form of religious belief, Acts 25:19 Strong‘s #3053 – logismos – a reckoning, computation, a reasoning: such as is hostile to the Christian faith Perschbacher #3053 – a computation, act of computing; a thought, cogitation, Rom. 2:15; a conception, device, 2 Cor. 10:5 Strong‘s # 141 – hairetikos – schismatic, factious, a follower of a false doctrine, heretic Perschbacher #141 – one who creates or fosters factions, Tit. 3:10
Relative / Subjective Standards NKJV Matt. 5:32 et al.
sexual immorality
KJV fornication
TEXTUS RECEPTUS / MASORETIC TEXT fornication
NKJV
KING JAMES VERSION
But I say to you that whoever divorces his wife for any reason except sexual immorality* causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a woman who is divorced commits
But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth
GREEK / HEBREW RESOURCES Strong‘s #4202 – porneia – illicit sexual intercourse Perschbacher #4202 – fornication, whoredom, Matt. 15:19; Mark 7:21;… adultery, Matt. 5:32, 19:19
1 Cor. 6:9
homosexuals (catamites only)
effeminate
abusers of themselves as women
OMIT ALL
perverted persons
sodomite
neither shall there be a sodomite of the sons of Israel.‖ (JPS 1917 Ed.) Nor shall any Israelite man be a cult pros-titute. (JPS 1985 Ed.)
2 Tim. 3:17
complete
perfect
fully fitted
adultery. *Or fornication Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites,
There shall be no ritual harlot of the daughters of Israel, or a perverted one of the sons of Israel. (Deut. 23:17) For the men themselves go apart with harlots, And offer sacrifices with a ritual harlot. (Hos. 4:14) that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.
adultery. Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel. (Deut. 23:17) for themselves are separated with whores, and they sacrifice with harlots (Hos. 4:14)
Strong‘s #3120 – malakos – effeminate: of a catamite, of a boy kept for homosexual relations with a man, of a male who submits his body to unnatural lewdness Perschbacher #3120 – cinaedus, an instrument of unnatural lust, effeminate, 1 Cor. 6:9
That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
Strong‘s #739 – artios fitted, complete, perfect Perschbacher #739 – entirely suited; complete in accomplishment, ready, 2 Tim. 3:17
KING JAMES VERSION
GREEK / HEBREW RESOURCES
Strong‘s # 6945 – qadesh – male temple prostitute from 6942 – to consecrate, sanctify, prepare, dedicate
New Age Name Game / Jargon NKJV
KJV
TEXTUS RECEPTUS / MASORETIC TEXT
NKJV
Matt. 23:10 et al.
the Christ
Christ
the Christ
And do not be called teachers; for One is your Teacher, the Christ.
Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ
Ps. 109:6
OMIT
Satan
Set a wicked man over him, And let an accuser stand at his right hand.
Set thou a wicked man over him: and let Satan stand at his right hand.
Rom. 6:22 et al
slaves
servants
'Set Thou a wicked man over him; and let an adversary stand at his right hand. bondmen
But now having been set free from sin, and having become slaves of God, you have your fruit to holiness, and the end, everlasting life.
But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.
OMIT 22 x
hades
hell
hades
OMIT 81 x
demon(s)
devil(s)
demon(s)
Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. (Rev. 20:14) And Jesus rebuked the demon, and it came out of him; and the child was cured from that very hour. (Mt. 17:18)
And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. (Rev. 20:14) And Jesus rebuked the devil; and he departed out of him: and the child was cured from that very hour. (Mt. 17:18)
Strong‘s #3588 – – definite article ―the‖ #5547 – Christos – Christ Perschbacher #3588 – nom. sg. m. article, …the prepositive article #5547 – the Christ, the Anointed One Strong‘s #7854 – satan 1) adversary, one who withstands 2) superhuman adversary 2a) Satan Strong‘s #1402 douloo 1) to make a slave of, reduce to bondage 2) metaph. give myself wholly to one‘s needs and service, make myself a bondman to him Perschbacher #1402 – to become devoted to the service of, Rom. 6:18, 22 Strong‘s #86 – aè – Hades Perschbacher #86: ―the invisible abode or mansion of the dead; the place of punishment, hell‖ Strong‘s #1140 – daimonion – evil spirits or the messengers and ministers of the devil Perschbacher #1140: in N.T., a demon, evil spirit
NKJV
KING JAMES VERSION
GREEK / HEBREW RESOURCES
Mark of the Beast NKJV
KJV
TEXTUS RECEPTUS /
MASORETIC TEXT Rev. 13:16 et al.
a mark...on their right hand
a mark...in their right hand
a mark...on their right hand
He causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their foreheads,
And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:
Strong‘s #1909 – epi * 1) upon, on, at, by, before 2) of position, on, at, by, over, against 3) to, over, on, at, across, against Perschbacher #1909 – epi…with the acc., upon
1 Sam. 13:21
the charge... was a pim (Word 'charge' is not in Hebrew; payim is Hebrew for file. Isn't a pim a positive iden-tification mark?) Accuses NKJV of cryptic reference to microchip implant
they had a file...for the coulters
And the price of the filing was a pim {That is, twothirds of a shekel.}... (JPS 1917 Ed.) ―The charge for sharpening was a pim for plowshares, mattocks, threepronged forks, and axes, and for setting the goads.‖
and the charge for a sharpening was a pim for the plowshares, the mattocks, the forks, and the axes, and to set the points of the goads.
Yet they had a file for the mattocks, and for the coulters, and for the forks, and for the axes, and to sharpen the goads.
Strong‘s #6477 – – פצירה petsiyrah - 1) price, charge #6310 – פִים – a weight equal to one third of a shekel, occurs only in 1 Sa. 13:21 Marginal note in JPS 1985 Edition: ―The word pim occurs only here. Its meaning became clear when stone weights inscribed with this weight were unearthed.‖
* Translation of the Greek preposition "" is determined by its syntax. Although ―epi‖ in some grammatical contexts may be translated ―in,‖ that is not permissible in these verses because the Greek article ―the‖ before the noun ―hand‖ in the prepositional phrase ―in the hand‖ renders ―hand‖ in the accusative case. According to Wesley Perschbacher‘s New Analytical Greek Lexicon (#1909), ―‗epi‘,...with the acc., upon”. Learn New Testament Greek by John H. Dobson, states that ―epi‖ means ―on, on top of‖ (―Prepositions followed by an accusative case‖, p. 186). In other words, when the preposition ‗epi‘ is present with a noun in the accusative case, its meaning is ―upon, on.‖ Had God meant the mark of the beast would be ―in the hand‖ or ―in the forehead,‖ He would have used a different Greek word – ―en‖ (Cf. Strong's Concordance #1909 and #1722). For a full discussion of the Mark of the Beast, see Chapter 9 of this report.
APPENDIX III TRANSLATION ERRORS IN THE KJV WHICH AFFECT THE INTERPRETATION OF BIBLE PROPHECY
CONTEND FOR THE FAITH: THE TEXTUS RECEPTUS http://watch-unto-prayer.org/TR-0-intro.html WATCH UNTO PRAYER taho@watch-unto-prayer.org http://watch-unto-prayer.org
TRANSLATION ERRORS IN THE KING JAMES VERSION WHICH AFFECT THE INTERPRETATION OF BIBLE PROPHECY
The King James Version contains certain translation and textual errors which will facilitate a global transition from the true Gospel of Jesus Christ to the false gospel of the Antichrist. This addendum hopes to present information which will enable the reader to understand what the Gnostic doctrine teaches and which mistranslations in the KJV support these errors. Coupled with the fact that the KJV will be interpreted according to ―letter meaings‖ and ―bible codes‖ purported to be contained in the text, it behooves Christians to undertake an objective evaluation of the KJV, as they should do with all translations in their language. The fact that foreign language translations are now, for the most part, translated from the KJV rather than the Greek Textus Receptus, makes this report equally relevant to nonEnglish speaking Christians who use foreign translations. We do not believe that the Translators of the KJV intended to mistranslate important words that will affect the interpretation of end-time prophecy. All of these translation and textual errors predated the 1611 KJV and can be traced through successive English translations which, according to King James‘ instructions, were ―to be followed, and as little altered as the original will permit.‖ The mischief appears to have originated with the Wycliffe translation, although one major error was inserted in a later edition of the KJV. Whatever the various reasons for these mistranslations in the King James Version, they needed to be corrected and, in every case, the New King James Version made the necessary corrections. The fact that a large network of KJV-Only defenders have made it their profession to misrepresent, not only these translation and textual errors, but hundreds of others, as accurate translations of the Greek Textus Receptus, while they tout the KJV as God‘s perfect Word and condemn the NKJV as a Satanic version, and allow no one to update or correct the KJV – not to mention their suppression of vital information (e.g. the Translators‘ Preface), their manipulation of textual data, their frequent misquoting of sources, their distortion of history and lies without end – in short, their thoroughly deceitful treatment of the Bible version issue, makes it difficult to resist the suspicion that King James Onlyism has a sinister interest in preserving these translation and textual errors in the Bible. It must be emphasized that these mistranslations did not originate with the King James Version but in the Wycliffe translation, which was translated from the Latin Vulgate. Furthermore, the Wycliffe translation carried a greater number of these corruptions than the Vulgate which is not surprising considering the evidence that John Wycliffe and the Lollard Knights were agents of the Rosicrucians. (See Chapter 19: ―The Lollard Movement: John Wycliffe‖ and preceding sections.) In the following report, we have analyzed certain translation and textual errors in the King James Version which may be used to promote the false gospel of the Antichrist. In this analysis, each KJV error is compared with the Greek Textus Receptus, readings in English translations before 1611, also the Latin Vulgate, the Syriac Peshitta and the Septuagint when applicable, and the NKJV. We have included other relevant information, such as the origin and history of the word (Etymology) and the pagan meaning and associations of the word (Mythology), to show the potential problems with these mistranslations in the end time deception. Textual errors in the KJV are also included, that is instances where the KJV fails to translate a word that is in the Greek text, thereby giving opportunity for a false interpretation of the verse. KING JAMES VERSION 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12.
HOLY GHOST JEHOVAH JUPITER & MERCURIUS MOUNT SION NEW TESTAMENT A FALLING AWAY GREAT TRIBULATION ANTICHRIST IN THE HAND/FOREHEAD GIANTS END OF THE WORLD EASTER
GREEK / HEBREW 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12.
HOLY SPIRIT YHWH ZEUS & HERMES MOUNT ZION NEW COVENANT THE FALLING AWAY THE GREAT TRIBULATION THE ANTICHRIST ON THE HAND/FOREHEAD NEPHILIM END OF THE AGE PASSOVER
333
1.
“GHOST” INSTEAD OF “SPIRIT” WITH REFERENCE TO JESUS CHRIST AND THE HOLY SPIRIT. ―Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.‖ (Matt. 27:50 KJV) ―Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:‖ (Matt. 28:19 KJV) GREEK TEXTUS RECEPTUS Matthew 28:19 <4198> (5679) {GOING} <3767> {THEREFORE} <3100> (5657) {DISCIPLE} <3956> {ALL} <3588> {THE} <1484> {NATIONS,} <907> (5723) {BAPTIZING} <846> {THEM} <1519> {TO} <3588> {THE} <3686> {NAME} <3588> {OF THE} <3962> {FATHER} <2532> {AND} <3588> {OF THE} <5207> {SON} <2532> {AND} <3588> {OF THE} <40> {HOLY} <4151> {SPIRIT;}
TRANSLATION ERROR ―Ghost‖ is a mistranslation of the Greek word ―pneuma‖ which means breath or spirit. The KJV inconsistently translated the word pneuma as spirit or ghost, with 91 instances of Ghost or ghost referring to God. The word ―Ghost‖ with reference to God, which is used in all English Bibles predating the King James Version, can be traced to the Wycliffe translation (1395). Although the Wycliffe Bible was translated from the Latin Vulgate, Jerome used the Latin term ―Spirtu Sancto‖ for the Holy Spirit and ―spiritum‖ for Jesus‘ spirit. Wycliffe did not actually translate the Bible that bears his name; it was translated by other Lollard scholars at Oxford University while Wycliffe led the Lollard movement politically. (See: Chap. 19 ―The Lollards: John Wycliffe‖) These scholars would have been familiar with the famous Old English (Anglo-Saxon) epic poem Beowulf, which was based on a Germanic oral tradition; they would therefore have known that the Old English word gást and gaést from the Gothic word usgaisjan were used in the poem to describe monsters, i.e., dragons and devils. The Wycliffe/Lollard translation of Eph. 6:17 is most inappropriate and disturbing: ―And take ye the helm of helthe, and the swerd of the Goost, that is, the word of God. That the Lollard scholars were ―knights‖ is evident in their use of the word ―knyyt‖ or ―knyytis‖ 92 times in their translation, e.g., 2 Tim. 2:3: ―Trauele thou as a good knyyt of Crist Jhesu.‖ FALSE GOSPEL OF THE ANTICHRIST Application of the word ―Ghost‖ to God the Holy Spirit may qualify as blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. (Matt. 12:31) The word ―ghost‖ means ―spirit‖ in a demonic sense; it is the pagan term for the spirits of dead people who are believed to roam on earth. ―Ghost‖ is derived from the Old English word gæstan (‗to frighten‘) and, apparently, from the Gothic word usgaisjan. It is a West Germanic word for a terrifying ‗supernatural being.‘ Needless to say, the pagan connotation of the word ―ghost‖ (i.e., Halloween ghosts) makes it an inappropriate term to identify God. This pagan usage may influence some unconverted persons to misunderstand the nature of God and to view Him as a Satanic being with evil intentions. In fact, Gnostic doctrine teaches that the God of the Bible is Satan, and that the true God is Lucifer. (See: ―The Gnostic Gospel‖) ―…in antiquity and reality, Lucifer, or Luciferus, is the name of the angelic Entity presiding over the light of truth as over the light of day. In the great Valentinian gospel Pistis-Sophia, it is taught that of the three Powers emanating from the Holy names of the three Triple powers (Tριδσνάμεις), that of Sophia (the Holy Ghost according to these Gnostics — the most cultured of all), resides in the planet Venus or Lucifer… Lucifer is divine and terrestrial light, the ‗Holy Ghost‘ and ‗Satan,‘ at one and the same time, visible Space being truly filled with the differentiated Breath invisibly; and the Astral Light…‖ (H.P. Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine, Vol. II, p. 312) ETYMOLOGY / MYTHOLOGY ―ghost. O.E. gast ‗soul, spirit, life, breath,‘ from P.Gmc. *ghoizdoz (cf. O.S. gest, O.Fris. jest, M.Du. gheest, Ger. Geist ‗spirit, ghost‘), from PIE base *ghois- ‗to be excited, frightened‘ (cf. Skt. hedah ‗wrath; Avestan zaesha- ‗horrible, frightful;‘ Goth. usgaisjan, O.E. gæstan ‗to frighten‘). This was the usual W.Gmc. word for ‗supernatural being,‘ and the primary sense seems to have been connected to the idea of ‗to wound, tear, pull to
334
pieces.‘ The surviving O.E. senses, however, are in Christian writing, where it is used to render L. spiritus, a sense preserved in Holy Ghost. Modern sense of ‗disembodied spirit of a dead person‘ is attested from c.1385 and returns the word toward its ancient sense. Most IE words for ‗soul, spirit‘ also double with ref. to supernatural spirits. Many have a base sense of ‗appearance‘ (e.g. Gk. phantasma; Fr. spectre; Pol. widmo, from O.C.S. videti ‗to see;‘ O.E. scin, O.H.G. giskin, originally ‗appearance, apparition,‘ related to O.E. scinan, O.H.G. skinan ‗to shine‘). Other concepts are in Fr. revenant, lit. ‗returning‘ (from the other world), O.N. aptr-ganga, lit. ‗back-comer.‘ Bret. bugelnoz is lit. ‗night-child.‘ L. manes, lit. ‗the good ones,‘ is a euphemism. The gh- spelling appeared c.1425 in Caxton, influenced by Flem. and M.Du. gheest, but was rare in Eng. before c.1550. Sense of ‗slight suggestion‘ (in ghost image, ghost of a chance, etc.) is first recorded 1613; that in ghost writing is from 1884, but that term is not found until 1927. Ghost town is from 1931. Ghost in the machine was Gilbert Ryle‘s term (1949) for ‗the mind viewed as separate from the body.‘‖ (Online Etymology Dictionary) Barnhart Concise Dictionary of Etymology – devil, angel, etc. Oxford English Dictionary of Etymology –Sanskrit – anger; Gothic – terrified Chambers Dictionary of Etymology – Indo European – enraged, aghast, terrified Liber Monstrorum: Monsters of Beowulf ―gást, gaést, m. -a., m. -i., a Ghost, Spirit, Demon; creature; gaést, 102 ( = Grendel), 2076(?) ( = Grendel‘s Mother), 2313(??) ( = the Dragon); gs. (wergan) gástes, 133 ( = Grendel), 1750 ( = the Devil?); as. gást, 1276 ( = Grendel); gp. gásta 1359, gaésta 1122 (fire). (note: it is sometimes difficult to decide whether (-)gæst (gist) or (-)gaést was intended) [cf. Go. usgaisjan ‗terrify‘] Cpds.: ellen-, ellor-, geósceaft-, wæl-.‖ STRONG‟S CONCORDANCE #4151 – pneuma {pnyoo'-mah} from 4154; TDNT - 6:332,876; n n AV - Spirit 111, Holy Ghost 89, Spirit (of God) 13, Spirit (of the Lord) 5, (My) Spirit 3, Spirit (of truth) 3, Spirit (of Christ) 2, human (spirit) 49, (evil) spirit 47, spirit general) 26, spirit 8, (Jesus‘ own) spirit 6, (Jesus‟ own) ghost 2, misc 21; 385 NEW TESTAMENT GREEK LEXICON Strong‘s Number: 4151 pneuma from (4154) 1.
2.
3.
4. 5.
the third person of the triune God, the Holy Spirit, coequal, coeternal with the Father and the Son a. sometimes referred to in a way which emphasises his personality and character (the \Holy\ Spirit) b. sometimes referred to in a way which emphasises his work and power (the Spirit of \Truth\) c. never referred to as a depersonalised force the spirit, i.e. the vital principal by which the body is animated a. the rational spirit, the power by which the human being feels, thinks, decides b. the soul a spirit, i.e. a simple essence, devoid of all or at least all grosser matter, and possessed of the power of knowing, desiring, deciding, and acting a. a life giving spirit b. a human soul that has left the body c. a spirit higher than man but lower than God, i.e. an angel 1. used of demons, or evil spirits, who were conceived as inhabiting the bodies of men 2. the spiritual nature of Christ, higher than the highest angels and equal to God, the divine nature of Christ the disposition or influence which fills and governs the soul of any one a. the efficient source of any power, affection, emotion, desire, etc. a movement of air (a gentle blast) a. of the wind, hence the wind itself b. breath of nostrils or mouth
PREVIOUS TRANSLATIONS & NKJV VERSION New King James Version (1979)
MATT. 27:50, 28:19 et al Holy Spirit
335
King James Version (1611) Bishops‘ Bible (1568) Geneva Bible (1587) Coverdale Bible (1535) Tyndale N.T. (1526) Wycliffe Bible (1395) Latin Vulgate (425) Syriac Peshitta (250)
2.
Holy Ghost holy ghost holy Ghost holy goost holy goost Hooli Goost Spiritu Sancto Holy Spirit
“JEHOVAH” INSTEAD OF “YHWH” ―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.‖ (Exod. 6:3 KJV) ―That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the most high over all the earth.‖ (Psalm 83:18 KJV) ―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 12:2 KJV) ―Trust ye in the LORD for ever: for in the LORD JEHOVAH is everlasting strength:‖ (Isaiah 26:4 KJV) See also: ―Jehovah-jireh‖ (Gen. 22:14), ―Jehovah-nissi‖ (Exod. 17:15), ―Jehovah-shalom‖ (Judges 6:24) TRANSLATION ERROR ―JEHOVAH‖ was not the name of God in the 1611 KJV, which translated the Hebrew name ―YHWH‖ as ―IEHOVAH.‖ This spelling was changed to ―JEHOVAH‖ in a later edition of the King James Version; which edition remains a mystery. IEHOVAH and JEHOVAH are both Masoretic corruptions of YHWH which combined the consonants of God‘s name and JHVH with the vowels of the name ―Adonai‖. The Coverdale Bible correctly translated YHWH as ―LORDE,‖ however, the KJV Translators chose to follow the mistranslation of these verses in in the Bishops‘ Bible and Geneva Bible. The NKJV has the correct translation, LORD. The progression from ―IEHOVAH‖ to ―JEHOVAH‖ in later editions of the KJV reflects the insertion of the letter ―J‖ into the English alphabet which, however, occurred before translation of the 1611 KJV. FALSE GOSPEL OF THE ANTICHRIST The name ―Adonai‖ is derived from the Canaanite title ―Adon‖ meaning ―Lord‖ and is the Hebrew cognate of the Greek god, Adonis. The Babylonian analogue of Adonis was the sun god, Tammuz, whose worship in ancient Israel led to the Babylonian captivity. (Ezek. 8:14) In our day, the Astrotheologists are having a heyday with this translation error, claiming that the God of Israel was Adonis. ―…theories (such as those discussed by Jonathan Z. Smith in his Drudgery Divine) which interpret the death and resurrection of Jesus in the categories of the Hellenistic religions of Attis, Osiris, Adonis, etc. Judaism, too, was part of Oriental Hellenism. These other religions grew from Near-Eastern roots. When we prefer to understand Jesus as an analogue to Yahweh/Baal, what is the difference? Baal is already the same, pretty much, as Adonis/Adonai isn‘t he? ―‗And here one wonders if Barker might not be willing to take her thesis a step farther and explain the origin of the myth of Jesus‘ resurrection as one more piece of polytheistic Yahweh tradition. If Yahweh was in so many ways parallel to Baal the Son of Elyon, why should this not have extended to the death and resurrection concept? It was by a resurrection victory that Baal became king of the immortals. Why not with Yahweh? Perhaps this aspect of the earlier Yahweh cycle had been successfully expunged by the priestly editors. But, a la Barker, we may surmise that it, too, hung on in the popular and sectarian imaginations, emerging into the light of history again when the theme was claimed for Jesus-Yahweh.‖ (The Great Angel, A Study of Israel's Second God. Reviewed by Robert M. Price. Institute for Higher Critical Studies) ―…the philosophical systems of the Gnostics and the primitive Jewish Christians, the Nazarines and the Ebionites,…show the views held in those days—outside the circle of Mosaic Jews—about Jehovah. He was identified by all the Gnostics with the evil, rather than with the good principle. For them, he was Ialdabaoth,
336
‗the son of Darkness,‘ whose mother Sophia-Akhamoth, was the daughter of Sophia, the Divine Wisdom (the female Holy Ghost of the early Christians)—Akhasa‘ while Sophia-Akhamoth personified the lower Astral Light or Ether. Ialdabaoth or Jehovah, is simply one of the Elohim, the seven creative Spirits, and one of the lower Sephiroth. He produces from himself seven other Gods, ‗Stellar Spirits‘ (or the lunar ancestors*), for they are all the same… With Pagans and Christians, with Hindus and Chaldeans, with the Greek as with the Roman Catholics…they were all the genii of the seven planets… Such, in the opinion of the philosophical Gnostics, were the God and the Archangels now worshipped by the Christians!... fn. Jehovah‘s connection with the moon in the Kabala is well known to students.‖ (H.P. Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine, Vol. I, pp. 197-8) HEBREW MASORETIC TEXT ―and I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, as God Almighty, but by My name YHWH I made Me not known to them.‖ (Exod. 6:3) ―That they may know that it is Thou alone whose name is the LORD, the Most High over all the earth.‖ (Psalm 83:18) ―Behold, God is my salvation; I will trust, and will not be afraid; for GOD the LORD is my strength and song; and He is become my salvation.‘‖ (Is. 12:2) ―Trust ye in the LORD for ever, for the LORD is GOD, an everlasting Rock.‖ (Is. 26:4) ―And Moses built an altar, and called the name of it Adonai-nissi.‖ (Gen. 22:14) ―And Abraham called the name of that place Adonai-jireh; as it is said to this day: ‗In the mount where the LORD is seen.‘‖ (Exod. 17:15) ―Then Gideon built an altar there unto the LORD, and called it ‗Adonai-shalom‘; unto this day it is yet in Ophrah of the Abiezrites.‖ (Judges 6:24) JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA ―JEHOVAH is an erroneous pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton, a four lettered name of God made up of the Hebrew letters Yod He Vav He. The word ‗JEHOVAH‘ therefore is a misreading for which there is no warrant and which makes no sense in Hebrew.‖ (The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia) ―JEHOVAH is a mispronunciation of the Hebrew YHWH the name of God. This pronunciation is grammatically impossible. The form ‗Jehovah‘ is a philological impossibility.‖ (The Jewish Encyclopedia) PREVIOUS TRANSLATIONS & NKJV VERSION New King James Version (1979) King James Version (1611) Bishops‘ Bible (1568) Geneva Bible (1587) Coverdale Bible (1535) Tyndale N.T. (1526) Wycliffe Bible (1395) Latin Vulgate (425) Syriac Peshitta (250)
EXODUS 6:3 et al LORD IEHOVAH Iehouah Iehouah LORDE n/a Adonai Adonai LORD
ETYMOLOGY / MYTHOLOGY “Jehovah. 1530, Tyndale‘s erroneous transliteration of Heb. Tetragramaton YHWH, using vowel points of Adhonai ‗my lord‘ (see Yahweh). Used for YHWH (the full name being too sacred for utterance) in four places in the Old Testament in the K.J.V. where the usual translation lord would have been inconvenient; taken as the principal and personal name of God. The vowel substitution was originally made by the Masoretes as a direction to substitute Adhonai for ‗the ineffable name.‘ European students of Heb. took this literally, which yielded L. JeHoVa (first attested in writings of Galatinus, 1516). Jehovah‘s Witnesses ‗member of Watchtower
337
Bible and Tract Society‘ first attested 1933; the organization founded c.1879 by Charles Taze Russell (18521916); the name from Isa. xliii:10.‖ (Online Etymology Dictionary) ―Adonis. ‗a beau,‘ 1622, from Gk. Adonis, youth beloved by Aphrodite, from Phoenician adon ‗lord,‘ probably originally ‗ruler,‘ from base a-d-n ‗to judge, rule.‘ Adonai, an O.T. word for ‗God,‘ is the Heb. cognate, with pl. of majesty.‖ (Online Etymology Dictionary) ―‗Jehovah‘ is a modern mispronunciation of the Hebrew name, resulting from combining the consonants of that name, Jhvh, with the vowels of the word Adonay, Lord,‘ which the Jews substituted for the proper name in reading the scriptures. In such cases of substitution the vowels of the word which is to be read are written in the Hebrew text with the consonants of the word which is not to be read. The consonants of the word to be substituted are ordinarily written in the margin; but inasmuch as Adonay was regularly read instead of the ineffable name Jhvh, it was deemed unnecessary to note the fact at every occurrence. When Christian scholars began to study the Old Testament in Hebrew, if they were ignorant of this rule or regarded the substitution as a piece of Jewish superstition, reading what actually stood in the text, they would inevitably pronounce the name Jehovah… The statement still commonly repeated that it originated with Petrus.‘‖ (1911 Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 15, p. 314) ―The pronunciation ‗Jehovah‘ is an error resulting among Christians from combining the consonants YHWH with the vowels of ADHONAY.‖ (Encyclopedia Britannica) See: Chapter 2: ―The Tetragrammaton‖
3.
“JUPITER” & “MERCURIUS” IN PLACE OF “ZEUS” AND “HERMES” ―And they called Barnabas, Jupiter; and Paul, Mercurius, because he was the chief speaker.‖ (Acts 14:12 KJV) See also: Acts 14:13 GREEK TEXTUS RECEPTUS Acts 14:12 <2564> (5707) <5037> <3588> <3303> {AND THEY CALLED} <921> {BARNABAS} <2203> <3588> {ZEUS;} <1161> {AND} <3972> {PAUL} <2060> {HERMES,} <1894> {BECAUSE} <846> {HE} <2258> (5713) {WAS} <3588> {THE} <2233> (5740) <3588> {LEADER} <3056> {IN SPEAKING.}
TRANSLATION ERROR Mistranslation of ―Zeus‖ and ―Hermes‖ as ―Jupiter‖ and ―Mercurius‖ is dynamic equivalence in all of its glory. This misleading transliteration can be traced through all of the English Bibles to Jerome‘s Latin Vulgate which used the Roman names of the Greek gods. The Wycliffe translation, which was based on the Latin Vulgate, brought Jerome‘s transliteration into the English Bible. And, even though William Tyndale translated from Erasmus‘ third edition of the Byzantine Greek text, he carried forward the Wycliffe error of using the Roman names of these Greek gods in English Bibles. The only reference in the KJV to ―Hermes‖ and ―Hermas‖ is to Christian brethren in Romans 16:14, hence, the name ―Hermes‖ has a good connotation. The Greeks of Lycaonia thought Paul was the god ―Hermes‖ come down to earth from the stars because he was the ―chief speaker‖ and performed a great miracle. ―Mercurius‖ does not have the name recognition of the Greek god, ―Hermes‖ and the translators of the Latin Vulgate and English Bibles, being Classical scholars, should have understood the importance of identifying the Greek god ―Hermes‖ in Acts 14:12. Paul commanded Timothy, ―Hold fast the form of sound words, which thou hast heard of me…‖ (2 Tim. 1:13) ―Hermes‖ is a ‗sound word‘ placed by God in the Greek text for a reason. The NKJV has corrected this translation error. FALSE GOSPEL OF THE ANTICHRIST
338
―Hermes Trismegistus‖ was a major Greek god whose identity is concealed by using the Roman name of Mercurius or Mercury. In his Genesis of the Grail Kings, Laurence Gardner identified Hermes as Ham, Noah‘s rebellious son who survived the Great Flood. Ham, the father of Canaan whom Noah cursed, is revered by occultists as the preserver of the pre-Flood ―ancient wisdom,‖ i.e., sorcery, which he taught to his descendants, the Merovingian bloodline. (See: Death of the Phoenix: Atlantis Rising) This ancient wisdom , also called the ―Hermetic arts and sciences,‖ was the mystery religion that supposedly made Egypt a world power. Hermes is the legendary Egyptian sage who is reputed to be the author of the Tarot, neo-Platonism, the Kabbalah, alchemy and astrology. The Hermetic arts and sciences were revived by Francis Bacon as The Advancement of Learning and the Rosicrucians are now mainstreaming Hermetic sorcery (e.g. Harry Potter) to condition mankind for the miraculous wonders performed by the Antichrist and False Prophet during the Tribulation period. It is no coincidence that Harry‘s female witch friend is named ―Hermione.‖ Since most people including Christians have never heard of Hermes Trismegistus, the Rosicrucians will be able to reimage him as a good sorcerer, in the same way they have portrayed white magicians Harry Potter and Hermione as white witches. And because ―Hermes‖ was not identified in our English Bibles (except the NKJV) as a Greek god, even believers are at risk of believing that Hermetic magic to be performed by the Antichrist are miracles of God. STRONG‟S CONCORDANCE #2203 – Zeus – Jupiter or Zeus = ―a father of helps‖, the national god of the Greeks and corresponds to the Roman Jupiter #2060 – Hermes – Hermes, perhaps from 2046; n pr m, Mercurius or Hermes = ―herald of the gods‖ 1) a Greek deity called by the Romans Mercurius (Mercury) PREVIOUS TRANSLATIONS & NKJV VERSION New King James Version (1979) King James Version (1611) Bishops‘ Bible (1568) Geneva Bible (1587) Coverdale Bible (1535) Tyndale N.T. (1526) Wycliffe Bible (1395) Latin Vulgate (425) Syriac Peshitta (250)
ACTS 14:12 Zeus / Hermes Iupiter / Mercurius Iupiter / Mercurius Iupiter / Mercurius Iupiter / Mercurius Iupiter / Mercurius Jubiter / Mercurie Iovem / Mercurium chief of the gods / Hermes
ETYMOLOGY / MYTHOLOGY ―Hermes. 1605, son of Zeus and Maia, god of commerce and Olympian messenger, from Gk. Hermes, of unknown origin.‖ (Online Etymology Dictionary) ―Hermetic. 1605 (implied in hermetically), ‗completely sealed,‘ also (1637) ‗dealing with occult science or alchemy,‘ from L. hermeticus, from Gk. Hermes, god of science and art, among other things, identified by Neoplatonists, mystics, and alchemists with the Egyptian god Thoth as Hermes Trismegistos ‗Thrice-Great Hermes,‘ who supposedly invented the process of making a glass tube airtight (a process in alchemy) using a secret seal. (Online Etymology Dictionary) ―The Tables of Testimony...not to be confused with the Ten Commandments...are rather more associated with the original Table of Destiny of the Anunnaki... This ancient archive is directly associated with the Emerald Table of Thoth/Hermes, and, as detailed in alchemical records of Egypt, the author of the preserved writings was the Biblical Ham, a great Archon of the Grail bloodline. He was the essential founder of the esoteric and arcane ‗underground stream‘ which flowed through the ages and his Greek name, Hermes, was directly related to the science of pyramid construction, deriving from the word herma, which relates to a ‗pile of stones‘.‖ (Laurence Gardner, Genesis of The Grail Kings: The Explosive Story of Genetic Cloning in the Bloodline of Jesus, 2000, p. 219)
339
4.
MOUNT “SION” INSTEAD OF MOUNT “ZION” IN PROPHECIES OF THE SECOND COMING OF JESUS CHRIST ―Praise waiteth for thee, O God, in Sion: and unto thee shall the vow be performed. O thou that hearest prayer, unto thee shall all flesh come. ‖ (Ps. 65:1-2 KJV) ―And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:‖ (Rom. 11:26 KJV) ―And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father‘s name written in their foreheads.‖ (Rev. 14:1 KJV) TRANSLATION ERROR The 1611 KJV mistranslated the Hebrew word for ―Zion‖ (tsiyown) as ―Sion‖ in many Psalms: 2:6, 9:11, 14; 14:7; 20:2; 48:2, 11, 12; 50:2; 51:18; 53:6; 65:1, 69:35, 74:2: 76:2; 78:68; 97:8. All of these translation errors were corrected except for Psalm 65:1. ―Sion‖ in Ps. 65:1 is not a spelling error but a translation error because the Hebrew word for ―Sion‖ is Siy’on, a different word than Tsiyown, which is translated ―Zion‖. The words Tsiyown (Zion) and Siy’on (Sion) identify two different locations in Israel: Mount Zion in Jerusalem and Mount Hermon, also called Mount Sion, in northern Israel. Deuteronomy 4:48 states, ―…Mount Sion (that is, Hermon)‖. This translation error is found in all of the English Bibles predating the KJV, except the Geneva Bible, and in the Latin Vulgate (425 A.D.) which Jerome may have derived from the Greek Septuagint (c. 280-130 B.C.), although he translated the O.T. from the Hebrew Text. These mistranslations reveal that, in this verse, the King James Translators followed the Greek Septuagint, by way of the Bishop‘s and other English Bibles (except the Geneva), as well as the Latin Vulgate, instead of the Hebrew Text. (See: ―Revision of the 1611 KJV‖) The error was corrected in the NKJV. FALSE GOSPEL OF THE ANTICHRIST Mount Hermon is named after the Greek god ―Hermes‖ who taught Hermetic magic to the Egyptians. Mt. Hermon is also called Mount Sion, presumably from Sirion, the name given to it by the Sidonians. (Deut. 3:8-9) Hermes came to earth to teach the Egyptians civilization and then returned to the stars, specifically the main star of the constellation Canis Major which is Sirius, the Dog Star. It is probable that Mount Sion/Sirion ultimately derived its name from the star Sirius which was, and still is, believed to be the location of the ancient gods who escaped the Great Deluge on the good ship Argo, the constellation next to Canis Major in the Zodiacal chart. (See: ―The False Gospel in the Stars: Heaven‘s Gate‖) Mistranslation of the Hebrew word for Zion (Tsiyown) as Sion in Psalm 65:1 is important because this verse will provide Scriptural validation of the Antichrist who will return from ―heaven‖ and rule from Mount Sion/Sirion in Dan instead of Mount Zion in Jerusalem. At the Luciferic Initiation, the False Prophet will use Psalm 65:1 to coerce mankind to swear allegiance to Lucifer and receive his mark, the Seal of Solomon. (See: ―The 6-Pointed Star: The Mark of the Beast‖) Compounding the problem, all seven New Testament references to Mount Zion in Jerusalem have not been been translated as ―Zion‖ in the KJV but left in the Greek as ―Sion.‖ Five of these verses were fulfilled at the first coming of Jesus Christ, however, two verses pertain to the Second Coming – Rom. 11:26 and Rev. 14:1. STRONG‟S CONCORDANCE #7865 Siy‘on {see-ohn‘} from 7863; n pr mont AV - Sion 1; 1 Sion = ―lofty‖ 1) another name for Mount Hermon #6726 Tsiyown {tsee-yone‘} the same (regularly) as 6725; TWOT - 1910; n pr loc AV - Zion 153, Sion 1; 154 Zion = parched place‖ 1) another name for Jerusalem especially in the prophetic books. “SION” instead of “ZION” in Matt. 21:5, John 12:15, Rom. 9:33, Rom. 11:26, Heb. 12:22, I Pet. 2:6, Rev. 14:1 / misleading transliteration
340
Matthew 21:5 – Tell ye the daughter of Sion, Behold, thy King cometh unto thee, meek, and sitting upon an ass, and a colt the foal of an ass. (KJV) John 12:15 – Fear not, daughter of Sion: behold, thy King cometh, sitting on an ass‘s colt. (KJV) Romans 9:33 – As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. (KJV) Romans 11:26 – And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: (KJV) Hebrews 12:22 – But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, (KJV) 1 Peter 2:6 – Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded. (KJV) Revelation 14:1 – And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father‘s name written in their foreheads. (KJV) GREEK TEXTUS RECEPTUS Romans 11:26 <2532> {AND} <3779> {DO} <3956> {ALL} <2474> {ISRAEL} <4982> (5701) {SHALL BE SAVED,} <2531> {ACCORDING AS} <1125> (5769) {IT HAS BEEN WRITTEN,} <2240> (5692) {SHALL COME} <1537> {OUT OF} <4622> {SION} <3588> {THE} <4506> (5740) {DELIVERER,} <2532> {AND} <654> (5692) {HE SHALL TURN AWAY} <763> {UNGODLINESS} <575> {FROM} <2384> {JACOB.}
Revelation 14:1 – <2532> {AND} <1492> (5627) {I SAW,} <2532> {AND}
<2400> (5628) {BEHOLD, [THE]} <721> {LAMB} <2476> (5761) {STANDING} <1909> <3588> {UPON} <3735> {MOUNT} <4622> {SION,} <2532> {AND} <3326> {WITH} <846> {HIM} <1540> {A HUNDRED [AND]} <5062> {FORTY} <5064> {FOUR} <5505> {THOUSAND,} <2192> (5723) {HAVING} <3588> {THE} <3686> {NAME} <3588> <3962> <846> {OF HIS FATHER} <1125> (5772) {WRITTEN} <1909> {ON} <3588> <3359> <846> {THEIR FOREHEADS.}
STRONG‟S CONCORDANCE #4622 Sion {see-own'}of Hebrew origin 6726; TDNT - 7:292,1028; n pr loc AV - Sion 7; 7 Sion or Zion = ―a parched place‖ 1) the hill on which the higher and more ancient part of Jerusalem was built 1a) the southwestern most and highest of the hills on which the city was built 2) often used of the entire city of Jerusalem 3) since Jerusalem because the temple stood there, was called the dwelling place of God PREVIOUS TRANSLATIONS & NKJV VERSION New King James Version (1979) King James Version (1611) Bishops‘ Bible (1568) Geneva Bible (1587) Coverdale Bible (1535) Tyndale N.T. (1526) Wycliffe Bible (1395) Latin Vulgate (425)
PSALM 65:1 Zion Sion Sion Zion Sion n/a Syon…in Jerusalem Sion (Ps. 64:2)
Syriac Peshitta (250)
Zion
ROM. 11:26 / REV. 14:1 Zion Sion Sion Sion Sion Sion Syon Sion Zion
ETYMOLOGY / MYTHOLOGY ―This treatise ‗The Virgin of the World‘ describes a personage called Hermes who seems to represent a race of beings who taught earthly mankind the arts of civilization after which: ‗And thus, with charge unto his kinsmen of the Gods to keep watch, he mounted to the Stars‘… This treatise says Hermes came to earth to teach men civilization and then again „mounted to the stars‟, going back to his home and leaving behind the
341
mystery religion of Egypt with its celestial secrets which were some day to be decoded… This treatise is quite explicit in saying that Isis and Osiris were sent to help the Earth by giving primitive mankind the arts of civilization… The treatise ends this long section with: ―‗Tis they alone who, taught by Hermes in God‟s hidden codes, became the authors of the arts, and sciences, and all pursuits which men do practice, and givers of their laws… Tis they who, taught by Hermes that the things below have been disposed by God to be in sympathy with things above, established on the earth the sacred rites over which the mysteries in Heaven preside… Tis they who, knowing the destructibility of (mortal) frames, devised the grade of prophets, in all things perfected, in order that no prophet who stretched forth his hands unto the Gods, should be in ignorance of anything, that magic and philosophy should feed the soul, and medicine preserve the body when it suffered pain. ―‗And having done all this, my son, Osiris and myself perceiving that the world was (now) quite full, were thereupon demanded back by those who dwell in Heaven…‘ ―And in the treatise Isis claims that the ‗Black Rite‘ honours her and ‗gives perfection… ―According to the treatise…the meaning of the ‗Dark Rite‘ will become clear. And as this rite and this mystery concern Isis and the star Sirius and by the context of this prophecy clearly concerns the heavens, can we be accused of sensationalism in making the suggestion that nothing would shake up the human race more than having the discovery of intelligent life elsewhere in the universe proven for the first time? And what if the dark companion of Sirius really does hold the answer to this mystery? What if the nearest centre of civilization really is based at the Sirius system and keeps a watchful eye on us from time to time?... ―If we ever come into contact with them again, they will probably be called the „Sirians‟ officially, and their civilization will be the ‗Sirian civilization‘….‖ (Robert Temple, The Sirius Mystery: Was Earth Visited by Intelligent Beings From a Planet in the System of Star of Sirius?, pp. 75, 81-83, ) “Sirius - brightest star, c.1374, from Gk. Seirios, lit. ‗scorching.‘ Probably so called from its ancient heliacal rising at the summer solstice (see dog days). An Egyptian name for it was Sothis.‖ (Online Etymology Dictionary) ―Greek mythology, Palestinian geography, and the biblical narrative come together in a most unusual way at ancient Banias, better known as Caesarea Philippi. ―In the first century, Pan was known as the only god to have died ‗in our own time.‘ Specifically, the god is recorded as having died during the reign of Tiberias, the Emperor of Rome at the time of Jesus‘ death. ‗Pan the great is dead,‘ shouted a sailor, Tammuz, sailing off the coast of Italy. There were reports of great lamentation. When Tiberias heard of it, he believed it a mistake. It could not be that the great son of Hermes and Penelope was dead, he concluded, but a lesser demon by the same name. ―Banias or Banyas—Arabic spellings of Paneas—is the ancient city at the foot of Mt. Hermon dedicated to the god, Pan. (Herod Philip, a son of Herod the Great, renamed the city Caesarea Philippi after himself.) The ruins of a temple dedicated to Pan are nearly obliterated now, yet the cave in which the god‘s great statue stood is still there, and votive niches in the cliff wall also remain. ―In the same way that Banias is named for Pan, Mt. Hermon is named for Pan‟s father, Hermes. The mountain straddles the modern Israeli-Syrian border. It rises to a height of over 9000 feet, and in the rainy months of December to March, is often snow-capped. (There is even a ski slope there now!) Only on a clear day—unusual during the winter—can you see it from the city of Tiberias on the Sea of Galilee (the Kineret). More often the view of it is obliterated even at close range in cold months by haze or mist or dense fog. ―The god Hermes was the son of Zeus and Maia. Being best known probably as ‗the messenger of the gods,‘ perhaps it is not surprising that Hermes‘ name (Mercury in Roman mythology) came to the English language in the word hermeneutic, which has to do of course with linguistic studies and interpretation and translation, most often associated with biblical exegesis. ―However, Hermes was also the conductor of the souls of the dead to Hades, the place in Greek mythology where dead peoples‘ souls go to wander around in boredom. Pan—the Greek word for ‗all‘— was among other things the guardian of thresholds. His job was to frighten you when you reached a threshold in life. That is where we get the word pan-ic! It was his job to panic anyone approaching a threshold, especially that of a cave. ―Putting this together, in the Cave of Pan at Caesarea Philippi stands a statue of Pan, guarding the threshold to the cave. This cave is in Mt. Hermon, named for Hermes, the conductor of souls to Hades. The Cave of Pan logically came to be known as the „gateway to Hades.‘ So, if you were to die and you did not get panicked by Pan, your soul would cross the threshold of the cave, and Hermes would take you to Hades from there! That was the mythology of this beautiful, natural setting. Interestingly, Pan was also the god of the pastoral and natural, thus our theological terms pantheism and panentheism. We in the English speaking world also have Pan to thank for pandemonium and pandering.‖ (Bert Gray, ―Jesus Unplugged‖)
342
―And we took at that time out of the hand of the two kings of the Amorites the land that was on this side Jordan, from the river of Arnon unto mount Hermon; (Which Hermon the Sidonians call Sirion; and the Amorites call it Shenir;)‖ (Deut. 3:8-9 KJV) ―They took possession of his land and the land of Og king of Bashan, the two kings of the Amorites, who were across the Jordan to the east, from Aroer, which is on the edge of the valley of Arnon, even as far as Mount Sion (that is, Hermon),‖ (Deut. 4:47-48 KJV) ―And the high places that were before Jerusalem, which were on the right hand of the mount of corruption, which Solomon the king of Israel had builded for Ashtoreth the abomination of the Zidonians, and for Chemosh the abomination of the Moabites, and for Milcom the abomination of the children of Ammon, did the king [Josiah] defile.‖ (II Kings 23:13 KJV) ―Come with me from Lebanon, my spouse, with me from Lebanon: look from the top of Amana, from the top of Shenir and Hermon, from the lions‘ dens, from the mountains of the leopards. (Song of Solomon 4:8 KJV) SIRYON is a variant form of SIRYA, from the Aramaic, meaning SPEAR. Syria - from L. Syria, from Gk. Syria, from Syrioi ‗the Syrians,‘ a name originally given to the Assyrians (Herodotus vii.63), an aphetic form of Assyrioi (see Assyria). See: ―Heeding Bible Prophecy: New Government: Mount Zion/Sion‖
5.
NEW “TESTAMENT” INSTEAD OF NEW “COVENANT” ―By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament.‖ (Heb. 7:22 KJV) ―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.‖ (Heb. 9:15 KJV) ―Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.‖ (Luke 22:20 KJV) See also: Matt. 26:28, Mark 14:24, Luke 22:20, 1 Cor. 11:25, 2 Cor. 3:6, 2 Cor. 3:14, Heb. 9:20 GREEK TEXTUS RECEPTUS Heb 7:22
<2596> <5118> {BY SO MUCH} <2909> {OF A BETTER} <1242> {COVENANT} <1096> (5754) {HAS BECOME} <1450> {SURETY} <2424> {JESUS.}
Heb.9:15 <2532> {AND} <1223> <5124> {FOR THIS REASON} <1242> {OF A COVENANT} <2537> {NEW} <3316> {MEDIATOR} <2076> (5748) {HE IS,} <3704> {SO THAT,} <2288> {DEATH} <1096> (5637) {HAVING TAKEN PLACE} <1519> {FOR} <629> {REDEMPTION} <3588> {OF THE} <1909> {UNDER} <3588> {THE} <4413> {FIRST} <1242> {COVENANT} <3847> {TRANSGRESSIONS,} <3588> {THE} <1860> {PROMISE} <2983> (5632) {MIGHT RECEIVE} <3588> {THEY WHO} <2564> (5772) {HAVE BEEN CALLED} <3588> {OF THE} <166> {ETERNAL} <2817> {INHERITANCE.}
Luke 22:20
<5615> {IN LIKE MANNER} <2532> {ALSO} <3588> {THE} <4221> {CUP} <3326> <3588> {AFTER} <1172> (5658) {HAVING SUPPED,} <3004> (5723) {SAYING,} <5124> <3588> {THIS} <4221> {CUP
343
[IS]} <3588> {THE} <2537> {NEW} <1242> {COVENANT} <1722> <3588> {IN} <129> <3450> {MY BLOOD,} <3588> {WHICH} <5228> {FOR} <5216> {YOU} <1632> (5746) {IS POURED OUT.}
STRONG‟S CONCORDANCE #1242 diatheke from 1303; TDNT - 2:106,157; n f AV - covenant 20, testament 13; 33 1) a disposition, arrangement, of any sort, which one wishes to be valid, the last disposition which one makes of his earthly possessions after his death, a testament or will 2) a compact, a covenant, a testament 2a) God‘s covenant with Noah, etc. PREVIOUS TRANSLATIONS & NKJV VERSION New King James Version (1979) King James Version (1611) Bishops‘ Bible (1568) Geneva Bible (1587) Coverdale Bible (1535) Tyndale N.T. (1526) Wycliffe Bible (1395) Latin Vulgate (425) Syriac Peshitta (250)
LUKE 22:20; HEB. 7:22, 9:15 et al covenant Testament testament Testament Testamete testament testament testamenti covenant
TRANSLATION ERROR The KJV Translators were inconsistent in their translation of the Greek word pertaining to God‘s covenants with Israel and the Church. In the Old Testament, they consistently translated the Hebrew word ―berith‖ as ―covenant‖ with reference to God‘s relationship with Jews and, in the New Testament, almost consistently mistranslated the Greek word ―diatheke‖ as ―testament‖ when referring to God‘s relationship to Church. Even in the New Testament, the Translators correctly translated the Greek word ―diatheke‖ as ―covenant‖ in most verses pertaining to the Jews. The error can be traced through all English translations to the Latin Vulgate. The NKJV corrected the mistranslation where correction was necessary. A covenant implies a contract based between two parties in a relational bond whereas a testament may be a book, a witness or a will. Any mistranslations in Scripture change the terms of God‘s various covenants with men. According to Hebrews 10:29, God will punish those who devalue the blood covenant between Jesus Christ and His Church: ―Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?‖ (Heb. 10:29) According to Easton‘s 1897 Bible Dictionary and other sources, ―testament‖ is a mistranslation of the Greek word ―diatheke‖: ―Covenant. A contract or agreement between two parties. In the Old Testament the Hebrew word ‗berith‘ is always thus translated. ‗Berith‘ is derived from a root which means ‗to cut,‘ and hence a covenant is a ‗cutting,‘ with reference to the cutting or dividing of animals into two parts, and the contracting parties passing between them, in making a covenant (Gen. 15; Jer. 34:18, 19). The corresponding word in the New Testament Greek is „diatheke‟, which is, however, rendered „testament‟ generally in the Authorized Version. It ought to be rendered, just as the word „berith‟ of the Old Testament, „covenant.‟ This word is used (1) of a covenant or compact between man and man (Gen. 21:32), or between tribes or nations (1 Sam. 11:1; Josh. 9:6, 15). In entering into a covenant, Jehovah was solemnly called on to witness the transaction (Gen. 31:50), and hence it was called a ‗covenant of the Lord‘ (1 Sam. 20:8). The marriage compact is called ‗the covenant of God‘ (Prov. 2:17), because the marriage was made in God‘s name. Wicked men are spoken of as acting as if they had made a ‗covenant with death‘ not to destroy them, or with hell not to devour them (Isa. 28:15, 18). (2.) The word is used with reference to God‘s revelation of himself in the way of promise or of favour to men. Thus God‘s
344
promise to Noah after the Flood is called a covenant (Gen. 9; Jer. 33:20, ‗my covenant‘). We have an account of God‘s covenant with Abraham (Gen. 17, comp. Lev. 26:42), of the covenant of the priesthood (Num. 25:12, 13; Deut. 33:9; Neh. 13:29), and of the covenant of Sinai (Ex. 34:27, 28; Lev. 26:15), which was afterwards renewed at different times in the history of Israel (Deut. 29; Josh. 1:24; 2 Chr. 15; 23; 29; 34; Ezra 10; Neh. 9). In conformity with human custom, God‘s covenant is said to be confirmed with an oath (Deut. 4:31; Ps. 89:3), and to be accompanied by a sign (Gen. 9; 17). Hence the covenant is called God‘s ‗counsel,‘ ‗oath,‘ ‗promise‘ (Ps. 89:3, 4; 105:8-11; Heb. 6:13-20; Luke 1:68-75). God‘s covenant consists wholly in the bestowal of blessing (Isa. 59:21; Jer. 31:33, 34).‖ (Easton‘s 1897 Bible Dictionary) FALSE GOSPEL OF THE ANTICHRIST Part and parcel of the conspiracy to eliminate the Greek New Testament is demotion of the New Covenant between God and His Church. Although the New Covenant is also a testament in the sense of a last will and testament – ―that by means of [Jesus‘] death…they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance‖ (Heb. 9:15) – a covenant is much more than a legal document. Use of the term ―New Testament‖ instead of ―New Covenant‖ reduces God‘s relationship with the Church to a book or a legal document, whereas God‘s covenant with Israel was a binding relationship based on love, in fact, a marriage covenant. Covenant Reformed theology has done much to blur the distinctive covenants which God has with Israel and the Church. Today the ―dispensational‖ division of the old and new covenants is being discredited and replaced by Covenant theology. Under the guise of the ―doctrines of Grace‖ Covenant theology preaches Old Testament Law and minimizes the exalted position of the Church which is the body of Christ. In today‘s Judaized churches, the Church takes low seat while Israel is elevated to as God‘s ―chosen people‖. Just as the Galatians were brought under the O.T. Law by the Judaizers, the great ‗falling away‘ of which Paul prophesied in 2 Thess. 2:3 has begun with the return of the Church to the Old Covenant Law. ETYMOLOGY / MYTHOLOGY ―Testament. c.1290, ‗last will disposing of property,‘ from L. testamentum ‗a will, publication of a will,‘ from testari ‗make a will, be witness to,‘ from testis ‗witness,‘ from PIE *tris- ‗three,‘ on the notion of ‗third person, disinterested witness.‘ Use in reference to the two divisions of the Bible (c.1300) is from L.L. vetus testamentum and novum testamentum, loan-translations of Gk. palaia diatheke and kaine diatheke. L.L. testamentum in this case was a mistranslation of Gk. diatheke, which meant both „covenant, dispensation‟ and „will, testament,‟ and was used in the former sense in the account of the Last Supper (see testimony) but subsequently was interpreted as Christ's ‗last will.‘‖ (Online Etymology Dictionary)
6.
“A” FALLING AWAY INSTEAD OF “THE” FALLING AWAY ―Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;‖ (2 Thes. 2:3 KJV) GREEK TEXTUS RECEPTUS 2 Thessalonians 2:3 <3361> {NOT} <5100> {ANYONE} <5209> {YOU} <1818> (5661) {SHOULD DECEIVE} <2596> {IN} <3367> {ANY} <5158> {WAY,} <3754> {BECAUSE [IT WILL NOT BE]} <1437> <3361> {UNLESS} <2064> (5632) {SHALL HAVE COME} <3588> {THE} <646> {APOSTASY} <4412> {FIRST,} <2532> {AND} <601> (5686) {SHALL HAVE BEEN REVEALED} <3588> {THE} <444> <3588> {MAN} <266> {OF SIN,} <3588> {THE} <5207> <3588> {SON} <684> {OF PERDITION,}
STRONG‟S CONCORDANCE #3588 ho {ho} including the feminine he {hay}, in all their inflections, the definite article; article AV - which 413, who 79, the things 11, the son 8, misc 32; 543 1) this, that, these, etc. Only significant renderings other than ―the‖ counted #646 apostasia {ap-os-tas-ee'-ah} feminine of the same as 647; TDNT - 1:513,88; n f
345
AV - to forsake + 575 1, falling away 1; 2 1) a falling away, defection, apostasy PREVIOUS TRANSLATIONS & NKJV VERSION New King James Version (1979) King James Version (1611) Bishops‘ Bible (1568) Geneva Bible (1587) Coverdale Bible (1535) Tyndale N.T. (1526) Wycliffe Bible (1395) Latin Vulgate (425) Syriac Peshitta (250)
2 THESS. 2:3 the falling away a falling away a fallyng away a departing the departynge a departynge dissencioun discessio a rebellion
TEXTUAL ERROR A textual error occurs when translators supply or omits words which are not in the Greek text with no indication, such as italics, that a word has been added, or a reference to word(s) not translated. In 2 Thessalonians 2:3, the KJV Translators failed to translate the definite article ―the‖ – ―‖ – preceding the Greek word for ―apostasy‖ in the Textus Receptus. ―The apostasy‖ refers to a specific event at a specific point in time—the great apostasy of the Church from the faith of Jesus Christ prior to the Tribulation period. Only the Coverdale Bible and the New King James Version (NKJV) translated the definite article ―the‖ which is in the Greek text. Bible versions which fail to translate the definite article in 2 Thessalonians 2:3, diminish the magnitude of the end time apostasy, thereby facilitating false teachings which limit the end time apostasy to the ecumenical movement. Some modern versions (NIV, RSV, NLT, CEV, Good News) mistranslate ―apostasia‖ as rebellion, which changes the falling away from the Word of God to a revolt against man‘s authority. FALSE GOSPEL OF THE ANTICHRIST ―The Apostasy‖ which immediately precedes the Day of Christ will rival no other period of apostasy in Church history. The great apostasy will be an identifiable event in which the entire organized Church system departs from the faith of Jesus Christ as it is set forth in the Greek Textus Receptus. To deceive the religious masses, false teachers will portray ―the apostasy‖ as a ―revival‖ or ―:reformation‖ of the Church or a ―new revelation‖ of God. In KJV-Onlyism, ―new revelations‖ of hidden meanings or Bible codes will be ―discovered‖ in the KJV. All such new revelations are simply a modern rehash of ancient Gnosticism masquerading as true Christianity. Medieval Gnostic sects will also be revived as the ―true Christians‖ in order to validate the heretical doctrines for which they suffered ―persecution.‖ See also: ―Heeding Bible Prophecy: New Doctrine: Apostasy‖
7.
“GREAT TRIBULATION” INSTEAD OF “THE GREAT TRIBULATION” ―And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.‖ (Rev. 7:14 KJV) GREEK TEXTUS RECEPTUS Revelation 7:14
<2532> {AND} <2046> (5758) {I SAID} <846> {TO HIM, [MY]} <2962> {LORD,} <4771> {THOU} <1492> (5758) {KNOWEST.} <2532> {AND} <2036> (5627) {HE SAID} <3427> {TO ME,} <3778> {THESE} <1526> (5748) {ARE} <3588> {THEY WHO} <2064> (5740) {COME} <1537> {OUT OF} <3588> {THE} <2347 > <3588> {TRIBULATION} <3173> {GREAT,} <2532> {AND} <4150> (5656) {THEY WASHED} <3588> <4749> <846> {THEIR ROBES,} <2532> {AND} <3021> (5656) {MADE WHITE} <4749> {ROBES} <846> {THEIR} <1722> {IN} <3588> {THE} <129> {BLOOD} <3588> {OF THE} <721> {LAMB.}
346
STRONG‟S CONCORDANCE #3588 ho {ho} including the feminine he {hay}, in all their inflections, the definite article; article AV - which 413, who 79, the things 11, the son 8, misc 32; 543 1) this, that, these, etc. Only significant renderings other than ―the‖ counted #2347 thlipsis {thlip'-sis} from 2346; TDNT - 3:139,334; n f AV - tribulation 21, affliction 17, trouble 3, anguish 1, persecution 1, burdened 1, to be afflicted + 1519 1; 45 1) a pressing, pressing together, pressure 2) metaph. oppression, affliction, tribulation, distress, straits PREVIOUS TRANSLATIONS & NKJV VERSION New King James Version (1979) King James Version (1611) Bishops‘ Bible (1568) Geneva Bible (1587) Coverdale Bible (1535) Tyndale N.T. (1526) Wycliffe Bible (1395) Latin Vulgate (425) Syriac Peshitta (250)
REV. 7:14 the great tribulation great tribulation great tribulation great tribulation gret tribulacion gret tribulation greet tribulacioun tribulatione magna great tribulation
TEXTUAL ERROR The Greek Textus Receptus has the definite article ―the‖ preceding ―great tribulation‖ in Rev. 7:14. ―The great tribulation‖ refers to a specific event in a specific point in time, i.e. that Great Tribulation period before the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. Only the New King James Version (NKJV) translated the definite article ―the‖ found in the Greek text. FALSE GOSPEL OF THE ANTICHRIST The phrase ―great tribulation‖ could refer to any persecution of the saints at any period of history, for example, the terrible Roman persecutions of Christians in the 2 nd and 3rd centuries. However, ―the great tribulation‖ refers to the specific 7-year period immediately preceding the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. The KJV Translators‘ neglect to translate the definite article ―the‖ lends support to the Amillennial doctrine of Covenant Reformed theology which maintains that all of the prophecies of the Bible were fulfilled by 70 A.D. when Jerusalem was destroyed. According to Covenant Reformed theology, the book of Revelation describes God‘s judgment on Israel and there is no 7-year Tribulation time of Jacob‘s Trouble before the return of Christ. This textual error in Bibles translated by Calvinists and Roman Catholics can be traced through all of the English Bibles to the Latin Vulgate and reflects the Amillennial eschatology of the Roman Catholic Church, Covenant Reformed theology as well as the Calvinist Reformed theology of King James and the KJV Translators. ―The word, millennium, means one thousand years. It is a combination of two Latin words mille (thousand) and annum (years). The odd term, amillennial, literally means ‗no one thousand years‘… ―The viewpoint is a very important one because it is the predominant concept of end time events in Christendom today. It is the official view of the Roman Catholic Church, and it is the doctrine that is held by the majority of mainline Protestant denominations. ―The view holds that the current Church Age will end abruptly with the appearance of Jesus for the redeemed. At that point the redeemed will be resurrected in spiritual bodies, the unrighteous will be consigned to Hell, the material universe will cease to exist, and the redeemed will take up residence eternally with God in Heaven... ―The amillennial view was developed in 400 A.D. by St. Augustine. It was adopted by the Roman Catholic Church in 431 A.D. at the Council of Ephesus. When this view was originally presented by St. Augustine, it caused a considerable stir because it differed so drastically from the premillennial view that had been the orthodox doctrine up to that time... ―Augustine‘s view, which was based on a spiritualization of Scripture, was quickly adopted by the Roman Catholic Church because it gave enhanced importance to the Church. It enabled the Church to claim that it was the fulfillment of all the kingdom promises in the Bible, and therefore it had the right to rule over all the nations
347
of the earth. ―It also enabled the Church to claim that it was the new Israel, replacing the old Israel composed of the Jewish people. The Jews were dismissed as a people divorced by God. Their kingdom promises had been inherited by the true Israel, the Church.‖ (―Amillennial Problems,‖ Dr. David R. Reagan, Lamb & Lion Ministries)
8.
“ANTICHRIST” INSTEAD OF “THE ANTICHRIST” ―Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.‖ (1 John 2:18 KJV) ―Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.‖ (1 John 2:22 KJV) GREEK TEXTUS RECEPTUS 1 John 2:18
<3813> {LITTLE CHILDREN, [THE]} <2078> {LAST} <5610> {HOUR} <2076> (5748) {IT IS,} <2532> {AND} <2531> {ACCORDING AS} <191> (5656) {YE HEARD} <3754> {THAT} <3588> {THE} <500> {ANTICHRIST} <2064> (5736) {IS COMING,} <2532> {EVEN} <3568> {NOW} <500> {ANTICHRISTS} <4183> {MANY} <1096> (5754) {HAVE ARISEN,} <3606> {WHENCE} <1097> (5719) {WE KNOW} <3754> {THAT [THE]} <2078> {LAST} <5610> {HOUR} <2076> (5748) {IT IS.}
1 John 2:22 <5101> {WHO} <2076> (5748) {IS} <3588> {THE} <5583> {LIAR} <1487> <3361> {BUT} <3588> {HE THAT} <720> (5740) {DENIES} <3754> {THAT} <2424> <3756> {JESUS} <2076> (5748) {IS} <3588> {THE} <5547> {CHRIST?} <3778> {HE} <2076> (5748) {IS} <3588> {THE} <500> {ANTICHRIST} <3588> {WHO} <720> (5740) {DENIES} <3588> {THE} <3962> {FATHER} <2532> {AND} <3588> {THE} <5207> {SON.}
STRONG‟S CONCORDANCE #500 antichristos {an-tee'-khris-tos} from 473 and 5547; TDNT - 9:493, 1322; n m AV - antichrist 5; 5 1) the adversary of the Messiah #473 anti {an-tee'} a primary particle; TDNT - 1:372,61; prep AV - for 15, because + 3639 4, for ... cause 1, therefore + 3639 1, in the room of 1; 22 1) over against, opposite to, before 2) for, instead of, in place of (something) 2a) instead of 2b) for 2c) for that, because 2d) wherefore, for this cause PREVIOUS TRANSLATIONS & NKJV VERSION New King James Version (1979) King James Version (1611) Bishops‘ Bible (1568) Geneva Bible (1587) Coverdale Bible (1535) Tyndale N.T. (1526) Wycliffe Bible (1395) Latin Vulgate (425)
1 JOHN 2:18 the Antichrist Antichrist antichrist Antichrist Antechrist Antichrist antecrist antichristus
1 JOHN 2:22 antichrist Antichrist antichrist that Antichrist ye Antichrist the Antichrist antecrist antichristus
348
Syriac Peshitta (250)
a false christ
a false christ
TEXTUAL ERROR The 1611 KJV capitalized ―Antichrist‖ in 1 John 2:18 and 2:22, however the Translators followed all previous English versions and the Latin Vulgate in neglecting to translate the definite article ―the‖ which preceded ―antichristos‖ in the Greek text. In a later edition of the KJV, the capital ―A‖ was changed to lower case ―a‖ which further obscured the singular identity of this personage who will enter the world stage during the Tribulation period. The NKJV translators were conscientious to translate the definite article in the Greek Textus Receptus and to capitalize ―Antichrist‖ in 1 John 2:18, however they followed the KJV in 1 John 2:22. FALSE GOSPEL OF THE ANTICHRIST The KJV Translators‘ failure to translate the definite article in the Greek Textus Receptus obscures not only the end time apostasy of the Church and the Great Tribulation, but also the person of the Antichrist. These textual errors lend support to the Amillennial eschatology of Calvinist Covenant Reformed theology, which is overtaking Dispensationalism in the preparation for the Tribulation period. Because the end time role of a particular man called ―the Antichrist‖ is obscured in the King James Version, many will fail to recognize this individual as ―the Antichrist‖ and mistake him for ―the Christ.‖ The Greek word ―antichristos‖ is derived from ―anti‖ and ―Christos.‖ ―Anti‖ may mean ―over against, opposite to, before‖ or ―for, instead of, in place of (something)‖ (e.g. Matt. 2:22, ―Archelaus did reign in Judaea in the room of his father Herod‖) The prevalent teaching about the ―Antichrist‖ stresses that he will be ―against Christ‖ but reject his role as a ―false Christ‖ who poses as ―the Christ‖ i.e. a surrogate Christ who usurps the government of this world ―instead of, in place of‖ Jesus Christ. This false teaching protects the Jewish identity of the Antichrist since, in order to deceive world Jewry that he is their Messiah, the Antichrist must be a Jew.
9.
“IN” THE HAND/FOREHEAD INSTEAD OF “ON” THE HAND/FOREHEAD ―And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:‖ (Rev. 13:16 KJV) ―And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand,‖ (Rev. 14:9 KJV) ―And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.‖ (Rev. 20:4 KJV) GREEK TEXTUS RECEPTUS Revelation 13:16
<2532> {AND} <4160> (5719) {IT CAUSES} <3956> {ALL,} <3588> {THE} <3398> {SMALL} <2532> {AND} <3588> {THE} <3173> {GREAT,} <2532> {AND} <3588> {THE} <4145> {RICH} <2532> {AND} <3588> {THE} <4434> {POOR,} <2532> {AND} <3588> {THE} <1658> {FREE} <2532> {AND} <3588> {THE} <1401> {BONDMEN,} <2443> {THAT} <1325> (5661) {IT SHOULD GIVE} <846> {THEM} <5480> {A MARK} <1909> <3588> {ON} <5495> {HAND} <846> <3588> {THEIR} <1188> {RIGHT,} <2228> {OR} <1909> <3588> {ON} <3359> {FOREHEADS} <846> {THEIR;}
Revelation 14:9 <2532> {AND} <5154> {A THIRD} <32> {ANGEL} <190> (5656) {FOLLOWED} <846> {THEM,} <3004> (5723) {SAYING} <1722> {WITH} <5456> {A VOICE} <3173> {LOUD,} <1487> {IF} <5100> {ANYONE} <3588> {THE} <2342> {BEAST} <4352> (5719) {DOES HOMAGE TO} <2532> <3588> {AND} <1504> {IMAGE} <846> {ITS,} <2532>
349
{AND} <2983> (5719) {RECEIVES} <5480> {A MARK} <1909> {ON} <3588> <3359> <846> {HIS FOREHEAD} <2228> {OR} <1909> {UPON} <3588> <5495> <846> {HIS HAND,}
Revelation 20:4
<2532> {AND} <1492> (5627) {I SAW} <2362> {THRONES;} <2532> {AND} <2523> (5656) {THEY SAT} <1909> {UPON} <846> {THEM,} <2532> {AND} <2917> {JUDGMENT} <1325> (5681) {WAS GIVEN} <846> {TO THEM;} <2532> {AND} <3588> {THE} <5590> {SOULS} <3588> {OF THOSE} <3990> (5772) {BEHEADED} <1223> {ON ACCOUNT OF} <3588> {THE} <3141> {TESTIMONY} <2424> {OF JESUS,} <2532> {AND} <1223> {ON ACCOUNT OF} <3588> {THE} <3056> <3588> {WORD} <2316> {OF GOD,} <2532> {AND} <3748> {THOSE WHO} <3756> <4352> (5656) {DID NOT DO HOMAGE TO} <3588> {THE} <2342> {BEAST,} <3777> {NOR} <3588> <1504> <846> {HIS IMAGE,} <2532> {AND} <3756> <2983> (5627) {DID NOT RECEIVE} <3588> {THE} <5480> {MARK} <1909> {UPON} <3588> <3359> <846> {THEIR FOREHEAD,} <2532> {AND} <1909> {UPON} <3588> <5495> <846> {THEIR HAND} <2532> {AND} <2198> (5656) {THEY LIVED} <2532> {AND} <936> (5656) {REIGNED} <3326> {WITH} <5547> {CHRIST} <3588> {THE} <5507> {THOUSAND} <2094> {YEARS:}
STRONG‟S CONCORDANCE 1909 epi {ep-ee'} a root; prep AV - on 196, in 120, upon 159, unto 41, to 41, misc 338; 895 1) UPON, ON, at, by, before 2) of position, ON, at, by, over, against 3) to, over, ON, at, across, against 5480 charagma {khar'-ag-mah} from the same as 5482: TDNT - 9:416,1308; n n AV - mark 8, graven 1; 9 1) a stamp, an imprinted mark 1a) of the mark stamped ON the forehead or the right hand as the badge of the followers of the Antichrist 1b) the mark branded UPON horses 2) thing carved, sculpture, graven work 2a) of idolatrous images PERSCHBACHER‟S GREEK LEXICON #1909 epi…with the acc., upon. ―37.4 Prepositions followed by an accusative case… on, on top of, on to; against, at… The basic meaning of most of these prepositions concerns movement towards something, or a position reached as a result of such movement.‖ (Learn New Testament Greek, John H. Dobson, p. 186.) PREVIOUS TRANSLATIONS & NKJV VERSION New King James Version (1979) King James Version (1611) Bishops‘ Bible (1568) Geneva Bible (1587) Coverdale Bible (1535) Tyndale N.T. (1526) Wycliffe Bible (1395) Latin Vulgate (425) Syriac Peshitta (250)
REV. 13:16 on / on in / in in / in in / in in / in in / in in / in in / in on / on
REV. 14:9 on / on in / in in / on in / on in / on in / on in / in in / in on / on
REV. 20:4 on / on vpon / in vpon / in vpon / on vpon / on vpon / on in / in in / in vpon / on
TRANSLATION ERROR
350
Translation of the Greek preposition ―‖ is determined by its syntax. Although ―epi‖ in some grammatical contexts may be translated ―in,‖ that is not possible in these verses because the Greek article ―the‖ before the noun ―hand‖ in the prepositional phrase ―in the hand‖ renders ―hand‖ in the accusative case. According to Wesley Perschbacher‘s New Analytical Greek Lexicon (#1909), ―‗epi‘,...with the acc., upon.‖ Learn New Testament Greek by John H. Dobson, states that ―epi‖ means ―on, on top of‖ (―Prepositions followed by an accusative case‖, p. 186). In other words, when the preposition ‗epi‘ precedes a noun in the accusative case, its meaning is ―upon, on.‖ Had God meant ―in the hand‖ or ―in the forehead,‖ He would have used the Greek word ―en‖ (Cf. Strong‘s Concordance #1909 and #1722). Also, in the verses above, the Greek word for ―mark‖ is charagma means a ―stamp‖ that is branded, imprinted or engraved ON the forehead or hand. (See Strong‘s # 5480) In this translation error, the KJV Translators were following the Bishops‘ Bible, although the latter correctly translated ―epi‖ as on in Rev. 14:9, which the KJV disregarded, and upon in Rev. 20:4, which the KJV followed. The source of the error was the Wycliffe translation based on the Latin Vulgate; however, the Latin word ―in‖ can mean in or on so it was not the Vulgate that first mistranslated the Greek word nor the Wycliffe which merely followed the Latin but William Tyndale failed to correctly translate ―epi.‖ Once again, the NKJV has corrected the error. FALSE GOSPEL OF THE ANTICHRIST An entire end time movement has been funded to promote the false teaching that the mark of the Beast is a computer chip that will be implanted ―in‖ the hand or forehead. This false teaching is supported by the mistranslation of ―epi‖ in the King James Version. For KJV-Only advocates to defend this translation error upon which depends the salvation of billions of people is inexcusable. Not only will multitudes of believers die for refusing to receive a counterfeit mark of the Beast, millions of people will receive the true mark of the Beast – the 6-Pointed star – thinking that it is the Magen David or Star of David. However, the 6-pointed star is a ancient symbol of Lucifer which is branded on his initiates who pledge their allegiance to him. Tattoos are an ancient tradition of pagan initiation rites. The tattoo bonds the initiate with the entity symbolized by the tattoo and enables him to communicate with that demonic power. The meaning and function of tattoos in initiation rites are explained in Chevalier's Dictionary of Symbols, which defines the tattoo as ―the permanent mark of that initiation.‖
―In some pictures of a tattooed man we are faced by a permanent prayer to and identification with the heavenly powers, at the same time as a basic means of communication with them. Such is the most generalized meaning of tattooing bestowed in consequence of a rite of initiation which allows this communication to take place. At the same time, this initiation is a rite of admission into a social group and the tattoo is the permanent mark of that initiation, the badge of the tribe. All in all, tattooing belongs among symbols of identification and is interfused with all their magic and mystic potency. Identification always carries a double meaning: it tends to invest the individual concerned with the properties and strength of the creature or thing to which that person is assimilated and, at the same time, to immunize the latter against its potential power to cause harm. This is why tattoos depict dangerous creatures such as serpents or scorpions, or animals which are symbols of fertility, such as bulls or of power, such as lions, and so on. Identification also carries a sense of surrender or even of consecration to whatever the tattoo symbolically depicts. It then becomes a badge of fealty.‖ (Jean Chevalier, The Penguin Dictionary of Symbols, 1996, pp. 975-6) Like a wedding band which represents an indissoluble union of a man and a woman, the initiate‘s tattoo ―becomes a badge of fealty‖ to the ―creature or thing to which that person is assimilated.‖ Since Lucifer aspires to be like God in every respect, in his pride he is planning a counterfeit fulfillment of the Bible prophecies concerning Jesus Christ. The terminology used in Chevalier‘s Dictionary of Symbols to describe the initiation
351
tattoo suggests that Lucifer will bond his followers to himself in a sacred marriage rite – the Satanic equivalent of the Marriage of the Lamb, the Lord Jesus Christ, to His Bride. (Rev. 19:7) See: ―The Six-Pointed Star: The Mark of the Beast‖ ―The Mark of the Beast: Tattoos & Brands‖ ―Heeding Bible Prophecy‖ 17.B ―Contending for the Faith: The Textus Receptus‖: The Mark of the Beast
10.
“GIANTS” INSTEAD OF “NEPHILIM” OR “FALLEN ONES” ―There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.‖ (Gen. 6:4 KJV) HEBREW MASORETIC TEXT ―The Nephilim were in the earth in those days, and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bore children to them; the same were the mighty men that were of old, the men of renown.‖ (Gen. 6:4, Jewish Publication Society, 1917 Edition) ―The N'filim were on the earth in those days, and also afterwards, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men, and they bore children to them; these were the ancient heroes, men of renown.‖ (Gen. 6:4, Complete Jewish Bible) ―The fallen ones were in the earth in those days, and even afterwards when sons of God come in unto daughters of men, and they have borne to them – they [are] the heroes, who, from of old, [are] the men of name.‖ (Gen. 6:4, Young‘s Literal Translation) STRONG‟S CONCORDANCE 5303 nephiyl {nef-eel'} or nephil {nef-eel'} from 5307; TWOT - 1393a; n m AV - giant 3; 3 1) giants, the Nephilim 5307 naphal {naw-fal'} a primitive root; TWOT - 1392; v AV - fail 318, fall down 25, cast 18, cast down 9, fall away 5, divide 5, overthrow 5, present 5, lay 3, rot 3, accepted 2, lie down 2, inferior 2, lighted 2, lost 2, misc 22; 434 1) to fall, lie, be cast down, fail 1a) (Qal) 1a1) to fall 1a2) to fall (of violent death) 1a3) to fall prostrate, prostrate oneself before 1a4) to fall upon, attack, desert, fall away to, go away to, fall into the hand of 1a5) to fall short, fail, fall out, turn out, result 1a6) to settle, waste away, be offered, be inferior to 1a7) to lie, lie prostrate… PREVIOUS TRANSLATIONS & NKJV VERSION New King James Version (1979) King James Version (1611) Bishops‘ Bible (1568) Geneva Bible (1587) Coverdale Bible (1535) Tyndale N.T. (1526) Wycliffe Bible (1395) Latin Vulgate (425) Syriac Peshtta (250)
GENESIS 6:4 giants Giants Giantes gyants giauntes n/a giauntis gigantes giants
352
Septuagint Masoretic Text
giðgantev Nephilim
TRANSLATION ERROR English Bibles said to be translated from the Hebrew Masoretic Text usually mistranslate the Hebrew word ―N‘filim‖ which means ―fallen ones.‖ The Nephilim may have been ―giants‖ as the Septuagint rendered the word, but that is not the correct translation of the Hebrew word and it misleads the reader concerning the true nature of these giants. Even leaving the Hebrew word ―N'filim‖ untranslated would prompt students of God‘s Word to ―seek further‖ in the words of the KJV translators. Filling the void, modern versions are mistranslating ―N'filim‖ as the ―children of the supernatural beings‖ and giving these demonic offspring of fallen angels a spiritual makeover as ―great men,‖ ―famous heroes‖ and ―mighty warriors.‖ Contemporary English Version (CEV) – ―The children of the supernatural beings who had married these women became famous heroes and warriors. They were called Nephilim and lived on the earth at that time and even later.‖ Good News Translation – ―In those days, and even later, there were giants on the earth who were descendants of human women and the heavenly beings. They were the great heroes and famous men of long ago.‖ The Message – ―This was back in the days (and also later) when there were giants in the land. The giants came from the union of the sons of God and the daughters of men. These were the mighty men of ancient lore, the famous ones.‖ Easy-To-Read Version – ―The sons of God saw that these girls were beautiful. So the sons of God married any of the girls they chose. These women gave birth to children. During that time and later, the Nephilim people lived in the land. They were famous people. They were heroes from ancient times. Then the Lord said, ‗People are only human; I will not let my Spirit be troubled by them forever. I will let them live 120 years.‘‖ FALSE GOSPEL OF THE ANTICHRIST Jesus likened the period preceding his Second Coming to the ―days of Noe‖ during which time the earth was populated with a hybrid demonic race produced by the mating of fallen angels with human women. (Gen. 6:4; Matt. 24:37) It is impossible to understand the complete ramifications of Jesus‘ words without understanding that the ancient demonic race which would manifest again on earth in the same perverse manner. This demonic race, which calls itself the Merovingian bloodline, will rule the world during the Tribulation period. The name ―Merovingian‖ suggests the demonic origins of the ―beast…out of the sea‖ in Rev. 13:1. Laurence Gardner, Bloodline of the Holy Grail, Element Books, 1996. ―…the mysterious sea beast – the Bistea Neptunis – as symbolically defined in the Merovingian ancestry. The relevant sea-lord was King Pallas, a god of old Arcadia... The immortal sea-lord was said to be ‗ever-incarnate in a dynasty of ancient kings‘ whose symbol was a fish – as was the traditional symbol of Jesus.‖ (pp. 166, 174) ―And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.‖ (Rev.13:1) ETYMOLOGY / MYTHOLOGY See: Heeding Bible Prophecy: New Government: 10.B; 10.D
11. THE END OF THE “WORLD” / END OF THE “AGE” ―The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.‖ (Matt. 13:39) ―So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,‖
353
(Matt. 13:49) ―And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?‖ (Matt. 24:3) ―Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.‖ (Matt. 28:20) ―For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.‖ (Heb. 9:26) GREEK TEXTUS RECEPTUS Matthew 24:3
<2521> (5740) <1161> {AND AS WAS SITTING} <846> {HE} <1909> {UPON} <3588> {THE} <3735> <3588> {MOUNT} <1636> {OF OLIVES} <4334> (5656) {CAME TO} <846> {HIM} <3588> {THE} <3101> <2596> {DISCIPLES} <2398> {APART,} <3004> (5723) {SAYING,} <2036> (5628) {TELL} <2254> {US,} <4219> {WHEN} <5023> {THESE THINGS} <2071> (5704) {SHALL BE?} <2532> {AND} <5101> {WHAT [IS]} <3588> {THE} <4592> {SIGN} <3588> <4674> {OF THY} <3952> {COMING} <2532> {AND} <3588> {OF THE} <4930> {COMPLETION} <3588> {OF THE} <165> {AGE?}
Matthew 28:20 <1321> (5723) {TEACHING} <846> {THEM} <5083> (5721) {TO OBSERVE} <3956> {ALL THINGS} <3745> {WHATSOEVER} <1781> (5662) {I COMMANDED} <5213> {YOU.} <2532> {AND} <2400> (5628) {LO,} <1473> {I} <3326> {WITH} <5216> {YOU} <1510> (5748) {AM} <3956> {ALL} <3588> {THE} <2250> {DAYS} <2193> {UNTIL} <3588> {THE} <4930> {COMPLETION} <3588> {OF THE} <165> {AGE.} <281> {AMEN.}
STRONG‟S CONCORDANCE #165 aion {ahee-ohn'} from the same as 104; TDNT - 1:197,31; n m AV - ever 71, world 38, never + 3364 + 1519 + 3588 6, evermore 4, age 2, eternal 2, misc 5; 128 1) for ever, an unbroken age, perpetuity of time, eternity 2) the worlds, universe 3) period of time, age #2889 kosmos {kos'-mos} probably from the base of 2865; TDNT - 3:868,459; n m AV - world 186, adorning 1; 187 1) an apt and harmonious arrangement or constitution, order, government 2) ornament, decoration, adornment, i.e. the arrangement of the stars, ‗the heavenly hosts‘, as the ornament of the heavens. 1 Pet. 3:3 3) the world, the universe 4) the circle of the earth, the earth 5) the inhabitants of the earth, men, the human race… PERSCHBACHER‟S NEW ANALYTICAL GREEK LEXICON #165 αίών, ωνος, ό [§4.2.E] pr. a period of time of significant character; life; an era; an age; hence, a state of things marking an age or era; the present order of nature;…‖ PREVIOUS TRANSLATIONS & NKJV VERSION New King James Version (1979) King James Version (1611)
MATT. 13:39, 49; 24:3; 28:20 et al end of the age end of the world
354
Bishops‘ Bible (1568) Geneva Bible (1587) Coverdale Bible (1535) Tyndale N.T. (1526) Wycliffe Bible (1395) Latin Vulgate (425) Syriac Peshitta
ende of the worlde ende of the worlde ende of the worlde ende of the worlde ende of the world ad consummationem saeculi [―to completion to all eternity‖] end of the world
TRANSLATION ERROR The Greek word ―aeon‖ means ―age.‖ If God meant to say ―end of the world‖ He would have used the Greek word ―kosmos.‖ The KJV‘s mistranslation of these verses can be traced to the Bishops‘ Bible and all previous English Bibles, including Wycliffe which, however, did not follow the Latin Vulgate in these verses (which translated the verse correctly) but the Syriac Peshitta. FALSE GOSPEL OF THE ANTICHRIST The KJV mistranslation of the Greek word ―aeon‖ has given occasion for those who promote Astrotheology to misrepresent Christians as believing that the world will end soon. The following excerpt from the ―Zeitgeist‖ movie is an example of the misrepresentation of Christian doctrine: ―ZEITGEIST‖ Movie, Transcript: ―Now, we have all heard about the end times and the end of the world. Apart from the cartoonish depictions in the Book of Revelation, the main source of this idea comes from Matthew 28:20, where Jesus says ‗I will be with you even to the end of the world.‘ [S121] However, in King James Version, ‗world‘ is a mistranslation, among many mistranslations. The actual word being used is ‗aeon‘, which means ‗age.‘ ‗I will be with you even to the end of the age.‘ Which is true, as Jesus‘ Solar Piscean personification will end when the Sun enters the Age of Aquarius. [S122] The entire concept of end times and the end of the world is a misinterpreted astrological allegory. [S123] [S124] [S125] [S126] [S127] [M] Let‘s tell that to the approximately 100 million people in America who believe the end of the world is coming.‖ [S121] - King James Version, The Holy Bible, Holman, Matthew 28:20 [S122] - Maxwell, Tice, Snow: That Old-Time Religion, The Book Tree, p44 [S123] - Churchward, Albert: The Origin & Evolution of Religion, p 282, 366 [S124] - Massey, Gerald.: The Historical Jesus and the Mythical Christ, The Book Tree, . Pages 1-10 [S125] - Massey, Gerald.: Lectures, A & B, p 7-8 [S126] - Acharya S.: The Christ Conspiracy, Adventures Unlimited Press, 1999. p.265-274 [S127] - Wells, G.A.: Who was Jesus?, Open Court 1991 p179
12.
“EASTER” INSTEAD OF “PASSOVER” ―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.‖ (Acts 12:4) GREEK TEXTUS RECEPTUS Acts 12:4
<3739> {WHOM} <2532> {ALSO} <4084> (5660) {HAVING SEIZED} <5087> (5639) {HE PUT} <1519> {IN} <5438> {PRISON,} <3860> (5631) {HAVING DELIVERED} <5064> {TO FOUR} <5069> {SETS OF FOUR} <4757> {SOLDIERS} <5442> (5721) {TO GUARD} <846> {HIM,} <1014> (5740) {PURPOSING} <3326> {AFTER} <3588> {THE} <3957> {PASSOVER} <321> (5629) {TO BRING OUT} <846> {HIM} <3588> {TO THE} <2992> {PEOPLE.}
STRONG‟S CONCORDANCE
355
#3957 pascha {pas'-khah} of Aramaic origin cf 6453; TDNT - 5:896,797; n n AV - Passover 28, Easter 1; 29 1) the paschal sacrifice (which was accustomed to be offered for the people's deliverance of old from Egypt) 2) the paschal lamb, i.e. the lamb the Israelites were accustomed to slay and eat on the fourteenth day of the month of Nisan (the first month of their year) in memory of the day on which their fathers, preparing to depart from Egypt, were bidden by God to slay and eat a lamb, and to sprinkle their door posts with its blood, that the destroying angel, seeing the blood, might pass over their dwellings; Christ crucified is likened to the slain paschal lamb 3) the paschal supper 4) the paschal feast, the feast of the Passover, extending from the 14th to the 20th day of the month Nisan TRANSLATION & TEXTUAL ERROR The Greek word is (―pascha‖) and, therefore, ―Easter‖ is a translation error. However, the KJV Translators were not the first to mistranslate pascha, but William Tyndale is the source of this error. In the Greek Textus Receptus, the definite article ―the‖ precedes pascha and this article designates the distinctive feast kept by the Jews as part of the Old Covenant. In all fairness to the KJV Translators, they had been instructed by King James to follow the Bishops‘ Bible and former translations and to retain the old ecclesiastical words such as ―Easter‖: ―FOR the better ordering of the proceedings of the translators, his Majesty recommended the following rules to them, to be very carefully observed:— 1. The ordinary bible, read in the church, commonly called the Bishop's Bible, to be followed, and as little altered as the original will permit. 2. The names of the prophets and the holy writers, with the other names in the text, to be retained, as near as may be, according as they are vulgarly used. 3. The old ecclesiastical words to be kept; as the word church, not to be translated congregation, &c. To give credit where due, the Geneva Bible, Bishops‘ Bible and the KJV worked toward phasing out this mistranslation, since it was frequent in the Coverdale and Tyndale Bibles which preceded it. The Greek word ―pascha‖ is found in the Textus Receptus in 27 verses: Matthew 26:2, 26:17, 26:18, 26:19; Mark 14:1, 14:12, 14:14, 14:16; Luke 2:41, 22:1, 22:7, 22:8, 22:11, 22:13, 22:15; John 2:13, 2:23, 6:4, 11:55, 12:1, 13:1, 18:28, 18:39, 19:14; Acts 12:4; I Corinthians 5:7; Hebrews 11:28. Compare the following translations: PREVIOUS TRANSLATIONS & NKJV ACTS 12:4
―Passover‖ or ―Easter‖ in New Testament
VERSION New King James Version (1979) King James Version (1611)
Passover
―Passover‖ in all 27 verses
Easter
Bishops‘ Bible (1568)
Easter
Geneva Bible (1587) Coverdale Bible (1535)
the Passeouer Easter
Tyndale N.T. (1526)
ester
Wycliffe Bible (1395) Latin Vulgate (425) Syriac Peshitta
pask pascha the passover
―Passeouer‖ in 25 N.T. verses; ―Easter‖ in Acts 12:4 ―Passouer‖ in 23 N.T. verses; Easter‖ in John 11:55, Acts 12:4; ―Passeouer‖ in all 27 N.T. verses ―Easter‖ in 30 N.T. verses ―Easter‖ in 25 N.T. verses; ―paschall lambe‖ in Matt. 26:17, John 18:28 ―paske‖ or ―pask‖ in all 27 N.T. verses ―pascha‖ in 23 N.T. verses ―passover‖ in all 27 N.T. verses
FALSE GOSPEL OF THE ANTICHRIST The failure of the KJV Translators to follow the Greek Text in Acts 12:4 has occasioned no end of contempt and wrath for the King James Version and KJV-Only advocates only make matters worse by defending the error as the correct translation. We include ourselves as former defenders of ―Easter‖ based on the fact that the feast of the Passover lasted one week, encompassing the pagan feast of Easter, so that Herod brought Peter out of prison after Easter as well as Passover. We do not believe that King James or the Translators intended to cause offense by the use of ―Easter;‖ nevertheless, the KJV needed correction in this verse so as not to give the world an opportunity to claim that the Christian celebration of Easter is based on the Egyptian celebration of the resurrection of Horus.
356
―ZEITGEIST‖ Movie: ―However, they did not celebrate the resurrection of the Sun until the spring equinox, or Easter. This is because at the spring equinox, the Sun officially overpowers the evil darkness, as daytime thereafter becomes longer in duration than night, and the revitalizing conditions of spring emerge.‖ ―‗...(The) infant Horus, who sank down into Hades as the suffering sun to die in the winter solstice and be transformed to rise again and return in all his glory and power in the equinox at Easter.‘ [Massey, Gerald: The Egyptian Book of the Dead, Health R., p 9 ]‖ (―Zeitgeist‖ documentation) ―‗The fact... that the date of his resurrection is also associated with the position of the sun at the time of the vernal(spring) equinox, is further intimation that we have in the story of the birth, death, and resurrection of Jesus, an ancient and nearly universal Sun-myth, instead of verifiable historical events.‘ [Mangasarian, MM: The Truth about Jesus, Infidels.org ]‖ (―Zeitgeist‖ documentation) ―‗Christians ever afterward kept Easter Sunday with the carnival processions derived from the mysteries of Attis. Like Christ, Attis arose when ‗the sun makes the day for the first time longer than the night‘...‘ [Walker, Barbara: Woman's Encyclopedia of Myths and Secrets, Harper, p. 78-79 ]‖ (―Zeitgeist‖ documentation)
APPENDIX IV
HOW TO AVOID PROFANE BABBLINGS: PERSONAL BIBLE STUDY PLAN CONTEND FOR THE FAITH: THE TEXTUS RECEPTUS http://watch-unto-prayer.org/TR-0-intro.html WATCH UNTO PRAYER taho@watch-unto-prayer.org http://watch-unto-prayer.org
357
APPENDIX IV HOW TO AVOID PROFANE BABBLINGS ―O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science [gnosis] falsely so called:‖ 1 Tim. 6:20 ―But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.‖ 2 Tim. 2:16 As the assault on the Greek Textus Receptus gains momentum, the secret doctrine of the Kabbalah will gradually replace the sound doctrine of the Bible. At the same time, the tools for refuting heresy are being removed from the Church, and this void will make it impossible to contend for the faith with authority. ―Behold, the days come, saith the Lord GOD, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the LORD:‖ (Amos 8:11) Since believers will be left to their own deceptive imaginations, arbitrary letter meanings will supersede the authority of God‘s words. ―In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes.‖ (Judges 17:6) To provide Christians with the tools they will need to earnestly contend for the faith once delivered to the saints — the Greek Textus Receptus — we have compiled a list of Bible study resources which have proven to be helpful in our own Bible study and in our research on Bible translations. We have also included links to free online resources which provide searchable Bible translations and Bible study resources and online bookstores where these resources can be purchased at reasonable prices. All of these resources are recommended for the sole purpose of helping the reader to ascertain the meanings of the God‘s words in the Greek Textus Receptus and to determine where various Bible translations, including older translations, modern versions, and current translations based on the Textus Receptus (KJV, NKJV), have departed from the original text. Assuming that the reader‘s final authority is the Greek Textus Receptus, references to corrupt texts and translations should only serve to highlight errors in various translations: ―Some peradventure would have no variety of senses to be set in the margin, lest the authority of the Scriptures for deciding of controversies by that show of uncertainty, should somewhat be shaken. But we hold their judgment not to be sound in this point. ...doth not a margin do well to admonish the Reader to seek further, and not to conclude or dogmatize upon this or that peremptorily? For as it is a fault of incredulity, to doubt of those things that are evident: so to determine of such things as the Spirit of God hath left (even in the judgment of the judicious) questionable, can be no less than presumption. Therefore as S. Augustine saith, that variety of Translations is profitable for the finding out of the sense of the Scriptures:...so diversity of signification and sense in the margin, where the text is no so clear, must needs do good, yea, is necessary, as we are persuaded....They that are wise, had rather have their judgments at liberty in differences of readings, than to be captivated to one, when it may be the other.‖ (―The Translators to the Reader‖) In the section below the list of Bible Study Resources will be found a Personal Bible Study Plan which was developed by Janet Moser for her own Bible study and research of various translations. This Bible Study Plan explains how to make profitable use of the recommended study resources. The format of the plan begins with determining the underlying Greek text of a verse and then, based on an accurate reading of the Greek, progresses to understanding of the major doctrine and personal application of the text. In addition, a sample Bible study in presented to demonstrate how this study is done in practice. The 359
Personal Bible Study Plan is downloadable in a one-page printer-friendly document with single-page blank study sheets which may be modified as desired and copied for personal use or group Bible studies. ―Many other things we might give thee warning of (gentle Reader) if we had not exceeded the measure of a Preface already. It remaineth, that we commend thee to God, and to the Spirit of his grace, which is able to build further than we can ask or think. He removeth the scales from our eyes, the vail from our hearts, opening our wits that we may understand his word, enlarging our hearts, yea correcting our affections, that we may love it to the end.‖ (―The Translators to the Reader‖) “BIBLE STUDY PLAN” RESOURCES George Ricker Berry, Interlinear Greek-English New Testament, World Publishing, 1997, 1999. The King James Version compared to the Stephens Text (1550) as the Elzevir 1624 edition of Textus Receptus with footnotes which identify textual departures in various Greek editions. ―It is an interesting feature of the Interlinear New Testament that in the margin appears the English word of the Authorized Version; in the text appears the Greek original of that particular word; and immediately under it, the English word that is its nearest literal equivalent... This work also gives in its notes not only the various readings of six different editors of the Greek Testament, but also these variations in English whenever the sense is affected thereby, but without attempting to present all the minute shades of meaning which a Greek scholar will attach to them.‖ (Introduction, pp. i, ii)
Jay P. Green, Sr. Gen. Ed. & Translator, The Interlinear Bible: Hebrew-Greek-English With Strong's Concordance Numbers Above Each Word, Sovereign Grace Publishers, 1976. ―An interlinear Bible is the next best thing to a formal course in the Hebrew and Greek languages... The Hebrew text in the Old Testament is the Masoretic text... The Greek text in the New Testament is the Received Text... It is based on The New Testament in the Original Greek According to the Text Followed in the Authorized Version, edited by F.H.A. Scrivener and published in 1894-1902. This Greek text differs slightly from other printed editions of the Received Text... It also departs in a few details from the Greek text used by translators of the King James Version.‖ James Strong, Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, with Hebrew, Chaldee and Greek Dictionaries, MacDonald Pub. Co., 1986. ―Shows every word of the text of the common English Version (King James Version) of the Canonical Books, and every occurrence of each word in regular order; together with Dictionaries of the Hebrew and Greek words of the Original with references to the English words... By observing the subjoined Directions, in the associated use of the Hebrew and Greek Dictionaries, the reader will have substantially a Concordance-Lexicon of the Authorized Version and the Hebrew Old Testament and the Greek New Testament.‖ (Title page, General Preface) Wesley J. Perschbacher, The New Analytical Greek Lexicon, Hendrickson Publishers, 1990. ―The new analytical Greek lexicon of the New Testament: every word and inflection of the Greek New Testament arranged alphabetically and with grammatical analyses: a complete series of Greek paradigms, with grammatical remarks and explanations... Every lexical form (and a few nonlexical forms) is coded with the numbering used in Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance. This numbering system is used in a variety of Greek and Hebrew reference works to make them more accessible to readers with a limited knowledge of the Biblical languages.‖ (pp. vii, ix) Ralph D. Winter and Roberta H. Winter, The Word Study New Testament, Tyndale House Publishers, 1979. Ralph D. Winter and Roberta H. Winter, The Word Study Concordance, Tyndale House Publishers, 1979. ―All scholars and translators are fallible. The serious Bible student will often consult more than one translation to find what he wants to know. But unless he has studied Greek, the original language of the New Testament, he is forced to rely on the translators‘ choice of English words... For all such people the Word Study New Testament (and
360
its companion volume, the Word Study Concordance) will be a great help. Here under every noun, verb, adjective, and adverb the reader will find the key number assigned to that word by Strong in Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible. The Bible student can then turn directly to that number in the Word Study Concordance and see the Greek word and, in English, all the various biblical references where that Greek word was used.‖ (p. v, vi) The Hendrickson Parallel Bible: KJV • NKJV • NIV • NLT, Hendrickson Publishers, 2005. This Parallel Bible facilitates verse comparison of four translations with Berry‘s Interlinear Greek-English Textus Receptus. The King James Version and the New King James Version are laid out with parallel verses in side by side columns on the same page, with the corresponding chapters of the New International Version and New Living Translation on the opposite page. Comparing these translations with the Greek Textus Receptus is made easy. All of the footnotes for each version are included. Lewis Sperry Chafer and John Walvoord, Major Bible Themes, Zondervan, 1974. ―Virtually a classic for this century, Major Bible Themes includes chapters on doctrines that merit particular attention in the contemporary religious scene, such as the Holy Spirit, the nature of the Church, and the second coming of Christ. Designed for group and individual study, for pastors, laymen, and students, Major Bible Themes is an indispensable tool, providing the biblical basis for fifty-two doctrines, complete with topical and Scripture indexes. Questions for discussion and review follow each section.‖ (Back Cover)
ENGLISH LANGUAGE RESOURCES G.W.S. Friedrichsen, The Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology, Oxford University Press, 1966. ―Each word is accompanied by its pronunciation, its present day meaning, the date of its first record in English and the chronology of the development of its sense(s), and its earliest form in written English. The principal Germanic cognates are presented, and also the relevant forms from other languages insofar as they help to explain the etymology of English words. The Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology is the most comprehensive etymological dictionary of the English language ever published. There are some 24,000 main entries, and with the derivatives, the total number of words treated is more than 38,000. This book has become a standard for scholars, and all those interested in the history of English words will find this book indispensable.‖ (Front Cover) Roget's Super Thesaurus, Writers Digest Books, 2003. ―This book is actually a fairly exhaustive Thesaurus. It is 663 pages of common, specialized, and even slang words that have been defined, cross referenced, and alphabetized. The entries also consist of the type of word (i.e. verb, noun, etc.), notable quotations of uses, and what this book calls ‗reverse dictionary,‘ which lists the words by their definition first, in case you know what it is and not what it is called ... The entries gives the reader both synonyms and antonyms. There is also an introduction that helps the reader to understand how the book is organized and how to most effectively use this reference work.‖
ONLINE BIBLE STUDY RESOURCES Olive Tree Online Bible Search: http://www.olivetree.com/bible/ / access multiple Bible versions simultaneously / 19 English versions, 3 Greek Texts, Hebrew OT, Interlinear Textus Receptus Study Light Bible Search: http://www.studylight.org/ / search many old and new Bible translations / 33 Bibles and 3 concordances / Caveat: This website does not italicize or otherwise indicate words in the KJV and other versions which are not in the Greek. Parallel Bible Search: http://www.studylight.org/par/ / compare texts and highlight variations between two different translations Caveat: This website does not italicize or otherwise indicate words in the KJV and other versions which are not in the Greek. KJV Online Search: http://www.kjvbible.net/ / good for word / phrase searches E-Sword: http://www.e-sword.net/ / Free Bible study software for Windows. Many Bibles, Greek & Hebrew Texts, Strong‘s Concordance, Lexicons, Bible Dictionaries, Thesaurus, and more
361
Strong‘s Concordance: http://www.virtualchurch.us/library/KJ_Bible/bible/index.html / King James Version with words hyperlinked to Strong‘s Concordance definitions Interlinear Study Bible: http://www.studylight.org/isb / does not have Berry's footnotes which identify Greek editions which contain textual variations Greek Textus Receptus Interlinear Search / search Interlinear Greek-English Textus Receptus http://www.OliveTree.com/cgi-bin/EnglishBible.htm?version=GNTInter_tag Hebrew-English Bible (Masoretic Text / JPS 1917 Ed.) http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0.htm / parallel columns Latin Vulgate - Douay Rheims Version: http://www.latinvulgate.com/ New English Translation of Septuagint: http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/nets/edition/ Online Etymology Dictionary: http://www.etymonline.com/ Roget‘s Interactive Thesaurus: http://thesaurus.reference.com/ The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge: http://www.studylight.org/con/tsk/ The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia: http://www.studylight.org/enc/isb/ Translators‘ Preface to 1611 King James Version: http://watch-unto-prayer.org/preface-kjv.html BOOK STORES & ONLINE BOOKS Amazon: http://www.amazon.com / inexpensive new and used books / Helpful ―Search inside‖ tool for selected books Bookfinder: http://www.bookfinder.com/ / ―Compare prices on over 125 million books for sale (new, used, rare, out of print, international, textbooks)‖ Christian Book Distributors: http://www.christianbook.com/ (1-800-CHRISTIAN) / reasonable prices and some bargain deals Google Book Search: http://books.google.com/ / ―Search inside‖ selected books NetLibrary & ebrary: http://blog.searchenginewatch.com/blog/041006-105816 / available for free from public and university libraries ebrary Discover: http://www.ebrary.com/corp/ / offers services to individual researchers Project Gutenberg: http://gutenberg.us / Original online book site has been providing full text access to books since 1971 The Million Books Project: http://www.archive.org/details/millionbooks / Internet Archive: The National Academies provides searchable, full text access to thousands of their titles. The Online Books Page: http://blog.searchenginewatch.com/blog/041019-153730 / University of Pennsylvania and Digital Book Index provides access to thousands of full text books online. Interlibrary Loan Services: Many non-reference books can be borrowed without charge through the Interlibrary Loan department of your local library.
362
PERSONAL BIBLE STUDY PLAN NEW TESTAMENT BIBLE VERSE (Address)
DATE STUDIED
GREEK TEXTUS RECEPTUS Berry, Interlinear Greek-English New Testament Write the English translation Underline words noted in ―Bible Perversions‖ section (below)
KING JAMES VERSION
NEW KING JAMES VERSION Hendrickson's Parallel Bible Write verse Compare with KJV and note KJV/NKJV discrepancies Compare with Berry's Interlinear and note NKJV discrepancies w/ Interlinear Underline words noted in ―Bible Perversions‖ section
BIBLE PERVERSIONS Berry, Interlinear Greek-English New Testament Write footnotes for verse Hendrickson's Parallel Bible Write NKJV footnotes for verse Modern Versions Note discrepancies in modern versions (Greek changes picked up by new versions)
GREEK WORD STUDY Winter, The Word Study New Testament (all major verse words keyed) Strong’s Concordance Perschbacher‘s New Analytical Greek Lexicon (keyed w/ Strong‘s numbers) List all appropriate translation options
WORDS / INSIGHTS Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology Try to match Greek words to their English counterparts and write the English counterpart in your lexicon. Write any new personal insights regarding the verse (if you have space)
CONTEXT / OUTLINE
Determine the key verse of a New Testament book Create outline of book using the main thoughts of chapters and/or paragraphs (some study Bibles outline each chapter)
PRINCIPLES
DOCTRINE
Write out the main doctrine of the verse w/ supporting cross reference verses Chafer, Major Bible Themes Winter, The Word Study New Testament The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge (Hendrickson Pub.) Note cross reference verses in your Bible
Write all godly attributes referred to in the verse or inspired by the verse.
Determine the main teaching of the verse (this should be the major doctrine in next section)
CROSS REFERENCES
ATTRIBUTES
Hendrickson's Parallel Bible Write the verse Compare with Greek-English Interlinear Underline words that vary from Greek Textus Receptus Underline words noted in ―Bible Perversions‖ section Note translation or textual errors (additions/omissions) in the KJV
List more major doctrine references List other cross references not directly related to the major doctrine
ACTIONS
Note all verse instructions to be followed Ask how you might need to apply this verse to yourself
Roget’s Super Thesaurus Look up godly attribute words and note their opposites (ungodly attributes to be avoided) EXAMPLES People – Jesus, Paul, others Note positive and negative examples of attributes and actions in Scripture
PROMISES / PRAYERS / PRAISE Note the promises, prayers and names of God connected with godly attributes and actions Trust in the promises Pray the prayers Praise the Lord
W H A T D O E S T H E V E R S E S A Y ?
W H A T D O E S I T M E A N ? H O W D O E S I T A P P L Y ?
363
EXAMPLE OF PERSONAL BIBLE STUDY
VERSE - REVELATION 5:9
DATE - 12/6/07
GREEK TEXTUS RECEPTUS
KING JAMES VERSION
Berry, Interlinear Greek-English New Testament ―And they sing a song new, saying, worthy art thou to take the book, and to open its seals; because thou wast slain, and didst purchase to God us by thy blood out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation,‖
―And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;‖
W H A T
NEW KING JAMES VERSION
BIBLE PERVERSIONS
D O E S
―And they sang a new song, saying: ‗You are worthy to take the scroll, And to open its seals; For You were slain, And have redeemed us to God by Your blood Out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation,‖
GREEK WORD STUDY Strong's Concordance: ―us‖ (#2248 - ήμάς - accusative case plural of 1473; pronoun us, we, our, etc. [1473 - έγώ - ego {eg-o'} a primary pronoun of the first person I] Perschbacher's Greek Lexicon: #2248 - ήμάς - acc. pl. 1 pers. personal pronoun - έγώ - (1473) Greek word hemas = us) is the plural form of the first person singular pronoun έγώ (ego = I). Westcott-Hort Greek Text omitted the pronoun
Berry‘s Interlinear footnote: — ήμάς LTAW (omit ―us‖ - Lachman, Tischendorf, Alford, Wordsworth) Modern version corruptions: ERV/ASV - [―men‖] RSV/NIV/NASB - ―men”
WORDS / INSIGHTS ―Us‖ refers to twenty-four elders who sing a new song saying they were purchased/redeemed to God by the blood of the Lamb. The 24 elders cannot be angels for they have been redeemed by the blood of the Lamb. Here we see redeemed men in heaven before the Tribulation begins in Rev. 6. John's vision of redeemed men in heaven before the Tribulation begins is proof of the pre-Tribulation resurrection of the dead in Christ and those in Christ who are alive on the earth. Corrupt modern versions insert ―men‖ (for Greek word omitted by W-H) which would refer to people still on earth.
CONTEXT / OUTLINE
PRINCIPLES
Key verse: Rev. 1:19 ―Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter;‖ Rev. 1 - things which thou hast seen / Glorified Christ Rev. 2-3 - things which are / letters to existing churches Rev. 4-22 - things which shall be hereafter / future events in heaven and on earth Rev. 4 - Throne of God / 4 creatures & 24 elders Rev. 5 - Book w/ 7 seals to be opened by Jesus Christ Rev. 6-19 - Tribulation events / Second Coming of Christ Rev. 20 - Millennial Reign of Jesus Christ Rev. 21-22 - New Heavens & New Earth / Eternity
The book of Revelation follows a strict chronological order. John's vision of the 24 elders in heaven is a future event which follows Christ's letters to the churches and immediately precedes the seal judgments of Rev. 6. Rev.4:1: ―After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will shew thee things which must be thereafter‖ Rev. 6:1: ―And I saw when the Lamb opened one of the seals, and I heard, as it were the noise of thunder, one of the four beasts saying, Come and see.‖
DOCTRINE
CROSS REFERENCES
Major Bible Themes: ―The dispensation of grace was directed to the church alone, as the world as a whole continues under conscience and human government... Under grace, however, failure also was evident as grace produced neither worldwide acceptance of Christ nor a triumphant church. Scripture in fact predicted that there would be apostasy within the professing church (1 Tim. 4:1-3; 2 Tim. 3:1-13; 2 Pet. 2-3; Jude). Although God is fulfilling His purpose in calling out a people to His name from Jew and Gentile, the professing but unsaved portion of the church left behind at the Rapture will be judged in the period between the Rapture and Christ's coming to set up His kingdom (Matt. 24:1-26; Rev. 6-19). The true church will be judged in heaven at the judgment seat of Christ (2 Cor. 5:10-11)‖ (Chafer, p. 135)
The 24 elders already have their glorified bodies and are wearing crowns received at the judgment seat of Christ: Rev. 4:4: And round about the throne were four and twenty seats: and upon the seats I saw four and twenty elders sitting, clothed in white raiment; and they had on their heads crowns of gold.‖ The 24 elders sing of their exalted position in Christ and their future reign as kings and priests over the earth: Rev. 5:10: ―And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth. Compare Rev. 5:9-10 to Rev. 1:5-6: ―...Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father...‖]
T H E V E R S E S A Y ?
W H A T D O E S T H E V E R S E M E A N ?
364
ATTRIBUTES Godly attributes of 24 elders: Joyful - ―And they sung a new song‖ Humble - ―Thou art worthy‖ Grateful - ―Thou...hast redeemed us to God by thy blood‖ Godly attributes inspired by Rev. 5:9: Joy / hope - John's vision of redeemed humanity in heaven inspires joyful anticipation of the resurrection of the true church.
EXAMPLES
ACTIONS Do not be troubled by world events leading up to the Tribulation but joyfully anticipate our gathering unto Jesus. Matt. 24:6-8: ―And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places. All these are the beginning of sorrows.‖ 2 Thes. 2:1-2: ―Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, For not quickly to be shaken you in mind, nor to be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by epistle, as if by us, as that is present the day of the Christ.‖ (Greek TR)
PROMISES / PRAYERS / PRAISE Jesus promised He will return and take us to be with Him: John 14:1-3: ―Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me. In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also. ‖
H O W D O E S V E R S E A P P L Y ?
365
NEW TESTAMENT BIBLE VERSE (Address)
DATE STUDIED
GREEK TEXTUS RECEPTUS Berry’s Greek-English Interlinear New Testament Write English translation
New King James Study Bible Write verse Compare with KJV Compare with Interlinear Note KJV / NKJV discrepancies w/ each other Note KJV / NKJV discrepancies w/ Interlinear GREEK WORD STUDY Winter, The Word Study New Testament (all major verse words keyed) Strong’s Concordance Perschbacher’s New Analytical Greek Lexicon (keyed w/ Strong’s numbers) List all appropriate translation options CONTEXT / OUTLINE
DOCTRINE Write out the main doctrine of the verse w/ supporting cross reference verses Chafer, Major Bible Themes Winter, The Word Study New Testament The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge (Hendrickson Pub.) Note cross reference verses in your Bible ATTRIBUTES
Berry’s Greek-English Interlinear (footnotes) NKJV (footnotes) Note new version discrepancies (Greek changes picked up by new versions)
WORDS / INSIGHTS Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology Try to match Greek words to their English counterparts and write the English counterpart in your lexicon. Write any new personal insights regarding the verse (if you have space) PRINCIPLES Determine the main teaching of the verse (this should be the major doctrine in next section)
CROSS REFERENCES List more major doctrine references List other cross references not directly related to the major doctrine
ACTIONS Note all verse instructions to be followed Ask how you might need to apply this verse to yourself
Roger’s Super Thesaurus Look up godly attribute words and note their opposites (ungodly attributes to be avoided) EXAMPLES People – Jesus, Paul, others Note positive and negative examples of attributes and actions in Scripture
PROMISES / PRAYERS / PRAISE Note the promises, prayers and names of God connected with godly attributes and actions Trust in the promises Pray the prayers Praise the Lord
HOW DOES THE VERSE APPLY?
Write all godly attributes referred to in the verse
BIBLE PERVERSIONS
WHAT DOES THE VERSE MEAN?
Determine key verse of N.T. book Create outline of book using the main thoughts of chapters and/or paragraphs (some study Bibles outline each chapter)
Write verse Underline words noted in “Perversions” section below Compare with Greek-English Interlinear Underline words that vary from TR Note translation or textual errors (additions or omissions) in KJV
WHAT DOES THE VERSE SAY?
NEW KING JAMES VERSION
KING JAMES VERSION
VERSE
DATE
BIBLE PERVERSIONS
GREEK WORD STUDY
WORDS / INSIGHTS
CONTEXT / OUTLINE
PRINCIPLES
DOCTRINE
CROSS REFERENCES
ATTRIBUTES
ACTIONS
EXAMPLES
PROMISES / PRAYERS / PRAISE
HOW DOES THE VERSE APPLY?
NEW KING JAMES VERSION
WHAT DOES THE VERSE MEAN?
KING JAMES VERSION
WHAT DOES THE VERSE SAY?
GREEK TEXTUS RECEPTUS
SCRIVENER'S APPENDIX A “WRONG READINGS OF THE BIBLE OF 1611 AMENDED IN LATER EDITIONS” The Authorized Edition of the English Bible (1611): Its Subsequent Reprints and Modern Representatives, F.H.A. Scrivener, Cambridge, 1884, pp. 147-202. Appendix A.] ―Wrong readings of the Bible of 1611 amended in later editions.‖ Catalogue of the variations from the original edition of the Authorized Version of the Holy Bible (1611), which, being found in all modern editions, have been retained in the Cambridge Paragraph Bible. Obvious misprints and the peculiar orthography of the original are excluded, and the dates annexed are those of the editions in which the several variations originated, so far as these can be ascertained.
Reading of the Authorized Bible
Genesis
Variation of later editions
v. 32; vi. 10; vii. 13 vi. 5 viii. 13 ix. 18, 23, 27; x. 1, 2, 21 x. 14 x. 19
Sem Shem, 1619 God GOD1, 1629 six hundredth and one six hundredth and first2, 1629 Japhet Japheth, 1629 Philistiim Philistim, 1612 (not 1613), 1629 Sodoma and Gomorrah Sodom and Gomorrah, 1629 (Gomorrah, 1612) xiv. 15 Hoba Hobah, 1638 xv. 7 Caldees (Chaldees, ch. xi. 31) Chaldees, 1629 xv. 19 Kenizites Kenizzites, 1629 xvi. 14; xx. 1 Cadesh (Kadesh, ch. xiv. 7) Kadesh, 1638 xix. 21 this thing this thing also, 1638 xli. 7 and wood and the wood, 1616 (not 1617) xxiii. 10 gate, 1762 gates xxxiv. 3 marg. to her heart to the heart of the damsel, 1744 xxxvi. 33 Bozra Bozrah, 1613 xxxix. 16 her lord his lord, 1638 xii. 40 marg. armed be armed, 1629 1 Heb. JEHOVAH. The words ―Lord‖ and ―God‖ are always intended to be printed in small capitals in the Authorized Version, when they are employed to translate that Holy Name. Adonai Jehovah is represented by ―LORD GOD‖ about a hundred times in Ezekiel alone, and Jehovah Adonai by ―LORD God‖ only in Hab. Iii. 19, itself corrected (perhaps wrongly) in the Cambridge folio of 1629. See Appendix B II. on Ps. xliv. 23. 2 In some places this bold archaism (see above, p. 111) is retained in the text of the Cambridge Paragraph bible, e.g. Ezek. xliii. 27; 2 Esdr. vii. 68; I Macc. xiii. 51; 2 Macc. xi. 21; but not in I Kin. vi. 1; xvi. 8, 23. *Holy Bible Containing the Old and New Testaments in the King James Version, The Open Bible Expanded Edition, 1985, Thomas Nelson, Inc.
Reading of the Authorized Bible
Exodus xiv. 25 marg.
made
Variation of later editions and made, 1629
366
xv. 25 xxi. 19 marg. xxi. 32 xxiii. 13 xxiii. 27 marg. xxvi. 8 xxx. 3 marg. xxxiv. 25 xxxv. 11 xxxv.29 xxxvii. 19
made a statute ceasing shekels names necks (so all in Josh. vii. 8) and the eleven † Hebr. the roof…and the walls of Passover and his bars hands of Moses Three bowls made he after
Reading of the Authorized Bible
Leviticus i. 8 i. 9 ii. 4 vi. 2
made for them a statute, 1638 his ceasing, 1638 shekels of silver, 1638 name, 1769 neck, 1629 and the eleven curtains, 1629 † Heb. roof, 1629 of the passover, 1762 and his boards, his bars, 1638 hand of Moses, 1629 Three bowls made after, 1629
Variation of later editions
in the fire the inwards an unleavened cake in ااfellowship…† violence
on the fire, 1638 his inwards, 1638 unleavened cakes, 1638 ااin †fellowship … violence, 1629 (nearly) vi. 5 marg. † Heb. the day † Heb. in the day, 1629 x. 14 the sacrifice the sacrifices, 1629 xviii. 21 marg. Moloc Moloch, 1629 xix. 34 shall be shall be unto you, 1638 xx. 11 be put surely be put, 1638 xxiii, 10 marg. an Omer omer, 1638 xxiii. 20 for the priests for the priest, 1638 xxiii. 22 the field thy field, 1638 xxv. 5 marg separations separation, 1629 C.1, 1630 xxv. 6 the stranger thy stranger, 1638 xxv. 31 wall, 1769 walls xxvi. 23 reformed reformed by me, 1638 xxvi. 40 the iniquity (the iniquities, 1613) their iniquity and the iniquity, 1616 1 By 1629, with or without C. annexed, we indicate the Cambridge folio of that year (see above, pp. 19-21), but by 1629 L., the London quarto.
Reading of the Authorized Bible
Numbers i. 2, 18, 20 iv. 40 vi. 2
poll houses ااprefixed to first ―separate‖
vii. 31, 55
charger
vii. 48, 53 & x. 22
Ammiud
vii. 54, 59 & x. 23
Pedazur
vii. 61
a silver bowl
xix. 11 marg. xxi. 20 marg. xxi. 24
soul hill Jabok
Variation of later editions polls, 1769 (so all in ver. 22) house, 1769 (so all in ver. 42) ااprefixed to second ―separate,‖ 1744 (not 1762), 1769 charger of the weight, 1762 (so all in ver. 43) Ammihud, 1638 (so all in ch. 1. 10) Pedahzur, 1638 (so all in ch. 1. 10) one silver bowl, 1638 (so all in ver 55, &c. soul of man, 1638 the hill, 1638 (Cf. Deut. xxxiv. 1) Jabbok, 1629, C. and L1 (so all in
367
Gen. xxxii. 22, &c. ااOr bowed, 1629 opened Hezron … Hezronites, Bagster 1846 xxvi. 21 Hesron … Hesronites2 Hezron … Hezronites, 1769 2 Cambr. Synd. A.3.14 (see above, p. 14), Brit. Mus. 1276. 1.4 (not 3050. g. 2 or g. 3) have ―Hezronites‖ in ver. 21, but ―Hesron‖ in the same verse. Comp. also 1 Chr. v. 3. ااBowed open Hesron … Hesronites
xxii. 31 marg. xxiv. 3 marg. xxvi. 6
Deuteronomy
Reading of the Authorized Bible
iv. 25 iv. 32 iv. 49
shalt have remained upon earth of this side
v. 29 ix. 10 x. 10 marg. xv. 11 fin. xvi. 4 xvi. 5
my commandments of fire fortie the land coasts the gates
xix. 6 marg.
third day
xx. 7 xxvi. 1 xxviii. 5 marg.
in battle the LORD kneading troughs
xxviii. 23 xxviii. 42 xxix. 26 text
the heaven locusts † whom he had not given † Hebr. divided: Or, who had not given to them any portion. †
marg.
Variation of later editions ye shall have remained, 1762 upon the earth, 1629 on this side, 1617 (not 1629 L., 1630), 1629 C. all my commandments, 1629 of the fire, 1762 former, 1629 thy land, 1629 coast, 1762 thy gates, 1616 (not 1617, 1629 L., 1630), 1629 C. the third day, 1612, 1613 (not 1629 C. and L., 1630), 1638. Cf. ver. 4, &c. in the battle, 1769. Cf. vers. 5, 6 the LORD thy God, 1629, 1637. kneading trough, 1762. Cf. Ex. Viii. 3. thy heaven, 1638 locust, 1612 (not 1613 &c.), 1629 ااwho he had not † given ااOr, who had not given to them any portion. † Heb. divided, 1629
xxxii. 15 & xxxiii. 5, 26 Jesurun Jeshurun, 16381 xxxiv. 1 marg. Hill the hill, 1638. Cf. Num. xxi. 20 1 In Deut. xxxiii. 5 alone ―Jeshurun‖ is read also in 1629 C and L, 1630. In Isaiah xliv. 2 the same form is found in 1616 alone of all our editions.
Joshua
Reading of the Authorized Bible
iii. 10
Girgashites
iii. 15 vii. 14
at the time and the households
vii. 26 x. 10 & xvi.
the place Bethoron
xi. 8 marg. xi. 17 xii. 6
burning of waters unto Baal-Gad and Gadites
Variation of later editions the Girgashites, 1612 (not 1613), 1629 all the time, 1638 and the household, 1616, 1617, 1629 C. (not 1629 L., 1630) that place, 1629 Beth-horon, 1629. Cf. ch. xviii. 13, &c burnings of waters, 16291 even unto Baal-Gad, 1638 and the Gadites, 1762
368
xii. 11
Lachis
xii. 18 marg. xiii. 27
Saron Cinneroth
xiii. 29
Manasseh, by
xv. 33 xv. 38
Esthaol Dileam (Diieam 1612, Diliam 1617) xv. 42 Lebnah (Lebanah, 1630) xv. 43 Jiphta xv. 49 Kirjath-Sannath xv. 50 Ashtemoth, Camb. Synd. A. 3. 14, but Ashtemoh, Oxf. 1611, 1612, 1613, &c xv. 57 Gibbeah xv. 59 Maarah xix. 18 Isreel xix. 22 Shahazimath xix. 35 Cinnereth xix. 38 Bethanah xix. 44 Baalah xxi. 23 Gibethon xxi. 31 Helkah 1 Modern editions follow 1672, 1769 in omitting ―of waters.‖
Judges i. 31
Reading of the Authorized Bible
Lachish, 1613 (not 1616, 1617), 1629 C. and L. Sharon, 1629 Cinnereth, 1629 – 1762 (Chinnereth, 1769 mod.) Cf. ch. xix. 35 the children of Manasseh, by, 1638 Eshtaol, 1629 (Esthahol, 1630) Dilean, 1629 Libnah, 1638 Jiphtah, 1638 Kirjath-sannah, 1629 Eshtemoh, 1638
Gibeah, 1629 C. and L., 1630 Maarath, 1629 Jezreel, 1629. Cf. ch. xvii. 16, &c Shahazimah, 1617 Chinnereth, 1769 Beth-anath, 1629 Baalath, 1629 Gibbethon, 1629 Helkath, 1629
Variation of later editions
Achzib, nor Helbath, nor Aphik
of Achzib, nor of Helbah, nor of Aphik, 1762 (Helbah, 1629, &c) i. 36 MaaleMaalth-, 1629 iv. 21 † took (first) † took (second), 1629 v, 26 text † smote (first) † with the hammer marg. † Heb. hammered † Heb. she hammered, 1629 v. 29 marg. words her words, 1638 v, 30 marg. † Heb. for the necks of the spoil Delet 1638 xi. 1 marg. Jephte (Jephthah Heb. xi. 32) Jephthae, 1629 xi. 2 his wives sons his wife’s sons, 17621 (wifes, 1744) xi. 31 marg. shall come forth which shall come forth, 1629 ibid. Or, I will offer Or, or I will offer, 1638 xiv. 17 while the feast while their feast, 1638 xxi. 19 Lebanon Lebonah, 1629 1 The apostrophe does not appear in our Bibles (see, however, below, p. 235 note 1) before 1762, nor constantly before 1769 (e.g. not in 1762, Ezra ii. 59. Neh. vii. 61, Ps. vi.4; xxxi. 16; xliv. 26; lxxxi. 12; cvii.27; cxl.3, &c). Through the errors of these books, it is sometimes misplaced, as is noted in this list within brackets. Cf. 1 Sam. ii. 13. I Chr. vii. 2, 40. Ezra ii. 59. Ps. Lxxxi. 12. Matt. xiv. 9. Mark vi. 26, in which places, unless the contrary be stated, the apostrophe is placed right for the first time in the Cambridge Paragraph Bible.
Ruth
Reading of the Authorized Bible
Variation of later editions
369
ii. 3 marg.
1 Samuel
ااCalled Math. i. 5, Booz
Reading of the Authorized Bible
Brought up to ver. 1 marg. in 1762
Variation of later editions
† time † when, 1638 revelation (so 1612, 1613, 1629 revolution, 1616, 1617, 1629, marg. L) 1630: in revolution, 1638 [ii. 13 priest’s custom, 1762, 1769 priests’ custom], See p. 152 note. iv. 21 marg. ااIchabod, saying, ااThe glory ااIchabod, saying, The glory, ااThat is, where is the glory,?اا ااThat is, where is the glory? Or, Or, there is the glory there is no glory, 1629 v. 4 marg. the filthy part1 the filthy part, 1616, 1617 vi. 7 the calves their calves, 1629 x. 10 a company of the prophets a company of prophets, 1629 x. 23 the shoulders his shoulders, 1638 xiii. 18 Bethoron Beth-horon, 1629 xvii. 38 marg. clothed clothed David, 1638 xviii. 27 David arose David arose and went, 1629 xxv. 16 keeping sheep keeping his sheep, 1629 xxviii. 7 And his servant said And his servants said, 1629 1 That this marginal rendering of 1611, 1612, 1613 cannot be designed appears from the version of Temellius and Junius, which, especially in the margin (see above, p. 44), our Translators closely follow;—quod referebat piscem. See Cardwell, Oxford Bibles, p. 16. i. 20 text
2 Samuel
Reading of the Authorized Bible
iii. 26 vi. 12 viii. 11
Shiriah pertained he had dedicate1
xi. 1
that after the year (that 1613)
xi. 3 [marg.]
Bath-Shuah, 1762, 1769
Variation of later editions Sirah, 1629 pertaineth, 1638 he had dedicated, 1612 (not 1613) after this year, 1762
Bath-shua, Bagster 1846, American 1867. Cf. 1 Ch. iii. 5 xi. 21 Jerubesheth Jerubbesheth, 1629 xiii. 20 marg. set not thine heart set not thine heart upon, So Bagster 1846, Cf. ch. xviii. 3 marg. xv. 3 marg. none will hear you none will hear thee, 1638 xvi. 12 requite good requite me good, 1629 xix. 34 marg. † How many † Heb. How many, 1616, 1617 xxi. 4 marg. silver or gold silver nor gold, 1616, 1617 xxiii. 32 Eliahaba Eliahba, 1629 xxiii. 37 Berothite Beerothite, 1629 1 But these archaisms we have elsewhere retained: e.g. 2 Kin. xii. 18. See above, p. 102. Compare I Chr. xxvi.20, Appendix C pp. 220, 221.
1 Kings iv. 10 vi. 1
Reading of the Authorized Bible Heseb, marg. Ben-Heseb fourscore1 … Cf., ch. xvi. 8, 23
Variation of later editions Hesed, marg. Ben-Hesed, 1629 eightieth, 1762
370
vii. 42 marg.
xi. 5 xi. 33 xiii. 6 xiv. 4 marg. xv. 2 [marg.]
upon the face Cf. 2 Chr. Iv. 13 marg. things of David the LORD your God that then Solomon Galile (Tobit i. 2) Sydonians Camb. Synd. A 3.14 but Sidonians Oxf. 1611, 16121638 Amorites (Ammorites 1612) Ashtaroth (pl. Cf. Judg. X. 6) was restored again stood for hoariness Michaia, 1769
xv. 10 marg. xv. 14 xv. 19
grandmother Asa his heart1 break the league
xvi. 8
twentieth and sixt (sixth 1613)
vii. 51 marg. viii. 61 ix. 11 ibid. xi. 1
xvi. 23 the thirty and one year1 1 For these archaisms see above, p. 111.
2 Kings
Reading of the Authorized Bible
v. 11 marg.
† Heb. said
viii., 19 ix. 23
promised turned his hand (Vulgate)
xi. 10 xii. 19, 20 xiii. 24
the Temple Jehoash Hazael the king of Syria
xv. 15 xviii. 8 xviii. 18
xix. 37
the conspiracy fenced cities Helkiah (so ver. 37 Camb. Synd. A. 3.14 alone, not being a reprint; see above, p. 6). Adramelech
xx. 1 xx. 13 xxi. 21 & xxii, 2 xxiii. 13 xxiii. 21 xxiii. 31 xxiv. 13 xxiv. 19
Amos shewed them the house all the ways Milchom this book of the Covenant Hamital and the treasure Jehoiachin (Cf. LXX.)
upon the face of the pillars, 1638 holy things of David, 1629 the LORD our God, 1629 that then king Solomon, 1638 Galilee, 1629. Cf. C. and L., 1630 Zidonians, 1629. Cf. vers. 5. 33
Ammonites, 1629 Ashtoreth, 1629. Cf. ver. 5 was restored him again, 1638 stood for his hoariness, 1638 Michaiah, Bagster 1846, Camb. 1858, American 1867. Cf. 2 Chr. xiii. 2 grandmothers, 1638, ‘s, 1762 Asa’s heart, 1762 break thy league, 1629 C. and L., 1630 twenty and sixth, 1629. Cf. vers. 10, 15 the thirty and first year, 1769
Variation of later editions † I said, 1617 (not 1629 C. and L., 1630), 1638 promised him, 1629 turned his hands, (Heb., LXX.) 1629 the temple of the Lord, 1638 Joash, 1629 Hazael king of Syria, (not 1613), 1629 his conspiracy, 1638 fenced city, 1629 Hilkiah, 1629
Adrammelech, 1638. Cf. ch. xvii. 31. Amoz, 1629. Cf. ch. xix. 2, 20 shewed them all the house, 1638 all the way, 1629 Milcom, 1638 this book of this covenant, 16291 Hamutal, 1629 and the treasures, 1629 Jehoiakim, 1629
xxv. 4, 5, 10, 13, 24, 25, Caldees Chaldees, 1744 26 1 This rendering of 1611 is quite justifiable, but the LXX, and Vulgate translate as in 1629.
371
1 Chronicles i. 9 i. 20 i. 33 i. 39 marg.
Reading of the Authorized Bible
i. 40 marg. i. 42 i. 44
Siba Hazermaveth Ephar Heman 1611-17692 (Hemah 1617) Sepho Bilham…Dishon Bosrah
ii. 10 ii. 13 marg. ii. 14 ii. 18 ii. 25 ii. 27 ii. 42 ii. 48 ii. 52 & iv. 1 marg. ii. 54 iii. 2
Aminadab bis Shamma Nathanael Shobab Ozen Ekar Maresha Maacha. Cf. ch. ix. 35 Haroe Salmah Maacha … Adoniah
iii. 3 iii. 5 marg. iii. 7 iii. 8 marg. iii. 10 marg. iii. 11 marg. iii. 15, 16 iii. 15 marg. ibid.
Shaphatia Bethsabe Noga Beliada Abiam and Joakim Joachaz Mathania
iii. 15 iii. 16 iii. 18
Sallum ااZedekiah his son Hosanna, Camb. Synd. A. 3. 14, B. M. 1276. l.4 only. Hosama, Oxf. 1611, 1612-1630. Hazubah Semaiah, bis Ahusam … Ahashtari
iii. 20 iii. 22 iv. 6 iv. 7 iv. 13 iv. 14 iv. 20 iv. 29 iv. 31 marg. iv. 34 iv. 35 iv. 36.
iv. 37 v. 2
Zoar Saraia (Saraiah, 1616) Charasim Simeon Bilha, marg. Bela Hazar-Susa Amashiah Josibia … Seraia Jehohaiah, Camb. Synd. A. 4. 14 alone, but Jesohaiah, Oxf. 1611, 1612-1630 Jedaia chief ااrulers
Variation of later editions Seba, 1629 Hazarmaveth, 1634, 1638 Epher, 1638 Hemam, Bagster 1846, Camb. 1858, American, 1867 Shepho, 1629. Cf. Gen. xxxvi. 23 Bilhan, 1629 … Dishan, 1638 Bozrah, 1629. Cf. Isai. Lxiii. 1, &c. Amminadab bis, 1629 Shammah, 1629 Nethaneel, 1638 and Shobab, 1629 Ozem, 1629 Eker, 1638 Mareshah, 1638. Cf. ch. iv. 21 Maachah, 1638 Haroeh, 1638 Salma, 1638. Cf. ver. 51 Maacha, 1638 … Adonijah, 1629. Cf. 1 Kings. 5, &c. Shaphatia, 1629 Bath-sheba, 1629 Nogah, 1638 Beeliada, 1769 (Becliada, 1762) Abijam, 1629 or, Jehoahaz, 2 Chr., 1762 Jehoiakim, 1619 Jehoahaz, 1629 Mattaniah, 1638 (Mattonia, 1629) Shallum, 1629 Zedekiah* his son1 Hoshama, 1638
Hashubah, 1629 Shemaiah, bis, 1629 Ahuzam, 1629 … Haahashtari, 1638 Jezoar, 1638 Seraiah, 1629. Cf. ver. 14 Charashim, 1629 Shimon, 1629. Cf. ver. 24 Bilhah, 1638, marg. Balah, 1629 Hazar-susah, 1629 Amaziah, 1629 Josibiah, 1629 … Seraiah, 1638 Jeshohaiah, 1638
Jedaiah, 1638 ااchief ruler, 1629 (place of اا
372
v. 3 v. 6 marg. v. 8 vi. 2, 22 marg vi. 21 marg. vi. 40 vi. 57 vi. 60 vi. 69 & viii. 13 vi. 78 marg. [vii. 2, 40 vii. 18 vii. 18 [marg.]
Ezron Tiglath-pilneser Asah (Aza, 1630) Izahar Adaia Baasiah … Melchiah Libna Anathoth (Anathoch, 1617) Aialon ااOr, Bozor, Josh. Xxi. 35 father’s house, 1762, 1869 Ishad Jezer, 1762, 1769
vii. 24 vii. 25 vii. 26 & ix. 4 vii. 32 viii. 11 viii. 14 viii. 31 viii. 31 marg. viii. 36 viii. 37 ix. 12 ix. 35 ix. 44 x. 2 marg. xi. 15 xi. 33 xi. 34 xi. 43 xi. 45 xi. 46 xii. 3 marg. xii. 5 xii. 6 xii. 7
Bethoron Reseph Amihud Shuah Ahitub Jerimoth Gidor Zachariah Asmaveth Elasa Maasia Maacha. Cf. ch. 11. 48 Ismael Ieshui to the rock of David Elihaba Shageh Maacah Zimri, marg. Zimrite Elnaan Hasmaa Bealiath Azariel Jeroam
xii. 10 xii. 11 xii. 20 xiii. 11 marg. xiv. 6 xiv. 7 xv. 18, 20 xv. 18 xv. 18, 20
Mashmannah Atthai Jediel Heb. Noga Elpalet Zachariah Jaziel Maasiah
xv. 18, 21
Eliphaleh (Eliphaleb, 1612, ver. 18) … Mikniah Jehiel (second) Azzaziah Nathaneel … Zachariah (so ch.
xv. 18 xv. 21 xv. 24
changed by Bagster 1846) Hezron, 1629 Tiglath-pileser, 1629 Azaz, 1629 Izhar, 1629 Cf. vers. 18, 38 Adaiah, 1629. Cf. ver. 41 Baaseiah … Malchiah, 1638 Libnah, 16381 and Anathoth, 1629 Aijalon, 1629 Delet 1629 fathers’ house], see p. 152 note Ishod, 1638 Jeezer, Bagster 1846, Camb. 1858, Amer. 1867. Cf. Num. xxvi. 30 Beth-horon, 1629 Resheph, 1638 Ammihud, 1629 Shua, 1638 Abitub, 1629 Jeremoth, 1638 Gedor, 1638. Cf. ch. ix. 37 Zechariah, 1629 Azmaveth, 1638. Cf. ch. ix. 42 Elessah, 1638. Cf. ch. ix. 43 Maasiai, 1629 Maachah, 1629 Ishmael, 1638. Cf. ch. viii. 38 Ishui, 1629. Cf. 1 Sam. xiv. 49 to the rock to David, 1629 Eliahba, 1629 Shage, 1629 Maachah, 1638 Shimri, marg. Shimrite, 1629 Elnaam, 1629 Hasmaah, 1629 Bealiah, 1638 Azareel, 1638 Jeroham, 1613 (not 1612, 1616, 1617, 1629 L., 1630), 1629 C. Mishmannah, 1638 Attai, 1629 Jediael, 1638 That is, 1629 Nogah, 1638 Eliphalet, 1629 Zechariah, 1638 Jaaziel, 1638 Maaseiah, 1638. See 2 Chr. xxiii. 1 Elipheleh … Mikneiah, 1638 Jeiel, 16291 Azzaziah, 1638 Nethaneel … Zechariah (so ch.
373
xviii. 8 marg. viii. 16 marg.
xvi. 5) Beta Saraiah … Sisa
xxi. 7 marg. xxiii. 10 marg. & ver. 11 xxiii. 19 xxiii. 22 xxiii. 6 xxiv 20 xxv. 2 marg. xxv. 4 xxv. 22 xxvi. 1 marg. xxvi. 16
† And it was Zisa Jekamiam Jerimoth1 Nathanael Jedeiah by the hand Eliatha Jerimoth Abiasaph Hosa
xxvi. 18 init. xxvii. 6 xxvii. 20 xxvii. 22 xvii. 27 xxvii. 29 xvii. 33, 34
And Parbar Amizabad Azazziah Azariel Sabdi (Zabdi 1612) the Ziphmite Shetrai Ahitophel
xxix. 2 xxix. 29
the silver for things ااbook of Samuel … †book of Nathan 1 In ver. 4 the vowel points are different, and ―Jerimoth‖ correct.
Reading of the Authorized Bible
2 Chronicles iii. 10 iv. 13 marg.
most holy place upon the face
vi. 27 xi. 8 xi. 10 xi. 20 xi. 20-22 xiii. 2 xiii. 6
the land Maresha Aialon Atthai Maacah Gibea his LORD1
xviii. 7,8
Jimla (Jimlah, 1630)
xx. 14 & xxix. 13
Jehiel
xxiii. 1 & xxvi. 11 & xxxiv. 8
Maasiah
xxiv. 26 xxvi. 1 xxv, 23 xxvii. 5 marg. xxviii. 11 xxviii. 22 xxix. 12
Shimeah Jehoadan (Jehoiadan 1612) Joahaz † Heb. much wrath of God this distress Amashai … Jahalelel
xvi. 5), 1636 Betah, 1769. Cf. 2 Sam. viii. 8 Seraiah … Shisha, 1629. Cf. 2 Sam. viii. 17; 1 Kin. iv. 3 † Heb. And it was, 1616, 1615 Zizah, 1638 Jekameam, 1629 Jeremoth, 1629 Nethaneel, 1638. Cf. ch. xxvi. 4. Jehdeiah, 1629 by the hands, 1629. Cf. ver 6 Eliathah, 1638. Cf. ver 27 Jeremoth Ebiasaph, 1629 Hosah, 1629. Cf. ver. 10, ch. xvi. 38. At Parbar, 1638 Ammizabad, 1638 Azaziah, 1629 Azareel, 1629 Zabdi the Shiphmite, 1629 Shitrai, 1638. Ahithophel, 1638. Cf. 2 Sam. xv. 12, 31, &c. and the silver for things, 1629 ااbook of Samuel… book of Nathan, 1629
Variation of later editions most holy house, 1629, add of the pillars. So Bagster 1846, also 1638 mod. In I Kin. vii. 42 thy land, 1638 Mareshah, 1638 Aijalon, 1629. See p. 138 note 2 Attai Maachah, 1629 Gibeah, 1629 his lord Imla, 1612, 1638. But cf. I Kin. xxii.8, 9. Jeiel, 16382 Maaseiah, 1638. Cf. ch xxvii. 7. See also 1 Chr. xv. 18, 20; Ezra x. 18 Shimeath, 1629 Jehoaddan, 1638 Jehoahaz † Heb. this, 1629 wrath of the LORD his distress, 1638 Amasai, 1629, Jehalelel
374
xxix. 15 marg. xxix. 27
of the Lord1 with the †instruments
of the LORD, 1629 with † the instruments, Bagster 1846 xxxi. 5 marg. brought forth brake forth, 1629 xxxi. 6 tithes of oxen tithe of oxen, 1638 xxxi. 14 Immah (Immath 1612) Imnah, 1629 xxxii. 5 prepared Millo repaired Millo, 1616, 1617 xxxii. 10 For this cause And for this cause, 1638 xxxiv. 12 Sechariah Zechariah, 1612 (not 1613), 1629 xxxv. 8 Zachariah Zechariah, 1638 xxxv. 9 Jehiel … Joshabad Jeiel1 xxxvi. 17 Caldees Chaldees, 1638 1 A strange oversight (retained up to 1630) in a matter about which our Translators are usually more careful than later editors, viz. in representing יהוהby LORD (or GOD, see p. 147 note 1) but אךציby ―Lord‖ or ―lord.‖ In ch. xxix. 15 marg. ―Lord‖ is a misprint, the text being correct. Compare also Neh. i. 11; iii. 5; viii. 10. Ps. Ii. 4, and Append. C. p. 233 note 3. 2 See above, p. 159 note.
Ezra
Reading of the Authorized Bible
ii. 2
Saraiah (Saraioh, 1617)
ii. 22 ii. 24, marg.
The children of Netophah Beth-Asmaveth
ii. 40
Hodavia, marg. Juda
ii. 50 [ii. 59 iii. 2 marg.
Nephushim father’s, 1769 Josua (but Josuah, Hagg. i. 1)
iii. 5
vii. 23 marg.
that willingly offered, offered / add word? Apharsathkites Caldean Zeraiah † He (Hee, 1616) was the foundation, 1611, 1612, 1613, 1616, 1617 † Heb. Whatsoever
viii. 13 & x. 43 viii. 16 x. 18, 21, 22, 30
Jehiel and for Jarib Maasiah
x. 23 x. 25 x. 33 x. 35 x. 38 1 See above, p. 159 note.
Kelitah Jesiah Mattatha Bedaiah Bennui (Benui, 1612)
iv. 9 v. 12 vii. 4 vii. 9 marg
Nehemiah
Reading of the Authorized Bible
Variation of later editions Seraiah, 1629. Cf. Neh. vii. 7 marg The men of Netophah, 1638 Beth-asmaveth, 1629, Cf. Neh. vii. 28 Hodaviah, marg. Judah, 1629. Cf. Neh. vii. 43 marg. Nephusim, 1629 fathers’]. See above, p. 152 note Joshua, 1613 (but Josuah, Hagg. i. 1) that willingly offered, 1613 Apharsathchites. 1629 Chaldean, 1638 Zerahiah, 1638. Cf. ch. viii. 4 † Heb. was the foundation, 1629 C.: was the f., 1629 L., 1630 † Chald. Whatsoever, Bagster, 1846 Jeiel1, 1638 also for Joiarib, 1638 Maaseiah, 1638. So Neh. iii. 23; viii. 4, 7; x. 25; xi. 5, 7; xii. 41, 42 in 1611. See 2 Chr. xxiii. 1. Kelita ()״ֶא, 1638 Jeziah, 1638 Mattathah ()״ֶה, 1638 Bedeiah, 1638 Binnui, 1638
Variation of later editions
375
i. 11
O LORD (1611-1769)
ii. 12 iii. 4, 21 & x. 5 & xii. 3 iii. 5, & viii. 10 prim.
what God hath put Merimoth LORD
iii. 6 iii. 15 vi. 10
vi. 17 marg. vii. 7
Besodiah Shallum Mehetable, Camb. Synd. A. 3. 14, B.M. 1276. l. 4 only, but Mehetabl, Oxf. 1611-1630 multiplied letters Nahum
vii. 24 marg.
Jora
vii. 31 vi. 38 vii. 39 vii. 46 vii. 54 [vii. 61 ix. 7 ix. 17 x. 11 x. 18 xi. 8 xi. 13
Michmash Senaa Jedaia Tabaoth Baslith father’s, 1869 Caldees the wonders Micah Hodiah (Hodaiah, 1616) Gabai Meshilemoth
xi. 24
Meshezabel
xi. 27
Hazer-Shual
xi. 28
Ziglag
xii. 3 marg.
Sebaniah
xii. 5 xii. 21, 36 xii. 36 xii. 41
Madiah Nethanael Asarael Zachariah
Reading of the Authorized Bible
Esther i. 8
for the king had appointed
i. 9, 11, 12, 15-17, 19; ii. 1, 4, 17 i. 14
Vasthi (Vulg.)
iii. 1
Amedath (Amm. 1629 C.)
iii. 4 iv. 4
Mordecai his matters the sackcloth Job
Tarshis
Reading of the
O Lord, Oxf. 1835, Camb 1858, Amer. 1867. See above. P. 147 note. what my God hath put, 1638 Meremoth Lord, 1629. See above, p. 147 note 1. Besodeiah, 1628 Shallun, 1629 Mehetabeel, 1638
multiplied their letters, 1629 Nehum, 1638 Jorah. Bagster 1846. Cf. Ezra ii. 18 Michmas, 1638 Senaah, 1629. Cf. Ezra ii. 35 Jedaiah, 1629. Cf. Ezra ii. 36 Tabbaoth, 1638. Cf. Ezra ii. 43 Bazlith, 1629 fathers’]. See above, p. 152 note Chaldees, 1638 thy wonders, 1638 Micha, 1629. Cf. ch. xi. 17, 22 Hodijah, 1638. Cf. ver. 13 Gabbai, 1638 Meshillemoth, 1638 Meshezabeel, 1612 (not 1613, &c), 1638 Hazar-shual, 1638 Ziklag, 1612, 1613 (not 1629 L., 1630) Shebaniah, 1629 (not 1638), 1744. Cf. ver. 14 Maadiah, 1638 Nethaneel, 1629 Azarael, 1629 Zechariah, 1638
Variation of later editions for so the king had appointed, 1629 Vashti, 1629 Tarshish, 1629 Hammedatha, 1638. Cf. ch. viii. 5; ix. 10, 24 Mordecai’s matters his sackcloth, 1629
Variation of later
376
Authorized Bible i. 17 iv. 6
editions
Caldeans ; the uprightness of thy ways (, 1616, 1617) and thy hope? on them that meats take it ااand no man His soul draweth there is he wilt thou bind added to Job
Chaldeans, 1638 , thy hope, and the uprightness of thy ways?1 1638 iv. 19 in them that, 1762. Cf. ver. 18 xx. 21 marg. meat, 1629 xxiv. 19 marg. take, 1629 xxiv. 22 and ااno man, Bagster 1846 xxxiii. 22 Yea, his soul draweth, 1638 xxxix. 30 there is she xli. 5 or wilt thou bind, 1638 xlii. 10 marg. added all that had been to Job, 1638 1 In 1629, 1637 we find ―; and the uprightness of thy ways, thy hope?‖ Though this has been noted as a mere error, the changes both of 1629 and 1638 (which all later editions have followed) are plainly unintentional and unique for their boldness. In the Paragraph Bible we have changed the comma after ―hope‖ into a semicolon, although the Hebrew has only Rebia and Athnakh in the word before. Cf. Grote MS. Pp. 130, 131.
Reading of the Authorized Bible
Variation of later editions
ii. 6 & marg. xxix. 8, 9 xxxiv. 5
Sion ااshaketh … to calve ااThey looked … were lightened
xxxvii. 3 marg.
in truth and stableness
xxxix. 6 marg. xlii. 6 xlii. 9
image Missar God, My (my 1612, 1630) rock, why of Korah Jaakob (Jakob, 1630) ااOr, to the chief Musician, destroy become not vain Sion
Zion, 16382. Cf. Ps. lxix. 35 shaketh … ااto calve, 1629 They looked … ااwere lightened, 1629, 1638 in truth, or stableness (1629), 1638 an image, 1629 Mizar, 1629 God my rock, Why (1629), 1638
Psalms
xliv. title liii. 6 lix. title marg. lxii. 10 lxv. 1
[lxxxi. 12 lxxxix. 4 marg.
and ااwaterest it seek good Sion ااOr, to the chief musician destroy not (Altaschith, 1616, 1617 for [destroy not]) a psalm or song for Asaph. hearts1, 1769 to generation and generation
xcix. 1
all people
cv. 30 cvii. 43 cxix. 101 cxxvii. 1 text
The land those things that I may keep that† ( ااCamb. Synd. A.3. 14; B.M. 1276.1.4 only; 1613) build
lxv. 9 lxix. 32 lxix. 35 lxxv. title marg.
of Korah, Maschill, 1629 Jacob, 1619, 1638 ااDestroy, 1638. Cf. Ps. lviii. & lxxv. titles marg. and become not vain, 1629 Zion, Amer. 1867 only. See below, note 2 ااand waterest it. Bagster 1846 seek God, 1617 Zion, 1761.Cf. p. 165 note 2 ااOr, Destroy not, ااOr, for Asaph, 1638 heart’s]. See p. 152 note. Deest (ver. 4 being cited in ver. 1 marg.) 1762. all the people, 1612 (not 1613, &c.), 1769 Their land, 1638. these things, 1762 that I might keep, 1638 † that build
377
† Heb. are builders † that are builders, 1638. Ephratah, 1629. Cf. Ruth iv. 11; Mic. v.2. flee, 1629 C. Cf. Prov. xxviii. 17. See 2 Esdr. xiv. 15
marg. cxxii. 6
Ephrata
cxxxix. 7
fly, Camb Synd. A.3. 14, & B.M. 1276, l.4 only, 1612, 1630; flie, Oxf. 1611, 1613-1629 L. [xzl. 3 adders’, 1769 adder’s]. Cf. Isai. lix. 3 marg. cxliii. 9 flee, 1616 (not 1617), 1629 flie 1 The ―eagle‖ should have been masculine throughout vers. 27-30, but after having regarded it as feminine thus far, it is too late to change here. 2 So Ps. ix. 11, 14; xiv. 7; xx. 2; xlviii. 2, 11, 12; l. 2; li. 18; liii. 6; lxxiv. 2; lxxvi. 2; lxxviii. 68; xcvii. 8. Elsewhere 1611 has “Zion” except in Ps. lxv. 1, where all have ―Sion‖ except Amer. 1867. Cf. Ps. lxix. 35
Proverbs
Reading of the Authorized Bible
vi. 19 vii. 21 x. 23 xi. 1 xx. 14 [xxvi. 3 xxvii. 26 xxvii. 17
and him that soweth With much fair speech as a sport (a sport, 1629 C.) A † false nought bis the fool’s, 1761 thy field flie
[xxxi. 14
merchants’, 1769 (merchant, 1762)
Eccles. i. 5 ii. 16 vii. 26 marg. viii. 17
Canticles
Reading of the Authorized Bible the place shall be forgotten † He [Hee. 1613) that is (†Heb. that is, 1612 L., 1630) seek it out
Reading of the Authorized Bible
iv. 6 v. 12
mountains of myrrh rivers of water
vi. 5
is a flock
vi. 12 marg.
the chariot
Isaiah viii. 8 marg. ix. 1
Reading of the Authorized Bible stretching Galile. See Tobit i. 2
Variation of later editions and he that soweth, 1769 With her much fair speech, 1938 as sport, 1638 † A false, Bagster 1846 (So read.) naught bis, 1638 the fools’]/ See [/ 152 the field, 1638 flee, 1617 (not 1629L., 1630), 1629. Cf. Ps. cxxxix. 7 merchant’s], Cf. ch. xxx. 28. See p. 152 note.
Variation of later editions his place, 1628 shall all be forgotten, 1629 † Heb. he that is, 1616 (not 1617), 1629 seek it out, yet he shall not find
Variation of later editions mountain of myrrh, 1629 rivers of waters, 1616 (not 1617, 1629 L., 1630), 1629 is as a flock, 1616, 1617, Cf. ch. iv. 1. the chariots, 1629
Variation of later editions stretchings, 1629 Galilee, 1629
378
x. 34 xxiii. 13 & xlii. 14 & xlvii. 1, 5 & xlviii. 14, 20 xxviii. 4
forests Caldeans
xxviii. 26 marg. xxix. 1 text
as God Woe… ׀׀the city God: Or, of the city he shall … ׀׀his strong (†׀׀his strong, 1629) ,rO ׀׀his strength: Heb. rocke
marg. xxxi. 9 text
seeth it (it. 1638, 1744)
forest, 1769 Chaldeans, 1638 (1630, ch. Xivii. 5). seeth, 1683 (Grote MS. P. 93), 1762 as his God, 1629 .ytic eht …׀׀eoW ׀׀ God. ,rO ׀׀of the city, 1629 † he shall… ׀׀his strong
† Heb. his rock, &c. Or, his strength, 1638. xxxiv. 11 The cormorant But the cormorant, 1629 xxxvii. 17 marg. me my soul, 1638 xliv. 2 Jesurun Jeshurun, 1616, Amer. 1867, only. See p. 150 note xliv. 20 feedeth of ashes feedeth on ashes, 1762 xlvii. 6 the yoke thy yoke, 1629 xlix. 13 heavens, 1629 … the LORD, heaven…God 1638 liii. 6 marg he hath made hath made, 1629 lvii. 8 made a covenant made thee a covenant, 16381. [lix. 5 marg. adders’, 1769 adder’s, Bagster 1846, Amer. 1867]. Cf. Ps. cxl. 3 lxii. 8 marg if he give if I give, 1629 lxiv. 1 rent the heavens (see p. 102) rend the heavens, 1762 lxvi. 9 gnirb ot esuac … gnirb ׀׀ bring … ׀׀cause to bring, 1629 1 Cardwell (Oxford Bibles, pl 16) imputes this change to Bp. Lloyd in 170l. But he knew no more of Camb. 1638 than Bp. Turton did of Camb. 1629. See above, p. 41 note. 2 So ch. xxii. 25; xxiv. 5; xxv. 12; xxxii. 4, 5, 24, 25, 28, 29, 43; xxxiii. 5; xxxv. 11; xxxvii. 5, 811, 13, 14l\; xxxviii. 2, 18, 19, 23; xl. 9, 10; xli. 3, 18; xliii. 3; l. 1, 8, 25, 35, 45; li. 4, 54; lii. 7, 8, 14, 17. marg.
Reading of the Authorized Bible
Jeremiah i. 13 iv. 6 xii. 15 xv. 4 marg xix. 11 xxi. 4, 9 xxiii. 30 xxiv. 5 marg. xxvi. 18 ibid.
the face thereof was standards will bring again a moving no place else to bury Caldeans my word captivity Morashite the high places
xxvii. 6 xxxi. 14 xxxi. 18 xxxiii. 16 marg. xxxv. 13
the words goodness thou art the Lord Jehova [Iehova] and inhabitants
xxxv. 19 text
Jonadab…†Heb.want (†shall not want, 1629) † Heb. there shall not a man be cut off from, &c.
marg.
Variation of later editions the face thereof is, 1762 standard, 1629 will bring them again, 1629 a removing, 1629 no place to bury, 1629 C., 1638 Chaldeans, 16382 my words, 1638 the captivity, 1629 Morashite, 1629 Cf. Micah i.1. as the high places, 1629 Cf. Micah iii. 12 thy words, 1629 my goodness, 1629 for thou art the Lord, 1629 Jehovah, 1629 and the inhabitants, 1616 (not 1617), 1629 Jonadab…want. †Heb. There shall not be cut off from Jonadab the son of Rechab
379
to stand, &c, 1638. , or a lie, 1638. So Zedekiah the king, 1638 Ramah, 1629 C. and L. (not 1630), 1638 xl. 5 all the cities the cities, 1638 9, 10 text ver. 9 † to serve ver. 10. † to serve. marg. †Heb. to stand before. And so † Heb. to stand before, 1629verse 101 1769, Bagster 1846, American 1867 xli. 1 Elishamah Elishama, 1638. xlii. 16 after you in Egypt after you there in Egypt, 1629 xlviii. 36 is perished are perished, 1762 xlix. 1 inherit God (so 1612, 1623) inherit Gad, 1616, 1617… 1629 C. and L. l. 10 & li. 24, 35 Caldea Chaldea, 1638 li. 12 watchmen, 1629 watchman li. 27 her horses the horses, 1638 li. 30 their dwelling places her dwelling places, 1629 lii. 31 Jehoiakim bis Jehoiachin bis (Jehoiakin 1616), 1629 1 This gross error of 1611-1630, though corrected long ago, is revived in most modern Bibles, e.g. D‘Oyly & Mant 1817, Oxford 1835, Camb. 1858. xxvii. 24 marg. xxxvii. 16 xl. 1
Lamentations
or, lie So the king Ramath
Reading of the Authorized Bible
Variation of later editions
ii. 2 marg. made to couch1 made to touch, 1629 1 This rendering might possibly stand, but that Tremellius, from whose version our Translators mostly derived their margin in the Old Testament (see above, p. 44), has Heb. facit ut pertineat. Hence ―couch‖ is a mere misprint.
Ezekiel
Reading of the Authorized Bible
Variation of later editions
i. 1
Jehoiakins
i. 3 & xii. 14 & xxiii. 14, 23 i. 17 iii. 5 marg. iii. 6 marg. iii. 11 iii. 26 marg. v. i. vi. 8 xi. 24 & xvi. 29 & xxiii. 15, 16 xii. 19 xxi. 30 marg. [xxii. 10 xxiii. 23 xxiii. 43 marg.
Caldeans
Jehoiachins, 1629 C. and L. (Jehoiakims 1617, 1630), 1638. Chaldeans, 1638 (1612, ch. i. 3).
returned deep of lips heavy language thy people nam A ׀׀ take the balances that he may have Caldea
turned, 1769. Cf. vers. 9, 12 deep of lip, 1629 heavy of language, 1629 the children of thy people, 1638 † Heb. a man, 1629 take thee balances, 1638 that ye may have, 1613 Chaldea, 1638 (1630 ch. xvi. 29)
of them that dwell cause to it to return fathers’, 1769 Shoah smoderohw reH ׀׀ ׀׀
xxiv. 5 xxiv. 7
let him seethe poured it
of all them that dwell, 1629 cause it to return, 1629 C. and L. father’s]. See above, p. 152 note. Shoa, 1629 †† Heb. her whoredoms, 1629 C. & L. (†† Heb. whordoms, 1617) let them seethe, 1638 poured it not, 1613
380
xxiv. 25 marg xxvi. 14 xxvii. 6 marg. xxvii. 16 marg. xxvii. 22, 23 xxvii. 27 marg. xxxi. 4
of the soul they shall be a place made hatches works Shebah withal, 1611-1630 (withal, 1744) † Heb. conduits
xxxii. 22 xxxii. 25 xxxiv. 28 xxxiv. 31
Ashur all her multitudes beasts of the land my flock of my pasture
xxxvi. 2
the enemy had said
xxxvi. 15 xxxix. 11 xlii. 17
the nations at that day a measuring reed
xliii. 3 marg xliv. 23 [xliv. 30
See chap. 9. 2, 5 cause men the priest’s, 1769
xlvi. 13 marg xlvi. 23 xlviii. 8
of his year a new building they shall offer
Reading of the Authorized Bible
Daniel
of their soul, 1638 thou shalt be a place, 1638 made thy hatches, 1629 thy works, 1638 Sheba, 1638 with all, 1629, 1638, 1762 boJ .fC .8361 ,stiudnoc ,rO ׀׀ xxxviii. 25. Asshur, 1638 all her multitude, 1629 beast of the land, 1762 my flock the flock of my pasture, 1629 the enemy hath said, 1630 (not 1629 C. & L., 1638, 1744), 1771 thy nations, 1629 in that day, 1638 the measuring reed, 1638 Cf. vers. 16, 18, 19 See ch. 9. 1, 5, 1769 cause them, 1629 the priests’], Gorle. See above, p. 79 note 2, and p. 152 note. a son of his year, 1638 a row of building, 1638 ye shall offer, 1638
Variation of later editions
i. 4 i.. 12 ii. 5 marg.
Caldeans give † pulse Cal. (2Camb. Synd. A.3.14)
ii. 8 marg.
Cald.2
Chaldeans, 16381. give us † pulse 1629 Chald., 1638 (Chal. ch. ii. 14, in Camb. Synd. A.3.14: so 1616 in ch. v.). Chald., 1638
Calde.2
Chaldee, 1638
potters’, 1769 in hand, 1611-01769, Oxf. 1835, 1857, Lond. 1859
potter’s]. See p. 152 note. in hands, Bagster 1846, Camb. 1858, Amer. 1867. Cf. ver. 34 marg. a burning fiery furnace, 1638 the golden image, 1629 mantles…turbants, 1629 fee, Bagster 1846 the children of the captivity, 1629 C. (not L., 1630) Chald, Bagster 1846 only that is, things 1613 (not 1629 L.), 1629 C. ,rO ׀׀the numberer, 1744 † Heb. intreated we not the face of the, &c., 1638 Or, and shall have nothing, 1629
also v. 7, 9, 12, 16 marg. [ii. 41 ii. 45 marg.
iii. 15 iii. 18 iii. 21 marg v. 17 marg. vi. 13
a fiery furnace thy golden image mantle…turbant fee, as the captivity of the children
vi. 27 marg. vii. 18 marg.
Heb. i. things (in things, 1630)
viii. 13 marg. ix. 13 marg.
׀׀The numberer † Heb. intreated the face
ix. 26 marg.
,rO ׀׀shall have nothing
381
ix. 27 marg.
,rO ׀׀with the abominable armies
xi. 13 marg. xi. 24 marg.
of times [, 1744] of years peaceable or fat think thoughts But in his estate… ׀׀forces ,rO ׀׀munitions. Heb. Maussin, or, as for the Almighty (Almightie 1617) God
ibid. xi. 38 text marg.
xii. 8
,rO ׀׀and upon the battlements hsall be the idols off the desolator, 1762 of times [, 1769] even years, 1762 peaceable and fat, 1629 think his thoughts, 1629 But † in his estate… † ׀׀forces † Heb. (potius, ׀׀Or) as for the Almighty God… ׀׀Or, munitions. † Heb. Mauzzim, 1638 (so 1744, but in the same order as 1611), To Mauzzim 1744, 1762, 1769 add ―or, Gods (God’s 1744, 1762) protectors O my lord ()אדוגי, 1744 only here.
O my Lord (so all before 1629 in ch. x. 16, 17, 19. Zech. iv. 4, 5, 13; vi. 4) xii. 13 in the lot in thy lot, 1638 1 This rendering of the margin in 1611 comes, as usual, from Tremellius (above, p. 44), ―legiones detestationum desolantes. Heb. Alam detestationum desolantem: ala pro copiis metaphoricè, ut Isai. viii. 8.‖ Whatever may be its value, it ought not to have been displaced by 1762 ( which 1769 and the moderns have servilely followed) for something not so very good of its own. In the Paragraph Bible, we have retained both. See above, p. 46.
Hosea
Reading of the Authorized Bible
iv. 4 vi. 9 marg. ix. 11 x. 5 marg.
this people Sichem (Sychem, 1630) flee away ׀׀Chemarims
xiii. 3
dew it passeth
10 [marg.]
Hosea ,1762, 1769
Joel i. 16 iii. 13
Reading of the Authorized Bible your eyes the wickedness
Amoz
Reading of the Authorized Bible
Variation of later editions thy people, 1629 Shechem, 1629, C. (not L.) fly (flie 1629, 1638) away, 1744. ,rO ׀׀Chemarim (Chemarims, 1629 C. and L., 1630), 1629, 1638 dew that passeth, 1638 (but not in ch. vi. 4) Hoshea, Oxf. 1835, &c.
Variation of later editions our eyes, 1629 their wickedness, 1629
Variation of later editions
i. 3 marg. i. 11 viii. 3
he, (hee 1616, 1617) for four yea for four, 1629 and kept and he kept, 1762 songs of the Temples (temples, songs of the temple, 1638 1629) ix. 5 all that dwelleth1 all that dwell, 1629 1 So in Amos vi. 7 Camb. Synd. A.3.14 alone has ―first that goeth‖ for ―first that go‖ of Oxf. 1611, 1612, 1613, 1616, 1617, &c. See Apppendix B, p. 212. Jonah
Reading of the
Variation of later
382
Authorized Bible i. 16 marg.
a sacrifice
Reading of the Authorized Bible
Micah v. 2 vii. 3 marg.
Beth-leem the soul
Reading of the Authorized Bible
Nahum i. 1 marg.
Lord
i. 4 ii. 2 marg. ii. 3 marg. iii. 17
floure and the pride †† Heb. fiery The crowned
Reading of the Authorized Bible
Habakkuk
init. † Heb.
i. 9 marg. iii. 1 text marg. iii. 13 iii. 19
Sigionoth Shigianoth † by discovering LORD God 1611-1630, 1762, 1769, moderns
Zephaniah iii. 11
Reading of the Authorized Bible mine holy
Haggai i. 1, 12, 14 & ii. 2
Zechariah
Reading of the Authorized Bible Josuah Cf. Ezra iii. 2 marg.
Reading of the Authorized Bible
i. 1, 7 iv. 12 marg.
Barachiah by the hand
vii. 7 viii. 19 marg. viii. 21 marg.
or the plain †† Heb. solemn the face
editions a sacrifice unto the LORD, 1638
Variation of later editions Beth-lehem, 1629 C. and L. his soul, 1629
Variation of later editions LORD, 1638. See above. p. 147 note 1 flower, 1629. See 2 Estr. xv. 50 as the pride, 1629 .rO ׀׀ ׀׀fiery, 1629 Thy crowned, 1629
Variation of later editions ) ,rO †׀׀before the following Heb.), 1638 Shigionoth, 1762 Shigionoth, 1629 by † discovering, 1629-1762, Bagster 1846 (not 1769, mod.) Lord GOD, 1629 C., 1638, 1744. Cf. Zeph. i. 7. See p. 147 note 1.
Variation of later editions my holy, 1629 C. & L., 1630. Cf. marg.
Variation of later editions Joshua, 1629 (ver. 12, 1629 L.)
Variation of later editions Berechiah, 17621 by the hand of, Bagster 1746; cf. ch. vii. 7, 12 marg. and the plain, 1638 ׀׀ ׀׀Or, solemn, 1762 the face of the LORD, 1638
383
xi. 2 all the mighty the mighty xiv. 10 Hananiel Hananeel, 1762 1 Thus 1611 reads in all the other nine places where the name occurs, except in 1 Chr. vi. 39, ―Berachiah.‖
Malachi iii. 4 iv. 2
Reading of the Authorized Bible offerings and shall go forth
S. Matthew i. 5 i. 9 ii. 1
Reading of the Authorized Bible
Variation of later editions offering, 1638 and ye shall go forth, 1617, 1629, &c.
Variation of later editions
Boos (bis) Achas (bis) Hierusalem Passim1
Booz (bis), 1629 Achaz (bis), 1629 Jerusalem, 1629 (not 1629 L., 1630), 1638 iv. 13, 15 Nephthalim, 1638 Nephthali v. 22 Racha Raca, 1638 v. 22 counsell (counsel 1744) council, 1629 L., 1630 (councel 1612, 1629, 1638). See 1 Esdr. iii. 15 note. vi. 3 thy right doeth thy right hand doeth, 1613 (not 1616, 1617), 1629, 1630 xii. 41 Nineve (Ninive 1616) Nineveh, 1629 (not Luke xi. 32) [xiv. 9 & Mark vi. 26 oath’s, 1762 &c. oaths’]. See p. 152 note. xiv. 34 Geneseret Gennesaret, 1629 C., 1638. Cf. Mark vi. 53; Luke v.1. xvi 15 Thou art Christ Thou art the Christ, 1762. Cf. ver 20. xvi. 19 whatsoever thou shalt loose and whatsoever thou shalt loose, 1616 (1617), 1629 xviii. 28 marg. 7. d. ob. Cf. ch. xx 2 seven pence halfpenny, 1616 (not 1617), 1629. xx. 29 Hiericho Jericho, 1616 (not 1617), 1629 xxvi. 75 the words of Jesus the word of Jesus, 1762 xxvii. 22 Pilate said Pilate saith, 1629 xxvii. 46 Lamasabachthani (Lamm-, 1613) lama sabachthani, 1629 1 ―Hierusalem‖ is the constant form in the N.T. except in Acts xxv. 1 Camb. Synd. A.3. 14, & c., 1612, 1613, 1617; not Oxf. 1611, 1616). I Cor. xvi. 3. Gal. i. 17, 18; ii. 1; iv. 25, 26. Heb. xii. 22. See 2 Esdr. ii. 10.
S. Mark ii. 4 v. 6 vii. 2 marg. x. 18 x. 46 xl. 8 xii. 26 & Luke xx. 37
Reading of the Authorized Bible
Variation of later editions
for press he came Theophilact there is no man good, but one high ways side
for the press, 1743. Cf. Luke viii. 19 he ran, 1628 Theophylact, 1629 there is none good but one, 16381. high-way side, 1629. Cf. Matt. xiiii. 4. branches off the trees, 1638 (έκ). Isaac, 1612 & 1617 (Mark), 1629. So
branches of the trees Isahac
384
Gethsemani (Clementine Vulg.) counsel
xiv. 32 xiv. 55
2 Esdr. iii. 16 Gethsemane, 1616 (not 1617, 1630), 1638. Cf. Matt. xxvi. 36 councell, 1630, councel, 1629 C. (not L.), 1638, council, 1743. See 1 Esdr. iii. 15 note. lama sabachthani, 1629 Galilee, 1629 (1612 ter). See Tobit 1.2 note.
xv. 34 lamasabachthani xv. 41 & xvi. 7 & Luke Gelile iv. 44 & Acts xiii. 31 (Camb. Synd. A.3.14, &c.) 1 A variation taken from Matt. xix. 17. A like change might well be made in some other places, e.g. matt. xi. 27; ch. xiii. 32. In John x. 28 ―any,‖ 29 ―none‖ of 1638-1762, are rejected by 1769 and later Bibles for ―any man,‖ ―no man,‖ of 1611-1630; ―man‖ however being printed in italic type.
S. Luke i. 3 i. 5, 7, 13, 24, 36, 40, 41 (bis), 57 i. 74 ii. 25, 34 iii. 21 iii. 25, 26 iii. 30
iii. 31 iii. 35 iv. 27 v. 1
vii. 11
Reading of the Authorized Bible
Variation of later editions
understanding of things Elizabeth
understanding of all things Elisabeth, 1638
out of the hands Simeaon and it came to pass Matthathias Simeon
out of the hand, 1762 Symeon it came to pass, 1629 Mattathias, 1629 Symeon. Cf. Appendix E § I, p. 244 and Acts xv. 14. Menan, 1629, (Geneva N. T., 1557).
Menan (Μеνάμ Erasmus 1516, Aldus 1518, Tyndale, Great Bible)2. see Appendix E. p. 244. Phaleg (Clementine Vulg.) Elizeus Genesareth (Genn – 16381743) Naim (Ναύμ Erasmus 1516, Aldus, Vulg. All Early Enlgish versions Naim, except Tynd. 1516 Naym) the wayes side
Phalec, 1629 Eliseus1, 1638 Gennesaret, 1762. Cf. Matt. xiv. 34 Nain, 1638 (Ναείν Erasm. 1519)
the way side, 1743. Cf. ver. 12. Matt. xiii. 4; Mark iv. 4. xi. 32 Nineve. Cf. Matt. xii. 41 Nineveh, 1699, American 1867. the other shall be left and the other shall be left, 1638. Cf. xvii. 34 vers. 35, 36 xix. 2, 5, 8 Zacheus Zaccheus 1638-17691. xix. 9 the son of Abraham a son of Abraham, 1762. xx. 12 sent the third sent a third, 1762 xxiii. 11 at naught at nought, 1638. Cf. Acts xix. 27 cast in prison cast into prison, 1616 (not 1617xxii. 19 1638), 1743 xxiv. 13 Emaus Emmaus, 1613 xxiv. 18 Cleophas Cleopas, 1629 2 In the same way all our books from Tyndale downwards (except Coverdale and the Genevan version) read ―Heber‖ ver. 35 from Erasmus‘s ‗Εβέρ retained in Beza 1589, 1598), though ―Eber‖ is the form used in the O.T. See Appendix E, p. 249. viii. 5
385
1
Elissaus might be preferable here, as Zacchaus is spelt in Oxf. 1835. Camb. 1858, and some recent Bibles. An English reader can hardly fail to confound the three separate terminations in – eus, (I) eu diphthong, as Menestheus, 2 Macc. iv. 21, Nereus, Rom. xvi. 15: (2) the dissyllable ĕus, e being short, as Timothĕus, I Thess. i. 1 & c.: (3) the more usual dissyllalbe –ē-us, e being long, as here. Such as Aggeus, 1 Esdr. vi. 1; 2 Esdr. i. 40: Asmodēus, Tobit iii. 8: Cendebēus, 1 Macc. xv. 38: Channunēus, 1 Esdr. viii. 48: Elisēus, here: Hymenēus, I Tim. i. 20: Maccabēus, 1 Macc. iii. 1 Y c.: Sabbathēus, I Esdr. ix. 14: Sabatēus, ibid. ver. 48: Timēus, Mark x. 46: Zacchēus, Luke xix. 2, 5 8. So also in I Esdr. ix. 21, 23, 30, 32 (bis), 33. These all represent the termination –αϊος. In 1 Macc. xii. 7 marg., 20, Άρειος should be rendered Arius, not Areus.
S. John i. 45-49 & xxi. 2 v. 18 vii. 16 viii. 30 xi. 3 xii. 22 xv. 20 xvi. 25 xxi. 17 init.
Acts ii. 22 iv. 17 vi. 5, 8 & vii. 59 & viii. 2 & xi. 19 & xxii. 20 vi. 5 vii. 10, 13 vii. 16 vii. 35 viii. 32 xiii. 18 marg. xiii. 42 marg. xv. 14 xvii. 22 marg. xxi. 28 & xxiv. 4 xxiv. 24 xxiv. 27 xxvii. 5 xxvii. 7 xxvii. 18
Reading of the Authorized Bible Nathaneel not only because he Jesus answered them, those words his sister told Jesus than the Lord (lord 16291743) the time He said unto him
Reading of the Authorized Bible miracles, wonders no farther Steven Permenas Pharao Sichem (bis)… Emor (Έμόρ Erasmus, Ald., Tynd., Great and Bishops‘ Bibles, &c.) by the hands the shearer έτρουουόρήσεν ׀׀Or, in the week Simeon ׀׀Or, court farther. Cf. ch. iv. 17 which was a Jew Portius Lysia Gnidus And being exceedingly tossed with a tempest the next day,
Variation of later editions Nathanael, 1629 (1612, ver. 47). because he not only, 1629 Jesus answered them, and said, 1634, 1638 these words, 1629 his sisters, 1629 tell Jesus, 1762 than his lord, 1762 but the time, 1756, 1762, 1769 He saith unto him, 1638
Variation of later editions miracles and wonders, 1638 no further, 1616 (not 1617, 1634), 1629, 1640. Cf. ver. 21: ch. xxi. 28. Stephen, 1629 Parmenas, 1629 Pharaoh, 1629, 1630 (1640, ver. 10), Cf. ver. 21. Sychem (bis) 1638…
by the hand, 1762 his shearer, 1629 έτρουουόρήσεν bore, or fed them, 17431. † Gr. In the week, 1629 Symeon, Cf. Luke iii. 30. ,rO ׀׀the court, 1638 further, 1609, 1762 (ch. xxiv. 4. 1639-1743). which was a Jewess, 1629. Cf. ch. xvi. 1 Porcius, 1638 Lycia, 1629. Cf. 1 Macc. xv. 23 Cnidus, 1638 And we being exceedingly tossed with a tempest, the next day 1638. 2
386
1
After Deut. 1.31 in this marginal note modern Bibles which do not contain the Apocrypha (e.g. Camb. 1858) unwarrantably omit the reference to 2 Macc. Vii. 27. See above, p. 119. 2 In 1616 (not 1617)-1630 the stop is transferred, but ήμών is still over looked.
Romans
Reading of the Authorized Bible Jesus Christ (So Beza‘s Latin only) but also walk reign therefore
iii. 24 iv. 12 vi. 12 vii. 13
Was that then Sabboth (Sabbath 1629 L., 1630) our † ׀׀report ׀׀Or, before † Gr.
ix. 29
Variation of later editions Christ Jesus but who also walk, 1762 therefore reign, 1616 (not 1617), 1629 Was then that, 1616 (not 1617), 1629 sabaoth, 1629-1762 (Sabaoth2, 1769)
† our ׀׀report † Gr. before ׀׀Or, 1629 (not 1629 L., marg. 1630), 1638. xi. 28 for your sake for your sakes, 1762 xli 2 that acceptable and acceptable, 1629 xiv. 6 regardeth a day regardeth the day, 1629 xiv. 10 we shall all stand for we shall all stand, 1638 Appeles Apelles, 1616 (not 1617, 1630), 1629 xvi 10 c. and L. 2 In James v. 4 Sabbaoth, Camb. Synd. A.3.14, & c., 1613, 1617, 1629 L., 1630; Sabaoth, Oxf. 1611, 1612, 1616; sabaoth, 1629 C., 1638, &c. x. 16 text
1 Cor. i. 12 & iii. 4-6, 22 & iv. 6
Reading of the Authorized Bible
Variation of later editions
Apollos, 1638 things that belong, 1612 (not 1613), vii. 32 1616, &c. See p. 110 ix. 9 & x. 2 Moyses Moses, 1629 (1612, ch. ix. 9) x. 28 The earth is For the earth is, 1638 xii. 28 helps in governments helps, governments, 1629 none of them are none of them is, 1638. Cf. pp. 109, xiv. 10 110 xiv. 23 some place one place, 1629 And that After that, 1616 (not 1617), 1629 C. xv. 6 & L. Cf. ver 7. xv. 41 another of the moon and another glory of the moon, 1629 such are they that are earthy such are they also that are earthy, xv. 48 1638 xvi. 22 Anathema Maranatha anathema, Maranatha, 1629-17431 1 But 1762 and American 1867 have Anathema, Maran-atha, and 1769 even removes the necessary comma between the words; and so D‘Oyly and Mant 1817, Oxf. 1835, Camb. 1858, and other moderns.
2 Cor.
Apollo things that belongeth
Reading of the Authorized Bible Sylvanus
i. 19
Variation of later editions Silvanus, 1613 (not 1616, 1617), 1629 C. (not 1629 L., 1630). Cf. 1 Peter v. 12.
387
earnestly, desiring
earnestly desiring, 1769 (έπιποθοϋντες)2 that ye be (that be ye Oxf. be ye reconciled, 1612, 1616 (not viii. 21 1611) reconciled 1613), 1617, 1629 ix. 5 but in the sight but also in the sight, 1638 ix. 5 not of covetousness and not as of covetousness, 1638 sparingly…bountifully also sparingly … also bountifully, ix. 6 1638 xi. 26 journeyings, 1762 journeying xi. 32 the city the city of the Damascenes, 1629 Subscription Philippos Philippi, 1629 2 Professor Grote (MS, p. 16. See above, p. 23 note) states that this punctuation was adopted in a small 8vo. Bible by Field in 1660, but that in Field‘s 12mo. N.T. of the same year, and in all later editions of that period, the change was revoked. See above, p. 91. v. 20
Galatians
on tree (Tynd. – Bishops‘)
iii. 13
Ephesians
Reading of the Authorized Bible that new man
iv. 24
sincerity
vi. 24
Phil. iv. 2 iv. 6
Reading of the Authorized Bible Syntiche request
2 Thess. ii. 14 ii. 15
Reading of the Authorized Bible the Lord Jesus Christ or our epistle
1 Tim. i. 4
Reading of the Authorized Bible edifying flie (θεϋγε)
vi. 11 Subscription
2 Tim. i. 7
Reading of the Authorized Bible
Pacaciana (Bishops‘ Bible)
Reading of the Authorized Bible of love
Variation of later editions on a tree, 1629
Variation of later editions the new man, 1616 (not 1617), 1629 C. sincerity, Amen, 1616 (not 1617, 1629 C.
Variation of later editions Syntyche, 1629. 1638 (not 1699), &c. requests, 1629
Variation of later editions our Lord Jesus Christ, 1629 or by our epistle, 1613 only
Variation of later editions godly edifying, 1638 (Tynd.-Bps‘). flee, 1613 (not 1616, 1617), 1629 C. & L. Cf. 2 Esdr. xiv 15 note. Pacatiana, 1629
Variation of later editions and of love, 1638
388
ii. 19 iv. 8
the seal unto them also bring with thee
iv. 13
Heb. iii. 10 iv. 8 marg. viii. 8 xi. 4
Reading of the Authorized Bible their hearts Josua and the house of Judah Kain and they (thy, 1617) not afraid Gideon…Jephthah
xi. 23 xi. 32 xii. 1
unto the race
James v. 2
Reading of the Authorized Bible motheaten
1 Peter ii. 1 ii. 5 ii. 6
Reading of the Authorized Bible evil speakings sacrifice Wherefore Sylvanus
v. 12
1 John ii. 16
Reading of the Authorized Bible
this seal, 1617, 1629 C. & L., 1630 unto all them also, 1629 bring with thee, and the books, 1616, 1617, 1629 C. & L., 1630.
Variation of later editions their heart, 1638 Joshua, 1638 and with the house of Judah, 1638 Cain, 1638. Cf. 1 John iii. 12; Jude 11. and they were not afraid, 1638. Gedeon … Iephthae, 1629. Cf. Judg. xi. 1 marg. the race, 1629 C. & L., 1630
Variation of later editions are motheaten, 1638
Variation of later editions all evil speakings, 1629 C. sacrifices, 1629 Wherefore also, 1629 Sylavanus, 1629 C. & L (not 1630), 1638. Cf. 2 Cor. i. 19.
Variation of later editions
the lust of the eyes hath not the Son1
and the lust of the eyes, 1638 hath not the Son of God, 1629 C. (not v. 12 1629 L., 1630), 16382. 1 The Book of Common Prayer (Epistle for the First Sunday after Easter) follows the reading of 1611, as does the Gospel for Palm Sunday in Matt. xxvii. 52, ―of saints which slept,‖ not ―the saints,‖ as in 1762 and later Bibles. See Cardwell, Oxford Bibles, p. 14. 2 Even after 1638 this variation continued : ―of God‖ is omitted by 1640-39, 1659 (fol.), 1677 (Camb.), 1678, 1679 (fol.), 1681; the words are retined by 1658 (Field) and its Dutch counterfeit (see above, p. 25 note 2), 1674, 1677 (4°), 1682, 1701, and by all later Bibles.
Jude ver. 11 ver. 25
Reading of the Authorized Bible Kain now and ever
Variation of later editions Cain, 1630, 1638. See Heb. xi. 4. both now and ever, 1638
Revelation
389
Reading of the Authorized Bible i. 4 i. 11 v. 13
Churches in Asia Philadelphia honour, glory Ruben
vii. 5
Nephali (Nephthali, 1629 C.)
vii. 6 ix. 17 & xxi. 20 xii. 14 xiii. 6 xiii. 16 marg. xviii. 12
jacinct flee (πέτήται). Cf. 2 Esdr. xv. 41 them that dwelt to give Thine (Thyne 1629 L.) ׀׀Or, hell ( ׀׀Or, well, 1612)
Variation of later editions Churches which are in Asia, 1638 unto Philadelphia, 1638 and honour, and glory, 1638 Reuben, 1616 (not 1617), 1629 C. & L., 1630. Nephthalim, 1638-1762, Amer. 18671. Cf. Matt. iv. 13, 15. Jacinth, 1762 fly (flie, 1629-1699), 1743, 1762
them that dwell, 1629 to give them, 1769 thyne, 1629 C. ׀׀Or, grave, 1613-1630: ׀׀Or, the xx. 13 marg. grave, 1638. xxi. 19 saphir2 sapphire, 1638 sardonix (even 1699)… topas sardonyx 1634, 1640 ……. topaz xxi. 20 1629. Colophon FINIS THE END 1 1769, followed by our standard (Camb. 1858) and all other moderns we know of, reads Nephthalim.‖ 2 Elsewhere the forms employed in 1611 are sapphire and saphyre. See above, p. 97. N.B. All variations in the foregoing list, except those relating to the apostrophe, have been introduced into at least one previous edition. The changes described in the subjoioned list (which relates chiefly to the Apocrypha) are peculiar to the Cambridge Paragraph Bible, and must justify themselves.
Genesis
Reading of 1611 and later editions. creature that hath †life Girgasite (Gergasite 1630)
i. 20 x. 16
Numbers
Reading of 1611 and later editions.
Correction made in the Paragraph Bible † creature that hath life. Girgashite, passim.
Correction made in the Paragraph Bible
xxvi. 58 Korathites Korahites. Cf. 1 Chr. ix. 191. (Gorle.) 1 Less palpable is the error in 1 Chr. xxvi. 19 (cf. ver. 1), where Kore ( ]קךאis put for Korhite ()קךחי.
2 Samuel xvii. 26 [marg.]
2 Kings iii. 9 xvi. 7 [marg.]
Reading of 1611 and later editions. Ismaelite, 1762
Reading of 1611 and later editions. †that followed † Heb. Tilgath-pileser, 1762
Correction made in the Paragraph Bible Ishmeelite. Cf. 1 Chr. ii. 17.
Correction made in the Paragraph Bible that † followed † Heb. Tiglath-peleser.
390
1 Chronicles
Reading of 1611 and later editions.
Correction made in the Paragraph Bible
vii. 28 unto ׀׀Gaza azaG otnu ׀׀2. 2 The annexed marginal note (omitted in Bibles which do not contain the Apocrypha, see above, p. 119) is almost unintelligible as it stands in 1611, &c. Inasmuch as the border of Ephraim did not reach to Gaza (Josh. xv. 47), our Translators suggest that עך־טןהmay possibly mean Adassa, the Άδαζά of 1Macc. viii. 40, 45.
Ezra
Reading of 1611 and later editions. a † little space
ix. 8
Nehemiah iii. 12
Reading of 1611 and later editions. Halloesh, 1611-1630 (Haloesh, 1616; Halohesh, 1638, &c.)
Esther
Reading of 1611 and later editions. † the letters devised (the † l.d. Bagster 1856; in 1630 marg. devised for the device.)
viii. 5
Job xxxii. 6 marg.
Psalms
Reading of 1611 and later editions. I feared (feared, 1638, &c.)
Reading of 1611 and later editions.
Correction made in the Paragraph Bible a little † space. Cf. Isai. xxvi. 20.
Correction made in the Paragraph Bible Hallohesh. Cf. ch. x. 24.
Correction made in the Paragraph Bible the letters † devised.
Correction made in the Paragraph Bible I feared to.
Correction made in the Paragraph Bible
vi. 4 & xxxi. 16 & xliv. for thy mercies (mercies‘, for thy mercy’s ()תםדך׃1. 26 1769) cxxxvi. 8 marg. rulings ruling. Compare ver. 9 (Heb.). 1 The noun in pausâ is no doubt singular, and so LXX., Vulg. have it in Ps. vi. 4; xxxi. 16. Our translators must have meant ―mercies‖ to be singular, as they so spell ―mercy‖ about four times out of ten. In that case 1769 would be the first to go wrong. See p. 152 note.
Canticles iv. 2
Reading of 1611 and later editions. every one bear (bare, 1629 L., 1630)
Isaiah
Reading of 1611 and later
Correction made in the Paragraph Bible every one beareth. Cf. ch. vi. 6
Correction made in the Paragraph
391
editions. iv. 9 marg.
xi. 14 xxvii. 8 marg. xxix. 1 marg. xliv. 14
† Hear ye ׀׀indeed.
†and the children removeth it cut off the heads he ׀׀strengtheneth
and † the children. removeth it with cut off the heads of morf .gram) htenehtgnerts eh ׀׀ Tremellius, quæ fortificat se).
† righteousness primo loco by the hands (Bagster 1846 adds of)
iii. 20 xxxviii. 17 marg.
Reading of 1611 and later editions.
Daniel ix. 26 text marg.
Malachi
Hear ye ׀׀indeed ( †׀׀1629) ,rO ׀׀without ceasing, & c. Heb. hear ye in hearing, & c.
Reading of 1611 and later editions.
Ezekiel
Bible
but not for himself ,rO ׀׀and [the Jews] they shall be no more his people, ch. 11. 17, or, and the prince’s [Messiah’s, ver. 25] future people, 1762.
Reading of 1611 and later editions.
† Heb. precedes ׀׀Or, Aliter sanat Bagster 1846.
Correction made in the Paragraph Bible † righteousness secundo loco. by the hand of. Cf. 1 Kin. xvi. 12
Correction made in the Paragraph Bible * but not for himself : ׀׀and the people. * Or, and [the Jews]… ch. 11. 17 * Or, and the prince’s [Messiah’s ver. 25] future people.
Correction made in the Paragraph Bible
i. 7 reffo ey ׀׀ Ye ׀׀offer1. 1 The marginal ―bring into‖ (b not B, 1611-1638) cannot be meant for the imperative, but renders differentes super of Tremellius. S. Matthew
Reading of 1611 and later editions.
Correction made in the Paragraph Bible
xxiii. 24 strain at a gnat strain out a gnat1. 1 So all the early versions from Tyndale to the Bishop‘s Bible, and even T. Baskett‘s 8 vo. edition of the Authorized, London, 8 vo. 1754, Brit. Mus. 1411. f. 5.
S. Mark
Reading of 1611 and later editions. Genesareth (Gennesaret, 1638-1769)
vi. 53
S. Luke i. 78 marg.
Reading of 1611 and later editions. Malach. iv. 2; follows Isai. xi.
Correction made in the Paragraph Bible Genesaret. Cf. Matt. xiv. 34; Luke v. 1.
Correction made in the Paragraph Bible Mal. iv. 1, follows sun-rising.
392
1
S. John x. 25
Reading of 1611 and later editions. and ye believed not
Acts
vii. & xiii. 19 xxi. 1
Reading of 1611 and later editions. Chanaan Choos (Coos, 1638, & c.) was entered (Bishops‘ Bible). Cf. 1 Esdr. viii. 49
xxv. 23
Romans xvi. 9
Reading of 1611 and later editions. Urbane
Philippians
Reading of 1611 and later editions.
Correction made in the Paragraph Bible and ye believe not.
Correction made in the Paragraph Bible Canaan (1612 only, ch. xiii. 19). See Judith v. 9. Cos. Cf. 1 Macc. xv. 24. were entered (Tyndale, Great Bible, Geneva 1557). See above, p. 110 note 1.
Correction made in the Paragraph Bible Urban.
Correction made in the Paragraph Bible
ii. 7, 8 nem fo ssenekil ׀׀ likeness of men… ׀׀fasion as a man1. 1 That the margin, ―Or, habit‖ refers to σχήματι, not to όμοιώματι, is plain enough in itself, not to add that for σχήματι the Vulg. has habitu, Tyndale, Coverdale, and the Great Bible apparel.
Hebrews
i. 6
Reading of 1611 and later editions. esohw ,2671 ,niaga dnA ׀׀ margin it is Judah
viii. 8 x. 23
faith
Correction made in the Paragraph Bible And ׀׀again. Juda. Cf. Matt. ii. 6; ch. vii. 14; Rev. v. 5. So Camb. 1863 in Ecclus. xlix. 4. hope. See Appendix E, p. 247.
CONTEND FOR THE FAITH: THE TEXTUS RECEPTUS http://watch-unto-prayer.org/TR-0-intro.html WATCH UNTO PRAYER taho@watch-unto-prayer.org http://watch-unto-prayer.org
393
CHAPTER III "CHRISTIAN" KABBALAH ―If nothing else, the term ‗convert,‘ as applied to Jews, must be viewed cautiously, in view of the concealed Judaism of the ‗Marranos,‘ which continued for centuries.‖ — Elizabeth Dilling, The Jewish Religion: Its Influence Today
The roots of the Kabbalah are in ancient Babylon where the southern kingdom of Judah was exiled in 586 B.C. Although the Babylonian captivity was limited to 70 years, only a remnant of Jews chose to return to Israel while the vast majority remained in Babylon, many preferring material comfort to the difficult task of rebuilding and resettling Jerusalem. No doubt there were those who also desired liberation from the restrictions of the Mosaic Law. Over the centuries, Jews from Babylon returned to Israel bringing with them the Babylonian mystery tradition which became an oral tradition taught to succeeding generations of Jews. In 70 A.D., the nation of Israel was again judged by God and carried captive to Rome whence the Jews were dispersed throughout what is now Europe. After the destruction of the Temple, the center of Jewish religion shifted to Rabbinic authority. It was during the Middle Ages that the rabbis compiled the oral traditions of Babylon in various books which became the Kabbalah. Having rejected the God of Israel who sent His Son, Jesus Christ, to redeem them, the dispersed Jews came under the baleful influence of famous Talmudists and Kabbalists such as Rabbi Isaac Luria (1534-72), who taught the doctrine of redemption as man‘s reunion with an impersonal deity, Ein Sof, and its first ray of light, adam qadmon: ―Under Luria‘s system, the tikkun implies two operations: on the one hand, the ingathering of the divine sparks that had fallen...; on the other hand, the ingathering of the holy souls imprisoned and subject to the anti-Adam,...the negative of the primordial man, adam qadmon, who is encountered in the domain of holiness...‖ (Marc-Alain Ouaknin, Mysteries of the Kabbalah, p. 201) Rabbi Luria also taught the Jews to view their exile as a messianic mission to accomplish their own redemption as well as tikkun, the ―perfecting of the world‖ by the Jews. ―The entire nation of Israel has a special function, namely to prepare the world for tikkun, bringing each thing to its rightful place; it has a duty to recover and assemble the sparks dispersed to the four corners of the earth. Consequently, the Jewish people must be exiled to the four corners of the earth. Exile is not mere chance, but a mission whose aim is repair and ‗sorting.‘ In fact, repair is accomplished in the form of sorting—of separating good from evil, with the aim of the total separation of the domains of the holy and the impure, which became mixed together at the original breakage and the episode of the fruit of the Garden of Eden. ―The children of Israel are completely preoccupied with the process of the ‗elevation of the sparks,‘ not only in the places where their feet touch the ground during their exile, but also within the cosmic exile into which they have been thrown internally, and which they gradually bring to an end through their actions.‖ (Marc-Alain Ouaknin, Mysteries of the Kabbalah, p. 203)
29
THE RENAISSANCE In his history of The Occult Underground, James Webb described the Renaissance as a steady stream of occult traditions flowing into Christian Europe during the 15th and 16th centuries. ―...the gradual flow into Christian Europe of writings of a totally alien spirit to that of the Establishment greatly assisted the collapse of that Establishment during the period of the Renaissance and Reformation. The Eastern Empire is one obvious direction from which some such information could come. Everyone is taught that the Turkish capture of Constantinople sent scholars scurrying to the West in time to add their contribution to the revival of free intellectual speculation in Italy. There was another chink in the papal armor; and one which was much more frequently penetrated. This was the Arab world to the south of the Mediterranean, with its contacts with Sicily and especially with Spain... ―...riding on the back...of Aristotle, had come Neo-Platonism and other such doctrines, with their origins in the systems of thought which Christianity had conquered in the first few centuries after Christ. ...besides the intellectual position of Neo-Platonism, there arrived in Europe those more spectacular symptoms of the occultists‘ tradition—alchemy, astrology, and magic. These attained the relatively exalted height they achieved during the Renaissance partly because of the association of the Hermetica with Neo-Platonic currents of thought which carried with them the intellectual prestige of Greek antiquity.‖ (Webb, The Occult Underground, Open Court Press, 1976, pp. 209-211) It was during the Renaissance that the Jewish Cabala merged with the occult Traditions that were inundating Western Christendom: ―Also swept up in this maelstrom of quasi-religious thought was the great Jewish body of mystical speculation known as the Cabala, one of the chief sources of later occult tradition. A composite body of knowledge alien to that approved by the Christian Establishment was, therefore, to hand when the Establishment hold on Europe was finally broken during the great crisis of the Renaissance and Reformation.‖ (Webb, p. 211) During the Middle Ages, large numbers of Jews converted to Christianity, either under coercion as ―Conversos‖ or willingly as ―Marranos.‖ The latter were baptized with the intention of infiltrating the Church, and the clergy, and thereby subverting the Christian religion with false doctrine. ―And in the assimilation of Jewish Cabalistic teaching into the framework of Christian mysticism, on the one hand, and occult Tradition on the other, the role played by converted Jews was of the greatest importance. The first Jewish convert to occupy himself with the Cabala was Abner of Burgos, who about 1320 became Christian under the name of Alfonso of Valladolid. He contrived to identify the Cabalistic personage of Metatron—who is said to sit at God‘s right hand—with the person of the Son in the Trinity. In Renaissance attempts to derive support from Traditional knowledge for the Christian position, this form of identification was continued. For example, Pico della Mirandola decided that the three highest Sefiroth—Kether, representing the Supreme Diadem, Hokmah, wisdom, and Binah, understanding—could be equated with the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost...‖ (Webb, p. 220) Leading Cabalists such as Marsilio Ficino, Pico della Mirandola, John Reuchlin and Cornelius Agrippa were funded by the wealthy Medici family which established a Platonic Academy at Florence. Sponsored by the powerful Medici, who also contributed four popes between 1513 and 1605, the neo-Platonist
30
scholars turned Catholic converts and priests, conspired to infiltrate the Vatican and managed to sell Jewish occultism to the Catholic hierarchy as ‗Christian Cabala.‘ ―In 1462, Cosimo de Medici gave [Marsilio] Ficino a villa near Florence in which to teach Platonic philosophy, and a manuscript of the Hermetica to translate which he had received two years earlier from a monk who brought it from Macedonia... Of native Italian Hermeticists, the most notable were Pico della Mirandolo and the remarkable Giordano Bruno. ―Bruno was burned for his Hermetic doctrines, and Pico was at one time condemned. Their mutual inspirer, Ficino—who turned priest in 1473—had conceived of Hermes and Plato as aids to persuading those to religion who would not accept Scripture alone. This reasoning appears eventually to be endorsed by the Church in the case of Pico, who joined to his Hermeticism a ‗Christian Cabala‘ and concocted a universal system in which Cabalistic ideas played a considerable part. Although condemned by a tribunal, Pico‘s synthesis was rehabilitated in 1493 by Alexander VI, whose recognition of the Cabalist as a loyal son of the Church seemed to give some authority to Pico‘s position. It should be remembered in this context that Sixtus IV (Pope, 1471-84) had himself translated seventy Cabalistic books into Latin, and that the concept of the ‗Christian Cabala‘ was not peculiar to Italian thought. Reuchlin, the foremost Orientalist of his time, and author of the first Hebrew grammar, came nearest in success to the attempt to transform the Cabala into Christian philosophy, although his pupil Widmanstadt considered Jewish tradition as ‗a Trojan Horse introduced into the Church.‘ ―But the Hermeticists and Cabalists of the Renaissance were always maintaining their orthodoxy. Agrippa stoutly protested what his contemporaries considered his doubtful Catholicity... Magic even penetrated to the papal closet. Pope Urban VIII, a firm believer in astrology,...used to irritate his cardinals by predicting the dates of their deaths... the renegade Dominican Tonmaso Campanella...practiced magic; and it seems fairly certain that he and the Pope were closeted together...taking measures against a dangerous eclipse of the moon that January.‖ (Webb, pp. 220-22) Although the occult traditions which flooded Europe borrowed elements of Jewish mysticism, the Cabala provided a coherent system of esoteric knowledge that has maintained its preeminence among occultists to this day. ―...While the earliest magical records known date back to 1800 B.C., the basis of ritual magic is contained in a collection of papyri originating in Egypt in the same period as saw the birth and elaboration of alchemy and the Hermetic writings. Such magical procedures are founded on elaborate ceremonies for conjuring up spirits and compelling them to work the magician‘s will. While the idea of hierarchies of demons was given some countenance by the Neo-Platonists, the chief debt of the ritual magician is to Jewish mysticism... In the Middle Ages treatises like the Testament of Solomon give magic an explicitly Jewish origin... ―...The Jewish genius for complicated metaphysics and occult speculation has provided occultists with some of their most erudite Traditional sources of inspiration. The Cabala, itself a Jewish word for Tradition, embodies these sources. For the history of European occultism two Cabalistic books are important: the early (3rd to 6th century) Sefer Yetsirah, the Book of Creation; and the later (late 13th century) Sefer Ha-Zohar, the 31
book of Splendor, probably written by Moses de Leon, and certainly in Spain.‖ (Webb, pp. 216-17) Assigning numerical values to the letters of the Hebrew alphabet was the scheme devised by the Cabalists to invent an extraordinary system of Gnostic speculation. This hypothetical pathway to union with the Godhead was illustrated in the Cabalistic ―Tree of Life‖—
―Of the long and complicated story of Jewish mysticism it is only necessary to recall here that an important element is the correspondence between the letters in the Hebrew alphabet and a numerical value—and that on this typically ‗occult‘ idea of ‗sympathies‘ has been erected an amazing framework of speculation. ―...There are stated to be ten Sefiroth—sets of forces, qualities, or the elements of creation—which in combination form the whole world. The concept was elaborated, particularly by the 13th century Zohar, into a mysticism by which the adept could ascend toward the Godhead by, as it were, absorbing into his being the qualities of all the Sefiroth in sequence. These supposed elements of creation can be drawn diagrammatically. The adept was supposed to work his way along the ‗paths‘ from one to another until, having achieved full mystical knowledge of the whole of creation, he achieved knowledge of God.‖ (Webb, pp. 216-19) One ploy of the so-called ―Christian Cabalists‖ of the Renaissance was to illustrate the Trinitarian Godhead using the five upper sephiroth on the Cabalistic Tree of Life, which forms a pentagram. By inserting the Hebrew letter Shin, which stands for Shekinah, the female Holy Spirit, into the Tetragrammaton (YHVH), they produced YHShVH or Jesus, who they claimed was the ―divine androgyne.‖ Thus, they deceptively reasoned, the Cabalistic view of the androgynous Godhead could be used by the Catholic hierarchy to prove the divinity of Jesus Christ to those who would not accept Scripture: ―In the Jewish kabbalistic tradition, which borrows many Pythagorean ideas, the pentagram represents the five upper sephiroth on the Tree of Life... Christian Kabbalists of the Renaissance were especially enamored of the pentagram, which they viewed as a mystical proof of the divinity of Christ – to them, it symbolized Christ as the Holy 32
Spirit manifest in the flesh. A favorite gematric feat was to add the Hebrew letter Shin (symbolizing fire and the holy spirit of pentecost) to the Biblical four letter name of God (YHVH, most commonly [and incorrectly] pronounced ‗Jehovah‘) yielding YHShVHY’heshua, or Jesus... ―There are many connections between the pentagram and Christianity... The pentagram was associated with the five wounds of Christ, and because it could be drawn in one continuous movement of the pen, the Alpha and the Omega as one. It was also an expression of a secret Gnostic heresy, found hidden here and there throughout Christian history - a symbol of Isis/Venus as the secret goddess, the female principle. The most notable instance of this symbolism is in the Arthurian Grail romances, which are Gnostic and kabbalistic teachings disguised as tales of knightly quests.‖ (Fig. 1 & 2) (Alternative Religions, http://altreligion.about.com/library/weekly/aa100102a.htm)
Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
The ‗modern Church‘s demonization of the goddess‘ was understandable once Dan Brown went into particulars concerning the deviant sex rites of apostate Judaism which simulated the so-called ―sacred marriage‖ between ―Jah‖ and his female consort, Shekinah, in Solomon‘s Temple. According to The Da Vinci Code version of the Tetragrammaton, Jehovah is the union of the male god ―Jah‖ with goddess, Havah, their union ―Jehovah‖ being an ancient, androgynous name from which YHWH derived. It was this blasphemy which the medieval Catholic Church condemned as heretical. ―...early Jewish traditions involved ritual sex. In the Temple, no less. Early Jews believed that the Holy of Holies in Solomon‘s Temple housed not only God but also His powerful female equal, Shekinah. Men seeking spiritual wholeness came to the Temple to visit priestesses —or herodules—with whom they made love and experienced the divine through physical union. The Jewish tetragrammaton YHWH—the sacred name of God—in fact derived from Jehovah, an androgynous physical union between the masculine Jah and the pre–Hebraic name for Eve, Havah. ―‗For the early Church,‘ Langdon explained in a soft voice, ‗mankind‘s use of sex to communicate directly with God posed a serious threat to the Catholic power base. It left the Church out of the loop, undermining their self-proclaimed status as the sole conduit to God. For obvious reasons, they worked hard to demonize sex and recast it as a disgusting and sinful act. Other major religions did the same.‘‖ (The Da Vinci Code, Anchor Books, 2006, p. 309) Dan Brown omitted to mention the specific Biblical context of this ―sacred marriage‖ rite that was performed by the elders in the Temple of Solomon. The book of Ezekiel spares the reader explicit details of the base immoralities that accompanied the worship of Tammuz, the Sun god; they are simply called ―abominations‖ and ―perverseness‖ which polluted the Temple and the land of Israel. Note in Ezekiel 8 33
that Tammuz, who was worshipped by the Jewish women, was the Babylonian analogue of Adonis, who represented the Sun which the Jewish elders worshipped by facing toward the east with their backs to the Temple: ―Then said he unto me, Son of man, lift up thine eyes now the way toward the north. So I lifted up mine eyes the way toward the north, and behold northward at the gate of the altar this image of jealousy in the entry. He said furthermore unto me, Son of man, seest thou what they do? even the great abominations that the house of Israel committeth here, that I should go far off from my sanctuary? but turn thee yet again, and thou shalt see greater abominations. Then he brought me to the door of the gate of the LORD's house which was toward the north; and, behold, there sat women weeping for Tammuz. Then said he unto me, Hast thou seen this, O son of man? turn thee yet again, and thou shalt see greater abominations than these. And he brought me into the inner court of the LORD's house, and, behold, at the door of the temple of the LORD, between the porch and the altar, were about five and twenty men, with their backs toward the temple of the LORD, and their faces toward the east; and they worshipped the sun toward the east. Then he said unto me, Hast thou seen this, O son of man? Is it a light thing to the house of Judah that they commit the abominations which they commit here? for they have filled the land with violence, and have returned to provoke me to anger: and, lo, they put the branch to their nose.‖ (Ezekiel 8) These abominations were so vile and offensive that God, in a watershed event, departed from His Temple and turned the kingdom of Judah over to the invading Babylonians. ―And the LORD said unto him, Go through the midst of the city, through the midst of Jerusalem, and set a mark upon the foreheads of the men that sigh and that cry for all the abominations that be done in the midst thereof. And to the others he said in mine hearing, Go ye after him through the city, and smite: let not your eye spare, neither have ye pity: Slay utterly old and young, both maids, and little children, and women: but come not near any man upon whom is the mark; and begin at my sanctuary. Then they began at the ancient men which were before the house. And he said unto them, Defile the house, and fill the courts with the slain: go ye forth. And they went forth, and slew in the city. And it came to pass, while they were slaying them, and I was left, that I fell upon my face, and cried, and said, Ah Lord GOD! wilt thou destroy all the residue of Israel in thy pouring out of thy fury upon Jerusalem? Then said he unto me, The iniquity of the house of Israel and Judah is exceeding great, and the land is full of blood, and the city full of perverseness: for they say, The LORD hath forsaken the earth, and the LORD seeth not. And as for me also, mine eye shall not spare, neither will I have pity, but I will recompense their way upon their head.‖ (Ezekiel 9:4-10) The centrality of the so-called ―sacred marriage‖ in the Jewish Kabbalah is affirmed in the introduction to The Holy Kabbalah by the famous Rosicrucian, A. E. Waite, creator of the popular Rider Waite Tarot Deck, the major Arcana of which is based on the meanings of the Hebrew letters as defined in the Kabbalah. ―To go back to the beginning, Kabbalism dates back into the most obscure past of Judaism. What are the distinguishing ideas of Kabbalism? It is first of all a theory of emanations. (‗degenerative monism‘ it is called philosophically). The inscrutable Godhead fills and contains the universe. To become active and creative, God emanated ten sephiroth or intelligences. A special prominence is given to one of these emanations, who functions as a female principle in the Deity, a demiurge and a term to creation. This is the final emanation, Malkuth the Queen, the physical manifestation of Deity in the universe. She is thought of as a Divine Woman, the Bride of God (like the Shakti of Shiva). Finally, the ‗innermost secrets‘ of the Kabbalah are what are ‗occult‘ in all 34
occultism, erotic mysticism and a group of practices of the sort we call yoga—autonomic nervous-system gymnastics. For the Kabbalist the ultimate sacrament is the sexual act, carefully organized and sustained as the most perfect mystical trance. Over the marriage bed hovers the Shekinah.‖ (A.E. Waite, The Holy Kabbalah, 2003, p. ix) Daniel Matt wrote in his introduction to The Essential Kabbalah that Pico della Mirandola‘s ―science‖ (falsely so-called) of magic and Kabbalah laid the foundation for an entire genre of ―Christian Kabbalistic literature.‖ In his 900 Theses (1486), Pico ―announced that his work was ‗derived from the fundamental ideas of the Hebrew sages, greatly strengthening the Christian religion.‘ The theses contained the daring claim that ‗no science can better convince us of the divinity of Jesus Christ than magic and Cabala.‘ Pico, therefore, claimed that he could prove the dogmas of the Trinity and the Incarnation of Jesus Christ on the basis of Cabalistic axioms.‖ (William Varner, ―The Christian Use of Jewish Numerology,‖ http://www.tms.edu/tmsj/tmsj8c.pdf) Pico‘s promotion of Kabbalah as ―science‖ was the Renaissance version of Gail Riplinger‘s exhortation to study the ―verifiable science‖ and ―the new scientific field of letter meanings.‖ Pico is regarded as the founder of Christian Kabbalah and his 900 Theses on religion, philosophy, natural philosophy and magic became the foundational work for Christian Kabbalistic literature: ―Although Kabbalah emerged within Judaism, and has deeply affected Jewish thought and religious observance, its influence extends far beyond. Italian Renaissance humanist Pico della Mirandola immersed himself in Latin translations of Kabbalah, believing it to be the original divine revelation. Long lost and now finally restored, Kabbalah would enable Europeans to comprehend Pythagoras, Plato, and the secrets of the Catholic faith. Pico claimed that ‗no science can better convince us of the divinity of Jesus Christ than magic and the Kabbalah.‘ His controversial, syncretistic 900 Theses drew heavily on Kabbalah and laid the foundation for Christian kabbalistic literature. Pico‘s follower, Johannes Reuchlin, produced the first systematic work of Christian Kabbalah, De arte cabalistica.‖ (The Essential Kabbalah: The Heart of Jewish Mysticism, HarperCollins, 1996, p. 16) Allision P. Coudert wrote in The Impact of the Kabbalah in the Seventeenth Century that Pico and Reuchlin, like Gail Riplinger, ―considered each letter a hieroglyph, whose shape revealed its meaning.‖ From this Kabbalistic principle the pseudo-Christian Cabalists of the Renaissance proceeded to argue that the Cabalistic way of interpretation, by shapes of letters, rather than the literal meanings of God‘s words, proved Jesus divinity: ―...Pico believed that the Scriptures contained all there is to know, but like them he believed this in an essentially kabbalistic, not Christian, way. Instead of interpreting every Biblical verse according to its literal, allegorical, topological, and anagogic sense, as both Jews and Christians did, he accepted the specifically kabbalistic view of the Bible as a sum of building blocks which could be sorted and shifted to reveal divine mysteries. Pico was aware of the complicated rules for manipulating and permutating Hebrew letters described in the Sefer Yezirah and elaborated into a system by the twelfth century Spanish Kabbalist Abraham Abulafia. Indeed, he uses these rules to great effect if we believe his kabbalistic conclusions, particularly the seventh one: ―No Hebrew Kabbalist can deny that the name Jesus, if we interpret it according to Kabbalist principles and methods, signifies God, the Son of God, and the wisdom of the Father through the divinity of the third person... ―Like Pico, Reuchlin was versed in the kabbalistic rules for permutating words and letters, and he considered each letter a hieroglyph, whose shape revealed its meaning. He was able to make his own great contribution to knowledge by means of the kabbalistic art of letter permutations. He transformed the Tetragrammaton into the Pentagrammaton, the 35
wonder-working word JSHUS, or Jesus.‖ (Allision P. Coudert, The Impact of the Kabbalah in the Seventeenth Century, Brill Academic Publishers, 1999, p. 88) Two centuries before Pico and Reuchlin, the Kabbalists were not so successful in their foxy scheme to infiltrate the henhouse. The ecstatic Kabbalist, Abraham Abulafia, from whom Pico derived his Kabbalistic system, ―came to see himself as playing a messianic role, and he actually attempted to meet with Pope Nicholas III in the summer of 1280, apparently to discuss theological and political questions. The pope condemned him to death by burning, but before the sentence could be carried out, the pope himself died. After a month in prison, Abulafia was released.‖ (Matt, The Essential Kabbalah, p. 12) By 1493, the works of Pico had captivated Pope Sixtus IV who welcomed the Trojan horse – Kabbalah – into the Roman Church. Our report ―Mystery Babylon: Catholic or Jewish?‖ deals at length with the medieval phenomenon of Jewish ―Marranos‖ who converted to Christianity for the sole purpose of infiltrating the Catholic Church, and becoming priests in order to gain access to its hierarchy. An interesting aspect of these conversions was the Jews‘ attraction to ―Christian Kabala‖ which the Church had adopted ―to persuade those to religion who would not accept Scripture alone.‖ (Webb, p. 220) In other words, by introducing ―Christian Kabala‖ to the Church, the Jews could claim to be Christian while bypassing the New Testament which they rejected. Pico‘s disciple, John Reuchlin, who produced the first systematic work of Christian Kabbalah, accommodated the Jewish belief in one God by teaching that the Father (‗YHWH‘) became the Son (‗Yehoshuah‘ or ‗Jesus‘) in the New Testament: ―Reuchlin‘s main contribution was a series of bold speculations on the names of God which ‗proved‘ or illustrated the Incarnation. Human history, Reuchlin argued, divides into three periods. In the first, a natural period, God revealed Himself to the Patriarchs through the three-lettered name of ‗Shaddai‘ (ydv,+s dy). In the period of the Torah, He revealed Himself to Moses through the four-lettered name of the Tetragrammaton (hwhy, yhwh). In the period of redemption He revealed Himself through five letters: the Tetragrammaton with the addition of the letter shin, thus spelling ‗Yehoshuah‘ (hvwhy, yhw+sh) or ‗Jesus.‘ Thus Reuchlin‘s arrangement was able to combine the Jewish belief in three ages (that of the Chaos, that of the Torah, and that of the Messiah) with the tripartite Christian division of a reign of the Father, a reign of the Son, and a reign of the Holy Spirit. Whatever be the merits of Reuchlin‘s interpretations, from his time on, no Christian writer who touched on Cabalism did so without using him as a source. ‗That the Christian Cabala was at all respectable is attributable to the respect in which Reuchlin‘s work was held.‘ ―During the sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries a wave of conversions to Christianity induced by the Cabala took place among the Jews.‖ (William Varner, ―The Christian Use of Jewish Numerology,‖ 1997) The false doctrine that God the Father and God the Son are the same Person effectively eliminates the second Person of the Godhead and this new teaching would accommodate the Jewish rejection of the Triune Godhead based on their misinterpretation of Deut. 6:4: ―Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD.‖ The Kabbalistic version of the Shema, according to Daniel Matt‘s The Kabbalah Unveiled, goes: ―Hear, O Israel, Tetragrammaton our God is Tetragrammaton Unity.‖ THE ELIZABETHAN RENAISSANCE ―The figure of the Renaissance man of learning is not complete if the place of the Magician is forgotten. Ficino was scholar, priest, and magician. Dr. Dee was a mathematician and cryptographer as well as spiritualist. Agrippa and Bruno moved with 36
freedom through the learned centers of Europe.‖ (James Webb, The Occult Underground, p. 222) The revival of Neo-Platonism was transitory, at least in its overt manifestation, as the continent of Europe resisted the occult invasion that threatened Western Christendom. ―But after the turmoil of the transitional period had subsided the Traditions returned to their status as the interest of a tiny minority. They went underground – joined once more the Opposition – because during the crisis of the Renaissance and Reformation, Aristotle and the scientific method had won.‖ (Webb, p. 222) After the Renaissance was suppressed on the Continent, John Dee brought the occult traditions to the royalty of England. According to Frances Yates‘ The Occult Philosophy in the Elizabethan Age, Dee presented himself to Queen Elizabeth as a ―Christian Cabalist,‖ whose predecessors were the infamous Christian Cabalists of the Italian Renaissance. ―The characteristic philosopher of the Elizabethan age was John Dee whose mathematical preface to the English translation of Euclid (1570) begins with an invocation to ‗Divine Plato‘ and quotes Henry Cornelius Agrippa on the three worlds. Dee‘s preface is the work of a Renaissance Neoplatonist organically connected with the Hermetic-Cabalist core of the movement… Dee quotes Pico della Mirandola on number, and follows Pico, Reuchlin and Agrippa in developing intensely the Pythagorean or mathematical side of the movement. His ‗mathematical‘ preface, and his teachings in general, were immensely influential in stimulating the Elizabethan scientific Renaissance. ―As is well known, Dee was not only famous as a mathematician but also famous, or infamous, as a ‗conjuror‘. How did he manage to reconcile his scientific and occult interests with his earnest claim to be a devout Christian and with his support of the Tudor Reformation? I believe that the answer to this question lies in realizing that Dee was a Christian Cabalist, supporting the ‗more powerful‘ philosophy implicit in Neoplatonism as understood by Pico, Reuchlin, Giorgi, Agrippa and as developed in the Renaissance occult tradition. ―It is important to bear in mind the late date of the Elizabethan Renaissance. It begins to flourish at a time when, on the continent, the reaction against Renaissance Neoplatonism and its associated occultisms was growing greatly in intensity as part of the Counter-Reformation effort to apply a restrictive attitude towards Renaissance Neoplatonism. The building up of Queen Elizabeth I as a Neoplatonic heroine by [Edmund] Spenser [viz., The Faerie Queene] was in itself a challenge to the Catholic Counter-Reformation powers and their attitude to Renaissance philosophy.‖ (Yates, The Occult Philosophy in the Elizabethan Age, Routeledge, 1979, pp. 88-9) Following in John Dee‘s footsteps as the Queen‘s conjurer was Francis Bacon who wrote The New Atlantis, a narrative of a ―Christian Cabalist utopia‖ founded on Baconian ―science‖, i.e. Cabala. Yates describes Bacon‘s ‗Christian Cabalist country of Bensalem,‘ over which reigned a King Salomon, obviously in the mold of King Solomon. Francis Bacon was possibly a crypto-Jew, since ―bacon‖ comes from ―pigs‖ for which the pejorative term in Spanish is marrano. The Christian Cabalist utopia of Bensalem, a prototype of America, was very congenial to its Jewish populace for obvious reasons. Yates described the oxymoronic religion of the ―Jew of Bensalem‖ as ―Christian Cabalism.‖ Note that the symbol of Christian Cabalism is a red cross: ―I have argued in The Rosicrucian Enlightenment that Francis Bacon‘s movement for the advancement of learning was closely connected with the German Rosicrucian movement, having a similar mystical and millennial outlook, and continuing in England 37
the movement which, exported to Germany, was to be so disastrously checked in 1620 [by King James I]. I emphasized that Bacon‘s New Atlantis, published in 1627, a year after his death, is full of echoes of the Rosicrucian manifestos, that Bacon is, in fact, defending the Rosicrucian movement and seeing his own movement for the advancement of learning as in continuity with it... ―The ideal state or city which Bacon describes was a Christian Cabalist community. They had the sign of the Cross (a red cross) and the Name of Jesus, but their philosophy was not normal Christian orthodox philosophy, of any persuasion. It was the occult philosophy, half suspected of being magical, really good-angelical, and more powerful than normal philosophies. Yes, certainly more powerful because it is the Baconian science. The program of learning and research set out in half-mythical, halfmystical, form in the New Atlantis is really the Baconian programme for the advancement of learning which finds a congenial setting in what one can now recognize as a Christian Cabalist utopia… ―‗…whereas they [the Jews] hate the name of Christ, and have a secret inbred rancour against the people amongst whom they live; these [i.e. the Jews of Bensalem] give unto our Saviour many high attributes and love the nation Bensalem extremely. ―‗And for the country of Bensalem, this man [the Jew] would make no end of commending it, being desirous by tradition among the Jews there to have it believed that the people thereof were of the generations of Abraham, by another son…and that Moses by a secret cabala ordained the laws of Bensalem which they now use, and that when the Messiah should come, and sit on his throne at Jerusalem, the King of Bensalem should sit at his feet…‘ ―The long discussion about the Jew of Bensalem, and of how though remaining unconverted, he assimilated completely to the country, is of great importance in the sequence of studies in this book. I suggest that the reason why he was able to assimilate with such enthusiasm was because Bensalem was a Christian Cabalist country.‖ (Yates, op. cit., pp. 203-5) Sir Francis Bacon was the President of the Fraternity of the Rose Cross and the founder and first Grand Master of modern English Freemasonry. Mrs. Riplinger favorably quoted leading Rosicrucian Francis Bacon in two places, but failed to mention his name when the occasion demanded it: ―Bacon (1597) said, ‗Some books are to be tasted, others to be swallowed, and some few to be chewed…‘‖ (Awe, p. 43) ―Francis Bacon, a contemporary, described James as ‗a prince the farthest from the appearance of vain-glory that may be, and rather like a prince of the ancient form than of the latter time.‘‖ (Awe, p. 571, citing B. Bevan, King James VI of Scotland & I of England) ―Other KJV Translators:… Contrary to contemporary myths, Shakespeare and Flood [sic Fludd] did not participate.‖ (Awe, p. 613) Gail Riplinger‘s third statement leaves a gaping loophole for Masonic claims that King James I turned over the 1611 Authorized Version to Francis Bacon for final editing. Surely Gail Riplinger is aware of the Masonic attack on the King James Bible which claims ―that the whole scheme of the Authorized Version of the Bible was Francis Bacon‘s.‖ Why then did she exclude William Shakespeare and Robert Fludd as 38
KJV Translators, but not Francis Bacon, the leading Rosicrucian who, according to the following Masonic sources, incorporated Hermetic codes into the King James Bible? ―William T. Smedley writes. ‗It will eventually be proved that the whole scheme of the Authorized Version of the Bible was Francis Bacon’s.‘‖ (Manly P. Hall, The Secret Teachings of All Ages: An Encyclopedic Outline of Masonic, Hermetic, Qabbalistic, & Rosicrucian Symbolical Philosophy, p. clxvi) ―There are some nine or ten theological works by the former and two sermons by the [translators]. Unless the theory of a special divine inspiration for the occasion be admitted, it is clear that neither Bilson nor Miles Smith could have given the final touches to the Bible. And now a curious statement has come down to us. In 1609 the translators handed their work to the King, and in 1610 he returned it to them completed. James was incapable of writing anything to which the term beautiful could be applied. What had happened to the translators' work whilst it was left in his hands? James had an officer of state at that time of whom a contemporary biographer wrote that ‗he had the contrivance of all King James his Designs, until the match with Spain‘ It will eventually be proved that the whole scheme of the Authorised Version of the Bible was Francis Bacon’s.‖ (William T. Smedley, The Mystery of Francis Bacon, ―The Authorized Version of the Bible‖ 1611, Chap. XVII, 1910) ―In England, the chief exponent of ‗Rosicrucian‘ thought was John Dee‘s disciple, Robert Fludd—who along with Frances Bacon, was among the conclave of scholars commissioned by King James to produce an English translation of the Bible...‖ (Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh, Freemasonry: Geometry of the Sacred, pp. 20-22) ―Dee‘s disciple, Robert Fludd, was the chief proponent of Rosicrucianism in England, and Fludd along with Sir Francis Bacon and others were commissioned by King James I...to produce an English translation of the Holy Bible.‖ (Dennis Cuddy, Now is the Dawning of the New Age New World Order, citing Michael Baigent, op. cit.) The same chapter of Gail‘s book which does not rule out Francis Bacon as a Rosicrucian who ―produced‖ the King James Version, also presents the bizarre scenario in which the unpublished manuscripts of the 1611 KJV were given to ―learned men,‖ Bishops, and many other men throughout the kingdom who were allowed to alter the Translators‘ work! She wrote: ―Unlike any English Bible translation, either before or since, the translation was opened to all Christians, according to rules 11, 12, and 13. Men ‗throughout the kingdom,‘ from pastors, to deans, to professors, to learned men to Bishops, to ‗any‘ spiritual plowmen, who ‗have taken pains‘ in their private studies of the scriptures, were asked to study the translation and ‗send such their observations…so that our said intended translation may have the help and furtherance of all…‘ ‗[A]ny…man in the land‘ could review the work. ‗To accomplish this review, each company made and passed copies of its work.‘ ‗Manuscripts were prepared and sent out for the scrutiny‘ of men ‗throughout the kingdom.‘ This participation of all men ‗throughout the kingdom‘ from ‗far and wide‘ is unique. The KJV is the only translation to be screened before its publication by the body of Christ, not just by translators. ‗[T]he Bps. [Bishops] altered very many places that the translators had agreed upon…,‘ noted Dr. Brett of the Old Testament Oxford Committee. Suggestions which ensued from the body of Christ at large from the ‗general circulation‘ were examined and incorporated by the original committee. In December of 1608 King James requested that ‗the translation of the Bible shalbe finished and printed so soone as may be‘ (Coming, p. 4; Bishop Bancroft cited in Alfred Pollard, Records of the English Bible, London: Henry Frowde by Oxford University Press, 1911, pp. 332-333, 53-55 et 39
al.; Translating the New, pp. xxii, lxxxiv, xxiii, xii, xxvii et al.; EB, Bible, English, pp. 902-903 et al.).‖ (In Awe of Thy Word, p. 587) The above quotation from In Awe of Thy Word is a hodgepodge of sentence fragments from ―King James Instructions to the Translators‖ intermingled with portions of statements from various other sources, the titles of which are lumped together at the end to make the citation ambiguous. Using this familiar ploy, Gail has once again managed to misquote her source. Rules 10 through 13 of ―King James‘ Instructions to the Translators of the Bible‖ read as follows: 10. If any Company, upon the Review of the Book so sent, doubt or differ upon any Place, to send them Word thereof; note the Place, and withal send the Reasons, to which if they consent not, the Difference to be compounded at the general Meeting, which is to be of the chief Persons of each Company, at the end of the Work. 11. When any Place of special Obscurity is doubted of, Letters to be directed by Authority, to send to any Learned Man in the Land, for his Judgement of such a Place. 12. Letters to be sent from every Bishop to the rest of his Clergy, admonishing them of this Translation in hand; and to move and charge as many skilful in the Tongues; and having taken pains in that kind, to send his particular Observations to the Company, either at Westminster, Cambridge, or Oxford. 13. The Directors in each Company, to be the Deans of Westminster, and Chester for that Place; and the King's Professors in the Hebrew or Greek in either University. It is important to note that Gail deleted the word ―learned‖ from rule 11 to make King James‘ Instructions state that ―‗[A]ny…man in the land‘ could review the work.‖ Also note that the role of ―any Learned Man in the Land‖ was limited to offering his judgment upon request concerning any ―Place of special obscurity‖ in the translation upon which the Company doubted or differed. Gail also rewrote rule 12, which limited ―every Bishop‖ to sending letters to ―the rest of his Clergy.‖ According to Gail, ―Men ‗throughout the kingdom‘‖ and ―‗any‘ spiritual plowmen, who ‗have taken pains‘ in their private studies of the scriptures, were asked to study the translation and ‗send such their observations …so that our said intended translation may have the help and furtherance of all…‘‖ (Awe, p. 587) Based on her dishonest citation of the King James‘ Instructions to the Translators, Gail proceeded to claim that just about everyone in Great Britain was invited to participate in the translation process: ―This participation of all men ‗throughout the kingdom‘ from ‗far and wide...‘‖ and ―The KJV is the only translation to be screened before its publication by the body of Christ.‖ Why is this an issue? Only ―the clergy‖ received letters from the Bishops, who ―admonished them of this Translation in hand ‖ and ―moved and charged as many skilful in the Tongues; and having taken pains in that kind, to send his particular Observations to the Company, either at Westminster, Cambridge, or Oxford.‖ (Rule 12) Substituting ―learned men‖ of Great Britain in this capacity — men who were consulted solely regarding ―places of special obscurity‖ (Rule 11) — allows for the unthinkable prospect that Francis Bacon and his ―literary secret society‖ of the ―Knights of the Helmet‖ were foremost among those who ―had their hands all over the King James Version,‖ in the inimitable words of David Bay of Cutting Edge Ministries: ―Before we get started in this first article in our journey to discover hidden truth about the 1611 King James Version of the Bible, let us remember our main premise: even though some of the most evil men in world history had their hands on the King James Bible from the inside out, they could not change one bit of the text! Please take a moment to read our original treatise on this most important subject, in our ‘Defending The KJV’ section. ―As we alluded, above, Cutting Edge Ministries is NOT saying that Sir Francis 40
Bacon ‗wrote the KJV‘. We will never say that. Our research indicates that the official KJV scholarship committee completed their work in 1610 and handed the manuscript to King James. The King then promptly gave that manuscript to Sir Francis Bacon, who possessed it for about one year, until 1611, when he handed the manuscript back to the King, who promptly sent it to his official printer. ―Historians have debated why King James felt that Bacon needed this manuscript for one year and what Bacon did with or to the manuscript while he had it for that time. Now, however, we feel confident that Bacon used this time to plan how to coordinate the text with all these symbols – page after page after page!… ―As you continue to understand, these pagan Rosicrucians and Freemasons led by Sir Francis Bacon had their hands all over the original 1611 King James Bible. They took perfectly good text and added page after page after page of Rosicrucian artwork, some of which tells a hidden story, while others are just symbols. These Masonic handshakes are very real and very telling, for they tell the story that Bacon and King James conspired to produce a Rosicrucian masterpiece when they published this Bible. ―Likely, Bacon, James, and the Knights of the Helmet intended that this KJV would be the perfect compliment to the Shakespearean plays in popularizing the new Elizabethan English with the common people. In the opinion of one Masonic author, Bacon and the Knights of the Helmet considered how to popularize this new English amongst the people and concluded that two different tools were required: ―To God be the glory!! He prevented the greatest attack in the modern era on His Word in the English language. Queen Elizabeth I and King James placed the power of the British Throne upon Bacon‘s project to popularize the new Elizabethan English with a Bible which was covered with Satanic symbolism – it was a Bible meant to be a Rosicrucian masterpiece and undoubtedly meant to gradually move the entire population into the ‗Mystic Christianity‘ of Rosicrucianism.‖ (David Bay, ―Defending the KJV,‖ Cutting Edge Ministries) Is Gail Riplinger ―defending the KJV,‖ as David Bay claims to do, all the while she leaves the door wide open for his false allegation that the King James Version was in the hands of Francis Bacon for a full year before its publication?
NOTES: ―...Jehovah...implies, even in its Kabbalistical, esoteric meaning, an androgynous nature, YHVH, or one of a male and female nature. It is simply Adam and Eve, or man and woman blended in one, and as now written and pronounced, is itself a substitute.‖ (Theosophical Glossary, p. 156) The Da Vinci Code also advocates canonization of the Gnostic Gospels which exalt Mary Magdalene as the Goddess and exalt the Mother Goddess as creator of the world by adding to the name of God, YHWH: ―The earliest Christian records...do not match up with the gospels in the Bible... The Gospel of Philip... the Gospel of Mary Magdalene... Jesus suspects He will soon be captured and crucified. So He gives Mary Magdalene instructions on how to carry on His Church after He is gone... According to these unaltered gospels, it was not Peter to whom Christ gave directions with which to establish the Christian Church. It was Mary Magdalene... ‖ (pp. 245-248) 41
―The root YHWH is radical of HWH, he-vau-he, meaning ‗being‘ or ‗life‘ or ‗woman‘ which were interchangeable concepts in the ancient Middle East. These identical letters in Latin are E-V-E: Eve. So the central or inner meaning of the Tetragrammaton is Eve, the Mother of All Living. ―In the Gnostic Gospels this concept also is conveyed. The Wisdom of God, or the Divine Spirit and Mother, is believed the real creator of the world. Allegedly her son, who was called the demiurge, stole his power from his mother and with it created the world. The early Gnostics believed the demiurge was the God which the orthodox Christians adored and not the true God or Supreme Being which they symbolized as Iao. ―The Tetragrammaton had two versions. EHYH, the lesser-known one, comes from Hayya, another one of Eve‘s many names, which designates the Goddess in her special connection to women in childbirth. On Samaritan phylacteries the male and female versions of the Tetragrammaton were intertwined. ―The Hebrew mystics embodied this sacred name of God into the lore of Kabbalism. The ‗ineffable name‘ of God by which all the powers of the universe could be controlled. Further Kabbalistic thought holds that the name YHWH contained all the Forces of Nature, and since some thought it could be divided this was a indication according to Kabbalistic theory that God had lost His Shekina, his feminine part or the Great Mother, who, as believed by mystics, had to return before there would be peace or harmony in the universe.‖ (―Tetragrammaton‖)
WATCH UNTO PRAYER http://watch-unto-prayer.org
42
CHAPTER IV THE BIBLE CODES ―Don‘t just read your Bible – Count It!‖ – David Bay
KJV BIBLE CODES It becomes difficult to dismiss the thought that Gail Riplinger is performing the same function as the ―Christian Kabbalists‖ of the Italian Renaissance and the Rosicrucians of the English Renaissance, who also claimed to be ―Christian Kabbalists.‖ The first lot of false converts posed as enlightened Christians in possession of the key to understanding the hidden truth of Scripture – the Cabala – and they managed to gain the confidence of the Roman Catholic hierarchy with their claims that Kabbalah could be used to prove Christian doctrine. Their hidden agenda, however, was to introduce Kabbalistic methods of interpreting Scripture which could also be used to introduce false doctrines. Gail‘s promotion of Kabbalists and their quest for hidden meanings in the letters of Scripture is conditioning her readers for the false teaching that Francis Bacon and his Rosicrucian brotherhood encrypted secret information in the King James Version. In a 2006 presentation to the Prophecy Club, Gail informed the audience of an exciting discovery by ―mathematical statisticians‖ of Equidistant Letter Sequences (ELS) in Genesis: ―This particular article is called ‗Equidistant Letter Sequences in the Book of Genesis.‘ Several Hebrew scholars took the book of Genesis and using a computer they discovered Equidistant Letter Sequences. They found embedded in the text of the Hebrew Bible the names of people...not people like Moses, but people who lived in the 1900s. It included not only their names but the day they were born, the day they died, and the cities they were born and died in. Now these were in the Hebrew text, not written straight out, but they were equidistant letter sequences. In other words, every third letter would spell their name or every fourth letter. It could be across, down, diagonally, and only a computer could pull all of this information out. The men that they found, the names of the people they found lived in the 5th century, 6th century, 10th century, 19th century.‖ Gail did not mention that the data plugged into the computer were ...―personalities...taken from the Encyclopedia of Great Men in Israel‖ and that the encoding of names and dates of ―great Torah sages‖ [read: Kabbalists] proves the ―divinity of the Torah,‖ which is a fundamental principal of Kabbalah. (See: ―Equidistant Letter Sequences in the Book of Genesis‖ by Doron Witztum, Eliyahu Rips and Yoav Rosenberg, http://cs.anu.edu.au/~bdm/dilugim/Nations/WRR2/) Other promoters of the popular Bible Code phenomenon include Chuck Missler, the author of Cosmic Codes: Hidden Messages, Grant Jeffrey (The Mysterious Hebrew Codes) and other ―Christian‖ Kabbalists who have been cracking the ―Bible Codes‖ which Francis Bacon and his band of the Knights of the Helmet supposedly encrypted in the KJV. David Bay, who sells the books of Missler, Jeffrey and other Kabbalists, advises Christians, ―Don‘t just read your Bible – Count It!‖ This exhortation links to an article on ―Bible Numerics‖ which is a tribute to the work of numerologist, Ivan Panin, whose computations led him to conclude that God did not inspire the Textus Receptus at all but, instead, put his seal of approval on the Greek Text of Westcott and Hort:
43
―Without the aid of Wescott and Hort I could not have really done my work, because the text of the Authorized Version from my point of view – not from the point of view of salvation or doctrine even, but from the textual point of view – the text of the Authorized Version was useless to me, and for this reason: it has too many inaccuracies for my special purpose… ―…Wescott and Hort based all their work largely on the Vatican and Sinai MSS., and decided that wherever the two MSS. agreed, that should generally settle the reading. Well, you know, there has been some doubt cast upon the Sinai MSS., because a very shrewd Greek copied a great many MSS. and tried to foist his own MSS. on the folk, so that has left a cloud on the Sinai MSS., and some people see fit to cast doubt on it even now, when there is the question as to whether the British Government did wisely to take part in its acquisition ... I have analysed the Greek words for the Sinai and Vatican Codexes. I have here page after page of the numerics of those words in Greek. Whenever we wish to study numerics relating to our own affairs or life or anything else, we must always remember that the language in which God wishes us to count is Greek, because He left the name of the anti-christ in Greek. You and I will have to stand the test when anti-christ comes. The Holy Spirit has given us warning. ‗Be sure not to receive this mark of the beast upon you,‘ because it will be the number of the beast upon ourselves. The Holy Spirit warns us that he is 666, that is, in Greek. You and I have to go to numerics in Greek when we wish to prove the correctness of a passage. The three words show striking numerics. There is a system there of sevens and nines at once on the blackboard. I have here page after page of the numerics of those three words. The Sinai Codex has a separate scheme of its own and the Vatican Codex has a separate scheme of its own.‘ ―That is how God has set His seal on His book; so that by the aid of the text presented to us by Wescott and Hort, I was able to verify everything they stated, and verify all the doubtful readings, so that those two great MSS. can be established in such a way that no one can attack their authenticity. This is the testimony of numerics as to any aspersion on the Sinai Codex.‖ (―Bible Numerics Examined‖ – Part II, http://www.cuttingedge.org/NEWS/n1363.cfm) According to one critique of ―Bible Numerics Examined‖, Ivan Panin doctored the Greek Text to arrive at a predetermined conclusion: ―One of the best-known examples of Ivan Panin‘s work concerns the first part of the New Testament, namely the first one or two chapters of the Gospel of Matthew… Ivan Panin was not the only writer to undertake this study. In 1923, R. McCormack published The Heptadic Structure of Scripture (Marshall Brothers), which also showed a great many features of the number 7 in the first two chapters of Matthew… In order to produce these patterns, they modified the text using the many variant readings that appear in old manuscripts. In addition to this deliberate cooking of the data, they presented some of the vast number of features of 7 that appear in any text by pure chance. The only logical conclusion we can draw from this sorry episode is that neither author achieved anything beyond self-delusion.‖ (Brendan McKay, ―In Search of Mathematical Miracles,‖ http://cs.anu.edu.au/~bdm/dilugim/mccormack.html) Even William Varner, a proponent of modern versions, dismissed Ivan Panin‘s ―Bible numerics‖ as meaningless, since numerics, like statistics, can be manipulated to prove whatever theory the numerologist wishes to promote: ―Another writer on ‗numerics‘ popular among some evangelicals is Ivan Panin. Panin‘s elaborate system of ‗Bible Numerics‘ actually attempted to establish the true text of the NT. The real problem with this and all methods of gematria is that one receives
44
from their use just what he puts into them. The possible number of permutations is endless, particularly when dividing numerical totals into factors! For example, consider Panin‘s treatment of Gen 1:1: ―‗The numeric value of the first word of this verse is 913; of the last 296; of the middle, the fourth word, 401; the numeric value of the first, middle and last words is thus 1610, or 230 sevens (Feature 7); the numeric value of the first, middle, and last letters of the 28 letters of this verse is 133, or 19 sevens (Feature 8). If now the first and last letters of each of the seven words in this verse have their numeric value placed against them, we have for their numeric value 1383, or 199 sevens.‘ ―Factoring number totals can prove almost anything. The practice also lends itself to omitting anything that does not fit a particular theory… ―There is no objective basis for controlling this methodology. The interpreter selects his words, and the combinations of numbers that he wishes. In other words 7 might have several combinations (6 + 1, 5 + 2, 4 + 3). How do we know which of these combinations the author intended to bear symbolic implications? This whole system is based on a false premise. There is no proof that the Hebrews of the Old Testament used their alphabet in this manner (i.e., in Gematria). As was pointed out earlier, the Moabite Stone and the Siloam Inscription have their numbers written out. This is the case in all the Old Testament. If we should grant that the Hebrews did use their alphabet in this manner, it has yet to be proven that these two factors (i.e., Gematria and Number Symbolism) are combined in Scripture.‖ (―The Christian Use of Jewish Numerology‖) Panin‘s Bible numerics prove to be a hoax; however, like Westcott and Hort, his New Testament scheme was not in vain, for nearly a century later Christians are turning to Bible codes to ascertain which of the Greek Texts is the inspired Word of God. The average Christian, who knows little or nothing about mathematics or Greek texts, will probably never figure out that these Kabbalists ―cooked the books‖ to promote a hidden agenda. One kabbalistic work by David Lane titled ―The Mystery Religions & the Seven Seals‖ reveals what we believe is the endgame of the Bible code cult. Lane‘s essay begins by crediting the King James Bible to Francis Bacon and the Rosicrucians who encoded ―ancient wisdom‖ within the sacred text. ―By the simple process of changing letters to numbers or numbers to letters both mathematical and written messages can be encoded. Sir Francis Bacon and the initiates who constructed the English language authorized King James Bible formed it as a device to encode the ancient wisdom. It may well be the most intricate such book in history. In addition the division of the bible into books, chapters, verses and words form it into a physical representation of the seven squares called the ‗Seven Spirits of God,‘ and these match the hidden codes in the text…‖ (David Lane, ―The Mystery Religions & the Seven Seals,‖ http://pyramidprophecy.info/mysteryintro.htm) Like David Bay, the author of this piece of blasphemy appeals to Psalm 46 as ―proof‖ of Francis Bacon‘s authorship: ―The author of the KJV, Sir Francis Bacon, used as his cipher signature the numbers 666 and 33. That is why you will find 33 words in the center chapter and shortest chapter of the bible, Psalm 117. Now count 666 chapters backward from the end of the bible (Revelation 22). You will find that the 666th chapter from the end is Psalm 46. Count 46 words from the beginning of the psalm and the word is ‗shake.‘ Exclusive of Bacon's
45
signature word ‗Selah,‘ you will find that the 46th word from the end of the psalm is ‗spear.‘ And that is how we are told that Sir Francis Bacon wrote the works falsely attributed to Shakespeare and that he is responsible for the KJV of the bible… ―Remember that Sir Francis Bacon and other initiates formed the modern English alphabet and thousands of root words, including those used in religion and politics by deliberate design and with complete knowledge. For example, in earlier times Jesus was Yashua and God was Yahweh in the older languages. Jesus and Jesus Christ were Hermetic creations, although in some respects they echo older formulations.‖ According to Gene Gordon writing for the Authors‘ Den, the so-called ―Baconian ciphers‖ are shoddy evidence that Francis Bacon authored, not only the 1611 KJV, but the complete works of Shakespeare and countless other works attributed to famous poets, playwrights and novelists: ―…And, we are asked to believe, Bacon was also author of the 37 ‗Shakespeare‘ plays and 154 Sonnets! Nay, more! Bacon wrote the Authorized Version of the Bible, Burton‘s Anatomy of Melancholy, the plays of Marlowe plus those of more than seven additional dramatists of the time, Montaigne‘s Essays in the original French, the works of Milton, Swift, and even Thomas Carlyle of the 19th century! ―The primary method of proof they teach at the Bacon school is cryptography or ‗secret writing: the enciphering and deciphering of messages in secret code or cipher.‘ The Baconians are like children who cannot go without their game of anagram. Here‘s how it works: in Love‘s Labours Lost there is a so-called nonsense‘ word ‗honorificabilitudinitatibus.‘ Baconians will swear that Sir Francis himself inserted this word, for it forms an anagram revealing that he is the true author. The letters shuffled around give us in Latin ‗hi ludi F. Baconis nati tuiti orbi‘ or ‗these plays born of F. Bacon are preserved for the world.‘ The idea is that Bacon invented this nonsense word so we would decode it and uncover his identity. How foolish and ignorant are the Baconians! The word honorificabilitudinitatibus is a real word, a medieval Latin word, going back to 1055 AD. Dante used that long, long word more than once, and so did other authors of the time. It means ‗the state of being able to achieve honors,‘ a state in which the Baconians are decidedly not to be found. ―Here‘s another hilarious Baconian ‗proof:‘ Look at the Title Page of the First Folio. (SHOW FOLIO) You see the numbers 1623 (the year of publication). Now assign numbers to letters of the alphabet - A equals 1, B equals 2, C equals 3, and so forth. Then the 1 in 1623 becomes A, the 6 becomes F, the 2 becomes B, and the 3 becomes C, yielding AFBC. Now to AFBC we must add the two letters ‗ON‘ from the word LONDON (which also appears on the Title Page). Now we have AFBCON and this gives the cryptic secret signature of Francis Bacon. For don‘t you see, if you shift around the letters AFBCON you get F. BACON! Stunning proof! ―By the way, with a method such as this we can easily ‗prove‘ that Shakespeare wrote the King James Bible. When in 1611 the King James Bible appeared Shakespeare was 46 years of age. The number 46 is crucial. If we take Psalm 46, the 46th word from the beginning is ‗shake‘ and the 46th word from the end is ‗spear‘! ―With such wretched and pitiful tricks and games as these the Baconians ‗prove‘ their case. And they write books 1,000 pages thick (the New York Public Library has 134 books on Baconian cryptography) – books full of obscure and esoteric letters and numbers. Nay, they go beyond that: some use ouija boards and make contact with Bacon‘s spirit at séances.‖ (―The Fat's in the Fire: Shakespeare is Bacon,‖ Author‘s Den, http://www.authorsden.com/categories/article_top.asp?catid=54&id=20367) David Lane then proceeded to dismiss the words of God as meaningless in a literal sense, and meaningful only as a parable encrypted with ancient wisdom:
46
―The bible is in fact a huge Hermetic parable from end to end, and attempts to read it literally will only drive men insane or lead to division into hundreds or even thousands of competing sects, and ultimately religious warfare… ―An initiate in the mysteries, if seeing the bible for the first time, would note immediately the masses of numbers having nothing to do with moral tenets and know that it was hermetic coding, or what Jews call ‗cabalism.‘… By now you should begin to realize that the words of the bible mean virtually nothing unless combined with number and the wisdom of an initiate. The words are filler, not history...‖ (―The Mystery Religions & the Seven Seals‖) The words of God are ―filler,‖ having nothing to do with moral tenets? What would Jesus say about the so-called Torah codes? ―He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men,... And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition... Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.‖ (Mark 7:6-13) JESUS CHRIST ≠ THE ANTICHRIST! Having diverted the reader from the literal interpretation of Scripture – what God actually said – and having convinced him that the ―secret codes‖ contained therein are the ―key‖ to understanding the ―deeper truths‖ of the Bible, Kabbalists are then in unique position to alter the doctrines of Scripture. This they do with astonishing brazenness, and in the process they reveal their true colors as Kabbalist Jews who, like the Pharisees of old, are determined to prove, not only that is Jesus Christ not the Messiah, but that He is the very Antichrist! Compare the blasphemy of the Pharisees with the blasphemy of Kabbalist David Lane: ―And all the people were amazed, and said, Is not this the son of David? But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils.‖ (Matt. 12:23-24) ―When Sir Francis Bacon and others formed the structure of the King James Bible, added letters to and set in order the letters of the English alphabet and formulated the names associated with Christianity in the English language, it was done in conformity to the ancient and sacred number canon… ―In Chapter 1 the number 74 is represented in the words Jesus and God. Shortly we shall see that the holy names are designed to both conceal and accomplish far more than just 74. ―Do not be dismayed by the connection between the number 666 and the holy names through the Sun Square and the number 74. Instead learn to read the authorized version English language King James Bible with the eyes of an adept in the mysteries. The famous verse, Revelation 13:18 reads in part, ‗count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.‘ A Hermetic philosopher would look at that sentence and conclude the following: 1) There are two entities, a man and a beast, both associated with the number 666. 2) Since 666 is stated, there must be something else to count that will in turn relate to 666. 3) Since 666 is one of the seven spirits of God the Creator, and the beast is evil, then the beast must usurp the
47
number of the man… ―Here are Jesus and God in the English language as the names were designed by Sir Francis Bacon and other initiates. JESUS 10 5 19 21 19 = 74 G=7 O = the Sun and Sun Square inside the Zodiac circle D=4 (…) G=7 O = the sun inside the Zodiac D=4 ―The 666 Sun Square contains 9 squares and rectangles whose four corners total 74, as 9 x 74 = 666. Concentric Squares: 6 + 1 + 31 + 36 = 74 11 + 8 + 26 + 29 = 74 16 + 15 + 21 + 22 = 74 Rectangles: 7 + 30 + 12 + 25 = 74 19 + 24 + 13 + 18 = 74 32 + 35 + 2 + 5 = 74 3 + 34 + 4 + 33 = 74 14 + 23 + 17 + 20 = 74 27 + 28 + 9 + 10 = 74 ―The ancient mythology of a Sun God, born at the winter solstice, resurrected near the vernal equinox, worshipped on Sun-day, whose name demonstrates the Kabalistic number canon is a certain sign of a hermetically created Mystery religion. ‗Jesus‘ equals 74. J = 10 E= 5 S = 19 U = 21 S = +19 74 ―‗Just coincidence!‘ cry the believers, as their eyes glaze in irrational denial.‖ (―Mystery Religions & the Seven Seals‖) This gematric feat purports to ‗prove‘ the foundational thesis of Astrotheology – that Jesus Christ was the Sun God – however, it doesn‘t stop there but pushes this blasphemous proclamation one step further and declares that the Christian God, Jesus, is therefore the Antichrist. As we have seen, David Bay heartily endorsed the use of gematria in his tribute to ―Ivan Panin: Russia's Gift to Christianity.‖ Since gematria doesn‘t work with the KJV if the words are ever changed, David had to assure his readership that ―even though some of the most evil men in world history had their hands on the King James Bible from the inside out, they could not change one bit of the text!‖ This also explains
48
why Gail Riplinger admonishes her readers that not even one word or syllable or even a letter of the King James Bible may ever be changed lest ―grave consequences‖ ensue. ―Since the words of the historic English Bible are the source for letter meanings, the Holy Bible cannot be changed or replaced. Moving from its words removes readers from the key to understanding their own language… ―No word can be changed in the Holy Bible without grave consequences to its order. If the meaningless ‗hairs of your head are all numbered,‘ how much more would he number each pen stroke of ‗one jot or one tittle‘ in his word (Matt. 5:18 and 10:30). (In Awe of Thy Word, p. 108-9) To reinforce her solemn warning that not a word of the King James Version may be changed, Riplinger attaches a short list of coincidental ―11s‖ and ―22s‖ found in the KJV – a list which reveals her talent for occult numerology. ―No word can be changed in the Holy Bible without grave consequences to its order. If the meaningless ‗hairs of your head are all numbered,‘ how much more would he number each pen stroke of ‗one jot or one tittle‘ in his word (Matt. 5:18 and 10:30).
The Old Testament‘s Hebrew alphabet has 22 letters…represented in the Old Testament by the 22 bowls which held the oil to light the testimony where God would ‗commune‘ with man (Exod. 25:22 et al.). The New Testament‘s 22 letters, called epistles, reflect this. The word ‗letter‘ (or ‗letters‘) occurs 22 times (11 times each) in the KJV New Testament (NIV 35, NKJV 21) God‘s letters ‗Alpha and Omega‘ are seen in Rev. 1:11; the ark of the testimony, with God‘s letters, is revealed again in Rev. 11. Language and its letters were confounded, as recorded in Genesis 11. We are forbidden to ‗take away from the words of the book,‘ as seen in Rev. 22. ‗Doth not the ear try words? Job 12:11 ‗[I]t shall talk with thee.‘ Prov. 6:22 ―Erasmus said, ‗God is in every syllable.‘ (The Bible Through the Ages, p. 306) ―(Similar ordered phenomena are discussed elsewhere in the book, e.g. chapter 10 and p. 332)‖ (In Awe of Thy Word, p. 109)
Riplinger‘s emphasis on the numbers 11 and 22 is revealing, for they are ―Master numbers‖ in ―cabalistic studies,‖ according to The Templar Revelation: Secret Guardians of the True Identity of Christ by Lynn Picknett and Clive Prince: ―There is a good reason for the emphasis on eleven and twenty-twos: these numbers are both ‗Master numbers‘ in the occult. They are particularly significant in cabalistic studies.‖ (Lynn Picknett and Clive Prince, The Templar Revelation: Secret Guardians of the True Identity of Christ, Touchstone, 1998, p. 203)
49
Aleister Crowley wrote in his Book of the Law, channeled by his Holy Guardian Angel Aiwass, that the angels (demons) have numbers: ―My number is 11, as all their numbers who are of us.‖ (Book of the Law, http://www.sacred-texts.com/oto/engccxx.htm) Kenneth Grant, the current Grand Master of Aleister Crowley‘s outfit, the Ordo Templis Orientalis (OTO), explained that ―11‖ is the number of a most important Sephiroth on the Kabbalistic Tree of Life: ―…eleven is the number of Magick and of the sephirah on the Tree of Life, called Daath, which is the ‗Gateway‘ to the backside of the Tree and to the Gods...‖ (―Kenneth Grant and the Merovingian Mythos,‖ Vadge Moore: http://www.redicecreations.com/specialreports/2005/12dec/merovingianmythos.html) In the nineteenth century, William Wynn Westcott co-founded the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn with S. L. MacGregor Mathers. Westcott translated the Hebrew text, the Sephir Yetsirah, the most famous of the ancient Kabalistic texts, to use as a primary source for the rituals and lectures of the Golden Dawn. The Sephir Yetsirah is the oldest Rabbinical treatise of Kabalistic philosophy on the alphabetic and numeric processes involved in the origin of the universe and mankind. According to the Kabbalist Rabbis, ―Jehovah‖ converted the 22 letters of the Hebrew alphabet into sounds which created all things and then revealed the mysteries of the 22 letters to the patriarch, Abraham, who wrote the Sephir Yetsirah. ―Section 1. In thirty-two (1) mysterious Paths of Wisdom did Jah, (2) the Jehovah of hosts, (3) the God of Israel, (4) the Living Elohim, (5) the King of ages, the merciful and gracious God, (6) the Exalted One, the Dweller in eternity, most high and holy—engrave his name by the three Sepharim (7)—Numbers, Letters, and Sounds.(8) ―2. Ten are the ineffable Sephiroth. (9) Twenty-two are the Letters, the Foundation of all things; there are Three Mothers, Seven Double and Twelve (10) Simple letters... ―10. The second: God produces air from this spirit and converts it into 22 sounds, the letters of the alphabet... But even above these does the spirit stand in value. ―JHVH, through the 32 paths, inscribed his name using the 3 forms of expression called letters, numbers and sound. There are 10 sacred Sephiroth. The foundation of things are the 22 letters. Of these, three are mothers; seven double and twelve simple are the remainder. but the Spirit is first and above these.‖ CHAPTER II ―Section 1. The twenty-two sounds and letters are the Foundation of all things. Three mothers, seven doubles and twelve simples. The Three Mothers are Aleph, Mem and Shin, they are Air, Water and Fire Water is silent, Fire is sibilant, and Air derived from the Spirit is as the tongue of a balance standing between these
50
contraries which are in equilibrium, reconciling and mediating between them. ―2. He hath formed, weighed, and composed with these twenty-two letters every created thing, and the form of everything which shall hereafter be... ―5. For He shewed the combination of these letters, each with the other; Aleph with all, and all with Aleph; Beth with all, and all with Beth. Thus in combining all together in pairs are produced the two hundred and thirty-one gates of knowledge. (32) ―6. And from the non-existent (33) He made Something; and all forms of speech and everything that has been produced; from the empty void He made the material world, and from the inert earth He brought forth everything that hath life. He hewed, as it were, vast columns out of the intangible air, and by the power of His Name made every creature and everything that is; and the production of all things from the twenty-two letters is the proof that they are all but parts of one living body. (34)‖ CHAPTER VI 4. And after that our father Abraham had perceived and understood, and had taken down and engraved all these things, the Lord most high (55) revealed Himself, and called him His beloved, and made a Covenant with him and his seed; and Abraham believed on Him (56) and it was imputed unto him for righteousness. And He made this Covenant as between the ten toes of the feet--this is that of circumcision; and as between the ten fingers of the hands and this is that of the tongue. (57) And He formed the twenty-two letters into speech (58) and shewed him all the mysteries of them. (59) He drew them through the Waters; He burned them in the Fire; He vibrated them in the Air; Seven planets in the heavens, and Twelve celestial constellations of the stars of the Zodiac. Riplinger‘s warning lest anyone ―take away from the words of the book‖ (she means the KJV, not the Textus Receptus) is also found in Kabbalistic writings: ―The geometric configurations and mathematical formulae concealed within the seven spirits/seals are almost infinite, and the King James Bible forms through code wheels and gematria a physical representation of the seven figures. Thus again, there is a Hermetic meaning for John 1:1, God is the Word. A reason for the admonition at the end of Revelation to not add or subtract from this book of prophecy, is because addition and subtraction are mathematical functions. We are told to not alter, not change, not edit, not modify, not switch, not substitute, not transpose or any other such possibilities.‖ (―The Mystery Religions and the Seven Seals‖) The reason Kabbalists forbid revising the text of the King James Version is that any changes would mess up the Hermetic codes which (they believe) reveal the ancient wisdom. Is retaining the ―Bible codes‖ in the KJV—which will be used by Jewish and ―Christian‖ Kabbalists to blaspheme Jesus Christ—the hidden agenda of David Bay and Gail Riplinger?
51
MESSIANIC JUDAISM Resorting to Kabbalah to prove Christian doctrine has become popular in the Messianic Jewish movement, so popular that some Messianics have converted to Judaism! Exposing this Kabbalistic trend in Messianic Judaism is Brian Barham of TorahofMessiah.com: ―An example of the Christianized use of Kabbalah by a growing number of Messianics is seen in these brief quotes from the Teshuvah Gate Website prior to the owner of the site converting to Judaism (more on that later): ‗We believe Moshiakh ben Yoseph has come in the person of Yahshua the Nazarene. Yahshua is the visible image and full spiritual embodiment of the Attributes (Sefirot) of the invisible Eternal (Ein Sof). Yahshua is the 'Living Torah'‘and thus is divine, as the Torah is divine. Moshiakh was with YHVH 'in the beginning;‘ he is the blueprint of creation, all things being created through him. We believe Yahshua came fully in the flesh.‘ ‗The Moshiakh is a ‗part‘ of Elohim. There are many ways of looking at this, but we believe (at least here he implicitly admits it‘s THEIR OWN FLAVOR of Kabbalah) that ‗the Godhead‘ -- Ein Sof - is made up of many parts (sefirot). Among these are the three pillars, Father, Mother/Spirit and in the middle the Son/Messiah. This is the understanding using Kabbalah, where the middle pillar, Son/Moshiakh is the combination of the attributes of the Father and Mother/Spirit, and is the one which reaches down and deals directly with the earth and humanity.‘‖ (―Kabbalah Mysticism The New and Improved Ejection Button of the Desperate,‖ http://torahofmessiah.com/kabbala.html) Note that, in the Kabbalistic version of the Godhead, the Holy Spirit is female. However, Brian Barham objects to Messianic Judaism‘s use of Kabbalah, not because it introduces a female deity, but because it is used to support the deity of Jesus Christ. Barham promotes the Mosaic Law as ―traditional Christianity,‖ whose messiah, Yahshua, is not God but a Jewish theologian. According to Mr. Barham, the decisive issue of our day is the deity of the Messiah, which he denies as a false teaching and a concession to ―Constantinian Christianity.‖ In Mr. Barham‘s words, the doctrine of the ―deity of Yahshua‖ was introduced by the Emperor Constantine and constitutes ―THE primary teaching of the Beast,‖ a reference to the Antichrist. His conclusion: ―the false man-God promoted through the Traditional Christian Trinity‖ is an antichrist! ―I also want to emphasize that my rebuke of certain sites mentioned in this article, as well as the majority of ‗Messianic‘ teachers, is specific to ONLY their misuse of Kabbalah in their promoting of Yahshua as ‗God‘. ...unfortunately, the deity issue is unparalleled in importance, a ‗show stopper‘; therefore, by promoting their Kabbalistic Trinity many Messianic sites frustrate - or even negate - the efforts of others like myself that are attempting to break down the barrier of false teachings that have prevented physical Israel (the Jews) from embracing their Messiah. The largest boulder of that barrier is the false teaching that Yahshua is God (or Ein Sof or among the Ten Sefirot). Frankly, I endorse the rejection by the Jews of the false man-God promoted through the Traditional Christian Trinity or the Christianized Messianic deformations of the Kabbalistic Ein Sof and am constantly struggling to prove to open minded Jews that such is NOT the Messiah presented in Scripture. I openly reject the false Messiah (antichrist) of Christianity and counterfeit Messianic Judaism as I struggle to explain the True Yahshua to Jews, all the while seeing my efforts destroyed by hordes of false
52
Messianics, following the lead of their Traditional Christian mother, that attempt to get the Jews to accept the same old lie dressed in new ‗Messianic Kabbalah‘ trappings... ―Sadly, most Messianics stubbornly hold to many of the standard teachings of their mother, Constantinian Christianity, including the deity of Yahshua (THE primary teaching of the Beast) which continues, as it has for 1700 years, to prevent Jews from ever taking Yahshua seriously.... ―Kabbalah, when properly applied, proves Yahshua is NOT God.‖ (―Kabbalah Mysticism‖) It is not surprising that, given their immersion in Jewish culture and traditions, some Messianic Jews are now dabbling in Kabbalah and returning to their true ―Hebrew Roots.‖ We expect that conversions to Judaism will become the trend, even among Gentile Christians who have succumbed to the Judaizers which are planted everywhere in the churches and on the Internet. On the vanguard of the apostasy of the Church into Judaism is John Hagee, Word of Faith mega-pastor, founder of Christians United for Israel, and agent of B‘nai B‘rith: ―So [Hagee] is invited to the annual conference of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, and is greeted there with rapturous applause. He is given the ‗Humanitarian of the Year‘ award by the San Antonio B‘nai B‘rith Council. He is honored with the Zionist Organization of America‘s ‗Israel Award.‘ In the two years since its birth, CUFI has sponsored 75 times, in cities all across America, a ‗Night to Honor Israel,‘ most if not all including participation by local rabbis and Jewish federation executives.‖ (Israel News, 5/19/2008) In his recent book, In Defense of Israel, John Hagee proclaimed that Jesus Christ was not the Jews‘ Messiah but only the Savior of the Gentiles: ―The Holy Spirit of God announced through a Jewish prophet, Simeon, that the sovereign purpose for Jesus‘s life was to be a light to the Gentiles...‖ (p. 133) ―That‘s why the Great Commission commanded, ‗Go ye [Jews] into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature...‘ Gentiles were considered creatures. Jesus even referred to the Gentiles as dogs. The message of the gospel was from Israel, not to Israel!‖ (p. 134) ―If there is not one verse of Scripture in the New Testament that says Jesus came to be the Messiah... And if Jesus refused by his words or actions to claim to be the Messiah to the Jews, then how can the Jews be blamed for rejecting what was never offered?‖ (p. 136) ―If God intended for Jesus to be the Messiah of Israel, why didn‘t he authorize Jesus to use supernatural signs to prove he was God‘s Messiah, just as Moses had done?‖ (p. 137) ―Jesus refused to produce a sign for the national leadership of Israel in an attempt to prove he was the Messiah because it was not the Father‘s will, nor his, to be Messiah. Jesus's repeated response to the Jewish people who urged him to be their Messiah was, ‗My kingdom is not of this world‘ (John 18:36)‖ (p. 138) ―If Jesus wanted to be Messiah, why did he repeatedly tell his disciples and followers to ‗tell no one‘ about his supernatural accomplishments?‖ (p. 139) ―The Jews were not rejecting Jesus as Messiah; it was Jesus who was refusing to be the Messiah to the Jews.‖ (p. 140)
53
―They wanted him to be their Messiah, but he flatly refused.‖ (p. 141) ―He refused to be their Messiah, choosing instead to be the Savior of the world.‖ (p. 143) ―Jesus rejected to the last detail the role of Messiah in word or deed. The Jews did not reject Jesus as Messiah; it was Jesus who rejected the Jewish desire for him to be their Messiah.‖ (p. 145) *** ―Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: but he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.‖ (1 John 2:22-23) Hagee‘s real reason for rejecting Jesus as the Jews‘ Messiah is his virulent hatred for Christianity and even for Jesus Christ Himself. ―It is time for Christians everywhere to recognize that the nation of Israel will never convert to Christianity and join the Baptist church in their town... the idea that the Jews of the world are going to convert and storm the doors of Christian churches is a myth. After two thousand years of a loveless, godless, anti-Semitic Christianity that has saturated the soil of the earth with their blood in the Crusades, the Inquisition, and the Holocaust, they are not about to convert. After two thousand years of an anti-Semitic replacement theology that says ‗The Church is the real Israel,‘ thus denying the Jews their rightful place in the economy of God, they are not about to convert. ―Where is the Christianity that says, ‗Love thy neighbor as thyself‘? where is the Christianity that says, ‗Love does its neighbor no ill‘? Where is the Christianity that follows the admonition of Christ to ‗love one another as I have loved you‘? It is not Jews and Judaism who have lost credibility; it is a loveless Christianity that has lost credibility. The Jews ask, ‗Was Jesus a false messiah?‘ No one can be the true Messiah whose followers feel compelled to hate, murder, rob, and rape for two thousand years and then brazenly proclaim, ‗We are the people of God.‘ (p. 148) Hagee denies that Jesus is the ‗true Messiah‘ on the basis of the blood shed by the Crusaders, the Roman Catholic Inquisitors and the Nazis. However, previous Watch Unto Prayer reports document that the Crusaders were the Knights Templars who were Merovingian Jews, that they infiltrated the Roman Church in order to pervert and demonize Christianity and their agenda was to use the Church to regain the Holy Land by force...and then to blame all of the bloodshed on the Christians. As for the Holocaust, the Nazi persecution of non-Zionist Jews was financed by none other than the Jewish House of Rothschild, whose offspring was the partly Jewish Adolf Hitler. (See: ―The Merovingian Conspiracy‖ and ―The Zionist Conspiracy,‖ http://watch-unto-prayer.org) John Hagee misrepresents Christianity as anti-Semitic and Jesus Christ as the anti-Christ because (says he) false teachers in the Church have taught ―replacement theology,‖ which means that God is finished with the Jews and the Church has replaced them as God‘s chosen people. We respond that this false teaching does not represent the teaching of Jesus in the New Testament, which does not teach replacement theology but ―dispensational theology,‖ i.e., that God has blinded the Jews due to their rejection of Jesus Christ until the times of the Gentiles (the dispensation of Grace) are fulfilled. At this time He will return to His covenant with the Jews (dispensation of the Law) and resume his dealings with Israel during the Tribulation Period, which is the seventieth week of Daniel.
54
―What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear;) unto this day. And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompence unto them: Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway... For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.‖ (Rom. 11:710, 25) ―Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy. Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.‖ (Dan. 9:24-27) As a result of their spiritual blindness, the Old and New Testaments are presently closed books to the vast majority of Jews. Since they cannot understand God‘s Word, they must rely on their intellects, which generate endless speculations having no basis in reality. Remarking on the heresies of the early Gnostics, most of whom were Jews, Irenaeus of Lyons wrote, ―Every day every one of them invents something new, and none of them is considered perfect unless he is productive in this way.‖ Modern Kabbalist Rabbi Ouaknin described the Kabbalists‘ freewheeling approach to God‘s Word to come up with an infinite number of man-centered interpretations: ―The Text-God must be accorded its status of infinity; in other words, every means must be used to give it an infinite meaning... The need to interpret the text as the liberation of the divine is one of the fundamental meanings of all the work of kabbalists and Talmudists... ―Reading is unknotting, unraveling, deconstructing the set of predeterminations and prior enclosures of the world. When reading unknots, unravels, when it opens up the mind to a different perspective of the text, when interpreting a text means not attaching a meaning to it but attempting to evaluate how many meanings it has, what its dynamic is—that is truth! ―The text of the Revelation explodes through the effect of interpretation. It is what we call ‗reading in bursts.‘ The masters of the Talmud and the Kabbalah emphasize one fundamental idea: that the Jewish people are not the ‗People of the Book‘ but the ‗People of the Interpretation of the Book,‘ to use a formula favored by Armand Abecassis. Unlike Descartes, the Talmudist and kabbalist do not say, ‗I think, therefore I am,‘ but ‗I read, I interpret, I think, I criticize, I oppose, I listen, I write, I question, I reply, I quote, I tell, I name, I discuss, I interpolate, I pray, I think, I learn, I teach, I live, therefore I am.‘‖ (Mysteries of the Kabbalah, pp. 382-83) BROKEN CISTERNS
55
The spiritual blindness of the Jews explains their desperation to reinterpret God‘s Word speculatively using the unconventional methods of applying mathematical and linguistic manipulations, which may seem erudite but are intellectually and spiritually bankrupt. Through the warnings of the prophet Jeremiah, the Lord expressed his profound grief that His people preferred the empty Babylonian mystery religion to the God who had so abundantly blessed them: ―Hath a nation changed their gods, which are yet no gods? but my people have changed their glory for that which doth not profit. Be astonished, O ye heavens, at this, and be horribly afraid, be ye very desolate, saith the LORD. For my people have committed two evils; they have forsaken me the fountain of living waters, and hewed them out cisterns, broken cisterns, that can hold no water.‖ (Jer. 2:11-13) Today, the Kabbalah is no longer reserved for a few, elderly Jewish sages but instead this radically speculative approach to God‘s Word is being taught to the masses of Jews and Gentiles alike through books such as Rabbi Ouaknin's Mysteries of the Kabbalah, Margaret Magnus‘ Gods of the Word and, sadly, Gail Riplinger‘s In Awe of Thy Word. Should Christians follow these blind guides who have forsaken the fountains of living water – the living Word of God, the Greek Received Text, once delivered to the saints – for the empty cisterns of letter meanings and numerical codes? The KJV Translators warned their readers against this very apostasy of falling into the error of the Jews: ―Many other things we might give thee warning of (gentle Reader) if we had not exceeded the measure of a Preface already. It remaineth, that we commend thee to God, and to the Spirit of his grace, which is able to build further than we can ask or think. He removeth the scales from our eyes, the vail from our hearts, opening our wits that we may understand his word, enlarging our hearts, yea correcting our affections, that we may love it to the end. Ye are brought unto fountains of living water which ye digged not; do not cast earth into them with the Philistines, neither prefer broken pits before them with the wicked Jews. [Gen 26:15. Jer 2:13.]‖ (―The Translators to the Reader‖) The error of Gnosticism in all of its expressions throughout the Church Age seems to be the subject of 1 Timothy 6:20: ―O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called. Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.‖ (1 Tim. 6:20-21) In the Textus Receptus, the Greek word for ―science‖ in 1 Tim. 6:20 is ―gnosis‖ which literally means ―knowledge.‖ (Strong‘s #1108) The Translators chose to translate gnosis as knowledge in 28 other places in the New Testament, but for some reason, they chose to translate it science in this single verse. Their choice of translation options suggests they may have had in mind the Gnosticism of the Rosicrucians, which incorporated the Baconian pseudo-science of Kabbalah, i.e., using the letters of the alphabet to encrypt codes in Scripture. Gail Riplinger has attempted to palm off this Gnostic tradition as the ―science of linguistics‖ in order to conceal its true source in Jewish occultism. Nowhere in their Preface or in the King James Version did the 1611 Translators even intimate that numbers should be assigned to letters or that letter meanings should be deciphered in order to understand God‘s words. 2 Timothy 2:15 calls the proper study of Scripture ―rightly dividing the word of truth,‖ not the letters of truth: ―Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.‖ (2 Tim. 2:15-16)
56
If Mrs. Riplinger had consulted Greek and Hebrew resources instead of Kabbalist sources, she may not have fallen into the broken cisterns of the wicked Jews. Meticulous attention to the Hebrew and Greek texts protects against error, however, leaning on one‘s own understanding (private interpretations) leads to heresy. The Translators of the 1611 KJV expressed the conviction that they must anchor their translation in the objective definitions of the Greek and Hebrew words which God inspired the holy prophets and apostles to write. Therefore, as textual scholars, they were careful to use ―as great helps as were needful‖— unlike Origen, who strayed into Gnosticism because he was ―destitute of former helps.‖ ―…neither, to be short, were we the first that fell in hand with translating the Scripture into English, and consequently destitute of former helps, as it is written of Origen, that he was the first in a manner, that put his hand to write Commentaries upon the Scriptures, [Sophoc. in Elect.] and therefore no marvel, if he overshot himself many times… Neither did we think much to consult the Translators or Commentators, Chaldee, Hebrew, Syrian, Greek or Latin, no nor the Spanish, French, Italian, or Dutch;…having and using as great helps as were needful.‖ (Translators‘ Preface)
WATCH UNTO PRAYER http://watch-unto-prayer.org
57
SECTION II FEAR & LOATHING OF GREEK RESOURCES CHAPTER V NO GREEK RESOURCES! ―There existed a true original Greek (i.e. Majority Text, Textus Receptus). It is not in print and never will be because it is unnecessary. No one on the planet speaks first century Koine Greek, so God is finished with it. He needs no ‗Dead Bible Society‘ to translate it into ‗everyday English‘…‖ (G.A. Riplinger, In Awe of Thy Word, p. 956) "It must be remembered that even the 5200 existing handwritten Greek manuscripts were the product of the Greek Orthodox Church. Its membership has never been made up of true believers. Unbelievers, Greek speaking or otherwise, cannot discern spiritual things." (G.A. Riplinger, In Awe of Thy Word, p. 955)
In stark contrast to the praise Gail Riplinger lavishes on the works of Jewish Kabbalists (whom she never identifies as such) is her unreserved contempt for all Christian Bible study resources, including the Greek Textus Receptus. Gail Riplinger‘s position on the Textus Receptus is that it retains no textual superiority over the King James Version and is irrelevant to the Christian Church today. To permanently sever students of God‘s word from the Greek New Testament and traditional Bible tools that will help them understand the objective meanings of the words in Scripture, Riplinger is merciless in her assault on Greek and Hebrew resources. One line of attack is to rank Greek interlinears, lexicons and concordances among the vilest books ever published, along with smut and sleazy novels. ―Many...translation theories have been developed in the dark rooms of writers‘ minds, as is pornography. What is there has some truth, but the picture has been ‗doctored.‘ And it‘s not for believers. Someone else‘s wife or the Bible of another culture and another time, seen through the eyes of doctored study aids, will leave patrons NIV positive very quickly. The little wife (and the ‗little book‘) will never look quite ‗right‘ again. Yet the simple spouse (and the simple scriptures) are what God has provided, just as he gave a Koine Greek New Testament to the early Greeks. One is not better than the other. Each has a purpose and an audience. When a man wants to find a ‗pure‘ Christian wife, he prays one might come to the church picnic. He does not tiptoe through the trollops and pick one in a bar. (Prov. 30:5) Greek reference works require much tiptoeing through corrupt Greek texts, lexical data and just plain private interpretation. Just as abhorrent as the suggestion of going to a bar to find a Christian wife, is the suggestion that one should go to a polluted reference work to ‗find‘ a match for a word in the KJV.‖ (Awe, p. 499, emphasis in original) We should add than when one wants to obtain a doctorate one should fulfill the Ph.D. requirements at an accredited university rather than receive an ―honorary doctorate‖ from a charlatan whose spiritual fruit was gross immorality and heresy. For Gail Riplinger‘s profile includes the odd statement, ―New Age Bible 58
Versions was an international best seller and for it the author was honored with a Doctorate from the world‘s largest church of its kind.‖ (Awe, p. 1178) Gail does not identify the church which conferred the honorary doctorate on her, however, this information is available on the Internet. ―Dr. Jack Hyles (born 9/25/26) pastored the First Baptist Church in Hammond, Indiana (FBCH) from 1959 until his death on February 6, 2001, overseeing its growth from 700 (attendance) to over 20,000 (membership claimed at over 100,000). (The ‗Dr.‘ is for a purely honorary degree from the Pontiac, Michigan, Midwestern Bible College, a Hyles‘-‗protégé‘ school.) He was also founder and chancellor of Hyles-Anderson College... ―Hyles had also become known for his alleged immorality, specifically his behavior with his secretary (the wife of a deacon in the church), and for his explicit sexual references from the pulpit, in counseling, and through FBCH‘s schools (grade school, high school, and HylesAnderson Bible College)... (The Biblical Evangelist, 5/1/89). Hyles‘ reported love affair with his secretary (allegedly begun in 1969), the wife of a deacon at FBCH, is well documented... See ‗Sin in the Camp‘ report for more details... ―Besides Hyles own church and schools being scandalized with immorality and pedophilic activity (numerous FBCH men have been charged or convicted of child molestation), Hyles spawned a number of ‗ministries‘ (there are approximately 200 independent Baptist churches nationwide that hold Hyles and his teachings in high regard) that have been scandalized in the same manner. For example, seven Hyles-affiliated churches from 1984-1993 were rocked by child molestation scandals (San Diego; North Sharon, MI; Petersburg, VA; Anniston, AL; Monroe, LA; Beaumont, TX; and Hyles own church in Hammond). From 5/16/93-5/20/93, Detroit television station WJBK-TV aired a five-part exposé on Hyles and various associated ministries... In the years since the WJBK-TV exposé, other criminal sexual misconduct scandals involving current or former Hyles-trained/-employed men have come to light... ―Hyles was a staunch member of the KJV-Onlyism cult... At Hyles‘ Pastor‘s Conference in 3/96, Mrs. Gail Riplinger (author of New Age Bible Versions) was awarded a ‗Sword‘ and an ‗Honorary Doctorate‘ from Hyles-Anderson College. Hyles, clowning around as was his custom, said he was ready to ‗ordain‘ Riplinger to preach. He referred to Riplinger‘s book as a ‗masterpiece,‘ but shortly thereafter said he had read the book but ‗did not understand it.‘ This might explain how he could endorse a book when its author denies the doctrine of the Eternal Sonship of Christ, the same doctrine believed by the KJV translators. (Reported in the 7/29/96, Christian News, p. 21.)...‖ (Jack Hyles (1926-2001), Biblical Discernment Ministries, http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/exposes/hyles/general.htm) Not only did Jack Hyles have a 20-year affair with his secretary and covered up what appears to have been a pedophile ring in his network of Fundamental Baptist churches, he tolerated all manner of sin, including homosexuality, at Hyles-Anderson College. For more information, read ―The Saddest Story We Ever Published!‖ in The Biblical Evangelist. Gail Riplinger has also been divorced twice after her professed conversion, and is currently married to her third husband. Public records of her multiple marriages and divorces are available at: http://www.avpublications.org/ 59
Gail Riplinger's Three Marriage References (listed in descending order, with most recent marriage first): Marriage Record - 3 - Marriage Certificate #59311, Summit County, Ohio Probate Court, 1984; Gail Anne Riplinger Marriage Record - 2 - Marriage Certificate #45789, Portage County, Ohio Probate Court, 1976; Gail Anne Kaleda Marriage Record - 1 - Marriage Certificate #61989, Trumbull County, Ohio Probate Court, 1969; Gail Anne Latessa Her name before marriages: Gail Anne Ludwig View All Three of Gail Riplinger's Marriage Records (listed in descending order, with most recent marriage first): Gail Riplinger Marriage – 3 (shows Gail was previously married twice) http://www.avpublications.org/records/gail-riplinger-marriage-3.pdf Gail Riplinger Marriage - 2 a http://www.avpublications.org/records/gail-riplinger-marriage-2a.pdf Gail Riplinger Marriage - 2 b http://www.avpublications.org/records/gail-riplinger-marriage-2b.pdf Gail Riplinger Marriage - 1 http://www.avpublications.org/records/gail-riplinger-marriage-1.pdf We have to wonder how Gail Riplinger defines ―adultery‖ and ―pornography‖ when she separates from Greek resources and those who use them, but she is on her third husband and fellowships with adulterous ministers like Jack Hyles and Peter Ruckman. God‘s definition of adultery is clear: ―And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery.‖ (Mark 10:12) Since receiving her honorary doctorate from ―the world‘s largest church of its kind,‖ Dr. Riplinger has announced that God is finished with the Greek New Testament as well as Hebrew and Greek reference works, since they are ―dead works based on dead languages‖: ―There existed a true original Greek (i.e. Majority Text, Textus Receptus). It is not in print and never will be because it is unnecessary. No one on the planet speaks first century Koine Greek, so God is finished with it. He needs no ‗Dead Bible Society‘ to translate it into ‗everyday English‘…‖ (Awe, p. 956) ―Like blind skeptics who are still digging for the bones of our resurrected Saviour, some believers are still digging into Greek graveyards for the word, ‗which liveth.‘‖ (Awe, p. 32) ―The current practice of transferring the Holy Bible‘s authority to ‗private‘ interpretations in pagan Greek lexicons is proven to have no precedence in history.‖ (Awe, p. 37) 60
―The Holy Ghost‘s teaching tool, the Bible, is ‗spirit,‘ because it is the breath of God, not the words of man. Christians are not to compare ‗spiritual things‘ (the words of God in the Bible) with the words of men, in lexicons, -- the ‗words which man‘s wisdom teacheth.‘ Only forbidden ‗private interpretation‘ can be drawn from dipping one‘s nose deeply into corrupt lexicons, dictionaries, and commentaries by worldly wise men, like Strong, Vine, and Zodhiates (2 Peter 1:19, 20).‖(Awe, p. 141) ―Study of today‘s Hebrew Old Testament texts, lexicons, grammars, and reference works draws the sheep – students, pastors, Christians, and so-called Hebrew scholars – away into dangerous enemy territory. Sheet by sheet these reference books sheer away the Christian‘s confidence in the Bible... When will we realize that all attacks on the words in the King James Bible have at their root the goal of usurping the authority of the word of God and replacing it with that of some man, whether priest, rabbi, scholar, Bible teacher, textbook or sect?‖ (Awe, pp. 429, 435) ―What must [God] think of the DOITYOURSELF bibles, where no KJV word is safe from being stained by those who dip each word into the dark pot of the lexicon they just bought.‖ (Awe, p. 490) ―Those who do not believe that God preserved, as promised, a 100% ‗pure‘ Holy Bible, subtract from its purity a point or two each time they search the lexicons of men instead of ‗search the scriptures‘ of God (Psalm 12:5,6).‖ (Awe, p. 500) ―Non-Biblical words such as ‗hex,’ ‘nix,’ ‘noxious,’ and ‘toxic’ picture the scull and crossbones (X). In a ‗lexicon‘ Greek or Hebrew word mix with English ‗private interpretation‘ and ‗asphyxiated‘ God‘s word.‖ (Awe, p. 1151) ―Corrupt Versions Cited in Comparison Charts: ESV…HCSB…NASB…NASB Update… NCV…NIV…NKJV…NLT…NRSV…RSV…TNIV…Other corrupt versions include: The Amplified bible, The Message…The Easy Reading KJV-ER 2000, the KJ21, all interlinears and lexicons.‖ (Awe, p. 1184) Notwithstanding her low opinion of Greek resources, Gail is not above using lexicons when they can be summoned to support her dubious teachings which are unsupported by other scholarly sources. For instance, in New Age Bible Versions, she implied that some lexicons can be trusted: ―All well respected Greek-English lexicons state emphatically that the use of these two Greek words by Greek manuscripts is wrong and is used in place of the correct rendering ‗JEHOVAH‘.3‖ (New Age Bible Versions, p. 375) The footnote (3) to this quotation references A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament by J.H. Thayer, whose lexicon she thoroughly condemned in her other book, In Awe of Thy Word: ―Thayer was a Unitarian whose heresies were so well known in his day that the publisher introduced Thayer‘s work with this warning:
61
‗A word of caution is necessary. Thayer was a Unitarian and the errors of this sect occasionally come through… The reader should be alert for both subtle and blatant denials of such doctrines as the Trinity (Thayer regarded Christ as a mere man and the Holy Spirit as an impersonal force)…and Biblical inerrancy (Thayer’s Greek English Lexicon of the New Testament, Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1977, p. vii).‘‖ (In Awe of Thy Word, p. 951) Why would Gail commend Thayer‘s Greek-English Lexicon as ―well respected‖ in New Age Bible Versions, but disparage this same resource in In Awe of Thy Word? In the former she is marshalling support for her false teaching on the English transliteration ―Jehovah‖ (See: Chapter 2); in the latter she is building a case against Greek resources. Specifically she is targeting George Ricker Berry‘s Interlinear Greek English New Testament, which she falsely charges was ―drawn chiefly from Thayer.‖ ―Scrivener‘s Greek New Testament is sold today as the Trinitarian Bible Society‘s Greek Textus Receptus... ―The only other ‗Textus Receptus‘ Greek New Testament in print, is the 1550 edition of Stephanus. As previously mentioned, it was not deemed accurate by the KJV translators in over 193 places. The Baker edition includes Berry‘s blasphemous interlinear English translation above Stephanus‘ Greek. Berry‘s use of anti-Trinitarian liberal G.B. Winer‘s A Grammar of the Idiom of the New Testament, translated by J. Henry Thayer, makes Berry‘s English interlinear useless. Furthermore, the English interlinear ‘has been drawn chiefly from Thayer.‘ (See the back of the paperback edition after p. 670, on p. v preceding the dictionary in Baker‘s reprint of the 1897 Hinds Noble edition.)‖ (Awe, pp. 950-951) Few readers, if any, will check Berry‘s Interlinear to verify that Gail has quoted her source accurately. In the first place, George Ricker Berry‘s Interlinear is merely an American edition of Samuel Bagster‘s 1896 Greek-English Interlinear prepared by Thomas Newberry. To Thomas Newberry‘s Interlinear, George Ricker Berry added an appendix with a Greek-English New Testament Lexicon and an Index of Synonyms. It is in Berry‘s introduction to his Lexicon that he mentioned using Thayer to provide some helpful information about the ―history‖ of certain words in his lexicon. J.H. Thayer‘s New Testament Lexicon and various grammars translated by Thayer were used by Berry for his Lexicon in the appendix of Newberry‘s Interlinear: ―Some indication of the history of a word will surely be serviceable to the average student. Consequently, the words whose first known occurrence is in the Septuagint, in the Apocrypha, and in the New Testament, are indicated by the respective abbreviations at the end of the articles. Where the usage is in doubt, no indication has been given. The material for this has been drawn chiefly from Thayer. The other classifications which Thayer gives, it was thought would not be of sufficient practical use to the average student to be incorporated... ―The grammatical references given are to the three grammars which are probably in the most common use, viz: S.G. Green, Handbook to the Grammar of the Greek Testament, Revised and Improved Edition; G.B. Winer, A Grammar of the Idiom of the New Testament, Seventh Edition, Translated by J.H. Thayer; and Alexander Buttman, 62
A Grammar of the New Testament Greek, Translated by J.H. Thayer. These have been indicated respectively by the abbreviations Gr., Wi., and Bu.... ―Besides other works which have already been mentioned, much material has been drawn from R.C. Trench, Synonyms of the New Testament, and from the New Testament Lexicons of Thayer and Cremer, as well as from the small ones of Green and Hickie.‖ (George Ricker Berry, ―Introduction to New Testament Lexicon,‖ Interlinear GreekEnglish New Testament, pp. iv, v) Gail Riplinger deceptively misquoted her source, saying that Berry‘s ―English interlinear ‗has been drawn chiefly from Thayer,‘‖ even though the Interlinear per se was not even translated by George Ricker Berry, but by Thomas Newberry. Thayer‘s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament was published 10 years after Thomas Newberry published his Greek-English Interlinear translation of the New Testament, which would make it impossible for Newberry to have used Thayer‘s Lexicon: Thomas Newberry (1811-1901). ―1877 - The Englishman‘s Greek New Testament, giving the Greek Text of Stephens 1550, with the various Readings of the Editions of Elzevir 1624, Griesbach, Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles, Alford, and Wordsworth, together with an interlinear literal Translation, and the Authorized version of 1611. London: Samuel Bagster, 1877. 3rd ed. 1896. Reprinted by Zondervan in 1970.‖ Joseph Henry Thayer (1828-1901). ―Thayer‘s chief works were his translation of Grimm‘s Wilke‘s Clavis Novi Testamenti (1887; revised 1889) as A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, and his New Testament Bibliography (1890).‖ On the basis of a lie Gail Riplinger has launched a formidable attack against an essential Bible study tool, maligning it as ―blasphemous‖ and ―corrupt.‖ Implied in Gail‘s assault on Hebrew and Greek language resources is the fanciful notion that the King James Translators used only Hebrew and Greek resources written by Christians. This fiction is contradicted by the testimony of the KJV Translators themselves who stated that they availed themselves of as many Hebrew and Greek helps as were needful and, as we discovered, they even used the commentaries and translations of humanists, Cabalists, and Roman Catholic scholars such as St. Augustine and St. Jerome, whose writings are liberally cited throughout the Preface as support for their views: THE PURPOSE OF THE TRANSLATORS, WITH THEIR NUMBER, FURNITURE, CARE, ETC. ―...neither, to be short, were we the first that fell in hand with translating the Scripture into English, and consequently destitute of former helps... Neither did we think much to consult the Translators or Commentators, Chaldee, Hebrew, Syrian, Greek or Latin, no nor the Spanish, French, Italian, or Dutch; neither did we disdain to revise that which we had done, and to bring back to the anvil that which we had hammered: but having and using as great helps as were needful, and fearing no reproach for slowness, nor coveting praise for expedition, we have at length, through the good hand of the Lord upon us, brought the work to that pass that you see.‖ (―Translator‘s Preface‖)
63
KJV TRANSLATORS’ RESOURCES Gail Riplinger cited Ward Allen‘s Translating for King James as a source document because it contains the recently discovered ―handwritten English, Latin and Greek notes of KJV translator John Bois, showing the final work on the Epistles and Revelation by the General Meeting of 1610...of which he was a member.‖ (Awe, pp. 524, 532) Gail‘s synopsis of John Bois’ Notes on the King James Bible misleads her readers that the KJV Translators consulted only the Greek texts of Beza and Erasmus, the Greek writings of John Chrysostom, a vast number of Greek manuscripts and translations, English and foreign Bibles, old Latin versions and the Italian Version. (Awe, pp. 533-534) However, the actual Notes of John Bois present a very different record. The reader may be surprised that John Bois‘ Notes are replete with references to the works of the Greek and Roman philosophers and scholars, such as Aristotle‘s Politicum, (Allen, p. 115), Plato‘s Politicus (Ibid., pp. 95, 122), Cicero‘s Tusculan Disputations (Ibid., pp. 61, 118), Horace‘s Odes (Ibid, pp. 53. 123), the Nemean Odes of Pindar (Ibid. pp. 91, 122), Homer‘s Iliad, and historical works of Thucydides, Herodotus, etc. And these pagan scholars are referenced throughout Bois‘ notes on the Epistles and Revelation. Dr. Bois‘ Notes also reveal that the Translators based their translation of certain verses on the Catholic Douay Rheims Version and the Septuagint: ―Attesting to the authenticity of the manuscript are notes scattered throughout its pages which patently are explications that unfold the intent of the translators of the Authorized Version. And, in the unfolding, the explications reveal purposes of composition that have generally been hidden or obscure to latter-day readers... At Col. 2.18, he explains that the translators were relying upon the example of the Rheims Bible. At Heb. 10.12, he explains that the context of the passage led the translators to reject all previous English translations.... ―Hebrews...Cap. 10.12. It is not clear concerning...[for ever], whether it ought not to be joined with...[had offered a sacrifice, [or?] with...[sat down] : the prior construction fits best with the remaining argument ; but the punctuation of every codex contends against it, and indeed the major number of the translators. ... ―2 Timothy...Cap. 2...v. 19. Nevertheless the sure foundation of God standeth etc... See Numer. 16.5 according to the Septuagint.‖ (Allen, pp. 10, 63, 81, 71) Even more significant than the KJV Translators‘ reliance on the Septuagint and the Catholic Bible, as well as Greek and Roman philosophers, poets and historians in translating the Holy Bible, Dr. Bois provided some information on the lexicons and grammars consulted by the Translators. One Greek lexicon frequently cited was the Lexicon of Constantinus (Lexicon Graeco-Latinum. Ex. R. Constantini aliorumque scriptis). The Universal Pronouncing Dictionary of Biography and Mythology states that Robert Constantin was ―a French scholar and eminent linguist born at Caen... He had compiled a Lexicon Graco-Latinum (1562) which was highly esteemed.‖ (Joseph Thomas, Lippincott, 1908, p. 705) Constantinus‘ theology was by no means ―Christian‖ but most likely of the Unitarian persuasion, since he was a Cabalist:
64
―In his Nomenclátor insignium scriptorum, published at Paris in 1555, Robert Constantinus devoted ten out of 189 pages to an account of the Cabala and a brief list of works on it. He regarded the original Cabala as divine and holy and transmitted by God to Moses by word of mouth only but the recent Cabala as corrupted by impostors and worthless. 74 Constantinus also ascribed to Guillaume Postel a book on Platonic and Pythagorean numbers... fn. 74... Constantinus gave 3 pages to judicial astrology, 3 to divination, and 5 to alchemy.‖ (Lynn Thorndike, A History of Magic and Experimental Science, Columbia Univ. Press, 1953, p. 454) ―Robert Constantinus, in the Nomenclatore Scriptorum Medicorum, published in 1515, says, that after a great deal of research, he found that [Cabalist] Raymond Lulli resided for some time in London, and that he actually made gold, by means of the philosopher‘s stone, in the Tower; that he had seen the golden pieces of his coinage, which were still named in England the nobles of Raymond, or rose-nobles.‖ (Charles Mackay, Memoirs of Extraordinary Popular Delusions And The Madness Of Crowds, 1841, 1852) Anthony Walker‘s Life of John Bois, which is reprinted as an appendix to Ward Allen‘s Translating for King James, mentioned other ―former helps‖ used by this KJV translator and reviewer: ―He was a most exacting grammarian having read near sixty grammars, Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Syriack ; with some other few. He esteemed Thomas Linacre above all other Latin grammarians;20 and would often with a kind of learned indignation, expresse how much Englishmen were to blame, so to neglect their so well deserving country-man. In the Greek (wherein he obtained most absolute perfection) he seemed to has set an high estimate upon Apollonius; after him on Sylburgius.‖ (Ward Allen. Translating for King James, Vanderbilt Univ. Press, 1969, pp. 146-147) Fridericus Sylburgius apparently based his Greek grammar on the Greek grammar of Kabbalist Petrus Ramus, who was a close friend of John Dee, under whose leadership the Rosicrucian Enlightenment began in England. ―Peter Ramus, in 1557, gave a fresh proof of his acuteness and originality, by publishing a Greek grammar with many important variances from his precursors… Sylburgius published one in 1582, which he professes to have taken from the last edition of the Ramean grammar.‖ (Henry Hallam, Introduction to the Literature of Europe in the Fifteenth, Sixteenth, and Seventeenth Centuries, Vol. II, 1879, p. 18) ―The bare list of the few selected names Dee mentions as among the many who sought his acquaintance in Paris at this time and with whom he enjoyed some intimacy is impressive in its scope; there were he says some 40,000 ‗accounted students‘ at Paris and among these ‗very many of all estates and professions were desirous of my acquaintance and conference as…Petrus Ramus…‖ (The John Dee Society, www.johndee.org/calder/pdf/Calder4.pdf) A footnote in Ward Allen‘s Life of John Bois reveals that Dr. Bois‘ esteemed Latin grammarian, Thomas Linacre (1460-1524), was a close friend of the famous English statesman, Sir Thomas More, a Roman Catholic who persecuted Protestant Reformers: 65
―20. ‗Thomas Linacre was great with, and highly admired by Sir Thomas More (whom formerly he had taught Greek), Erasmus, Grocyn, Latimer, Tonstall, and who not. He was one of the first Englishmen that brought learning into our nation.‖ After his death, Sir Thomas More (1478-1535) was canonized ―St. Thomas More‖ by Pope Pius XI. As fellow Roman Catholics, neither Thomas Linacre nor Sir Thomas More would repudiate papal supremacy by taking an oath to uphold the Act of Succession, for which stand the legendary More was beheaded by King Henry VIII. As Lord Chancellor of England, Sir Thomas More vigorously opposed Martin Luther and the Protestant Reformation, having burned at the stake six Lutherans who circulated the Tyndale Bible in England. Sir Thomas More and Thomas Linacre, John Bois‘ favorite Latin grammarian, were humanist scholars educated ―in the home of Lorenzo de‘ Medici, who welcomed [Linacre] into his own household as a fellow-student of his sons, of whom one was later to become Pope Leo X. Here under Politian in Latin, and Demetrius Chalcondylas in Greek, Linacre obtained a knowledge of these languages which made him one of the foremost humanistic scholars in England.‖ (Catholic Encyclopedia, ―Thomas Linacre‖) Leo X, formerly Giovanni de Medici, was the pope who excommunicated Martin Luther. The wealthy Medici oligarchy funded the neo-Platonic Academy of Florence which launched the Italian Renaissance, a revival of the occult traditions that swept Europe and eventually England. Thomas Linacre‘s Latin and Greek tutors at the Platonic Academy, Politian and Demetrius Chalcondylas, were colleagues of the famous neo-Platonist philosophers and Cabalists, Marsilio Ficino and Pico della Mirandola: ―Politian. An Italian Humanist, born at Monte Pulciano in 1454; died at Florence in 1494. At the age of ten he went to Florence, where he followed the courses of Landino, Argyropoulos, Andronicus Callistus, and Marsilio Ficino. In 1477 he was tutor to the children of Lorenzo the Magnificent, and became one of the Accademia which Lorenzo had grouped about him, in which with Marsilio Ficino, were associated Landino, Pico della Mirandola, and Hermolaus Barbarus. Politian was professor of Greek and Latin literature at Florence from 1480; among his pupils were the Englishmen, Grocyn and Linacre, and the German Reuchlin.‖ (Catholic Encyclopedia, ―Politian‖) ―Demetrius Chalcocondyles... (1423 – 1511), born in Athens, was one of the most eminent Greek scholars in the West. He contributed also to Italian Renaissance literature. He was associated with Marsilius Ficinus, Angelus Politianus, and Theodorus Gaza in the revival of letters in the Western world. One of his pupils at Florence was the famous Johann Reuchlin. Demetrius belonged to one of the noblest Athenian families. He was a first cousin of the chronicler of the fall of Constantinople, Laonicus Chalcondyles, and the last of the Greek humanists who taught Greek literature at the great universities of the Italian Renaissance (Padua, Florence, Milan).‖ (Wikipedia: ―Demetrius Chalcondyles‖) Ficino and Pico synthesized Platonism and the Hermetic sciences (astrology, alchemy and magic) with Scripture, professing the new belief system to be a Christian form of neo-Platonism. The Renaissance scholars who instructed Thomas Linacre, KJV Translator John Bois‘ favorite Latin grammarian, taught the Cabala as a mystical system that could effectively be used for the defense of Christianity. 66
―It was in the princely house of Pico de Mirandola that the Jewish scholars used to meet…. The discovery of the Jewish Cabbala, which he imparted to various enlightened Christians contributed far more than the return to Greek sources to the extraordinary spiritual blossoming which is known as the Renaissance. About half a century later, the rehabilitation of the Talmud was to lead to the Reformation….Pico de Mirandola had understood that the indispensable purification of Christian dogma could only be effected after a profound study of the authentic Jewish Cabbala.‖ (Joshua Jehuda, L’antisemitisme, Miroir du Monde, p. 164) (Poncins, Judaism and the Vatican) The Kabbalistic teachings of Ficino and Pico are well documented in Allison Coudert‘s The Impact of the Kabbalah in the Seventeenth Century. Note that, just like Gail Riplinger, the Renaissance Cabalist Pico della Mirandola ―read meaning into the shapes of letters...which reveal divine mysteries.‖ ―Marsilio Ficino (1433-1499) was one of the earliest, most famous and influential of Renaissance natural magicians to discuss the magical power of images and sounds. His ideas were accepted and embellished by innumerable later writers. Ficino developed a form of spiritual and subjective magic to attract beneficial celestial forces into the soul of the operator. An essential element in Ficino‘s magic was his conviction that words represent the natures of things. He cites the usual sources to support this: Plato, Origen, Hermes Trismegistus, Plotinus, and Iamblichus... ―Indeed, a name, as the Platonists say, is nothing else than a certain power of the thing itself, first conceived in the mind, so to speak, then expressed by the voice, and finally, indicated by letters. ―With Ficino‘s younger contemporary, Pico della Mirandola (1463-1494), we come one step closer to van Helmont‘s kabbalistic theory of language, for Pico combined ideas derived from the Kabbalah with the more common Neoplatonic ones about sounds and symbols. Pico applied Ficino‘s view of the Egyptian hieroglyphs to Hebrew and...read meaning into the shapes of letters: “‘There are no letters in the whole law which in their forms, conjunctions, separations, twisting, direction, defect, superabundance, smallness, greatness, crowning, shutting, opening and order... do not reveal secrets.’ ―...Pico believed that the Scriptures contained all there is to know, but like them he believed this in an essentially kabbalistic, not Christian, way. Instead of interpreting every Biblical verse according to its literal, allegorical, topological, and anagogic sense, as both Jews and Christians did, he accepted the specifically kabbalistic view of the Bible as a sum of building blocks which could be sorted and shifted to reveal divine mysteries...‖ (The Impact of the Kabbalah in the Seventeenth Century, pp. 83-85) he Translators of the 1611 KJV were scholars whose erudition was due in no small part to the academic works of unsaved humanists whose religious beliefs were heretical in the extreme. Yet we are told that, during the translation process, the Translators not only consulted their Hebrew and Greek grammars, lexicons, etc. but considered them to be indispensable resources. Should we therefore assume that the Cabalistic beliefs and humanistic mindset of these grammarians and lexicographers somehow found their way into the 1611 King James Version? Is it fair to brand the 1611 King James Bible ―blasphemous‖ and ―corrupt,‖ as Gail Riplinger brands Berry‘s Interlinear, because the Translators consulted a variety of resources authored by Renaissance humanists, some of them Jewish Cabalists, for acceptable word meanings and the proper grammatical structure of Greek sentences? If only ―Christian‖ resources may be 67
consulted by those who translate Scripture, then surely every vernacular Bible, including the KJV, and every Hebrew and Greek text, including Erasmus‘ Greek Text, has been contaminated by worldly scholarship and must therefore be judged untrustworthy. COOKING DATA 101 We have seen how Gail Riplinger misrepresented George Ricker Berry‘s Interlinear Greek English New Testament as being the work of Unitarians, although it is provably nothing of the sort. Gail continues to misrepresent Berry‘s (American reprint of Thomas Newberry‘s) Interlinear on her website with a PDF file of a 1550 Stephens 3rd Edition of the Textus Receptus which, she claims, ―has unearthed some changes in the notes‖ of Berry. The promo for this CD reads as follows [with this writer's comments in brackets / BA]: ―1550 Greek Textus Receptus by Robert Stephens on CD-ROM. The title reads in part Nouum IESV Christi D.N. Testamentum Ex Bibliotheca Regia... Ex officina Roberti Stephani typographi Regii, Regiis typis. M. D. L. ―This CD-ROM contains a scan of an actual 1550 Greek Textus Receptus edited by Robert Estienne (Stephens). The file is PDF. This edition of the Greek New Testament is Robert Estienne‘s 3rd edition printed in Paris in 1550. (A comparison of this authentic edition against the currently printed edition by George Ricker Berry (Interlinear Greek English New Testament) has unearthed some changes in the notes.) ―In the main, both Berry‘s and Stephanus Greek texts represent the Textus Receptus and are very helpful in proving that the readings in the KJV are correct and those in new versions are wrong. [Actually they also show wrong readings in the KJV.] ―(Sadly, however Berry‘s Interlinear of Stephanus is used in some T.R. Bible Schools to ‗correct‘ the KJV. (Its interlinear comes from Unitarian J.H. Thayer!) [This is not true as previously shown.] The KJV translators had superior Greek & vernacular evidence than Stephanus‘ one-man text in Luke 17:36 (Berry & Stephanus omit the verse!) [see below]; Rev. 3:1 (Berry and Stephanus omit ‗seven‘; Mark 2:15 (Berry and Stephanus omit ‗Jesus‘ in its second occurrence); Acts 19:20 (Berry and Stephanus have ‗Lord‘ not ‗God.‘); Berry mis-spells Beelzebub seven times in the New Testament (e.g. Matt. 10:25) (See correct spelling in the KJV N.T. and any Hebrew Bible in 2 Kings 1:2, 3, and 6). [No, see below.] Many of the above errors are also followed in one-man Greek New Testament edition (e.g. Scrivener (TBS, DBS), Berry etc.. See In Awe of Thy Word, pp 947-956 etc. for details.‖ So we read Luke 17:36 in Berry‘s Greek-English Interlinear to see if, as Gail claims, ―Berry & Stephanus omit the verse!‖ The verse is not in the text of Berry‘s interlinear, but rather in a footnote followed by the letter ―E.‖ The meaning of ―E‖ and the reason for removing the verse to a footnote are explained in Berry‘s Introduction: ―The Greek Text is that of Stephens, 1550, which has long been in common use ; but as the edition of Elzivir, 1624, is the one often called the Received Text, or Textus Receptus, because of the words, ‗Textum...ab omnibus receptum,‘ occurring in the preface, we give the readings of this Elzivir edition in the notes, and mark them E.‖
68
In other words, Thomas Newberry (not George Ricker Berry) placed Luke 17:36 in a footnote because it was not in Stephen‘s edition of the Greek Text published in 1550 (which Gail demeans as a ―one man text‖) but was only inserted later in the 1624 Textus Receptus published by the Elzivir Brothers. In the 1611 King James Version there is a marginal note next to Luke 17:36 which states: ―This 36. verse is wanting in most of the Greek copies.‖ (See Luke 17:36 in the King James Version with the footnote at StudyLight.org.) The marginal note would have been based on the Translators‘ reading of the Greek texts of Stephens and Beza. Instead of informing her readers that the KJV Translators added a marginal disclaimer to Luke 17:36, which stated the verse was not in most of the Greek manuscripts, Gail exclaimed, ―The KJV translators had superior Greek & vernacular evidence than Stephanus‘ one-man text in Luke 17:36.‖ This statement reveals her utter contempt for the Greek Text which she subordinates to the KJV. Gail‘s ―superior Greek evidence‖ must not include the Greek texts of Stephens and Beza since the Translators stated, ―This 36. verse is wanting in most of the Greek copies.‖ By ―superior vernacular evidence‖ Gail cannot be referring to the Coverdale or Tyndale Bibles for neither carry the verse. Luke 17:36 is found in the Geneva Bible and the Bishop‘s Bible which the Translators were required to follow ―as little altered as the original will permit.‖ On this textual base, the Translators should have omitted the verse; having chosen to include it, they at least qualified it with a marginal note which was later removed from modern KJVs, courtesy of the Masonic Bible societies. (See: Chapter 7) Gail‘s ―superior vernacular evidence‖ would also have to include the Wycliffe Bible and the Roman Catholic Douay Rheims Bible, both based on the Latin Vulgate, which numbers the verse as Luke 17:35b. N.B. The absence of Luke 17:36 in F.H.A Scrivener‘s Greek New Testament is evidence that he did not merely ―back-translate‖ the King James Version into Greek, as Gail Riplinger claims in order to deprive Christians of this Greek Text which was based on Beza‘s 1598 Greek Text. (Awe, p. 949) If Scrivener had simply back-translated the KJV, he would have included Luke 17:36. Gail also makes an issue of the fact that Berry‘s Greek-English Interlinear and the Trinity Bible Society‘s edition of Scrivener‘s Greek Text leave the word ―Beelzebul‖ in the Greek instead of translating it as ―Beelzebub‖ as the King James Version renders it. ―Beelzebub, in the New Testament 7 times (e.g. Matt. 10:25), is spelled Beelzebub by pure vernacular Bibles (e.g., English, German, Latin, Bohemice, Italian, Galice, and Danish) as seen in the Nuremberg Polyglot of 1599. It is spelled in Berry‘s and the TBS edition as Beelzebul. Did the entire body of Christ worldwide, make a mistake, or did one apostate church (Greek Orthodox) or a few men carry forward an error? Jesus revealed truth to ‗babes‘ who read Bibles, not the ‗brains,‘ who spur revivals.‖ (Awe, p. 953) Gail does not divulge the fact that ―Beelzebub‖ was carried over from the Latin Vulgate, which shows that her ―pure vernacular Bibles‖ adopted the Roman Catholic rendering of ―Beelzebub‖ instead of ―beelzeboul‖ (Beelzebul) in Stephen‘s and Beza‘s Greek texts. So which spelling is correct, the Latin Vulgate‘s ―Beelzebub‖ or the Greek Textus Receptus, ―beelzeboul‖? That the KJV translators adopted the reading of the Latin Vulgate and Douay Rheims instead of the Greek Text is noted in F.H.A. Scrivener‘s volume, The Authorized Edition of the English Bible (1611): Its Subsequent Reprints and Modern Representatives, Strong‘s Concordance, the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, W.R.F. 69
Browning‘s Dictionary of the Bible, and many other Bible resources which are no doubt also on Pope Riplinger‘s ―Index of Forbidden Books‖: ―Appendix E. Passages wherein the text of the Authorized Bible seems to follow the Latin Vulgate. ―It may be useful to subjoin a list, probably quite an incomplete one, of places in which the Translators of 1611 have apparently followed the Latin Vulgate, mostly after the example of Tyndale, sometimes of Versions later than his, especially of the Rhemish of 1582, whereof the Epistle of the Translators to the Reader speaks so contemptuously… It is probable that at least some of the passages collected in the first section of the present Appendix, wherein the Authorized Version is supported by Compl., Vulg., only were derived from the Vulgate rather than the Complutensian.... ―Matt. xii. 24, 27; Mark iii. 22; Luke xi. 15, 18, 19, Beelzebub. So Tynd. (So also Compl. in Matt. x. 25)...‖ (Scrivener, The Authorized Edition of the English Bible (1611): Its Subsequent Reprints and Modern Representatives) ―Beelzebul The devil . ‗Beelzebub‘ (= ‗Lord of Flies‘), in AV, following Latin Vulgate; Greek MSS have Beelzebul (= ‗Lord of Heaven‘ or ‗Lord of the House‘), which is the more reliable spelling.‖ 32. (Browning, Dictionary of the Bible, NY: Oxford University Press, 1996) ―BEELZEBUB. be-el'-ze-bub (in the King James Version and the Revised Version (British and American) is an error (after the Vulgate) for Beelzebul (Revised Version margin) Beelzeboul; Westcott and Hort, The New Testament in Greek, Beezeboul):‖ (International Standard Bible Encyclopedia) Here is another reading where the Greek Textus Receptus differs from a vernacular translation, yet Gail Riplinger exalts the ―pure vernacular Bible‖ over the Greek Received Text because it‘s not possible that ―the entire body of Christ worldwide‖ could make a mistake! This astonishing statement is followed by the startling revelation that Gail considers the 5200+ manuscripts which represent the Textus Receptus to be a defective product of the apostate Greek Orthodox Church: ―It must be remembered that even the 5200 existing handwritten Greek manuscripts were the product of the Greek Orthodox Church. Its membership has never been made up of true believers…. Unbelievers, Greek speaking or otherwise, cannot discern spiritual things.‖ (Awe, p. 955) Gail‘s statement openly challenges the authenticity and authority of the Greek manuscripts which were the basis of the Textus Receptus. Such accusations are usually made by proponents of modern versions such as James D. Price, who points to the heterodoxy of the Greek Orthodox Church as a reason to reject the Byzantine manuscripts: ―If preservation is limited to only one text tradition (the Byzantine), then its distribution was limited to mainly the eastern Greek speaking churches. That means that all the churches in the South and West and in Palestine were deprived of the Word of God, in the sense Surrett states it in absolute terms. The criterion of ‗widely accepted‘ falls short of the mark. Instead of an alleged time gap, he now has created a geographical gap. One 70
cannot argue that these areas were deprived of the true text because of heresy, because the eastern churches had their own share of heresy. Surely Surrett doesn‘t accept many of the doctrines of the Greek Orthodox Church—the custodians of the Byzantine text tradition; he doesn‘t accept them as ‗orthodox‘ in the sense that he understands the term. It seems far better to accept the possibility that the autographic text is preserved in the joint witness of all the manuscript witnesses God saw fit to preserve.‖ (Book Review of Which Greek Text? The Debate Among Fundamentalists, James D. Price, Ph.D., http://www.kjvonly.org/jamesp/jdprice_review_surrett.htm) B.F. Westcott and Fenton Hort also rejected the 5200+ Greek manuscripts used for the Textus Receptus, identifying them as a Syrian rescension produced by the Arian heretic, Lucian, with the blessing of the Greek Church headquartered in Constantinople. Drs. Westcott and Hort wrote: ―...Greek Christendom became centralised, with Constantinople for its centre. Now Antioch is the true ecclesiastical parent of Constantinople, so that naturally the Antiochian text of the fourth century would first acquire traditional if not formal authority at Constantinople, and then become in practice the standard New Testament of the Greek East. To carry the history one step further, the printed ‗Received Text‘ of the sixteenth century, with the exception of scattered readings commended, in most cases by Latin authority to Erasmus or his successors, is a reproduction of the Syrian text in its medieval form... Further, the identity of readings implies identity of origin; the evidence already given has shown many of the characteristic readings to have originated about 250—350, assigning them at the same time a definite single origin... ―Meanwhile the Syrian text grew in influence. For some centuries after the fourth there was in the East a joint currency of the Syrian and other texts, nearly all mixed : but at last the Syrian text almost wholly displaced the rest. ...the Syrian text must have been due to a revision which was in fact a recension, and which may with fair probability be assigned to the time when Lucianus taught at Antioch...‖ (The New Testament in the Original Greek: The Text Revised by B.F. Westcott & F.J.A. Hort, Cambridge Press, 1881, pp. 143, 178, 182) Echoing Westcott and Hort, KJV-Only advocates claim that the Syrian recension agrees with the Greek Textus Receptus, even though the Syriac Peshitta contains many Alexandrian corruptions. (See ―Progression of New Testament Corruption‖ and ―The Semitic New Testament‖ at http://watch-untoprayer.org. Also, Chapter 16 of this book.) Why would KJV-Only defenders support key arguments of the Westcott-Hort theory of textual criticism, that tissue of lies created by apostates to undermine the authority of the Textus Receptus? Let us recall that the endgame of the dialectical process — liberal vs. conservative – is to eliminate the Textus Receptus as the international standard for Bible translation. On one side of the Bible version dialectic are the modern version advocates whom we would expect to disparage the Textus Receptus. On the other side are the KJV-Only advocates who, it appears, only profess to defend the Textus Receptus. They may remonstrate against Westcott, Hort and modern versions, but their publications are loaded with disinformation that will one day be used to overthrow the Textus Receptus and replace it with corrupt manuscripts and bibles.
71
It will be seen in later chapters of this report that Gail Riplinger promotes many translations which were not based on the Byzantine text, but on the corrupt Alexandrian manuscripts that Westcott and Hort claimed were the most ancient texts. In the process, Gail also reimages the heretics who used these corrupt bibles as the ―true Christians‖ who were persecuted by the Roman Church for preserving the true Greek text. As she stealthily mainstreams corrupt bibles and heretical sects, Gail is working overtime to discredit the standard Greek and Hebrew resources which would enable her readers to evaluate the accuracy of the various translations she promotes. And in place of using Greek and Hebrew helps to determine the meanings of the words and verses in Scripture, Gail teaches her readers how to conjure up word and letter meanings Kabbalistically. In Awe of Thy Word is fundamentally a broadside attack on the Greek Textus Receptus and a primer on Kabbalah. Yet the heretical nature of Riplinger‘s book is undetected by many in the King James-Only community probably because her previous book, New Age Bible Versions, seemed to uphold the Textus Receptus as the sole standard text for Bible translation. As Mark Twain observed, ―Give a man a reputation as an early riser, and that man can sleep till noon.‖ When it became apparent that Gail Riplinger had done a volte face on the superiority of the Greek Textus Receptus, it was time for us to reexamine her teachings and to confront many false teachings of King James Onlyism; for there appears to be a ―conspiracy of silence‖ among KJV-Only leaders as Gail takes the movement to a new level of heresy.
WATCH UNTO PRAYER http://watch-unto-prayer.org
72
CHAPTER VI ―KJV-ONLY‖ = NO GREEK & NO HEBREW Gail Riplinger‘s rejection of all Hebrew and Greek resources is an extension of the false teaching of Peter Ruckman that the King James Version is divinely inspired and therefore inerrant. Since Hebrew and Greek resources do not always agree with readings the KJV, Gail reasons that they are the works of mere men and are therefore flawed. ―Unlike today‘s editors, the KJV translators‘ final authorities were Bibles, not lexicons. They saw the KJV as the final ‗perfected‘ and ‗finished‘ English Bible... ‖ (Awe, p. 31) Since the KJV is perfect, Gail reasons, ―God has not called readers to check His Holy Bible for errors.‖ (In Awe of Thy Word, p. 956) To the contrary, the Translators of the 1611 King James Version were adamant that no translation, including their own, is divinely inspired, and they regarded only the Hebrew and Greek originals as directly inspired by God. To illustrate the fundamental principle of divinely inspired originals, they made an analogy between the inferiority of translations of the original Scriptures and the lower quality of the rebuilt Temple in comparison to the original Temple of Solomon: AN ANSWER TO THE IMPUTATIONS OF OUR ADVERSARIES ―For whatever was perfect under the Sun, where Apostles or Apostolic men, that is, men endued with an extraordinary measure of God's spirit, and privileged with the privilege of infallibility, had not their hand?… So, by the story of Ezra, and the prophecy of Haggai it may be gathered, that the Temple built by Zerubbabel after the return from Babylon, was by no means to be compared to the former built by Solomon (for they that remembered the former, wept when they considered the latter) [Ezra 3:12] notwithstanding, might this latter either have been abhorred and forsaken by the Jews, or profaned by the Greeks? The like we are to think of Translations.‖ (―The Translators to the Reader‖ In Gail Riplinger‘s logic, the use of concordances and lexicons to determine the meanings of words transfers the Bible‘s authority to these resources. There is no middle ground in her false dilemma: ―You‘re either KJV-Only (no Hebrew or Greek) or against the Word of God.‖ In her inverted scheme of Biblical inspiration, referencing various Greek resources as a system of checks and balances to determine acceptable translations of Hebrew and Greek words and thereby the KJV‘s accuracy, amounts to high treason, akin to using a modern version. Gail asserts that those who use Greek reference works as aids to Bible study give them more weight than Scripture itself – a false assumption and a false accusation. And the owner of a Strong‘s Concordance will find him/herself in the same camp as the Mormons: ―The current practice of transferring the Holy Bible‘s authority to ‗private‘ interpretations in pagan Greek lexicons is proven to have no precedence in history.‖ (Awe, p. 37)
73
―Cults are characterized by the fact that, while recognizing the Bible as a noble book, they move its authority on to something else. It may be a guru, pope, or a false prophet; it may be another book, such as the Book of Mormon, or even Strong’s Concordance.‖ (Awe, p. 500) ―There are definite elements of choice, preference, and uncertainty involved in Greek scholarship, which prevent it from being the absolute authority.‖ (Awe, p. 504) It is true that there are ―definite elements of choice, preference, and uncertainty involved in Greek scholarship,‖ but there were also elements of choice, preference and uncertainty involved in the translation of the King James Version, as the Translators‘ Preface attests: REASONS MOVING US TO SET DIVERSITY OF SENSES IN THE MARGIN, WHERE THERE IS GREAT PROBABILITY FOR EACH ―…doth not a margin do well to admonish the Reader to seek further, and not to conclude or dogmatize upon this or that peremptorily? For as it is a fault of incredulity, to doubt of those things that are evident: so to determine of such things as the Spirit of God hath left (even in the judgment of the judicious) questionable, can be no less than presumption. Therefore as S. Augustine saith, that variety of Translations is profitable for the finding out of the sense of the Scriptures:…so diversity of signification and sense in the margin, where the text is not so clear, must needs do good, yea, is necessary, as we are persuaded… They that are wise, had rather have their judgments at liberty in differences of readings, than to be captivated to one, when it may be the other.‖ (―The Translators to the Reader‖) Gail repeatedly deprecates Greek-English resources as ―private interpretations‖ of Scripture: ―Only forbidden ‗private interpretation‘ can be drawn from dipping one‘s nose deeply into corrupt lexicons, dictionaries, and commentaries by worldly wise men, like Strong, Vine, and Zodhiates (2 Peter 1:19, 20).‖ (Awe, p. 141) To support her false teaching, she must wrest the Scriptures: ―The New Testament uses the word ‗interpretation‘ to describe translation from one language to another (e.g. John 1:42, 9:7, Acts 9:36, 13:8; Heb. 7:2). Therefore, the ‗private interpretation‘ forbidden in 2 Peter 1:20, included ‗private translation‘ (e.g. TNIV, NKJV, Strong‘s), as well as private ‗meaning.‘).‖ (Awe, p. 846) ―The harlot haunts higher education, calling bookish brooders to her leavened lexicons. Easychair Christians who brood over books, not the Bible, will eventually hatch ‗cockatrice‘ eggs.‘ (Isaiah 59:5)... First things first. According to the Holy Bible, among the first things its students need to know is that the scriptures are of no ‗private interpretation,‘ that is, private translation, ‗Knowing this first,‘ as Peter said, this foundational tenet is echoed repeatedly in upcoming chapters by the very men who chose to publish his word — men such as Erasmus, Wycliffe, Coverdale, Tyndale, and the King James Bible translators (2 Peter 1:20). (Awe, pp. 520, 522)
74
Gail does not fully quote 2 Peter 1:20 on pages 141, 522 and 846 because it would be apparent to her readers that the verse does not prove her point. When 2 Peter 1:20 finally appears on pages 899 and 955, the verse is misquoted: ―Thomas Causton and Thomas Highbed were burned at the stake in 1555; their Confession said: ‗Words…must be searched out by other open Scriptures, whereby we may come to the spiritual understanding of them, which shall be most to the glory of God: for, as the holy apostle saith, ‗There is no Scripture that hath any private interpretation‘ Besides this, Scriptures are full of the like figurative speeches…[built-in dictionary]‘ (Foxe, vol. 6, p. 735) (Awe, p. 899) ―Scrivener‘s and Berry‘s printed editions are not ‗authoritative‘ or to be regarded as ‗the Original Greek‘ ‗in the microscopic points of detail,‘ where they differ from the manuscript tradition or the King James Bible and other great vernacular Bibles (Cambridge History of the Bible, vol. 2, p. 499) The scriptures are of no „private interpretation‘ (2 Peter 1:20)‖ (Awe, p. 955) Anyone familiar with 2 Peter 1:20 knows that this verse states ―no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.‖ 2 Peter 1:19-21 19 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: 20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. 21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. Following the editorial style of Westcott and Hort, Gail ―omitted‖ three words – ―prophecy of the‖ – which changes the meaning of the verse. Not only did Gail misquote 2 Peter 1:20, she erroneously redefined the Greek word for ―interpretation‖ in that verse as ―translation‖: ―The New Testament uses the word ‗interpretation‘ to describe translation from one language to another (e.g. John 1:42, 9:7, Acts 9:36, 13:8; Heb. 7:2). Therefore, the ‗private interpretation,‘ forbidden in 2 Peter 1:20, includes private translation (e.g. TNIV, NKJV, Strong‘s) as well as private ‗meaning‘).‖ (Awe, p. 846) In the Greek Textus Receptus, not one of the various Greek words for ―interpretation‖ found in John 1:42, 9:7, Acts 9:36, 13:8; Heb. 7:2 is the same Greek word used in 2 Peter 1:20. Strong‘s Concordance shows the different Greek words translated ―interpretation‖ in the KJV New Testament, and The New Analytical Greek Lexicon edited by Wesley J. Perschbacher defines the Greek words used in the verses which Gail cited as references (Awe, p. 846). In these verses, note that only in 2 Peter 1:20 is ―translation‖ not an option, for the Greek word έπίλσοις (epilusis) is narrowly translated ―interpretation‖: 2 Peter 1:20 (έπίλσοις – Strong‘s #1955) – Perschbacher: ―a loosing, liberation; metaphorically, interpretation of what is enigmatical or obscure, 2 Pet. 1:20‖ John 1:42 (έρσηνεύω – Strong‘s #2059) – Perschbacher: ―to explain, interpret, translate, John 1:39, 43; 9:7; Heb. 7:2‖ 75
John 9:7, (έρσηνεύω - Strong‘s #2059) – Perschbacher: ―to explain, interpret, translate, John 1:39, 43; 9:7; Heb. 7:2‖ Acts 9:36 (ζιερμηεύω – Strong‘s #1329) – Perschbacher: ―to explain, interpret, translate, Luke 24:27; Acts 9:36; 1 Cor. 14:5, 13, 27; to be able to interpret, 1 Cor. 12:30 Acts 13:8 (μεθερμηνεύω – Strong‘s #3177) – Perschbacher: ―to translate, interpret, Matt. 1:23; Mark 5:41, et al.‖ Heb. 7:2 (έρσηνεύω – Strong‘s #2059) – Perschbacher: ―to explain, interpret, translate, John 1:39, 43; 9:7; Heb. 7:2‖ As we have just seen, Greek resources enable us to determine if there are different Greek words underlying the same English word in the KJV, and also to know their various meanings. Simply reading the English Bible does not yield this information. Therefore, depriving Christians of Greek reference books allows false teachers wide latitude to misinterpret verses to support their unbiblical teachings. 2 Peter 3:16 calls this ploy ―wresting the scriptures‖ by ―they which are unlearned and unstable…unto their own destruction.‖ If Gail had used a lexicon, she may have had second thoughts about ―wresting‖ Scripture. Strong‘s #4761 {streb-lo'-o}from a derivative of 4762; v AV - wrest 1; 1 1) to twist, turn awry 2) to torture, put to the rack 3) metaph. to pervert, of one who wrests or tortures language in a false sense Besides forbidding the use of Greek-English interlinear translations and lexicons, Gail Riplinger also discourages Christians from learning Koine Greek, and she has a surprisingly low view of the Greek Textus Receptus. ―There are no Bible verses that state that Bible study should be done in those ancient languages. If such were a benefit to our understanding, one would think that at least one verse would mention it.‖ (Awe, p. 498) ―There existed a true original Greek (i.e. Majority Text, Textus Receptus). It is not in print and never will be because it is unnecessary. No one on the planet speaks first century Koine Greek, so God is finished with it. He needs no ‗Dead Bible Society‘ to translate it into ‗everyday English,‘ using the same corrupt secularized lexicons used by the TNIV, NIV, NASB and HCSB (quote on file).‖ (Awe, p. 956) ―It must be remembered that even the 5200 existing handwritten Greek manuscripts were the product of the Greek Orthodox Church. Its membership has never been made up of true believers…. Unbelievers, Greek speaking or otherwise, cannot discern spiritual things.‖ (Awe, p. 953) We have just been informed that God is finished with the extant copies of the Greek manuscripts authored by the Apostles, which manuscripts were collated to create the Textus Receptus. In 1603, according to Gail Riplinger and Peter Ruckman, God commissioned the Church of England and Calvinist scholars to author a new ―Word of God.‖ Furthermore, no one may question this proclamation or dare to do with the KJV what Gail Riplinger has done with all modern versions, that is, to evaluate its accuracy. ―God has not called readers to check His Holy Bible for errors‖ (Awe, p. 956) begs the question by assuming there are no errors in the KJV. Gail Riplinger insists that, where the KJV differs from the Textus Receptus, authority rests with the ―Bible in use‖ rather than the Greek text: 76
―None of these microscopic differences between the KJV and today‘s printed one-man editions of the ‗Textus Receptus‘ are of major consequence. They are insignificant compared to the thousands upon thousands of serious differences between the pure Textus Receptus text type and the corrupt new versions‘ minority text type. Authority must remain with the Bible in use, not with the critical edition of one man or one ecclesiastical tradition.‖ (Awe, p. 955) Altogether, Riplinger ignores the Textus Receptus except to diminish its importance or to demean it. Her attitude is that God used the Greek language in the early Church period, but English soon took its place, starting in Acts 2 with the Gothic Bible, and that English Bibles in this lineage have been the standard for translation during the Church Age. ―The English Bible‘s seven purifications are…the Gothic, the Anglo-Saxon, the PreWycliffe, the Wycliffe, the Tyndale / Coverdale / Great / Geneva, the Bishop‘s, the King James Bible. ―Gothic, the great great grandfather of English, was a major world language at the time of Christ and the apostles. Gothic benefited from this gift, by which the Holy Ghost superintended over the preaching of the ‗word…in all the world‘ (Col. 1:5, 6) and the translation of the ‗scriptures… made known to all nations‘ (Rom. 16:26). … ―The original New Testament was complete before 100 A.D.; the Gothic Bible must have been translated immediately to fill the need of the nearby Gothic Christians, following the pattern of the urgent multiplying of the Gospel itself.‖ (Awe, pp. 33-4, 622)‖ According to Gail, the King James translators simply followed this tradition of translating from previous Bibles: ―Unlike today‘s editors, the KJV translators‘ final authorities were Bibles, not lexicons.‖ (Awe, p. 31) Elsewhere she states: ―On the title page of the KJV, the translators said that the King James Bible was ‗Translated out of the Originall Greeke.‘‖ Which is it, Gail, English Bibles or the Original Greek? for King James Bible lovers have been led to believe that the 1611 KJV was translated directly and verbatim from the Greek Textus Receptus and the Hebrew Masoretic Text. To determine the truth of the matter, we must consider the history of the King James Version. The Translators stated in their Preface that they availed themselves of ―as great helps as were needful‖ in many languages, which would have included lexicons: THE PURPOSE OF THE TRANSLATORS, WITH THEIR NUMBER, FURNITURE, CARE, ETC. ―…neither, to be short, were we the first that fell in hand with translating the Scripture into English, and consequently destitute of former helps, as it is written of Origen, that he was the first in a manner, that put his hand to write Commentaries upon the Scriptures, …and therefore no marvel, if he overshot himself many times... Neither did we think much to consult the Translators or Commentators, Chaldee, Hebrew, Syrian, Greek or Latin, no nor the Spanish, French, Italian, or Dutch; neither did we disdain to revise that which we had done, and to bring back to the anvil that which we had hammered: but having and using as great helps as were needful, and fearing no reproach for slowness, nor coveting praise for expedition, we have at length, through the good hand of the Lord upon us, brought the work to that pass that you see.‖ (―The Translator to the Reader‖) First, we remind the reader that John Bois‘ Notes referenced various grammars and lexicons used in the translation and review process. (See: Chapter 5) The Translators also stated that the Hebrew and Greek originals, not other Bibles, must be the final authority for any translation: ―If you ask what they had before them, truly it was the Hebrew text of the Old Testament, the Greek of the New. These are the two golden pipes, or rather conduits, where-through the olive branches 77
empty themselves into the gold. Saint Augustine calleth them precedent, or original tongues; … Saint Jerome, fountains… The same Saint Jerome affirmeth, …and Gratian hath not spared to put it into his Decree, That ‗as the credit of the old Books‘ (he meaneth of the Old Testament) ‗is to be tried by the Hebrew Volumes, so of the New by the Greek tongue,‘ he meaneth by the original Greek. If truth be tried by these tongues, then whence should a Translation be made, but out of them? These tongues therefore, the Scriptures we say in those tongues, we set before us to translate, being the tongues wherein God was pleased to speak to his Church by the Prophets and Apostles.‖ ―Therefore the word of God being set forth in Greek, becometh hereby like a candle set upon a candlestick, which giveth light to all that are in the house, or like a proclamation sounded forth in the market place, which most men presently take knowledge of; and therefore that language was fittest to contain the Scriptures, both for the first Preachers of the Gospel to appeal unto for witness, and for the learners also of those times to make search and trial by.‖ (―The Translators to the Reader‖) At this point, we are faced with a dilemma. For although the Translators identified the Hebrew and Greek originals as the source from which any translation must be made, and state that they set before themselves the Greek New Testament and Hebrew Old Testament to translate, the fact is that these scholars had been instructed by King James to adhere as closely as possible to the Bishop‘s Bible, and secondarily to previous English Bibles, when they could do so without violating the Greek and Hebrew texts: ―FOR the better ordering of the proceedings of the translators, his Majesty recommended the following rules to them, to be very carefully observed:— 1. The ordinary bible, read in the church, commonly called the Bishop‘s Bible, to be followed, and as little altered as the original will permit... 14. These translations to be used when they agree better with the text than the Bishop‘s Bible, viz. Tyndal‘s, Coverdale‘s, Matthews‘, Wilchurch‘s, Geneva.‖ 1. The final product—the 1611 King James Version—attests to the Translators‘ fidelity to the Bishops‘ Bible and earlier English translations, in many places against the Textus Receptus. Very often English words in the KJV which do not reflect the Hebrew and Greek texts can be traced to the Bishop‘s, Geneva, Great, Coverdale, Matthews, Tyndale, Wycliffe and, at times, the Latin Vulgate. Another uncomfortable fact is that that the Translator‘s Preface abounds with favorable references to, quotations from and high praises for the Roman Catholic scholars, St. Jerome and St. Augustine. A few excerpts from the Preface demonstrate the Translators‘ great esteem for the translator of the Latin Vulgate: ―This moved S. Jerome a most learned father, and the best linguist without controversy, of his age, or of any that went before him, to undertake the translating of the Old Testament, out of the very fountain with that evidence of great learning, judgment, industry, and faithfulness, that he had forever bound the Church unto him, in a debt of special remembrance and thankfulness... ―First S. Jerome saith,... ‗The Scripture being translated before in the languages of many Nations, doth show that those things that were added (by Lucian and Hesychius) are false.,‘ [S. Jerome. praef. in 4::Evangel.] So S. Jerome in that place... ―...The same Jerome elsewhere affirmeth that he, the time was, had set forth the translation of the Seventy suae linguae hominibus, i.e., for his countrymen of Dalmatia [S. Jerome. Sophronio.] Which words not only Erasmus doth understand to purport, that S. Jerome translated the Scripture into the Dalmatian tongue, but also Sixtus Senensis [Six. Sen. lib 4], and Alphonsus a` Castro [Alphon. lb 1 ca 23] (that we speak of no more) men not to be excepted against by them of Rome, do ingenuously confess as much... So, S. Chrysostom that lived in S. Jerome‘s time, giveth evidence with him: ―Many men's mouths have been open a good while (and yet are not stopped) with speeches about 78
the Translation so long in hand, or rather perusals of Translations made before: and ask what may be the reason, what the necessity of the employment: Hath the Church been deceived, say they, all this while?... We will answer them both briefly: and the former, being brethren, thus, with S. Jerome, ‗Do we condemn the ancient? In no case: but after the endeavors of them that were before us, we take the best pains we can in the house of God.,‘ As if he said, Being provoked by the example of the learned men that lived before my time, I have thought it my duty, to assay whether my talent in the knowledge of the tongues, may be profitable in any measure to God's Church, lest I should seem to laboured in them in vain, and lest I should be thought to glory in men, (although ancient,) above that which was in them. Thus S. Jerome may be thought to speak.‖ (―The Translators to the Reader‖) The fact is that, in a number of verses, the Translators of the 1611 KJV followed the Latin Vulgate instead of the Greek Textus Receptus. These departures from the Greek text and the specific verses where the Vulgate was preferred were documented by F.H.A. Scrivener in The Authorized Edition of the English Bible (1611): Its Subsequent Reprints and Modern Representatives. (See: Appendix A) By way of introduction to ―Appendix E. Passages wherein the text of the Authorized Bible seems to follow the Latin Vulgate‖ is inserted Dr. Scrivener‘s explanation of the various texts used by the Translators: ―In Appendix E has been brought together all that can throw light on the critical resources at the command of our Translators in the prosecution of their version of the New Testament. … It would be unjust to allege that the Translators failed to take advantage of the materials which were readily accessible, nor did they lack care or discernment in the application of them. Doubtless they rested mainly on the later editions of Beza‘s Greek Testament, whereof his fourth (1589) was somewhat more highly esteemed than his fifth (1598), the production of his extreme old age. But besides these, the Complutensian Polyglott, together with the several editions of Erasmus, and Stephen‘s of 1550, were constantly resorted to. Out of the 151 passages examined in Appendix E, wherein the differences between the texts of these books is sufficient to affect, however slightly the language of the version, our Translators abide with Beza against Stephen in 113 places, with Stephen against Beza in 59, with the Complutensian, Erasmus, or the Vulgate against both Stephen and Beza in 80. The influence of Beza is just as perceptible in the cases of their choice between the various readings which have been collected above (p. 58): the form approved by him is set in the text, the alternative is mostly banished to the margin. On certain occasions, it may be, the Translators yielded too much to Beza‘s somewhat arbitrary decisions; but they lived at a time when his name was the very highest among Reformed theologians, when means for arriving at an independent judgment were few and scattered, and when the first principles of textual criticism had yet to be gathered from a long process of painful induction. His most obvious and glaring errors their good sense easily enabled them to avoid. (cf. Matt. i. 23; John xviii, 20).‖ (pp. 59-60) ―Appendix E. Passages wherein the text of the Authorized Bible seems to follow the Latin Vulgate. ―It may be useful to subjoin a list, probably quite an incomplete one, of places in which the Translators of 1611 have apparently followed the Latin Vulgate, mostly after the example of Tyndale, sometimes of Versions later than his, especially of the Rhemish of 1582, whereof the Epistle of the Translators to the Reader speaks so contemptuously… It is probable that at least some of the passages collected in the first section of the present Appendix, wherein the Authorized Version is supported by Compl., Vulg., only were derived from the Vulgate rather than the Complutensian. In I Cor. xiv. 10; I John i. 5, where Colinaeus (1534) and the Vulgate alone favour the rendering of 1611, the Vulgate is almost certainly their authority, not Colinaeus. ―Matt. xii. 24, 27; Mark iii. 22; Luke xi. 15, 18, 19, Beelzebub. So Tynd. (So also Compl. in Matt. x. 79
25). Mark xiii. 37 ϋ quod. xiv. 43 om. ών. So Tynd. Luke i. 35 nascetur. So Tynd. i. 49 μεγάλα magna. So Tynd. xx. 35 habebuntur. So Tynd. xxiii. 34 sortes: but sortem Matt. xxvii. 35; Mark xv. 24; John xix. 24, the English versions having lots in all four places, save that Wicklif alone keeps up the distinction of Vulg. xxiii. 46. παραηίθεμαι commendo. So Tynd. John vii. 9 om. ζέ. So Tynd. x. 16 unum ovile Vulg. So Great Bible and Geneva 1557. xii. 26 om, καί after εζηαι. So Rhemish Version 1582. xviii. xviii. 1 ηοΰ Κεδρών, Cedron. So Tynd. Acts ii. 22 approbatum. So Tynd. iv. 32 cor unum Vulg. Clementine. So Tynd.vi. 3 καηαζηήζωμεν constituamus. So Tynd. vii. 26 ζσνήλλαζζεν reconciliabat. So Tynd. vii. 44 om. ó : loquens. So Tynd. x. 20 itaque (άλλά). So Tynd. viii. 1 Simeon (Σίμων Er.: Simon Vulg. in ch. xv. 14)., xiii. 15 εί ηις si quis. So Tynd. xvii. 30 hujus ignorantiae. So Tynd. xix. 20 Θεοΰ Dei Vulg. Clementine. So Tynd. xxiii. 15 aliquid certius (om. ηά). So Tynd. xxvi. 6 παηέρας ημών patres nostros. So Tynd. Rom. xiv. 2 alius enim. So Rhemish 1582. xvi. 4 suas cervices. So Tynd. I Cor. xiii. 1 velut aes sonans. So Tynd. xvi. 23 domini nostri. So Geneva 1557. Gal. iv. 15 text : ubi. So Rhemish 1582. Eph. vi. 24 om. Άμην. Vulg. MSS. (A.V. 1611) : not Vulg. Clementine (A.V. 1616). Phil. ii. 21 Ίηζοΰ Χριζηοΰ Jesu Christi. So Tynd. Col. i. 4 quam habetis. So Tynd. nearly. i. 24. qui nunc. So Rhemish 1582. 1 Thess. ii. 12 qui vocavit. So Tynd. ii. 13 ούτ ώς λόγον non ut verbum. So Tynd. ii. 16 enim. So Tynd. iv. 1 ut quemadmodum. So Rhemish 1582. I Tim. i. 17 immortali. So Tynd. iii. 15 oporteat te. So Tynd. iv. 15 om. έν : manifestus sit omnibus (A.V. marg. in all things). 2 Tim. i. 18 διηκόνηζέ μοι ministravit mihi Vulg. Clementine. So Tynd. James iii. 14 cordibus vestris. So Tynd. I Pet. ii. 13 om. οΰν So Tynd. I John iii. 20 om όηι second. So Tynd. v. 8 hi tres Vulg. Clementine. So Tynd. 2 John 3 έζηω sit. So Tynd. Rev. xxiii. 10 qui in captivatatem duxerit, in captivitatem vadet. Vulg. Clementine. So Tynd. xvi. 11 om. έκ secund. So Tynd. xvii. 9 et hic. So Tynd. xviii. 23 Φάνη lucebit. So Geneva 1557.‖ 2. Despite the evidence found in the Translators‘ Preface and in the KJV, that is, readings undeniably from the Vulgate, Gail Riplinger denies that the KJV Translators ever consulted the Vulgate: ―Fifteen total editions of the Greek New Testament were printed by Erasmus, Stephanus, Beza, and the Elzivirs. They are, in the main, identical. The KJV translators availed themselves of all of these, as well as numerous Greek manuscripts and vernacular editions. On the title page of the KJV, the translators said that the King James Bible was ‗Translated out of the Originall Greeke.‘ They would not have made this claim if they did not have authoritative proof or if they had followed any Latin Vulgate readings, as some critics, like Frederick Scrivener, claim.‖ (Awe, p. 949) The 1611 KJV title page actually states, ―Newly Translated out of the Originall tongues: & with the former Translations diligently compared and revised, by his Majesties Special Commandment.‖ That they consulted St. Jerome may be deduced from the textual evidence, their profuse praise of Jerome and his translation of the Old Testament from the Hebrew, and other statements in the Preface: ―For when Your Highness had once out of deep judgment apprehended how convenient it was, that out of the Original Sacred Tongues, together with comparing of the labours, both in our own, and other foreign Languages, of many worthy men who went before us, there should be one more exact Translation of the holy Scriptures into the English Tongue...‖
80
―But now the Latin Translations were too many to be all good, for they were infinite... Again they were not out of the Hebrew fountain (we speak of the Latin Translations of the Old Testament) but out of the Greek stream, therefore the Greek being not altogether clear, the Latin derived from it must needs be muddy. This moved S. Jerome a most learned father, and the best linguist without controversy, of his age, or of any that went before him, to undertake the translating of the Old Testament, out of the very fountain with that evidence of great learning, judgment, industry, and faithfulness, that he had forever bound the Church unto him, in a debt of special remembrance and thankfulness.‖ (―The Translators to the Reader‖) Considering Gail Riplinger‘s plentiful assertions concerning the translation process of the 1611 KJV, one would expect to find the Translators‘ Preface presented as a source document in the Appendix of her book. Instead of this important document, there is a 60-page Appendix on the ―KJV‘s ABCs‖ – ―Bible meanings for each of the 26 letters of the English alphabet.‖ There seems to be a good reason for this oversight or omission, for the Preface would have revealed that her assertions altogether disagree with the views expressed by the Translators. In fact, this source document patently contradicts the entire thesis of Gail‘s book – that the King James Version is perfect and inerrant, that every word, nay every letter, was directly inspired by God, that any revision of the King James Version is an attack on God‘s Word and that, where the KJV differs from the Hebrew and Greek texts, the KJV is the final authority. “THE ENGLISH CORRECTS THE GREEK” The notion that the KJV corrects the Greek Textus Receptus is not only illogical, it is heretical, denying the supremacy and inerrancy of the Hebrew and Greek texts. It also contradicts the testimony of the Translators of the 1611 King James Version set forth in their Preface, which unfortunately has been missing from King James Bibles for two hundred years. ―The Translators to the Reader‖ documents the process undertaken by the Translators to produce the 1611 King James Version, their belief in the divine inspiration and superiority of the Hebrew and Greek Texts, their conviction that no translation can be perfect, not even their own, and their purpose which was simply to improve upon other Reformation Bibles that were also based on the Textus Receptus, i.e. ―...to make a good one better, or out of many good ones, one principal good one...‖ Gail Riplinger is a protégé of Peter Ruckman who is the founder and President of Pensacola Bible College. Notorious for his rudeness, scathing sarcasm and even profanity in his writings and sermons, Ruckman regularly blasts those who disagree with him as ―idiots,‖ ―stupid fools‖ and worse. Peter Ruckman has brought further reproach on the name of Jesus Christ and His Church by his personal life, which at last count includes two divorces and three marriages. Public records disclose that Gail Riplinger has also been married three times and divorced twice, after her profession of faith in Jesus Christ. (Source: http://www.avpublications.org/) Peter Ruckman‘s worst mischief, however, has been to launch a movement which heretically contends that the King James Version is superior to the Greek Textus Receptus. For, according to Dr. Ruckman, the King James Bible represents a new revelation from God to the translators of the 1611 Authorised Version. Also, states Ruckman, the KJV alone is the inspired Word of God (hence the term ―KJV-Only‖) and, in the many verses where the KJV differs from the Greek Textus Receptus, Dr. Ruckman pontificates, ―the English corrects the Greek.‖
81
―Correct the Greek with the English. It is always the best policy; the one that God will bless. Feel free (with a clear conscience) in always correcting the Greek Receptus with the Holy Bible [meaning the King James]…‖ 3. ―Three things should be emphasized…1. The absolute insanity of translating any Greek text literally, word for word, in order to give a reader THE WORDS God wants him to have in another language.‖ 4. ―The King James Bible…often contains revelations of the truth that evidently cannot be found in any Greek text.‖ 5. ―Moral: Mistakes in the A.V. 1611 are advanced revelation!‖ 6. ―The King James Bible was ‗GIVEN BY INSPIRATION OF GOD.‘ (2 Timothy 3:16)‖ 7. ―The King James‘ text is the last and final statement that God has given the world and He has given it in the universal language of the 20th century... The truth is God slammed the door of revelation shut in 389 B.C. and slammed it shut again in 1611.‖ 8. Gail Riplinger concurs with Peter Ruckman that ―the KJV corrects the Greek‖ text. To support this modern advance in Bible scholarship, she references an article in that scholarly publication, The Ladies Home Journal: ―…the November 1921 issue of the popular secular magazine, Ladies Home Journal, published an article entitled, ‗Human Nature in the Bible,‘ by William Lyon Phelps. The article stated, ―[O]ur English translation is even better than the Hebrew and Greek. There is only one way to explain this; I have no theory to account for the so-called ‗inspiration of the Bible,‘ but I am confident that the Authorized Version [KJV] was inspired… all others [modern English versions] are inferior‘ (pp. 8, 166, 167)‖ (Awe, p. 522) Gail seems to have assumed the Papal mantle of proscribing the reading of the original Scriptures due to the fact that students of God‘s Word are too ignorant to understand a Greek-English Interlinear translation. ―Neither Berry‘s edition of Stephanus nor Scrivener‘s edition should be used, as some do today, to ‗correct‘ the KJV. These texts can create unnecessary confusion for students who have one of these two printed editions and are comparing it to the Received Text of the KJV.‖ (Awe, p, 952) According to Gail, Christians will be confused by learning the meanings of the Greek words in Scripture and may therefore only read the Bible which bears the KJV-Only Imprimatur. We think it is Gail Riplinger who is ―creating unnecessary confusion for students‖ of God‘s Word by misleading them with deceptive terms like ―Received Text of the KJV‖! Those who contend against the heretical teaching that ―the KJV corrects the Greek Textus Receptus‖ are ridiculed as pseudo-intellectuals whose conviction of the superiority of the Textus Receptus is only ―a fog of emotional steam.‖ ―A fog of emotional steam, that carries no substance, precedes comments such as ‗I don‘t believe the KJV corrects ‗the original Greek‘ or ‗I don‘t believe the KJV corrects the ‗Majority Text‘ or the ‗Textus Receptus.‘ The desire to appear intelligent or superior by referring to ‗the 82
Greek‘ and downplaying the common man‘s Bible, exposes a naivety concerning textual history and those documents which today‘s pseudo-intellectuals call ‗the critical text,‘ ‗the original Greek,‘ ‗the Majority Text,‘ or the ‗Textus Receptus.‘‖ (Awe, p. 956) Gail is sounding less and less like the KJV Translators nowadays and more and more like Westcott and Hort, who also stigmatized those who used the Textus Receptus as the basis for correcting translations: ―The other great cause of its insufficiency [Griesbach‘s New Testament] we have already mentioned…, [is] his use of the Received Text as a basis for correction.‖ 9. By bullying many Christians who love the King James Version to a radical extreme the King James Translators never envisioned, nor would have condoned, Gail Riplinger and Peter Ruckman have functioned as agents provocateurs with whom modern version proponents love to associate the King James Version instead of addressing the serious problems with their modern versions. In reality, the Ruckman/Riplinger dogma is no less heretical than the textual theory and liberal theology of Westcott and Hort which has found its way into modern versions. Both sides of the Bible version dialectic have set aside the Greek Textus Receptus as the inerrant Word of God and the standard for Bible translation. Having dispensed with the inspired Word of God, the Greek Textus Receptus, Gail Riplinger, now unfettered by those meddlesome resources, is free to lead multitudes of King James Only readers into the Great Beyond of ‗letter meanings‘ which ultimately leads to Kabbalah. THE ALTAR OF SACRIFICE By strange coincidence, Jewish Kabbalism is also the core doctrine and ritual basis of Freemasonry. ―Freemasonry is a Jewish establishment, whose history, grades, official appointments, passwords, and explanations are Jewish from beginning to end.‖ 10. ―Freemasonry is based on Judaism. Eliminate the teachings of Judaism from the Masonic ritual and what is left?‖ 11. ―...Leo Taxil and the Cabbalist handbook of Brother Constant, 30th Grade of Freemasonry… writes: ‗This report confirms the opinion of almost all authors who have dealt with this devilish magic, that all branches and practices of sorcery have their origin in the Jewish Cabbala.‘ ―Since the Jews were without doubt the founder and secret leaders of Freemasonry, they also introduced into some freemasonic organisations the cult of Lucifer. This is proved by Leo Taxil, who has employed himself thoroughly within this material. Concerning the 20th Grade (degree) of certain rites he writes: ‗The Prince of the Tabernacle is now prepared for the freemasonic revelation, for in the 20th degree of the Grand Patriarch he has worshipped...Lucifer, and hears the summons of the President: ‗Be like the morning star, who announces the day; bring the world light, in the holy name of Lucifer, dispel the darkness‘. 12. A former 33º Freemason, the late Rev. James Shaw exposed the doctrine and rituals of Freemasonry as having their basis in Jewish Kabbalah:
83
―Albert Pike wrote that the ‗G‘ displayed in English speaking lodges is merely a corruption of the ‗YOD‘ (with which it should be replaced), and that ‗the mysterious YOD of the Kabala‘ is the ‗image of the Kabalistic Phallus.‘ (3) The ‗Kabalah‘ he refers to here is a medieval book of the occult, a highly mystical and magical interpretation of the Bible, (4) and important sourcebook for sorcerers and magicians. (5)... ―Albert Pike, in writing on the subject of Masonry‘s source-book said, ‗Masonry is a search after light. That search leads us directly back, as you see, to the Kabalah.‘ (Morals and Dogma, page 741). The Kabalah, then, seems to be the actual sourcebook of Masonry and the Bible merely (as it is spoken of in the ritual) a piece of the ‗furniture‘ of the Lodge… 3. Pike, Albert, Morals and Dogma, pp. 5, 757, 758, 771, 772. 4. Cabala (Kabalah) is a medieval and modern system of theosophy, mysticism and thaumatology (magic), Webster‘s New Collegiate Dictionary. p. 53. 5. Baskin, Wade, The Sorcerer‘s Handbook, New York, Philosophical Library, 1974.‖ 13. The Kabbalah is the sourcebook of Masonry, but is the Bible a mere ―piece of furniture‖ in the Masonic lodge? The official Bible of Freemasonry, which is on display in Masonic lodges, is the King James Version. Why is Freemasonry ―King James Only‖? Is there a connection between King James Onlyism and Freemasonry? Later chapters of this report deal with the issue of ―Baptist Successionism‖ providing historical evidence linking the Anabaptist and Baptists, not with the New Testament Church as Baptist Successionists claim, but with Rosicrucianism and Freemasonry. We were therefore not surprised to find evidence of a Masonic nature in Peter Ruckman‘s Bible Baptist Catalogue. Page 1 features a full page heraldic image of a King James Bible with two crossed swords overlaying it. This illustration is strikingly similar to a Masonic photo in the ―Picture Book‖ supplement to John Daniel‘s book, Scarlet & The Beast. The Picture Book supplement is titled ―Two Faces of Freemasonry‖ and the photo of a session of the Scottish Rite Supreme Council appears in ―Section 1 – Masonic Symbology‖ on page 27 of that section. The captions above and below the photo state: Figure 26. King James Version of Masonic Bible on Altar of Sacrifice. Masons prefer KJV because King James I was a Scottish Templar Mason.* Crossed Swords on a Bible indicate Scottish Rite‟s Supreme Council is in session. Picture from Life Magazine 10-8-56 ―Freemasonry claims that crossed swords on a Bible represents its protection of God‘s Holy Word. Yet we document time and again in Scarlet and the Beast that Masonry plans to destroy Christianity. First, by infiltration. If that fails, by separation of church and state. If that fails, by relentless persecution.‖ 14. The ―King James Version…on Altar of Sacrifice‖? Could this be the esoteric meaning of the cover of the Bible Baptist Catalogue? Certainly Peter Ruckman has done irreparable damage to the King James Version by his bad witness and divisive influence on the Christian community. It is also true that that rudeness and contentiousness seem to characterize King James Onlyism which is only surpassed by the deceptiveness of its more egregious
84
claims. With their lies and contentions the Ruckmanites have, in a most sinister way, placed the King James Bible on the Altar of Sacrifice. *Evidence the King James I was not a Scottish Templar Mason is presented in our audio series, ―Did Francis Bacon Edit the KJV?‖ An excerpt from a Knight Templar York Rite Initiation reveals an initiate‘s solemn vow taken before a Masonic altar with a Bible on top of which are crossed swords: ―Additionally, the Candidate made a solemn obligation kneeling, upon two crossed swords, before the altar upon which is a Bible on top of which is another pair of crossed swords on which he lays his hands: ‗Furthermore do I promise and swear, that I will support and maintain the by-laws of the Encampment of which I may hereafter become a member, the edicts and regulations of the Grand Encampment of the United States of America, so far as the same shall come to my knowledge.‘‖ 15. The Knights Templar are found in the higher degrees of Freemasonry and membership is limited to Masons who profess belief in the Christian religion. Is Peter Ruckman also a Scottish Templar Mason? Echoing Ruckman and Riplinger, Dan Brown revealed in his best-seller, The Da Vinci Code, that the Prieuré de Sion and its network of secret brotherhoods consider English to be a pure language, and a sacred, secret tongue: ―The Priory, like many European secret societies at odds with the Church, had considered English the only European pure language for centuries. Unlike French, Spanish and Italian, which were rooted in Latin - the tongue of the Vatican - English was linguistically removed from Rome‘s propaganda machine, and therefore became a sacred, secret tongue for those brotherhoods educated enough to learn it.‖ (The Da Vinci Code, p. 303) John Daniel‘s ―Picture Book‖ reveals the esoteric interpretation of the crossed swords, which symbolizes the revival of Mystery Babylon. ―Crossed swords...have a dual meaning. First, the extended hand of fellowship at the end of one point represents a peaceful return to the Babylonian religion. The sharp point on the second sword represents the military means by which the Babylonian system will be restored, should the peaceful means fail.‖ 16. The ―peaceful return to the Babylonian religion‖ is the covert mission of a network of religious movements, such as Freemasonry, to revive the mystery religion of ancient Babylon. KJV-Only advocates have written extensively about the Babylonian Harlot, which they identify as the Roman Catholic Church. They have been mysteriously silent, however, about Freemasonry. And they have looked the other way as Gail Riplinger leads a crusade against the Textus Receptus and multitudes into the Babylonian mystery religion via her primer on Kabbalah, In Awe of Thy Word. Why have KJV-Only advocates largely ignored Gail Riplinger‘s false teachings? Those who have written critiques come woefully short of adequately addressing the many errors and outright heresy which Gail now propagates with impunity. David Cloud did expose her deceptive misquoting of sources in New Age Bible Versions. 17. He also wrote a one page critique of In Awe of Thy Word in which, however, he also promoted the corrupt Old Latin versions. 18. (See also Chapter 16) And he has written volumes promoting heretical medieval cults as the ―true Christians‖ who preserved the true Greek text. (See Chapter 13 and Chapter 15) On the issue of which text should be the Christian‘s final authority, the Greek Textus Receptus or the King James Bible, David Cloud stands firmly in the middle. 85
―My final biblical authority is the King James Bible itself. I do not correct the King James Bible and I do not support any corrections of it. I do not believe it needs to be fixed. I have never corrected the King James Bible with the Greek or the Hebrew. At the same time, I know that God gave the Scriptures in Hebrew and Greek. The holy men of old who spoke by the Holy Spirit (referred to in 2 Peter 1:21) were speaking Hebrew and Greek. Those are the languages God chose. I am not going to stand here and say God made a mistake and that it is wrong for men to go directly to those languages to find the inspired Word of God... ―...I have never been a corrector of the KJV and it has always been my final authority... ―...The AV is the authority. My writings definitely do not contain ‗corrected passages from the original Greek.‘... Further, I don‘t see that there are contradictions between the Received Text and the AV. If someone asks what edition of the Received Text do I believe is perfect, my answer is the King James Bible edition of the Received Text is perfect.‖ 19. It is not true that ―the King James Bible edition of the Received Text is perfect.‖ There are errors in the King James Bible which are documented in Chapter 8 through Chapter 11 of this report. On the critical issue of translating foreign language Bibles, David Cloud seems to equivocate: ―...not once have I ever corrected the King James Bible... For the Ruckmanite, though, that is not enough. To be a REAL Bible believer by their strange standards one must submit to Ruckman‘s theory that the King James Bible is advanced revelation, the apex of Bible transmission, that the King James Bible itself was given by divine inspiration, that it is superior to the Hebrew and Greek in which the Scripture was originally given, and that every foreign language translation today should be based on the English King James Bible.‖ 20 ―I founded a project in the 1980s to translate the Bible into an Asian language. One of the principles that I established for that project was that the translation would be from the KJV. The translators could use various tools to dig into the meaning of the AV, but the final authority would be the KJV itself and not some lexicon or commentary. Absolutely no textual departures from the KJV would be allowed. That has always been my position.‖ 21. This statement mistakenly assumes the KJV never departs from the Greek Textus Receptus, but this is not the case as F.H.A. Scrivener has documented in his meticulous analysis of the KJV: ―There are, however, many places in which the Authorised Version is at variance with Beza‘s text; chiefly because it retains language inherited from Tyndale or his successors, which had been founded on the text of other Greek editions. ...in some places the Authorised Version corresponds but loosely with any form of Greek original, while it exactly follows the Latin Vulgate. All variations from Beza‘s Text of 1598, in number about 190… ―...In the following places the Latin Vulgate appears to have been the authority adopted in preference to Beza… ‖ 22. Please see previously documented Scrivener‘s ―Appendix E. Passages wherein the text of the Authorized Bible seems to follow the Latin Vulgate.‖ Because the KJV departs in some places from the Greek Textus Receptus, a foreign language translation based on the KJV would also depart from the Greek text in the same places. Some of these departures will have serious consequences during the Tribulation period; therefore, using the KJV as the basis of foreign language translations will to export these errors to foreign countries. (See ―Translation Errors in the KJV Which Affect the Interpretation of Bible Prophecy‖) Is spreading error the goal of King James Onlyism? We suspect this is the case given the intransigence of its major proponents, who refuse to acknowledge textual differences between the KJV and the Received Text, who resist efforts by others to make these textual differences known, who 86
suppress the Translators‘ Preface and discourage the use of Hebrew and Greek resources which reveal differences between the KJV and the Textus Receptus. It was from D.A. Waite we learned that ―King James-Only‖ means literally ―no Greek and no Hebrew.‖ Also, that he believes the Ruckmanite teaching to be heretical. Dr. Waite‘s stated position on the matter of which text must be the Christian‘s final authority is as follows: ―You can never correct the original text of Hebrew and Greek that God authored and has preserved with English, Spanish, French or any other translation. ...you cannot corrupt and change the Greek and Hebrew text and correct it with the King James Bible or any other language version. This is illogical, unscriptural, and should never be done... ―We cannot change those original language manuscripts by the King James Bible and try to correct them that way and say they give us some kind of ‗advanced revelation.‘ This is the position that Dr. Peter Ruckman and Dr. Samuel Gipp have taken and I believe that this is wrong... ―When Samuel Gipp says that the English is the only way to go and that the English corrects, gives ‗advanced revelation,‘ and at times even contradicts the Hebrew and Greek, we believe that this is total heresy. God‘s Word in Hebrew and Greek are the very words that God spoke to the original writers, gave to us through accurate copies, and preserved for us down to the present age. To say that the only word that God has preserved for us is in English and not preserved in Hebrew and Greek and that everyone who wants to know the Word of God must learn English is blatant heresy and perversion of truth.‖ 23. Although Dr. Waite‘s stated position sounds good, his writings reveal that he uses the King James Version as the standard of version comparison instead of the Textus Receptus. (See Chapter 10) This double-mindedness seems to be true of most KJV-Only defenders who only pay lip service to the Greek Textus Receptus. We find it exceedingly strange that the KJV-Only experts who claim to deny the false teachings of Riplinger and Ruckman seem to have never consulted the Preface of the 1611 King James Version to ascertain the views of the Translators concerning their own translation. Why do they not quote in their writings the position of the KJV Translators on the issues of divine inspiration and preservation, on the superiority of the Greek and Hebrew versus vernacular translations, on the use of Greek and Hebrew resources, on the fallibility of their translation, on the textual standard for all Bible translation? If the KJV Translators were ―divinely inspired‖ in their work of translating the Holy Bible, as Ruckmanites claim, surely their views on the inspiration, preservation, and translation of the Bible were informed by the Holy Spirit as well. If those who profess to defend the King James Bible ever consulted the Preface to the 1611 KJV to learn the Translators‘ view of their own translation, we have yet to read about it in their copious books and articles. Had King James Only advocates, from the outset, deferred to the Translators‘ stated views on the translation of Scripture in general, and on their own translation in particular, the Ruckmanite heresy and the damage it has done might have been averted. At this late hour, we do not expect to end the Ruckmanite madness, but for the sake of many sincere Christians who are so badly misinformed, we felt it imperative to publish the ―The Translators to the Reader‖ and to review in the next chapter the stated beliefs of the scholars who personally translated the 1611 King James Bible.
ENDNOTES
87
1. Isaac H. Hall, ed., The Revised New Testament and History of Revision, giving a literal reprint of the Authorized English Edition of the Revised New Testament, with a brief history of the origin and transmission of the New Testament Scriptures, and of its many versions and revisions that have been made, also a complete history of this last great combined movement of the best scholarship of the world; with reasons for the effort; advantages gained; sketches of the eminent men engaged upon it, etc., etc. prepared under the direction of Professor Isaac H. Hall, LL.B.; Ph. D. Philadelphia: Hubbard Brothers; Atlanta: C.R. Blackall & Co.; New York: A.L. Bancroft & Co., 1881, http://www.bible-researcher.com/kjvhist.html 2. Scrivener, F.H.A. The Authorized Edition of the English Bible (1611): Its Subsequent Reprints and Modern Representatives, Cambridge Press, 1884, pp. 262-263. 3. Ruckman, Peter. How to Teach the Original Greek, Pensacola Bible Institute, 1992, p. 117. 4. Ibid. p. 124. 5. Ibid. p. 110. 6. Ruckman, Peter. The Christian’s Handbook of Manuscript Evidence, Pensacola Bible Institute, 1970, p. 126. 7. Ruckman, Peter. The Christian’s Book of Biblical Scholarship, Pensacola Bible Inst., 1988, pp. 271-2. 8. Ruckman, Peter. The Monarch of the Books, Pensacola Bible Inst., 1980, p. 9. 9. Westcott, B.F. and F.J.A. Hort. The New Testament in the Original Greek: The Text Revised by B.F. Westcott & F.J.A. Hort, Cambridge Press, p. 184. 10. Rabbi Isaac Mayer Wise, B‘nai B‘rith, ―The Israelite of America,‖ Aug. 3, 1866. 11. The Jewish Tribune, editorial, 1927. 12. Pinay, Maurice. The Plot Against the Church, St. Anthony Press, 1967, pp. 561-2. 13. Shaw, James and Tom McKinney, The Deadly Deception, Huntington House, 1988, p. 144. 14. Daniels, John. Scarlet & The Beast Picture Book, Section 1, ―Masonic Symbology, 2007, http://scarletandthebeast.com/PB%206-23-07/PB-1.pdf 15. ―Christ and Cross-Bones,‖ Mike Restivo, Meta-Religion, http://www.metareligion.com/Secret_societies/Groups/Order_of_Skull/christ_and_cross_bones.htm 16. Daniels, op. cit., p. 51. 17. ―The Problem With New Age Bible Versions,‖ David Cloud, Way of Life Literature, http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/newage.htm 18. ―What About Gail Riplinger‘s New Book?‖, David Cloud, Friday Church News Notes, Aug. 12, 2005, http://www30.pageplanet.com/media/fridaynews/pdf/2005/20050812.pdf 19. ―My Position on the King James Bible,‖ David Cloud, Jan. 30, 2006, Fundamental Baptist News Service, http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/fbns/fbns356.html 20. ―Ruckmanites Lying About Me Again,‖ David Cloud, July 9, 2007, FBIS, http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/ruckmanites-lying.html 21. ―My Position on the King James Bible,‖ op. cit. 22. Scrivener‘s Annotated Greek New Testament, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1908, pp. viii-ix. 23. Waite, D.A. Foes of the King James Bible Refuted, Bible For Today, 1997, pp. 6, 7, 8. WATCH UNTO PRAYER http://watch-unto-prayer.org
88
CHAPTER VII “THE TRANSLATORS TO THE READER” Were Christians who have been influenced by King James Onlyism to carefully read the Translator‘s Preface to the 1611 KJV, they would be disabused of the illusions and falsehoods that have been planted in their minds by KJV-Onlyism. A refreshing eye-opener, the Preface documents the Translators‘ intentions and the translation process they employed, their high view of the Hebrew and Greek texts, their opinions of previous translations and Bible revision in general, and much, much more. The Translators‘ Preface has not been included in King James Bibles since the British and Foreign Bible Society and the American Bible Society assumed responsibility for the translation and worldwide distribution of the Bible. Founded in 1804, the British and Foreign Bible Society was under the direction of the Grand Lodge of England where it held its meetings. Funded by the British and Foreign Bible Society, the American Bible Society was likewise a Masonically-directed organization. Though ostensibly founded for the purpose of circulating the Word of God, the Baptist founders of the British and Foreign Bible Society and the American Bible Society also took it upon themselves to eliminate the Translators‘ Preface and marginal notes from King James Bibles. This policy was incorporated into the Constitution of both Bible societies as the defining article: ―In 1804, the British and Foreign Bible Society was formed ; Joseph Hughes, a Baptist minister, bore a prominent part in that work. He was appointed one of its secretaries, and became, as it has been expressed, ‗the hands and feet, as he had been the head of the institution.‘ Its constitution provided that its ‗sole object shall be to encourage a wider circulation of the Holy Scriptures without note or comment.‘ Baptists were large contributors to its treasury... ―By the Constitution of the American Bible Society, its Managers are, in the circulation of the Holy Scriptures, restricted to such copies as are without note or comment, and in the English language to the version in common use. The design of these restrictions clearly seems to have been to simplify and mark out the duties of the Society ; so that all the religious denominations of which it is comprised might harmoniously unite in performing those duties.‖ (Thomas Armitage, A History of the Baptists, pp. 885, 894) The British and Foreign Bible Society was directed by prominent members of the Quatuor Coronati Lodge which was under the direction of the United Grand Lodge of England. The American Bible Society was directed by Dewitt Clinton who was Grand Master of the Masonic Lodge of New York. The stated purpose of these Masonically-controlled, Baptist-led Bible Societies for removing the Translators‘ marginal notes and comments, which would have included the Preface, was to unite all religious denominations in the task of circulating the Bible. Our report ―The Unauthorized History of Bible Revision‖ documents that this joint venture eventuated in the complete revision of the King James Bible which – contrary to KJV-Only propaganda – began with Baptists in the United States who collaborated with the English Revision Committee led by Westcott and Hort. There may have been another reason for the omission of the Translators‘ Preface: to deliberately conceal from readers of the King James Bible important facts concerning its translation, thereby creating an information gap that would foster the conditions of mass ignorance which Gail Riplinger and other fundamental Baptists are now exploiting to launch an attack against the Textus Receptus. What other book is published without its own preface, the preliminary essay in which the author – or, in this case, the translators – explain their intentions and methods of research, define the scope of their work and present invaluable background information to the
89
reader, in order to avoid misunderstanding and misrepresentation of the work? Of this travesty – the omission of the Translators‘ Preface from the King James Bible – the late manuscript scholar, E.J. Goodspeed, wrote: ―But it is the omission of the great Preface, ‗The Translators to the Reader,‘ that is most to be regretted. The makers of the version in their day felt that the work called for some explanation and defense, and entrusted the writing of a suitable preface to Myles Smith, of Brasenose College, Oxford, afterward Bishop of Gloucester. His Preface for many years stood at the beginning of the version. But for various reasons – its length, its obscurity, its controversial and academic character – it has gradually come to be omitted by modern publishers of the King James, which is thus made to present itself to the reader abruptly and without explanation or introduction of any kind. ―The result of this upon the hosts of ignorant and untrained people who use the version is disastrous in the extreme. My own correspondence abounds in letters from well-meaning people who have been led into the strangest misconceptions by its absence. It is indeed long, controversial, and pedantic, but this very fact is significant. And with all its faults, it says some things about the version and its makers and their aims that still greatly need to be said, indeed, that must be said, if the readers of the version are to be given the protection and guidance that they deserve and that its makers provided for them. ―For they will accept this guidance and protection from no one else. It is idle for any modern to attempt to correct these misapprehensions; his efforts will only be resented or ignored. But if the King James Bible itself can be shown to say to its adherents the very things they most need to know about their version, it will be possible for them to benefit by them without embarrassment or inconsistency. All the more necessary, it would seem, for restoring the great Preface, or at least the essential parts of it, to its rightful place in the ‗Authorized Bible.‘... ―That that edition should continue to sink into greater and greater misconception and misrepresentation, when much of it might be prevented by the simple and obvious device of restoring the Preface, is intolerable. That version is too deeply freighted with religious values to be left at the mercy of every charlatan to exploit. Its Preface is a great monument of sound biblical learning and method. Its readers need it as they have never needed it before. It lies ready to our hands, enfolding in itself the very correctives modern vagaries about the King James Bible so sadly need.‖ (―Thesis on the Translators‘ Preface‖) We are left to wonder why it has been left to a modern scholar to publish this compelling and righteous protest of the removal of the Translators‘ Preface from the King James Version. Why is it that a modern scholar endeavored for years to restore the Translators‘ Preface to the King James Version, but among the multitude of KJV-Only advocates who only claim to defend the KJV, not one has (to our knowledge) ever registered a complaint about the removal of the Preface and demanded its restoration by the publishing houses and Bible societies. Nor have any of them independently published King James Bibles which include the Preface. Nor do the so-called defenders of the 1611 King James Version educate their readers as to the contents of the Translators‘ Preface; nor do they post it on their websites. Nor do they cite the Translators‘ own words in their defense of the KJV, but instead invent dishonest explanations concerning the various translation issues, such as the Translators‘ choice of ―Easter‖ instead of ―Passover‖ in Acts 12:4, which is forthrightly explained in the Translators‘ Preface. We submit that inclusion of the Translators‘ Preface in King James Bibles would provide KJV readers with the facts concerning the translation of the 1611 Authorised Version – facts that, as stated by E.J. Goodspeed, would enlighten and protect them against the great quantity of false and misleading information that has issued forth 90
from the leadership of the KJV-Only movement. It is for this reason that we recommend Professor Edgar J. Goodspeed‘s ―Thesis on the Translators‘ Preface‖ – not as an endorsement of modern scholarship – but to inform our readers and create awareness of what we believe has been the deliberate suppression of the Preface to the 1611 King James Version. The Translators made numerous statements that would expose the heresy of Ruckmanisim, if only their Preface were made more available to Christians. As for complete quotations from the Translators‘ Preface, it‘s slim pickins in KJV-Only publications. Gail Riplinger ought to have included the Preface in her book and posted it on her website, but no, the reader must request it from her organization. This offer is found in small print in Chapter 15 of In Awe of Thy Word: ―Four primary records, some recently discovered, document the thoughts of the KJV translators: 1. The Annotated Bishop's Bible ... held in the Bodleian Library in England, catalogued as ‗Bib. Eng. b.I.‘... 2. Manuscript 98: A trial translation of the Epistles (1607-1608) by the Westminster committee. 3. The handwritten English, Latin and Greek notes of KJV translator John Bois, showing the final work on the Epistles and Revelation... 4. The Translators to the Reader: Preface to the King James Bible, by Miles Smith (available at A.V. Publications)‖ (In Awe of Thy Word, p. 524) Instead of including the Translators‘ Preface in her book, a chapter is devoted to ―Manuscript 98, the Annotated Bishop‘s Bible, and the handwritten notes from the decisive and final translation committee meeting.‖ (Awe, p. 31) Instead of the Translators‘ Preface presented for all to read, the reader is given minutiae about various KJV readings and selected information about the life of John Bois from Ward Allen‘s translation of the ―Hidden Handwritten Notes of John Bois‖ which ―had been lost but a copy of them was recently discovered for our generation. They are catalogued as MS C.C.C. 312 in the Fulman Collection of Corpus Christi College Library, Oxford University.‖ (Awe, p. 532) These virtually inaccessible source documents, along with the Translators‘ Preface, which the reader can obtain by special request from AV Publications, ―document the thoughts of the KJV translators.‖ (Awe, p. 524) How many readers of In Awe of Thy Word have actually contacted AV Publications for a copy of the Translators‘ Preface? Gail could easily have directed her readers to one of many websites which post the Translators‘ Preface, or simply suggested they type ―The Translators to the Reader‖ into any search engine, which brings up scores of websites. No need to travel to Oxford University for this source document, which should be available on Gail‘s website, AV Publications, as well as in her books. Making the Translators‘ Preface difficult to obtain reminded us of the Translators‘ complaint that the Roman Catholic Church suppressed the Scriptures by obstructing the path to them: THE UNWILLINGNESS OF OUR CHIEF ADVERSARIES, THAT THE SCRIPTURES SHOULD BE DIVULGED IN THE MOTHER TONGUE, ETC. ―Now the Church of Rome would seem at the length to bear a motherly affection towards her children, and to allow them the Scriptures in their mother tongue: but indeed it is a gift, not deserving to be called a gift, an unprofitable gift:... they must first get a licence in writing before they may use them, and to get that, they must approve themselves to their Confessor, that is, to be such as are, if not frozen in the dregs, yet soured with the leaven of their superstition... So 91
much are they afraid of the light of the Scripture,...that they will not trust the people with it, no not as it is set forth by their own sworn men, no not with the Licence of their own Bishops and Inquisitors. Yea, so unwilling they are to communicate the Scriptures to the people‘s understanding in any sort, that they are not ashamed to confess, that we forced them to translate it into English against their wills. This seemeth to argue a bad cause, or a bad conscience, or both.‖ (―The Translators to the Reader‖) ABOUT ROMAN CATHOLICISM The Translators had many things to say about the Roman Catholic Church, most of them uncomplimentary. However, many will be surprised to learn that the Translators considered the Roman Catholic Church to have been a ―true Church‖ in the early centuries of its existence. The Translators thought well of St. Gregory of Nazianzus (325-389 A.D.), the Catholic theologian who contended against the Arians and Apollinarians at the First Council of Constantinople in 381 A.D. The Translators also likened those who criticized King James‘ funding of the Church of England to those who criticized the Roman Emperor Constantine‘s liberal endowment of the Catholic clergy. THE BEST THINGS HAVE BEEN CALUMNIATED ―And fourthly, that he was no babe, but a great clerk [Gregory the Divine], that gave forth (and in writing to remain to posterity) in passion peradventure, but yet he gave forth, that he had not seen any profit to come by any Synod, or meeting of the Clergy, but rather the contrary; And lastly, against Church-maintenance and allowance, in such sort, as the Ambassadors and messengers of the great King of Kings should be furnished, it is not unknown what a fiction or fable (so it is esteemed, and for no better by the reporter himself [Nauclerus], though superstitious) was devised; Namely, that at such a time as the professors and teachers of Christianity in the Church of Rome, then a true Church, were liberally endowed, a voice forsooth was heard from heaven, saying: Now is poison poured down into the Church, etc. Thus not only as oft as we speak, as one saith, but also as oft as we do anything of note or consequence, we subject ourselves to everyone‘s censure, and happy is he that is least tossed upon tongues; for utterly to escape the snatch of them it is impossible.‖ (―The Translators to the Reader‖) The Translators were referring to a statement made in 1500 A.D. by John Nanclerus who was the president of the University of Tubingen, that bastion of theological liberalism in Germany, where Luther launched the Reformation soon afterward. This identification was made by Thomas Fuller in his Church History of Britain, wherein he also praised Constantine the Great for ending the persecution of Christians and bestowing material benefits on the Church. 20. Peace and Prosperity restored to the Church by Constantine. A.D.3I2. ―Constantine being now peaceably settled in the imperial throne, there followed a sudden and general alteration in the world; persecutors turning patrons of religion. O the efficacy of a godly emperor's example, which did draw many to a conscientious love of Christianity, and did drive more to a civil conformity thereunto ! The Gospel, formerly a forester, now became a citizen ; and leaving the woods wherein it wandered, hills and holes where it hid itself before, dwelt quietly in populous places. The stumps of ruined churches, lately destroyed by Diocletian, grew 92
up into beautiful buildings; oratories were furnished with pious ministers, and they provided of plentiful maintenance, through the liberality of Constantine. And if it be true, what one relates, that about this tune, when the church began to be enriched with means, there came a voice from heaven, (I dare boldly say, he that first wrote it never heard it, being a modern author,)* saying, ‗Now is poison poured down into the church; yet is there no danger of death thereby, seeing lately so strong an antidote hath been given against it.‘ Nor do we meet with any particular bounty conferred by Constantine, or Helen his mother, on Britain, their native country, otherwise than as it shared now in the general happiness of all Christendom… fn. John Nanclerus, president of Tubing University, anno 1500.‖ (Thomas Fuller, D.D., The Church History of Britain from the Birth of Jesus Christ to the Year MDCXLVIII, Vol. I, London, 1837) Apparently the first Holy Roman Emperor, whose largesse toward the Church deserved praise, was met with calumny instead, according to the Translators: THE BEST THINGS HAVE BEEN CALUMNIATED ―So the first Christened Emperor [Constantine] (at the least-wise that openly professed the faith himself, and allowed others to do the like) for strengthening the Empire at his great charges, and providing for the Church, as he did, got for his labour the name Pupillus, as who would say, a wasteful Prince, that had need of a Guardian or overseer [Aurel. Victor].‖ (―The Translators to the Reader‖) The Translators likened Constantine the Great to King James I and cited Eusebius‘ Life of Constantine as evidence of his Christian character: HIS MAJESTY'S CONSTANCY, NOTWITHSTANDING CALUMNIATION, FOR THE SURVEY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS ―It doth certainly belong unto Kings, yea, it doth specially belong unto them, to have care of Religion, yea, to know it aright, yea, to profess it zealously, yea to promote it to the uttermost of their power. This is their glory before all nations which mean well, and this will bring unto them a far most excellent weight of glory in the day of the Lord Jesus. For the Scripture saith not in vain, ‗Them that honor me, I will honor,‘ [1 Sam 2:30] neither was it a vain word that Eusebius delivered long ago, that piety towards God was the weapon and the only weapon, that both preserved Constantine‘s person, and avenged him of his enemies [Eusebius lib 10 cap 8].‖ (―The Translators to the Reader‖) Gail Riplinger and other KJV-Only advocates (who tell us what the 1611 AV Translators believed while suppressing their Preface in which they wrote what they believed), present a view of Constantine and Eusebius that fully contradicts that of the Translators. The KJV-Only version portrays Constantine and Eusebius as wolves in sheep‘s clothing who conspired to synthesize Christianity and paganism. ―The Western roots of the New World Religion of the false prophet can be found in the philosophies of Egypt, Greece and Rome....the Rome of Constantine and Eusebius, with their 93
merger of Christianity and paganism, cradled the infantile crossbreed which today is Satan‘s seasoned scarlet woman. (Revelation 18)... ―Historians, such as the author of The Spear of Destiny, record that the ruler who possesses the spear that pierced Christ‘s side, including forty-five men from Constantine to Adolf Hitler, will have occultic sovereignty...‖ (New Age Bible Versions, pp. 516, 535) Gail dignifies Trevor Ravenscroft‘s Spear of Destiny as history even though the material for the book was based on the visions and astral travels of an occultist, a Dr. Walter Johannes Stein, who practiced ―the ancient Rosicrucian meditation on the Black Cross and Seven Roses which embraced the inner significance of the Blood, the central theme of the search for the Grail.‖ (The Spear of Destiny, p. 192) Are we to believe the statement of a fellow occultist of Trevor Ravenscroft or the KJV Translators, whose favorable opinion of Constantine, Eusebius and the early Roman Church Gail Riplinger omitted in her section on the ―Public Views of the King James Translators: Rome‖? (Awe, pp. 535-6) The Translators‘ source, Eusebius of Caesarea‘s The Life of the Blessed Emperor Constantine,, was a chronology of Constantine‘s labors to establish the Christian Church and to eradicate paganism throughout the Roman Empire. Socrates Scholasticus‘ Ecclesiastical History is a respected historical account of the Council of Nicea and the role of Constantine and Eusebius of Caesarea in bringing the bishops to agreement concerning the Arian controversy. Convened and led by Constantine, the Council established as Christian doctrine the deity of Jesus Christ as it was set forth in the Nicene Creed. The King James Translators‘ knowledge of Roman history derived from accepted historical records such as these. In New Age Bible Versions, Gail did the usual hatchet job on her source, Eusebius‘ ―Oration in Praise of Constantine‖, which was not identified lest readers discover her misquote: ―Eusebius, like the false prophet of the book of Revelations and Daniel, ‗magnifies‘ Constantine, proclaiming that his power came from a supernatural source. Constantine was, he says, ‗...interpreter to the Word of God...invested as he is with heavenly sovereignty...whose character is formed after the Divine original... Hence is our emperor perfect. 74...‖…fn. 74. What Ever Happened to Heaven?, p. 115‖ 6. (New Age Bible Versions, pp. 535, 685) As stated, the original source for this quotation was Eusebius‘ ―Oration in Praise of Constantine.‖ Notice the many words which Gail omitted (Westcott-Hort style, ) in order to misrepresent Eusebius: ―He who is the pre-existent Word, the Preserver of all things, imparts to his disciples the seeds of true wisdom and salvation, and at once enlightens and gives them understanding in the knowledge of his Father‘s kingdom. Our emperor, his friend, acting as interpreter to the Word of God, aims at recalling the whole human race to the knowledge of God; proclaiming clearly in the ears of all, and declaring with powerful voice the laws of truth and godliness to all who dwell on the earth... ―Lastly, invested as he is with a semblance of heavenly sovereignty, he directs his gaze above, and frames his earthly government according to the pattern of that Divine original, feeling strength in its conformity to the monarchy of God. ―He is indeed an emperor, and bears a title corresponding to his deeds; a Victor in truth, who has gained the victory over those passions which overmaster the rest of men: whose character is formed after the Divine original of the Supreme Sovereign, and whose mind reflects, as in
94
a mirror, the radiance of his virtues. Hence is our emperor perfect in discretion, in goodness, in justice, in courage, in piety, in devotion to God...‖ In New Age Bible Versions, Gail misrepresented Constantine as condoning the Arian heresy while in her other book, In Awe of Thy Word, she portrayed Ulphilas, the Arian missionary responsible for spreading Arianism throughout the Roman Empire, as a Bible-believing Christian! ―Together Constantine and Eusebius called for religious toleration, which is invariably followed by amalgamation. To placate both Christian and heathen, they took the middle road position regarding the deity of Christ. Consequently Arianism and semi-Arianism, the doctrine that Jesus was ‗the eldest and highest of creatures,‘ rather than ‗God manifest in the flesh‘, was adopted by Constantine in 330 A.D.‖ (New Age Bible Versions, p. 535) ―Ulphilas drew the water of life from the pure fountain, and delivered it to his people uncontaminated. (The Gospels: Gothic, Anglo-Saxon, Wycliffe, and Tyndale Versions, ed. Joseph Bosworth, 4th Ed., London, 1907) ‗Of the influence of the [corrupt] Vulgate there is no trace whatsoever‘ in the Gothic Bible. ‗We are certain of this, that so far as the translation of Ulphilas has been recovered, there is not a trace of Arianism to be found [the heresy that Jesus was a created being]. On the contrary, in passages clearly unfavorable to the doctrine of Arius, Ulphilas has honestly and plainly given the literal meaning of the Greek.‘ (Freiderichsen, Gospels, p. 162; Bosworth, p. iv).‖ (In Awe of Thy Word, p. 624) Factual information regarding the Arian evangelist, Ulphilas, and his Gothic translation is presented in Chapter 16. Our report ―Mystery Babylon: Catholic or Jewish?‖ offers some insights as to why Constantine gets such bad press in the global disinformation network which appears to include King James Onlyism. We have previously documented the Translators‘ generous praise of St. Jerome, the Roman Catholic monk and scholar who was commissioned by Pope Damascus to translate the Latin Vulgate. St. Jerome is cited as an authority no less than twenty times in the Translators‘ Preface, and St. Augustine of Hippo is favorably quoted as a ―Father of the Church‖ some fourteen times. It seems that the Translators‘ high regard for the early Roman Catholic Church may be one reason for the omission of their Preface in King James-Only literature, which presents a version of Church history very different from the Translators‘ perspective. Agreeing with the Translators‘ favorable references to Jerome and Augustine is Erasmus‘ high opinion of these early Church fathers, especially Jerome and Origen. According to historian James Bass Mullinger, author of The University of Cambridge, referring to Frederic Seebohm‘s The Oxford Reformers, Jerome had no equal in Erasmus‘ judgment, in part because he was a pupil of Origen. ―Erasmus himself, who entertained a decided preference for the Greek theology, declared that Jerome was worth the whole of the Latin fathers, and even ventured to point out how far, by virtue of his long and arduous study of the Scriptures and his real knowledge of Greek, he was entitled to rank as an authority above Augustine, who knew but little of the language, and whose labours had been carried on amid the onerous duties of his episcopate...‘ fn. Seebohm, The University of Cambridge, p. 362‖ (Mullinger, p. 483) Although Erasmus repeatedly referenced the works of Augustine, he wrote to his Oxford colleague and close friend, Sir Thomas More, ―One page of Origen teaches me more of Christian Philosophy than ten of Augustine.‖ 95
―Let his critics examine [Erasmus‘] works, they would find that there was scarcely a work of St. Augustine which was not there quoted many hundred times. Let him compare Augustine and Jerome on their merits. Jerome was a pupil of Origen, and one page of Origen teaches more Christian philosophy than ten of Augustine. Augustine scarcely knew Greek; at all events was not at home in Greek writers. Besides this, by his own confession, he was busied with his bishopric, and could hardly snatch time to learn what he taught to others. Jerome devoted thirtyfive years to the study of the Scriptures.‖ (Seebohm, The Oxford Reformers, p. 437) What understanding of Church history did the KJV Translators have that they would call the ―Church of Rome, then a true Church‖— that is, a true Church in its early centuries? The Translators were textual scholars who knew Church history well and their chronological proximity to the early Church period gave them a clearer perspective than modern Christians have, whose understanding of the early Roman Church has been seriously distorted by Masonic propaganda. When did the ―Church of Rome, then a true Church,‖ go so terribly wrong? The ―Avignon Papacy‖ is the missing link in the evolutionary history of the Roman Catholic Church. (Chapter 19) ABOUT BIBLE TRANSLATIONS The Translators of the King James Version expressed many other views which would probably be the undoing of ‗King James Onlyism‘ if their Preface was widely published and read. As noted previously, they unequivocally regarded only the original Hebrew and Greek to be divinely inspired and inerrant, and all translations, by their very nature, to be less than perfect. Yet, even with imperfections, they believed these translations were the ―Word of God.‖ AN ANSWER TO THE IMPUTATIONS OF OUR ADVERSARIES ―Now to the latter we answer; that we do not deny, nay we affirm and avow, that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English, set forth by men of our profession, (for we have seen none of theirs of the whole Bible as yet) containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God. As the King‘s speech, which he uttereth in Parliament, being translated into French, Dutch, Italian, and Latin, is still the King‘s speech, though it be not interpreted by every Translator with the like grace, nor peradventure so fitly for phrase, nor so expressly for sense, everywhere. For it is confessed, that things are to take their denomination of the greater part; and a natural man could say, Verum ubi multa nitent in carmine, non ego paucis offendor maculis, etc. [Horace.] A man may be counted a virtuous man, though he have made many slips in his life, (else, there were none virtuous, for in many things we offend all) [James 3:2] also a comely man and lovely, though he have some warts upon his hand, yea, not only freckles upon his face, but also scars. No cause therefore why the word translated should be denied to be the word, or forbidden to be current, notwithstanding that some imperfections and blemishes may be noted in the setting forth of it. For whatever was perfect under the Sun, where Apostles or Apostolic men, that is, men endued with an extraordinary measure of God’s spirit, and privileged with the privilege of infallibility, had not their hand?... Judge by an example or two... So, by the story of Ezra, and the prophecy of Haggai it may be gathered, that the Temple built by Zerubbabel after the return from Babylon, was by no means to be compared to the former built by Solomon (for they that remembered the former, wept when they considered the latter) [Ezra 3:12] notwithstanding, might this latter either have been abhorred and forsaken by the Jews, or profaned by the Greeks? The like we are to think of Translations.‖ (―The Translators to the Reader‖) 96
Contradicting the Translators‘ testimony, Gail Riplinger maintains that they believed their own translation and the Bishops‘ Bible were ―perfect‖ Bibles. ―Unlike today‘s editors, the KJV translators‘ final authorities were Bibles, not lexicons. They saw the KJV as the final ‗perfected‘ and ‗finished‘ English Bible.‖ (Awe, p. 31) ―The previous Bishops‘ Bible (c. 1568-1611) was no less perfect, pure, and true than the KJV.‖ (Awe, p. 17) Contrary to KJV-Onlyism, the King James Translators neither declared any translation to be ―perfect‖ nor did they condemn any translation of Scripture: A SATISFACTION TO OUR BRETHREN ―And to the same effect say we, that we are so far off from condemning any of their labors that travailed before us in this kind, either in this land or beyond sea, either in King Henry's time, or King Edward‘s (if there were any translation, or correction of a translation in his time) or Queen Elizabeth‘s of ever renowned memory, that we acknowledge them to have been raised up of God, for the building and furnishing of his Church, and that they deserve to be had of us and of posterity in everlasting remembrance.‖ The 1611 Translators were certainly more accepting of corrupt translations than KJV-Only advocates. They considered the Septuagint to be the Word of God although it departed from the original Hebrew. The Apostles used it, they stated, and God used it to prepare the Greek-speaking Gentiles for the coming of Jesus Christ. AN ANSWER TO THE IMPUTATIONS OF OUR ADVERSARIES ―The translation of the Seventy dissenteth from the Original in many places, neither doth it come near it, for perspicuity, gravity, majesty; yet which of the Apostles did condemn it? Condemn it? Nay, they used it, (as it is apparent, and as Saint Jerome and most learned men do confess) which they would not have done, nor by their example of using it, so grace and commend it to the Church, if it had been unworthy of the appellation and name of the word of God.‖ (―The Translators to the Reader‖)
97
THE TRANSLATION OF THE OLD TESTAMENT OUT OF THE HEBREW INTO GREEK ―This is the translation of the Seventy Interpreters, commonly so called, which prepared the way for our Saviour among the Gentiles by written preaching, as Saint John Baptist did among the Jews by vocal. ...Again, the Greek tongue was well known and made familiar to most inhabitants in Asia, by reason of the conquest that there the Grecians had made, as also by the Colonies, which thither they had sent. For the same causes also it was well understood in many places of Europe, yea, and of Africa too. Therefore the word of God being set forth in Greek, becometh hereby like a candle set upon a candlestick, which giveth light to all that are in the house, or like a proclamation sounded forth in the market place, which most men presently take knowledge of; and therefore that language was fittest to contain the Scriptures, both for the first Preachers of the Gospel to appeal unto for witness, and for the learners also of those times to make search and trial by. It is certain, that that Translation was not so sound and so perfect, but it needed in many places correction; and who had been so sufficient for this work as the Apostles or Apostolic men? Yet it seemed good to the holy Ghost and to them, to take that which they found, (the same being for the greatest part true and sufficient) rather than making a new, in that new world and green age of the Church, to expose themselves to many exceptions and cavillations, as though they made a Translations to serve their own turn, and therefore bearing a witness to themselves, their witness not to be regarded. This may be supposed to be some cause, why the Translation of the Seventy was allowed to pass for current. Notwithstanding, though it was commended generally, yet it did not fully content the learned, no not of the Jews. For not long after Christ, Aquila fell in hand with a new Translation, and after him Theodotion, and after him Symmachus; yea, there was a fifth and a sixth edition, the Authors whereof were not known. [Epiphan. de mensur. et ponderibus.] These with the Seventy made up the Hexapla and were worthily and to great purpose compiled together by Origen.‖ (The Translators to the Reader)
The Translators also commended Origen (185-232 A.D.) for his Hexapla, a compilation of six translations of the Old Testament with the Septuagint in the fifth column. The KJV Translators dated the translation of the Septuagint ―before Christ‖ rather than Anno Domini, as Gail Riplinger claims: ―Origen was the author of this A.D. document.‖ (NABV, p. 537) ―So in A.D. 331 Constantine asked Eusebius to create bibles which presented this somewhat de-deified Christ and ecumenical theology. Origen had much in his writings to suggest the subordination of the Son; his amalgamation of heathen and Christian doctrine—smoothing out differences thereby allowing for unity—was perfect for Constantine‘s purposes. So Constantine,...‗charged Eusebius with preparing fifty copies...written on prepared skins with the help of skillful artists.‘ (B.F. Westcott, A General Survey of the History of the Canon of the New Testament, p. 426) ―Scholars agree on the role of Origen and Pamphilus, a scribe, as the authors of these fifty corrupt copies. Jerome (A.D. 325-420) records that Pamphilus, a friend of Eusebius and an apologist of Origenism, ‗copied with his own hand the chief part of the work of Origen.‘ Even Westcott tells us that the bible texts used by Eusebius to create these bibles were ‗compared with accurate copes of Pamphilus of Caesarea contained in the library of Eusebius.‘ (Westcott, p. 398) In the textbook, Ancestry of the English Bible, Ira Price summarizes: ―Eusebius of Caesarea...assisted by Pamphilus...issued with all his critical remarks the fifth column of Origen‘s Hexapla... The Emperor Constantine gave orders that fifty copies of this edition should be prepared for use in the churches. (Ira Price, Ancestry of the English Bible, as quoted in Which Bible, p. 3)... 98
―The Septuagint (LXX), a Greek translation of the Old Testament, is used today by textual critics, in many instances, to determine the wording of new versions. It appears that Origen was the author of this A.D. document. The NIV translators admit they use the O.T. text which was ‗standardized early in the third century by Origen.‘ (Kenneth Barker, The NIV: The Making of a Contemporary Translation, pp. 50, 89)...‖ (New Age Bible Versions, pp. 535-538) Notice Kenneth Barker stated that Origen only ―standardized‖ the Greek Old Testament in the third century. Big difference between ―authored‖ and ―standardized‖ (about 400 years), but how many readers of New Age Bible Versions noted the discrepancy? David Otis Fuller was the author of Which Bible?, Gail Riplinger‘s source for her claim that Eusebius used Origen‘s Hexapla for the bibles ordered by Constantine. Fuller wrote: ―Eusebius was a great admirer of Origen and a student of his philosophy. J.J. Ray quotes from Dr. Ira Price‘s Ancestry of the English Bible, ‗Eusebius of Caesarea, the first church historian, assisted by Pamphilus, or vice versa, issued with all its critical remarks [sic] the fifth column of Origen‘s Hexapla with alternative readings from the other columns, for use in Palestine. The Emperor Constantine gave orders that fifty copies of this edition should be prepared for use in the churches.‘‖ David Otis Fuller got his information from J.J. Ray‘s God Only Wrote One Bible. Notice that J.J. Ray substituted ―critical remarks‖ for ―critical marks‖ — a system of diacritical markings invented by Origen which he inserted in his revised/corrected Septuagint, as stated in the original source which J.J. Ray selectively (mis)quoted. Perhaps this blunder was intentional to obscure the truth. Ray‘s error was not corrected or noted by Fuller or Riplinger. J.J. Ray quoted Dr. Ira Price‘s Ancestry of Our English Bible but omitted certain key statements by Dr. Price concerning (1) the B.C. translation of the Septuagint, (2) Origen‘s A.D. revision and correction of the Septuagint, and (3) Eusebius’ addition of critical marks to Origen‘s version of the Septuagint in the Hexapla before issuing the 50 copies ordered by Constantine. From Ira Price‘s Ancestry of the English Bible— ―The Septuagint was translated out of the original Hebrew probably between 280 and 130 B.C. It was made at Alexandria under Hebrew-Greek influences, hence it carries a distinctive Hebrew flavor... ―Origen found in existence and in use in his day, besides the Old Testament in Hebrew, the Septuagint and the three Greek versions noted above (Aquila, Theodocian, Symanchus). He complained that every manuscript contained a different text from its next. He conceived the idea of carefully studying by comparison all these different versions and manuscripts, and of producing therefrom the best possible manuscript or version... The real purpose of Origen‘s Hexapla was not a restoration of the original text of the Septuagint. but to make it correctly and adequately represent the Hebrew original. The fifth column of the Hexapla is the most important, touching Origen's work, for it was his revision of the Septuagint. He revised the regular Septuagint text on this wise: If the manuscripts of the Septuagint differed he chose that one that was the best translation of the Hebrew original. In case there were words in the Hebrew that had no adequate representation in the Septuagint, he inserted in the Septuagint text such translation of these words as was found in one of the other three Greek versions, preferably from Theodotion. Such insertion was marked by an asterisk (* 99
or *) at the beginning, and a metobelus (Y) at the close of the passage. A passage which was found in the Septuagint, but had no equivalent in the Hebrew was marked in Origen's Septuagint by an obelus (—), or a horizontal line, but it was not expunged. ―These are a few of the critical marks introduced by Origen to specify the sources and variations of his version of the Septuagint... ―Origen‘s work did not unify existing Greek texts of the Old Testament, but rather opened the door for revisions. Three great scholars arose in the third century who gave themselves to this work: (l) Eusebius of Caesarea (260-340), the first church historian, assisted by Pamphilus or vice versa, issued with all its critical marks the fifth column of the Hexapla, with alternative readings from the other columns, for use in Palestine. The Emperor Constantine gave orders that fifty copies of this edition should be prepared for use in the churches... [Discussion of other revisers of Origen‘s Hexapla Septuagint, Lucian and Hesychius] ―These three revisers furnished Greek revisions for all the eastern coasts of the Mediterranean Sea. Eusebius for Palestine, Lucian for Asia Minor, and Hesychius for Egypt.‖ (p. 66-68, 70, 71) The Ancestry of Our English Bible cited by J.J. Ray and David Otis Fuller and, and indirectly by Gail Riplinger, states that the Septuagint had been translated between 280 and 130 B.C. by the Hebrews in Alexandria, and that Origen revised the Septuagint ―to make it correctly and adequately represent the Hebrew original.‖ Here we see that Gail selectively quoted yet another source to advance her agenda. Changing the author and date of the original Septuagint – from the Jews in B.C. to Origen in A.D. – allows Gail Riplinger to dissociate this translation (which was ―not so sound and so perfect, but it needed in many places correction‖) from the Alexandrian Jews and, instead, to associate the corrupt Septuagint with Eusebius and Constantine. It is beyond the scope of this book to delve further into early Church history, however, we are inclined to believe that the learned Translators of the 1611 King James Version knew Church history well and that the KJV-Only advocates who present themselves as Bible scholars today have suppressed the Translators‘ Preface in order to popularize, not only their false teachings, but also a falsified version of Church history. One thing is certain: the King James Translators believed that Origen, Eusebius, Constantine, Jerome, Augustine and the early Roman Catholic Church preserved the Scriptures and the Christian faith. If the KJV-Only advocates disagree with the Translators‘ favorable statements about these men and the early Roman Catholic Church, then they need to issue statements expressing their disagreement with the views of the Translators in the 1611 KJV Preface. ABOUT DYNAMIC EQUIVALENCE Gail Riplinger claims that the 1611 King James Version was a formal equivalence translation as opposed to dynamic equivalence: ―There are two methods of translating the Bible. God‘s formal equivalency method is good; the devil‘s dynamic equivalency scheme is bad. 1. Formal equivalence: One English word is usually used to translate one Greek or Hebrew word. Parts of speech are carried over into English in the same form... The KJV is the only true formal equivalency translation of the true Bible texts into the English language.‖ (Gail Riplinger, Awe, p. 270) Did the KJV scholars translate word for word, even using identical parts of speech? The Translators stated ―we have not tied ourselves to an uniformity of phrasing, or to an identity of words, as some peradventure would wish that we had done.‖ The fact is that the Translators did resort to dynamic equivalence instead of formal 100
equivalence translation which might ―darken the sense.‖ They were not adverse to modifying words and phrases to render the meaning of the Bible understandable to the common people. REASONS INDUCING US NOT TO STAND CURIOUSLY UPON AN IDENTITY OF PHRASING ―Another things we think good to admonish thee of (gentle Reader) that we have not tied ourselves to an uniformity of phrasing, or to an identity of words, as some peradventure would wish that we had done, because they observe, that some learned men somewhere, have been as exact as they could that way... ―Lastly, we have on the one side avoided the scrupulosity of the Puritans, who leave the old Ecclesiastical words, and betake them to other, as when they put WASHING for BAPTISM, and CONGREGATION instead of CHURCH: as also on the other side we have shunned the obscurity of the Papists, in their AZIMES, TUNIKE, RATIONAL, HOLOCAUSTS, PRAEPUCE, PASCHE, and a number of such like, whereof their late Translation is full, and that of purpose to darken the sense, that since they must needs translate the Bible, yet by the language thereof, it may be kept from being understood. But we desire that the Scripture may speak like itself, as in the language of Canaan, that it may be understood even of the very vulgar.‖ (―The Translators to the Reader‖) The KJV Translators used dynamic equivalence in many verses. In Acts 12:4, the ―old Ecclesiastical word‖ Easter was preferred to Passover which is pascha in the Greek (Strong‘s #3957). In the above passage, their stated reason for using Easter was that ―it may be understood even of the very vulgar.‖ They were simply following King James‘ Instructions which stated: ―The old ecclesiastical words to be kept; as the word church, not to be translated congregation, &c.‖ They were also following the King James‘ instruction to closely follow former English translations such as the Bishops‘, Coverdale and Tyndale Bibles which also translated pascha as Easter. The Translators also used dynamic equivalence in Acts 14:12, which reads, ―And they called Barnabas, Jupiter; and Paul, Mercurius, because he was the chief speaker.‖ The Greek Textus Receptus reads, ―And they called Barnabas Zeus and Paul Hermes, because he was the leader in speaking.‖ The choice of Jupiter and Mercury was based on previous English Bibles which carried the reading of the Latin Vulgate. Jupiter and Mercury were the Roman gods which corresponded to the Greek gods, Zeus and Hermes. In his volume, The Authorized Edition of the English Bible (1611): Its Subsequent Reprints and Modern Representatives,‖ F.H.A. Scrivener observed that the King James Translators‘ aversion to ‗uniformity of phrasing‘ and ‗identity of words‘ led them, on occasion, to sacrifice accuracy of translation for literary beauty: ―Nor can the attentive student of the Authorized version fail to marvel at the perfect and easy command over the English language exhibited by its authors on every page. The fullness and variety of their diction, the raciness of their idiomatic resources, seem almost to defy imitation, while they claim our just and cheerful admiration. We need not extenuate that great error of judgment which is acknowledged to be the capital defect of the Translation, especially in the New Testament, in that the same foreign word is perpetually translated by several English ones, while on the other hand a single English word is made to represent two or three in the original, and that too in the same context, where the cogency of the argument or the perspicuity of the narrative absolutely depends on identity in the rendering. But in avoiding this conspicuous fault 101
of the men of 1622, some modern revisers [Westcott/Hort] whose efforts are already before the public have fallen into the opposite mistake of forcing the same English word to stand for the same Hebrew or Greek one where there is no real need for preserving such slavish uniformity, thus at once impoverishing our native tongue which is so much more copious than either of the others, and casting over the version an air of baldness very painful to the cultivated taste.‖ (Scrivener, pp. 141-2) One example of the Translators‘ injudicious use of different English words for the same Greek word is the variable translation of the Greek preposition ―epi‖ in verses pertaining to the Mark of the Beast. The Greek word ―epi‖ is mistranslated as ―on‖ in Revelation 13:16 and 14:9, but in Rev. 20:4, ―epi‖ is correctly translated ―on.‖ The error in the first two verses is defended by King James Only advocates who also promote a counterfeit Mark of the Beast, which is the subject of Chapter 9. A major example of the Translators‘ rejection of ―uniformity of phrasing, or to an identity of words‖ found in the Greek and Hebrew texts is their insertion of many English words that have no underlying words in the original texts. In the 1611 Authorised Version these were distinguished by the use of a smaller font than the rest of the text. In our current KJVs, these added words are distinguished by italics. How many KJV readers know that the italicized words in the KJV were additions to the Greek Text at the discretion of the Translators? For example, in 1 John 2:23 the Translators added an entire phrase of ten words that is not found in the Greek: ―Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: (but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.‖ The concluding phrase is not original to the 1611 KJV but is also found in the Bishops‘ Bible, the Wycliffe Bible, the Latin Vulgate and the Syriac Peshitta. Note below that the phrase was not in the Tyndale, Coverdale, or Geneva Bibles, and that the Bishops‘ Bible picked it up from the Roman Catholic Vulgate. In this verse the KJV Translators erroneously followed the Bishops‘ Bible, per the instructions of King James. However they violated the King's Instruction which stated: ―The...Bishop‘s Bible, to be followed, and as little altered as the original will permit.‖ Peshitta - Lamsa Translation ―Whoever denies the Son, the same does not believe in the Father; but whoever acknowledges the Son, acknowledges the Father also.‖ The Latin Vulgate (425) ―omnis qui negat Filium nec Patrem habet qui confitetur Filium et Patrem habet‖ The Wycliffe Bible (1395) ―So ech that denyeth the sone, hath not the fadir; but he that knowlechith the sone, hath also the fadir.‖ Tyndale New Testament (1526) ―Whosoever denyeth the sonne the same hath not the father.‖ ―Miles Coverdale Bible (1535) Whosoeuer denyeth the sonne, the same hath not the father.‖
102
The Geneva Bible (1587) ―Whosoeuer denyeth the Sonne, the same hath not the Father.‖ The Bishop's Bible (1568) ―Whosoeuer denyeth the sonne, the same hath not the father [But he that knowledgeth the sonne, hath the father also.]‖ King James Version (1611) ―Whosoeuer denieth the Sonne, the same hath not the Father: but he that acknowledgeth the Sonne, hath the Father also.‖ Scrivener stated that the Great Bible was the fist English translation to distinguish words that had been derived from the Latin Vulgate and the Old Latin versions with a different font: ―The practice of indicating by a variation of type such words in a translation of the Bible as have no exact representatives in the original is believed to have been first employed by Samuel Munster in his Latin version of the Old Testament published in 1534. Five years later this diversity of character (‗a small letter in the text‘ as the editors describe it) was resorted to in the Great Bible, in order to direct attention to clauses rendered from the Latin Vulgate which are not extant in the Hebrew or Greek originals. A good example of its use occurs in Matt. xxv.1 where ‗(and the bride)‘ is added to the end of the verse from the Old Latin, not from any Greek copy known in that age. As the readings of the Vulgate came to be less regarded or less familiar in England, subsequent translators applied the smaller type to the purpose for which Muster had first designed it, the rather as Theodore Beza had so used it in his Latin New Testament of 1556. Thus the English New Testament published in Geneva at 1557, and the Genevan Bible of 1560, ‗put to that word, which lacking made the sentence obscure, but set it in such letters, as may easily be discerned from the common text.‘ The same expedient was adopted by the translators of the Bishops‘ Bible (1568, 1572), somewhat too freely indeed in parts. It is one of the most considerable faults of this not very successful version, that its authors assumed a liberty of running into paraphrase, the ill effects of which this very difference in type tended to conceal from themselves. From these two preceding versions, then held in the best repute, the Geneva and the Bishops‘ Bibles, the small Roman as distinguished from the black letter (now and as early as the Bible of 1612 respectively represented by the Italic and Roman type) was brought naturally enough into the Bible of 1611, and forms a prominent feature of it, whether for good or ill.‖ (Scrivener, pp. 61-62) How many King James readers know that the italicized words in the KJV are (1) words added by the Translators and not translated from the original Greek or Hebrew text and (2) that many of these words were translations of words and phrases in the Latin Vulgate and/or Old Latin Versions??? How many KJV readers are aware that, out of the 7,957 verses in their New Testament, 2,257 contain italicized words, and many of these verses contain more than one italicized word. In other words, 28% of the verses in the KJV New Testament contain words which are not translated from the Greek Textus Receptus. And many of these words are translated from the Latin Vulgate or Old Latin. The next phase of defrauding KJV Christians will be to eliminate the italics, since few people know the reason for the italicized words in the first place, and many would not care. Some Large Print KJVs have already done away with the italics, leaving readers with the mistaken idea that all of the words in their KJV are translated 103
from the Masoretic Text and Textus Receptus and are therefore God‘s words. Also, some online Bibles, such as StudyLight.org do not italize words that are italicized in the KJV, i.e., words not in the Greek TR. For online Bibles, we recommend www.olivetree.com/bible which brackets words in all translations that are not found in their underlying Greek Text. ON MARGINAL NOTES The KJV Translators were of the opinion that marginal notes showing a variety of translations is profitable for Bible study: REASONS MOVING US TO SET DIVERSITY OF SENSES IN THE MARGIN, WHERE THERE IS GREAT PROBABILITY FOR EACH ―Some peradventure would have no variety of senses to be set in the margin, lest the authority of the Scriptures for deciding of controversies by that show of uncertainty, should somewhat be shaken. But we hold their judgment not to be sound in this point. ...doth not a margin do well to admonish the Reader to seek further, and not to conclude or dogmatize upon this or that peremptorily? For as it is a fault of incredulity, to doubt of those things that are evident: so to determine of such things as the Spirit of God hath left (even in the judgment of the judicious) questionable, can be no less than presumption. Therefore as S. Augustine saith, that variety of Translations is profitable for the finding out of the sense of the Scriptures: [S. Aug. 2. de doctr. Christian. cap. 14.] so diversity of signification and sense in the margin, where the text is no so clear, must needs do good, yea, is necessary, as we are persuaded....They that are wise, had rather have their judgments at liberty in differences of readings, than to be captivated to one, when it may be the other.‖ (―The Translators to the Reader‖) We might presume the Translators meant translations based on the Textus Receptus, however, there are readings in their marginal notes from the Septuagint and the Latin Vulgate. Such references are documented in Scrivener‘s book, Section II, ―On the Marginal Notes and Original Texts of the Authorized Version of the English Bible‖: ―In the Old Testament the marginal notes in our standard Bibles of 1611 amount to 6637, whereof 4111 express the more literal meaning of the original Hebrew or Chaldee (there are 77 referring to the latter language): 2156 give alternative renderings (indicated by the word "ﺍﺍOr" prefixed to them) which in the opinion of the Translators are not very less probable than those in the text: in 63 the meaning of proper Names is stated for the benefit of the unlearned (e.g. Gen. xi. 9; xvi. n): in 240 (whereof 108 occur in the first Book of Chronicles) necessary information is given by way of harmonizing the text with other passages of Scripture, especially in regard to the orthography of Hebrew names (e.g. Gen. xi. 16, 20, 24): while the remaining 67 refer to various readings of the original, in 31 of which the marginal variation (technically called Keri) of the Masoretic revisers of the Hebrew is set in competition with the reading in the text (Chetiv). Of this last kind of marginal notes a list is subjoined, as many of them are not readily distinguishable from the alternative renderings, being mostly, like them, preceded by ― ﺍﺍOr‖. They are ―Deut. 28:22; Josh. 8:12, 15:53; I Sam. 6:18 (…with the Targum and Septuagint); 27:8; 2 Sam.13:37, 14:22; I Kings 22:48, 2 Kings 5:12, 20:4, 23:33; 1 Chr. 1:6,7; 2 Chr. 1:5; Ezra 2:33, 104
46, 8:14, 10:40; Neh. 3:20; Job 6:21, 33:28; Ps. 9:12, 10:12, 24:6 (marg. with the Septuagint, Syriac, and Latin Vulgate), 64:6, 68:30, 102:3, 147:19; Prov. 17:27, 20:30, 21:29, 24:19, 26:17; Cant. 5:4, Isai. 10:13, 13:22, 18:2, 30:32; 41:24, 49:5, 63:11 (marg. with Aquila and the Vulgate), 65:4; Jer. 2:20, 3:9 (text with the Septuagint), 7:18 and 44:17, 16:7, 18:4, 23:31, 33:3, 49:1 & 3 (marg. with the Septuagint), 50:9, 26, 51:59 (marg… Septuagint): Ezek. 7:11, 23:42, 25:7, 30:18, 36:14…ver. 23 (marg. with the Masora, Septuagint, and some Hebrew manuscripts, against the commonly printed text), 40:40, 42:9; Dan. 9:24; Amos 3:12; Zech. 11:2; Mal. 2:5…‖ 15. Notwithstanding occasional references in the margin to readings from the Septuagint and the Vulgate, the Translators did seem to distinguish between the quality of the Greek text of Erasmus and that of the Greek text underlying the Latin Vulgate: A SATISFACTION TO OUR BRETHREN ―For by this means it cometh to pass, that whatsoever is sound already (and all is sound for substance, in one or other of our editions, and the worst of ours far better than their authentic vulgar) the same will shine as gold more brightly, being rubbed and polished; also, if anything be halting, or superfluous, or not so agreeable to the original, the same may be corrected, and the truth set in place.‖ (―The Translators to the Reader‖) AN ANSWER TO THE IMPUTATIONS OF OUR ADVERSARIES ―If we should tell them that Valla, Stapulensis, Erasmus, and Vives found fault with their vulgar Translation, and consequently wished the same to be mended, or a new one to be made, they would answer peradventure, that we produced their enemies for witnesses against them; albeit, they were in no other sort enemies, than as S. Paul was to the Galatians, for telling them the truth [Gal 4:16]: and it were to be wished, that they had dared to tell it them plainlier and oftener. But what will they say to this, that Pope Leo the Tenth allowed Erasmus‘ Translation of the New Testament, so much different from the vulgar, by his Apostolic Letter and Bull;… so we may say, that if the old vulgar had been at all points allowable, to small purpose had labour and charges been undergone, about framing of a new.‖ (―The Translators to the Reader‖) ON FOREIGN LANGUAGE TRANSLATIONS Ruckmanites like Gail Riplinger argue that all foreign Bibles should be translated from the English King James Version rather than the Greek Textus Receptus. ―Imagine the irony of well-meaning scholars who state that a foreign translation should be made from the ‗original‘ Greek (and not from the KJV), when the Greek [TBS Scrivener‘s] they are using was translated from the KJV. It becomes a double irony when some mockingly chatter, ‗Are you saying that the KJV translators were inspired like Moses?‘ — when the printed Greek edition that they naively think is ‗the originals‘ was edited by men, such as Scrivener, who were no more ‗inspired‘ than the KJV translators. God‘s word is inspired.‖ (Awe, p. 951) What text did the KJV Translators say should be the universal standard for Bible translation? 105
THE PURPOSE OF THE TRANSLATORS, WITH THEIR NUMBER, FURNITURE, CARE, ETC. ―That ‗as the credit of the old Books‘ ([Jerome] meaneth of the Old Testament) ‗is to be tried by the Hebrew Volumes, so of the New by the Greek tongue,‘ he meaneth by the original Greek. If truth be tried by these tongues, then whence should a Translation be made, but out of them? These tongues therefore, the Scriptures we say in those tongues, we set before us to translate, being the tongues wherein God was pleased to speak to his Church by the Prophets and Apostles.‖ (―The Translators to the Reader‖) The Translators used Hebrew and Greek texts compiled by manuscript scholars like F.H.A. Scrivener who, Gail Riplinger falsely charges ―back-translated‖ the KJV New Testament to produce his Greek edition. Scrivener did not ―back-translate‖ but looked at all of the printed Greek TR-type editions available to the KJV translators (from Erasmus‘ 1516 edition through Beza‘s 1598 edition) and from these existing editions he chose the Greek readings that supported the KJV translators‘ rendering. ―Wherever, therefore, the Authorised renderings agree with other Greek readings which might naturally be known through printed editions to the revisers of 1611 or their predecessors, Beza‘s reading has been displaced from the text in favour of the more truly representative reading, the variation from Beza being indicated by *.‖ Gail faults Scrivener because he was a member of the English Revision Committee, along with Westcott and Hort, which produced the English Revised Version in 1881/1884. However, it is well documented that Scrivener disputed with Westcott and Hort throughout the committee‘s proceedings because he rejected their New Greek Text and theory of textual criticism, which he described as ―ingenious conjecture...destitute not only of historical foundation, but of all probability...‖ In his great ―Refutation of Westcott and Hort‘s False Greek Text & Theory,‖ The Revision Revised, Dean John Burgon documented Dr. Scrivener‘s protest of the revision project as published in his Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament: The following is PREBENDARY SCRIVENER‘S recently published estimate of the System on which DRS. WESTCOTT AND HORT have constructed their ‗Revised Greek Text of the New Testament‘ (1881). – That System, the Chairman of the Revising Body (BISHOP ELLICOTT) has entirely adopted...and made the basis of his Defense of THE REVISERS and their ‗New Greek Text.‘ (1.) ‗There is little hope for the stability of their imposing structure, if its foundations have been laid on the sandy ground of ingenious conjecture. And, since barely the smallest vestige of historical evidence has ever been alleged in support of the views of these accomplished editors, their teaching must either be received as intuitively true, or dismissed from our consideration as precarious and even visionary.‘ (2.) ‗DR. HORT‘S System is entirely destitute of historical foundation.‘ (3.) ‗We are compelled to repeat as emphatically as ever our strong conviction that the Hypothesis to whose proof he has devoted so many laborious years, is destitute not only of historical foundation, but of all probability resulting from the internal goodness of the text which its adoption would force upon us.‘ (4.) ‗‗We cannot doubt‘ (says DR. HORT) ‗that S. Luke xxiii. 34 comes from an extraneous source.‘ [Notes, p. 68.]—Nor can we, on our part, doubt,‘ (rejoins DR. SCRIVENER,) ‗that the System which entails such consequences is hopelessly self-condemned.‘ 106
SCRIVENER‘S ‗Plain Introduction,‘ &c. [ed. 1883] : pp. 531, 537, 542, 604.‖ (Dean John William Burgon, The Revision Revised, p. v) ON BIBLE REVISION The Translators praised God for King James ―for working this religious care in him, to have the translations of the Bible maturely considered of and examined... For by this means...if anything be...not so agreeable to the original, the same may be corrected, and the truth set in place.‖ The full quotation from the Preface reads as follows: A SATISFACTION TO OUR BRETHREN ―Therefore let no man‘s eye be evil, because his Majesty‘s is good; neither let any be grieved, that we have a Prince that seeketh the increase of the spiritual wealth of Israel (let Sanballats and Tobiahs do so, which therefore do bear their just reproof) but let us rather bless God from the ground of our heart, for working this religious care in him, to have the translations of the Bible maturely considered of and examined. For by this means it cometh to pass, that whatsoever is sound already (and all is sound for substance, in one or other of our editions, and the worst of ours far better than their authentic vulgar) the same will shine as gold more brightly, being rubbed and polished; also, if anything be halting, or superfluous, or not so agreeable to the original, the same may be corrected, and the truth set in place.‖ (―The Translators to the Reader‖) The Translators also stated that all of the English Bibles based on the Textus Receptus were fundamentally ―sound,‖ yet they were not ―perfect‖ and could always be improved upon. A SATISFACTION TO OUR BRETHREN ―Yet for all that, as nothing is begun and perfected at the same time, and the later thoughts are thought to be the wiser: so, if we building upon their foundation that went before us, and being holpen by their labours, do endeavor to make that better which they left so good; no man, we are sure, hath cause to mislike us; they, we persuade ourselves, if they were alive, would thank us.‖ (―The Translators to the Reader‖) THE PURPOSE OF THE TRANSLATORS, WITH THEIR NUMBER, FURNITURE, CARE, ETC. ―Truly (good Christian Reader) we never thought from the beginning, that we should need to make a new Translation, nor yet to make of a bad one a good one,... but to make a good one better, or out of many good ones, one principal good one, not justly to be excepted against; that hath been our endeavor, that our mark.‖ (―The Translators to the Reader‖) The Roman Catholic Church criticized the Protestants for continually revising their Bibles. To this criticism the Translators responded that it was right to correct and revise the English translations to conform to the Hebrew and Greek texts. Conversely, to refuse to correct their errors would be a sin rooted in arrogance or negligence. Christians, they rightly maintained, may not protect their own work or reputations at the expense of God‘s Truth: 107
AN ANSWER TO THE IMPUTATIONS OF OUR ADVERSARIES ―Yet before we end, we must answer a third cavil and objection of theirs [the Papists] against us, for altering and amending our Translations so oft; wherein truly they deal hardly, and strangely with us. For to whomever was it imputed for a fault (by such as were wise) to go over that which he had done, and to amend it where he saw cause? Saint Augustine was not afraid to exhort S. Jerome to a Palinodia or recantation; [S. Aug. .] and doth even glory that he seeth his infirmities. [S. Aug. .] If we be sons of the Truth, we must consider what it speaketh, and trample upon our own credit, yea, and upon other men‘s too, if either be any way an hindrance to it.‖ (―The Translators to the Reader‖) Nowhere in their Preface did the Translators state or even imply that their translation was perfect and inerrant, or that God was finished with the Greek Textus Receptus, or that the King James Version is God‘s ―final statement to the world and He slammed the door shut on revelation in 1611.‖ The Translators did not close the door on future revision and correction of their translation nor did they restrict English-speaking Christians to the King James Version Only, nor did they warn them against verifying words by consulting the Hebrew and the Greek texts. Neither did they declare their translation to be the standard for all foreign Bible translations; nor did they warn against the use of Hebrew and Greek resources because they were ―polluted reference works,‖ ―pagan books‖ ―private interpretations authored by unsaved liberals.‖ On the contrary, as scholars, the Translators availed themselves of ―as great helps as were needful,‖ and they also exhorted their Christian readers ―to seek further...the sense of the Scriptures...where the text is not so clear.‖ ―...doth not a margin do well to admonish the Reader to seek further, and not to conclude or dogmatize upon this or that peremptorily? For as it is a fault of incredulity, to doubt of those things that are evident: so to determine of such things as the Spirit of God hath left (even in the judgment of the judicious) questionable, can be no less than presumption. Therefore as S. Augustine saith, that variety of Translations is profitable for the finding out of the sense of the Scriptures: [S. Aug. 2. de doctr. Christian. cap. 14.] so diversity of signification and sense in the margin, where the text is no so clear, must needs do good, yea, is necessary, as we are persuaded... They that are wise, had rather have their judgments at liberty in differences of readings, than to be captivated to one, when it may be the other.‖ (―The Translators to the Reader‖)
ENDNOTES 1. Watch Unto Prayer: http://watch-unto-prayer.org 2. Thomas Fuller, D.D., The Church History of Britain from the Birth of Jesus Christ to the Year MDCXLVIII,‖ Vol. I, London, 1837‖ 3. Eusebius of Caesarea The Life of the Blessed Emperor Constantine, Bagster translation, revised by Ernest Cushing Richardson, Ph.D., Medieval Sourcebook, http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/vitaconstantine.html 4. G.A. Riplinger, New Age Bible Versions, AV Publications, 1995, pp. 516, 535. 5. Trevor Ravenscroft, The Spear of Destiny, York Beach, ME: Samuel Weiser, Inc, 1973, p. 192. 6. New Age Bible Versions, pp. 535, 685. 108
7. ―Eusebius Pamphilius: Church History,‖ Life of Constantine, Oration in Praise of Constantine, Christian Classics Ethereal Library, http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf201.iv.viii.vi.html 8. New Age Bible Versions, p. 535. 9. ―Mystery Babylon the Great: Catholic or Jewish?, Barbara Aho, Watch Unto Prayer, http://watch-untoprayer.org 10. New Age Bible Versions, p. 537. 11. New Age Bible Versions, pp. 535-8. 12. David Otis Fuller, Which Bible?, Grand Rapids, MI: Institute for Biblical Textual Studies, 1990 (1970), p. 3. 13. Ira Price, Ancestry of the English Bible, Sunday School Times Co., 1920, pp. 70-71 14. Scrivener, op. cit. pp. 141-2. 15. Scrivener, op. cit., pp. 41-2. To facilitate checking Scripture verses, Scrivener‘s Roman numerals are converted to Arabic numbers. 16. Scrivener‘s Annotated Greek New Testament, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1908, pp. viii-ix. 17. Dean John William Burgon, The Revision Revised, Bible For Today Press, p. v.
WATCH UNTO PRAYER http://watch-unto-prayer.org
109
CHAPTER VIII REVISION OF THE 1611 KJV In 1516, Desiderius Erasmus published his first edition of the Byzantine Greek text and this edition was followed by four more editions in 1519, 1522, 1527 and 1535. The next great edition of the Textus Receptus was published in 1550 by Robert Stephanus (Estienne) and was based on Erasmus 4th and 5th editions. Stephanus‘ (Stephens) 3rd edition became one of the two standard texts of the Textus Receptus, the other being that of Theodore Beza, the leading Protestant reformer after John Calvin. Beza‘s editions were published between 1565 and 1611, and the KJV Translators used the 1588-89 and 1598 editions of Beza, along with Stephens‘ 3rd edition. In 1624 and 1633, the Elzivir Brothers published a New Testament based on Beza‘s editions. In their preface of the 1633 edition, the Elzivir brothers referred to the Byzantine editions in use as the ―textum...nunc ab omnibus receptum‖—―the text now received by all‖— hence, the name Textus Receptus was thereafter applied to these editions. There were between 100 and 200 textual differences between the various editions of the Textus Receptus, and most of these were orthographic, that is related to letters and spelling. It is important to understand that the reason for the differences in these Byzantine type texts was due to the differences in the multitude of Byzantine manuscripts used to compile them, and the editors (Erasmus, Stephens and Beza) had to make textual choices among variations in the manuscripts. In the main, the various editions of the Textus Receptus are substantially the same as opposed to the Sinaiticus, Vaticanus and Alexandrian manuscripts which form the basis of most modern versions. The 1611 Translators found fault with the Septuagint and the Vulgate which were translated from Alexandrian manuscripts but regarded all translations from the Byzantine editions to be reliable translations.
HIS MAJESTY'S CONSTANCY, NOTWITHSTANDING CALUMNIATION, FOR THE SURVEY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS ―Therefore let no man‘s eye be evil, because his Majesty‘s is good; neither let any be grieved, that we have a Prince that seeketh the increase of the spiritual wealth of Israel (let Sanballats and Tobiahs do so, which therefore do bear their just reproof) but let us rather bless God from the ground of our heart, for working this religious care in him, to have the translations of the Bible maturely considered of and examined. For by this means it cometh to pass, that whatsoever is sound already (and all is sound for substance, in one or other of our editions, and the worst of ours far better than their authentic vulgar) the same will shine as gold more brightly, being rubbed and polished; also, if anything be halting, or superfluous, or not so agreeable to the original, the same may be corrected, and the truth set in place.‖ (The Translators to the Reader) Here we see the Translators‘ humble and honest admission that all translations, including their own, are by their very nature imperfect and must, therefore, ―be maturely considered and examined...that...if anything be halting, or superfluous, or not so agreeable to the original, the same may be corrected, and the truth set in place.‖ The Translators took a dim view of those who protested revision of the English Bible, accusing them of having an evil eye and hindering the spiritual profit of the Church. These critics they likened to Sanballat and Tobiah who withstood the Jews who labored to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem—a very fitting analogy! Apparently, the 1611 King James Version was not gladly received by all subjects in the Realm, the reason being that, according to the Translators, any revision of the traditional Bible in use is always met with resistance and persecution. Even though the King James Version was based for the most part on the inspired Greek text, the Translators were much abused for their efforts:
110
HIS MAJESTY'S CONSTANCY, NOTWITHSTANDING CALUMNIATION, FOR THE SURVEY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS ―This, and more to this purpose, His Majesty that now reigneth (and long, and long may he reign, and his offspring forever, Himself and children, and children‘s always) knew full well, according to the singular wisdom given unto him by God, and the rare learning and experience that he hath attained unto; namely that whosoever attempteth anything for the public (especially if it pertain to Religion, and to the opening and clearing of the word of God) the same setteth himself upon a stage to be gloated upon by every evil eye, yea, he casteth himself headlong upon pikes, to be gored by every sharp tongue. For he that meddleth with men‘s Religion in any part, medleth with their custom, nay, with their freehold; and though they find no content in that which they have, yet they cannot abide to hear of altering.‖ (―The Translators to the Reader‖) Harsh criticism of the Translators‘ revision of previous English Bibles came from the Puritans as well as Anglicans who objected to any revision of the Bible in use: DEDICATION ―Your most Sacred Majesty, that since things of this quality have ever been subject to the censures of ill meaning and discontented persons, it may receive approbation and Patronage from so learned and judicious a Prince as Your Highness is, whose allowance and acceptance of our labours shall more honour and encourage us, than all the calumniations and hard interpretations of other men shall dismay us. So that if, on the one side, we shall be traduced by Popish Persons at home or abroad, who therefore will malign us, because we are poor Instruments to make GOD'S holy Truth to be yet more and more known unto the people, whom they desire still to keep in ignorance and darkness; or if, on the other side, we shall be maligned by self-conceited Brethren, who run their own ways, and give liking unto nothing, but what is framed by themselves, and hammered on their Anvil; we may rest secure, supported within by truth and innocency of a good conscience, having walked the ways of simplicity and integrity, as before the Lord; and sustained without by the powerful protection of Your Majesty's grace and favour, which will ever give countenance to honest and Christian endeavours against bitter censures and uncharitable imputations.‖ (The Translators to the Reader) THE SPEECHES AND REASONS, BOTH OF OUR BRETHREN, AND OF OUR ADVERSARIES AGAINST THIS WORK ―Many men‘s mouths have been open a good while (and yet are not stopped) with speeches about the Translation so long in hand, or rather perusals of Translations made before: and ask what may be the reason, what the necessity of the employment: Hath the Church been deceived, say they, all this while? Hath her sweet bread been mingled with leaven, here silver with dross, her wine with water, her milk with lime? (Lacte gypsum male miscetur, saith S. Ireney,) [S. Iren. 3. lib. cap. 19.] We hoped that we had been in the right way, that we had the Oracles of God delivered unto us, and that though all the world had cause to be offended and to complain, yet that we had none.‖ (The Translators to the Reader) A SATISFACTION TO OUR BRETHREN ―But besides all this, they were the principal motives of it, and therefore ought least to quarrel it: for the very Historical truth is, that upon the importunate petitions of the Puritans, at his Majesty's coming to this Crown, the Conference at Hampton Court having been appointed for hearing their complaints: when by force of reason they were put from other grounds, they had recourse at the last, to this shift, that they could not with good conscience subscribe to the Communion book, since 111
it maintained the Bible as it was there translated, which was as they said, a most corrupted translation. And although this was judged to be but a very poor and empty shift; yet even hereupon did his Majesty begin to bethink himself of the good that might ensue by a new translation, and presently after gave order for this Translation which is now presented unto thee. Thus much to satisfy our scrupulous Brethren.‖ (The Translators to the Reader) Because the 1611 Translators knew that any translation of the originals would contain errors, and that even their translation had ―imperfections and blemishes,‖ they, of all men, would have approved of ―corrections‖ even of their own translation, if the corrections rendered it ―more agreeable to the original.‖ THE PURPOSE OF THE TRANSLATORS, WITH THEIR NUMBER, FURNITURE, CARE, ETC. ―...neither did we disdain to revise that which we had done, and to bring back to the anvil that which we had hammered...‖ (The Translators to the Reader) Far from warning against correction of their translation, the Translators would have thought refusal to undertake examination of their translation and correction of errors to be a sin against God: AN ANSWER TO THE IMPUTATIONS OF OUR ADVERSARIES ―Yet before we end, we must answer a third cavil and objection of theirs [the Papists] against us, for altering and amending our Translations so oft; wherein truly they deal hardly, and strangely with us. For to whomever was it imputed for a fault (by such as were wise) to go over that which he had done, and to amend it where he saw cause? Saint Augustine was not afraid to exhort S. Jerome to a
Palinodia or recantation; [S. Aug. .] and doth even glory that he seeth his infirmities. [S. Aug. .] If we be sons of the Truth, we must consider what it speaketh, and trample upon our own credit, yea, and upon other men‘s too, if either be any way an hindrance to it.‖ (The Translators to the Reader) The God-fearing and self-effacing principles of the Translators were honored by future generations and the Authorized Version was revised several times over 158 years following its publication. This fact is vehemently denied by KJV-Only advocates: ―...the King James Bible printed in 1611 reads the same as the King James Bible printed in 1997.‖ (William Bradley, Purified Seven Times, p. 115) ―A lost man would laugh at the suggestion that a particular text could be promoted as the same text with even one alteration.‖ (William Grady, Final Authority, p. 311). ―It is true that there were revisions. The first was in 1629 by Samuel Ward and John Bois, who had worked on the original translation. The second was in 1638 by the Cambridge University Press. The third was in 1762 by Dr. Thomas Paris of Trinity College, Cambridge. The fourth was in 1769 by Dr. Benjamin Blayney. The changes, though, were of a very minor nature. They were largely a correction of printing errors, an updating of italics, spelling, and punctuation, and modernizing of some obsolete words. The changes also involved the addition of a large number of new marginal notes and crossreferences. How different, then, is the King James Bible today than the one in 1611? The following authoritative answer is by Dr. Donald Waite of Bible for Today ministry. It is authoritative because he took the time to examine this challenge first hand by diligently and laboriously comparing every word of the 1611 KJV with a standard KJV in publication today. Following is his testimony:...‖ 112
(David Cloud, ―Was the 1611 King James Bible Different Than Those We Have Today?‖) ―There were ONLY 136 SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES that were different words. The others were only 285 MINOR CHANGES OF FORM ONLY. Of these 285 MINOR CHANGES, there are 214 VERY MINOR CHANGES such as ‗towards‘ for ‗toward‘; ‗burnt‘ for ‗burned‘; ‗amongst‘ for ‗among‘; '‗lift‘ for ‗lifted‘; and ‗you‘ for ‗ye.‘ These kinds of changes represent 214 out of the 285 minor changes of form only. Thus you're talking about ONLY 136 REAL CHANGES out of 791,328 words. Many people imply that the KING JAMES BIBLE is completely changed from what they had in 1611, that there are THOUSANDS of differences. You tell them about the MERE 136 CHANGES OF SUBSTANCE plus 285 MINOR CHANGES OF FORM ONLY.‖ (D.A. Waite, The Four-fold Superiority of the King James Bible). ―Samuel Ward was involved in the ongoing proofing of the KJV text after its publication in 1611. The only changes of the KJV since 1611 were of three types: 1. 1612: Typography (from Gothic to Roman Type). 2. 1629 & 1638: Correction of typographical errors 3. 1762 & 1769: Standardization of spelling... ―These typo-corrected editions of 1629 and 1638 and standardized spelling editions of 1762 and 1769 are wrongly called ‗revisions‘ of the KJV, by those who would like to pretend that the KJV has undergone ‗several revisions‘ or ‗four revisions‘ correcting ‗slight inaccuracies‘ and ‗its English form‘... There have never been any „revisions‟ of the KJV text. ... ―...Scrivener lists many of the typos and the course of their correction over the years [e.g. 1613, 1616, 1629, 1638, 1744, 1762, 1769 et al.] He lists some of the unwarranted variations. Seeing for one‘s self his list of typos, which have been fixed over the years, makes the myth of any textual ‗revision‘ of the KJV vanish into smoke. Most are spelling errors of insignificant words, such as ‗Jehoiakins‘ vs. ‗Jehoiachins.‘ Most were fixed almost immediately by Ward and Bois.‖ (Gail Riplinger, In Awe of Thy Word, pp. 600-602) F.H.A. Scrivener‘s volume, The Authorized Edition of the English Bible (1611): Its Subsequent Reprints and Modern Representatives documents hundreds of textual revisions of the original 1611 King James Version. Scrivener‘s Appendix A titled ―Wrong readings of the Bible of 1611 amended in later editions‖ reveals that a surprising number of the revisions were not of misspellings or typos but correction of translation errors. In other words, wrong readings which tainted the interpretation of verses. Even D.A. Waite admitted there have been ―136 substantial changes that were different words...136 changes of substance‖ between the original 1611 KJV and the present day (Old Scofield) KJV. (Defending the King James Bible, p. 244) These ―changes of substance‖ in progressive editions of the King James Version are documented in Frederick Scrivener‘s Appendix A which is reproduced on our website. For relevance sake, we omitted from Scrivener‘s Appendix the Apocryphal books that were in the 1611 KJV (1 Esdras, 2 Esdras, Tobit, Judith, Esther, Wisdom, Ecclus, Baruch, Hist. of Susanna, Bel and the Dragon, Prayer of Manasseh, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees). For readability, we have bolded the more significant errors noted by Scrivener in the 1611 AV. For the full list of corrections, see Scrivener‘s Appendix A: ―Wrong readings of the Bible of 1611 amended in later editions.‖ The tables below present abbreviated lists of selected translation errors along with their dates of correction. OLD TESTAMENT VERSE 1611 KING JAMES VERSION LATER EDITIONS OF KJV Gen. xxxix. 16 her lord his lord, 1638 Lev. 26:40 confess the iniquity of their fathers (the confess their iniquity and the iniquity of iniquities, 1613) their fathers (1616) Jer. 38:16 So the king sware So Zedekiah the king sware I Kings 11:5 Amorites (Ammorites 1612) Ammonites, 1629 II Kings 11:10 the Temple the temple of the Lord, 1638 113
2 Chron. iii. 10 most holy place 2 Chron. xxxii. prepared Millo 5 Ezra ii. 22 The children of Netophah Job xxxix. 30 there is he Psalm ii. 6 & Sion marg. Psalm lxv. 1 Sion
most holy house, 1629, repaired Millo, 1616, 1617 The men of Netophah, 1638 there is she, 1616, 16171 Zion, 16382. Cf. Ps. lxix. 35
Zion, Amer. 1867 only. See below, note 2 Psalm lxix. 32 seek good seek God, 1617 Psalm lxix. 35 Sion Zion, 1761.Cf. p. 165 note 2 Jer. xl. 9,10 ver. 9 † to serve ver. 10. † to serve. marg. †Heb. to stand before. And so verse 101 † Heb. to stand before, 1629-1769, Bagster 1846, American 1867 Ezek. i. 17 returned / Bishops Bible turned, 1769. Cf. vers. 9, 12 Ezek. iii.11 thy people the children of thy people, 1638 Ezek. xxiv. 7 poured it poured it not, 1613 Ezek. xlvi. 23 a new building a row of building, 1638 Dan. xii. 13 in the lot in thy lot, 1638 Zech. vii. 7 of the plain and the plain, 1638 1 This gross error of 1611-1630, though corrected long ago, is revived in most modern Bibles, e.g. D‘Oyly & Mant 1817, Oxford 1835, Camb. 1858. Dr. Scrivener noted one ―gross error‖ in the 1611 AV, in the marginal note for Jeremiah 40:9,10, which was not corrected until 1629. The alternate reading would render the verse: ―Feare not to stand before the Caldeans: dwell in the land, and serue the king of Babylon, and it shalbe well with you.‖ The error lies in the fact that the remnant of Jews were to remain in Israel to till the land. (2 Kings 25:12) 1. The marginal note may have been based on readings in the Septuagint (LXX). kai wmosen autoiv Godoliav kai toiv andrasin autwn legwn mh fobhqhte apo proswpou twn paidwn twn Xaldaiwn katoikhsate en th gh kai ergasasqe tw basilei Babulwnov kai beltion estai umin‖ Had our present King-James Only defenders lived in 1611, they would no doubt be among the AV Translators‘ harshest critics. Alas, some of the marginal notes in the 1611 King James Version plainly demonstrate the uncertainty and fallibility of the Translators, which they were the first to acknowledge in their Preface. While King James-Only proponents self-righteously remonstrate against marginal notes in new versions, modern version proponents are noting the same ―diversity of signification and sense in the margin‖ of the 1611 KJV:
VERSE Judges 19:2
Ezra 10:40 Psalm 102:3 Matt. 1:11
1611 KJV TEXT
MARGINAL NOTE
And his concubine played the whore ║Or, a yeere and four months. against him, and went away from him vnto Heb. dayes, and foure months her fathers house to Bethlehem Iudah, and was there ║foure whole moneths. ║Machnadebai, Shashai, Sharai, ║Or, Mabnadebai, according to some copies. For my dayes are consumed ║like smoke: ║Or, (as some reade) into smoke. and my bones are burnt as an hearth. And ║Iosias begate Iechonias and his ║Some read, Iosias begate Iakim, brethren, about the time they were caried and Iakim begat Iechonias 114
Luke 10:22
Luke 17:36
Acts 25:6
Eph. 6:9
James 2:18
1 Pet. 2:21
2 Pet. 2:2
2 Pet. 2:11
2 Pet. 2:18
2 John 8
Hebrews 11:35
away to Babylon. ║All things are deliuered to me of my ║Many ancient copies adde father: and no man knoweth who the sonne these words, And turning to his is, but the father: and who the father is, but Disciples, he said. the sonne, and he to whom the sonne will reueale him. ║Two men shall be in the field; the one ║This 36 verse is wanting in most shall be taken, and the other left. of the Greek copies / In Awe of Thy Word And when hee had taried among them ║Or, as some copies reade, no ║more then ten dayes, hee went downe more then eight or ten dayes. vnto Cesarea, and the next day sitting in the iudgement seat, commanded Paul to be brought. And ye masters, do the same things vnto ║Or, moderating. ║Some read, them, ║forbearing threatning: knowing that both your, and their master. ║your master also is in heauen, neither is there respect of persons with him. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I ║Some copies reade, by thy haue workes: shew mee thy faith ║without workes. thy workes, and I will shew thee my faith by my workes. For euen hereunto were ye called: because ║Some reade, for you. Christ also suffered for ║vs, leauing vs an example, that yee should follow his steps. And many shall follow their ║pernicious Or, lascivious wayes, as some wayes, by reason of whom the way of copies reade. trueth shall be euill spoken of: Whereas Angels which are greater in Some read against themselves. power and might, bring not railing accusation ║against them before the Lord. For when they speake great svelling words Or, for a little, or a while, as some of vanitie, they alure through the lusts of read. the flesh, through much wantonnesse, those that were ║cleane escaped from them who liue in errour. Looke to your selues, that wee lose not ║Or, gained. Some copies reade, those things which wee haue ║wrought, which yee haue gained, but that ye but that we receiue a full reward receive, &c. Women receiued their dead raised to life *2 Maccabees 7:7 / Reference to againe: and others were * tortured, not Apocrypha accepting deliuerance, that they might obtaine a better resurrection.
Source: Photo gallery of 1611 edition, KJV marginal variations This is one example of a modern version proponent trying to justify an otherwise weak case against the KJV by focusing on false information put out by the KJV-Only disinformation network. KJV-Onlyism has so damaged the credibility of the King James Bible that proponents of modern versions seem to represent the more rational side of the version issue. So many lies have been disseminated by KJV-Only leaders that the whole community is largely misinformed and therefore unable to intelligently discuss the issue with modern version advocates. To state the matter frankly, the modern version proponents seem to have a secret ally in the KJV-Only leadership. 115
Returning to F.H.A. Scrivener‘s Appendix A, the following table presents a few examples of ―Wrong readings of the Bible of 1611 amended in later editions‖ which were not mere spelling errors or typos. Note that words were added, omitted and mistranslated in the original KJV and some of these errors were not corrected until many years later. NEW TESTAMENT VERSE 1611 KING JAMES VERSION Matt. vi. 3 thy right doeth Matt. xxvi. 75 Luke i. 3 Luke xi. 3 John vii. 16 John xv. 20 Acts. xxiv. 24 1 Cor. xii. 28 2 Cor. xi. 32 Eph. vi. 24 2 Thess. ii. 14 1 Tim. i. 4 2 Tim. iv. 13
the words of Jesus understanding of things his sister Jesus answered them, than the Lord (lord 1629-1743) which was a Jew helps in governments the city sincerity the Lord Jesus Christ edifying bring with thee
1 John v. 12
hath not the Son1
Heb. x. 23
faith
LATER EDITIONS OF KJV thy right hand doeth, 1613 (not 1616, 1617), 1629, 1630 the word of Jesus, 1762 understanding of all things, 1629 his sisters, 1629 Jesus answered them, and said, 1634, 1638 than his lord, 1762 which was a Jewess, 1629. Cf. ch. xvi. 1 helps, governments, 1629 the city of the Damascenes, 1629 sincerity, Amen, 1616 (not 1617, 1629 C.) our Lord Jesus Christ, 1629 godly edifying, 1638 (Tynd.-Bps‘) bring with thee, and the books, 1616, 1617, 1629 C. & L., 1630. hath not the Son of God, 1629 C. (not 1629 L., 1630), 16382. hope. See Appendix E, p. 247.
Scrivener‘s footnote on Hebrews 10:23 was: ―The variation in Heb. x. 23 ‗faith‘ for ‗hope‘ is...a mere oversight of our Translators...‖ The table above is a selective list from Scrivener‘s catalogue of the word changes, additions, and omissions to the 1611 KJV that were not printing or spelling errors. We do not fault the Translators for such translation errors. Indeed, it is extraordinary that there were not more translation errors given the sheer magnitude of the project they undertook. Absent divine authorship and direct inspiration, it is humanly impossible to render every word of a manuscript the length of the Bible (and even much shorter documents) with perfect accuracy. The 1611 Translators understood full well that they were not infallible as the Prophets and Apostles who penned the Hebrew and Greek Originals: ―For whatever was perfect under the Sun, where Apostles or Apostolic men, that is, men endued with an extraordinary measure of God‘s spirit, and privileged with the privilege of infallibility, had not their hand?‖ (―The Translators to the Reader‖) “SION” VS. “ZION” There are certain translation errors in the King James Version that will have end-time ramifications. Analysis of the most critical errors is available in an addendum, ―Translation Errors in the KJV which Affect the Interpretation of Bible Prophecy.‖ A few of these errors are also discussed in the body of the report, specifically errors related to the name, location and mark of the Antichrist. Chapter 2 dealt with the problem of the name JEHOVAH instead of YHWH. The location of the Antichrist‘s headquarters follows here, with his ―mark‖ the subject of the next chapter.
116
The 1611 KJV mistranslated of the Hebrew word for ―Zion‖ (tsiyown) as ―Sion‖ in the following Psalms: 2:6, 9:11, 14; 14:7; 20:2; 48:2, 11, 12; 50:2; 51:18; 53:6; 65:1, 69:35, 74:2: 76:2; 78:68; 97:8. Of these, all were corrected except for Psalm 65:1 which was corrected only in the American edition of 1867. However, the KJV Old Testament still retains the mistranslation ―Sion‖ in Psalm 65:1, which is the Hebrew word tsiyown and should be translated should be ―Zion.‖
Psalms
Reading of the Authorized Variation of later editions Bible
Zion, 16382. Cf. Ps. lxix. 35 Zion, Amer. 1867 only. See below, note 2 lxix. 35 Sion Zion, 1761.Cf. p. 165 note 2 2 So Ps. ix. 11, 14; xiv. 7; xx. 2; xlviii. 2, 11, 12; l. 2; li. 18; liii. 6; lxxiv. 2; lxxvi. 2; lxxviii. 68; xcvii. 8. Elsewhere 1611 has ―Zion‖ except in Ps. lxv. 1, where all have ―Sion‖ except Amer. 1867. Cf. Ps. lxix. 35 ii. 6 & marg. lxv. 1
Sion Sion
This translation error can be traced back through all of the English Bibles, except the Geneva Bible, to the Latin Vulgate (425 A.D.). It is possible that Jerome derived the error from the Greek Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament (c. 280-130 B.C.). The translators of the Greek Septuagint changed all Hebrew spellings of ‗Zion‘ to ‗Sion‘ because there is no letter ―S‖ in the Greek alphabet which corresponds to the letter ―Zayin‖ (Z) in the Hebrew alphabet. These mistranslations demonstrate that, in these verses, the King James Translators were ultimately following the Greek Septuagint, by way of the Bishop‘s and other English Bibles (except the Geneva), as well as the Latin Vulgate, instead of the Hebrew Masoretic Text. See below: PSALM 65:1-2 MASORETIC TEXT – ―Praise waiteth for thee, O God, in Zion; And unto Thee is the vow performed.‖ SEPTUAGINT – ―soi prepei umnov o qeov en Siwn kai soi apodoqhsetai euxh en Ierousalhm‖ BISHOP'S BIBLE – ―O Lorde thou wylt be greatly praysed in Sion: and vnto thee shal vowes be perfourmed‖ GENEVA BIBLE – ―To him that excelleth. A Psalme or song of Dauid. O God, praise waiteth for thee in Zion, and vnto thee shall the vowe be perfourmed.‖ COVERDALE BIBLE – ―Thou (o God) art praysed in Sion, and vnto the is the vowe perfourmed.‖ TYNDALE N.T. – n/a WYCLIFFE BIBLE – ―The titil of the foure and sixtithe salm. `To victorie, `the salm of the song of Dauid. God, heriyng bicometh thee in Syon; and a vow schal be yolden to thee in Jerusalem.‖ LATIN VULGATE – ―tibi silens laus Deus in Sion et tibi reddetur votum‖ DOUAY RHEIMS VERSION – ―A hymn, O God, becometh thee in Sion: and a vow shall be paid to thee in Jerusalem.‖ 117
What may at a glance seem to be a spelling error was in fact a translation error. The Hebrew word for ―Sion‖ is Siy’on, an altogether different word than Tsiyown, which is translated ―Zion‖. The words Tsiyown (Zion) and Siy’on (Sion) are not interchangeable because they identify two different locations, Mount Zion in Jerusalem and Mount Hermon, also called Mount Sion, in northern Israel. #7865 Siy‘on {see-ohn‘} from 7863; n pr mont AV - Sion 1; 1 Sion = ―lofty‖ 1) another name for Mount Hermon #6726 Tsiyown {tsee-yone‘} the same (regularly) as 6725; TWOT - 1910; n pr loc AV - Zion 153, Sion 1; 154 Zion = ―parched place‖ 1) another name for Jerusalem especially in the prophetic books. Deuteronomy 4:48 identifies Sion as Mount Hermon: Deuteronomy 4:48 KJV – ...even unto mount Sion, which is Hermon... Deuteronomy 3:9 KJV – ...(Which Hermon the Sidonians call Sirion; and the Amorites call it Shenir;)... Mount Hermon/Sion is the highest mountain in Israel where the fallen angels mated with human women (Genesis 6). It is for this reason sacred to to the Merovingian bloodline. The Merovingians are the tribe of Dan which relocated to the Mount Hermon area and intermarried with the Canaanite Tuatha de Danaan. Mount Hermon in Dan is located at the 33º latitude and longitude using the Paris Zero Meridian, which was used by the French before 1884 when Greenwich became the international Zero Meridian. The Prieuré de Sion is headquartered in Paris; the Protocols of Sion were signed by the Leaned Elders of Sion of the 33rd Degree. Psalm 48:2 and Isaiah 14:13 identify Mount Zion in Jerusalem as the city of the great King, the most High, God. However, these readings in the Septuagint locates the throne of the Most High at Mount Sion in northern Israel: Psalm 48:2 KJV - Beautiful for situation, the joy of the whole earth, is mount Zion, on the sides of the north, the city of the great King. SEPTUAGINT - The city of the great King is well planted on the mountains of Sion, with the joy of the whole earth, on the sides of the north. Isaiah 14:13 KJV - How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High. SEPTUAGINT – How has Lucifer, that rose in the morning, fallen from heaven! He that sent orders to all the nations is crushed to the earth. But thou 118adist in thine heart, I will go up to heaven, I will set my throne above the stars of heaven: I will sit on a lofty mount, on the lofty mountains toward the north: I will go up above the clouds: I will be like the Most High. Mistranslation of the Hebrew word for Zion (Tsiyown) to Sion in Psalm 65:1 in the King James Version is important because this verse will provide Scriptural support for the Merovingian high command, the Prieuré de Sion, to exalt Mount Hermon in Dan as the place where God dwells, i.e., Lucifer‘s dwelling place in Mount Sion, instead of Mount Zion in Jerusalem. The Antichrist, a Merovingian who will be indwelt by Lucifer, will rule the world from Mount Sion/Hermon in Dan instead of Mount Zion in Jerusalem. At the Luciferic Initiation, the False Prophet will coerce mankind to swear allegiance to Lucifer and to receive his mark. 118
―And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon. And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed...And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.‖ (Rev. 13:1-13, 16-18) Psalm 65:1, as it is mistranslated in the King James Bible, may even be the text from which the False Prophet will preach that all must swear allegiance to Lucifer and seal their vows with his mark: ―Praise waiteth for thee, O God, in Sion: and unto thee shall the vow be performed. O thou that hearest prayer, unto thee shall all flesh come. ‖ (Ps. 65:1-2 KJV) Compounding the problem, all seven New Testament references to Mount Zion in Jerusalem have been translated ―Mount Sion‖ in the KJV. Five of these verses were fulfilled at the first coming of Jesus Christ, however, two of these verses pertain to the Second Coming of Jesus Christ – Romans 11:26 and Revelation 14:1. These verses they will likely be prematurely misappropriated to the Antichrist to establish him as the messiah of Israel and ruler of the world from his palatial headquarters in Mount Sion/Hermon. Matthew 21:5 – Tell ye the daughter of Sion, Behold, thy King cometh unto thee, meek, and sitting upon an ass, and a colt the foal of an ass. (KJV) John 12:15 – Fear not, daughter of Sion: behold, thy King cometh, sitting on an ass‘s colt. (KJV) Romans 9:33 – As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. (KJV) Romans 11:26 – And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: (KJV) Hebrews 12:22 – But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, (KJV) 1 Peter 2:6 – Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded. (KJV) Revelation 14:1 – And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father‟s name written in their foreheads. (KJV) See: ―Heeding Bible Prophecy: New Government: Mount Zion/Sion‖ KJV-Only advocates sanctimoniously denounce the New King James Version translators‘ use of the Septuagint which, they omit to mention, the 1611 KJV Translators also consulted. Ironically, in Psalm 65:1, where the KJV mistranslated the Hebrew word Tsiyown as ―Sion‖ (following the Septuagint reading), the NKJV translated it correctly as ―Zion‖: ―Praise is awaiting You, O God, in Zion; And to You the vow shall be performed. O You who hear prayer, To You all flesh will come.‖ (Ps. 65:1-2 NKJV) 119
In the NKJV, only Deuteronomy 4:48 is translated as ―Sion,‖ since it is the Hebrew word ―siyon‖ referring to Mount Hermon. In all other relevant verses of the Old Testament, including Psalm 65:1, the NKJV correctly translates the Hebrew word Tsiyown as ―Zion.‖ In the New Testament, the Greek word ―Sion‖ [#4622 ] does not derive from the Hebrew word for ―Sion‖ [#7865, siyon] referring to Mt. Hermon, but is derived from the Hebrew word for ―Zion‖ [#6726, tsiyown] referring to Mt. Zion in Jerusalem. #4622 Sion {see-own‘}of Hebrew origin 6726; TDNT – 7:292,1028; n pr loc AV – Sion 7; 7 Sion or Zion = ―a parched place‖ 1) the hill on which the higher and more ancient part of Jerusalem was built 1a) the southwestern most and highest of the hills on which the city was built 2) often used of the entire city of Jerusalem 3) since Jerusalem because the temple stood there, was called the dwelling place of God In the NKJV, all New Testament references to Mount Zion in Jerusalem are accurately translated ―Zion.‖ Matthew 21:5 – Tell the daughter of Zion, Behold, your King is coming to you, Lowly, and sitting on a donkey, A colt, the foal of a donkey. (NKJV) John 12:15 – Fear not, daughter of Zion; Behold, your King is coming, Sitting on a donkey‘s colt. (NKJV) Romans 9:33 – As it is written: Behold, I lay in Zion a stumbling stone and rock of offense, And whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame. (NKJV) Romans 11:26 – And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: ―The Deliverer will come out of Zion, And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob; (NKJV) Hebrews 12:22 – But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels, (NKJV) 1Peter 2:6 – Therefore it is also contained in the Scripture, Behold, I lay in Zion A chief cornerstone, elect, precious, And he who believes on Him will by no means be put to shame. (NKJV) Revelation 14:1 – Then I looked, and behold, a Lamb standing on Mount Zion, and with Him one hundred and forty-four thousand, having His Father‘s name written on their foreheads. (NKJV) NOTES 1. Jeremiah 40:9-10 ¶7Now when all the captains of the forces which were in the fields, euen they and their men, heard that the king of Babylon had made Gedaliah the son of Ahikam gouernour in the land, and had committed vnto him men, and women, and children, and of the poore of the land, of them that were not carried away captiue to Babylon; 8 Then they came to Gedaliah to Mizpah, even Ishmael the sonne of Nethaniah, and Iohanan and Ionathan the sonnes of Kareah, and Seraiah the sonne of Tanhumeth, and the sonnes of Ephai the Netophathite, and Iezaniah the sonne of a Maachathite, they and their men. 9 And Gedaliah the sonne of Ahikam the sonne of Shaphan sware vnto them and to their men, † Heb. To saying, Feare not † to serve the Caldeans: dwell in the land, and serue the king of Babylon, and stand before. And so verse it shalbe well with you. 10. 10 As for me, behold, I will dwell at Mizpah to serue the Caldeans, which will come vnto vs : but yee, gather yee wine, and summer fruits, and oyle, and put them in your vessels, and dwell in your cities that yee haue taken. 120
CHAPTER IX THE MARK OF THE BEAST The following warning is given in Chapter 2 of In Awe of Thy Word: ―The KJV warns of the mark of Antichrist, whereby many ‗receive a mark in the right hand.‘ New versions miss the mark, pretending it will only be ‗on the right hand‘ (Rev. 13:16). This may be the most damaging twist of scripture in these perilous days. The NKJV, TNIV, NIV, NASB, ESV, HCSB and generally all new versions allow their readers to take the mark of the beast – simply by changing the letter ‗i‘ to ‗o.‘ (According to the OED (and even the new versions in some places), the Greek epi can be translated as ‗in,‘ as in epicorolline, ‗inserted in,‘ epicranidal [sic], ‗in the cerebellum,‘ epistolary, ‗in letters,‘ ‗epitomize, ‗contain in…into a small compass.‘) Applied Digital Solutions has a ‗Verichip‘ ready to market. Their spokesman appeared on the 700 Club to assure Christian viewers that their embedded (in-bedded) chip did not fit the new versions description about the mark of the Beast, because their chip goes ‗in‘ the hand, ‗inserted with a large needle device,‘ not stamped ‗on‘ the hand. The Associated Press (Washington, Feb. 26, 2002) reports, ‗GOOD OR EVIL?… Applied Digital has consulted theologians and appeared on the religious television program the ‗700 Club‘ to assure viewers the chip didn‘t fit the biblical description of the mark because it is under the skin hidden from view.‘ (http://www.msnbc.com/news/716493.asp). ―Over ten years ago the bestseller, New Age Bible Versions, warned of the one letter change from ‗in‘ to ‗on.‘ It used thousands of examples proving that new versions are a part of the counterfeit sheep‘s clothing by which the ―beast‖ deceives and speaks ‗like a lamb,‘ with ‗miracles,‘ ‗worship,‘ and ‗great wonders‘ (Rev. 13:11-14). The merchants of the ‗mark‘ can swear on a wobbly stack of NKJVs that ‗The Bible says its ok‘ to take the I.D. marker. No wonder few escape it. ‗And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand…And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark…‘ Rev. 13:16, 17‖ (In Awe of Thy Word, pp. 100-101) According to the Oxford English Dictionary, says Gail, ―the Greek epi can be translated as ‗in‘.‖ To begin with, the Oxford English Dictionary should never be used as an authority on Greek usage. For the translation of Greek words depends on their grammatical relationships — their arrangement in phrases, clauses and sentences — and one thing the student of the Bible won‘t learn from the OED is the meaning of Greek words according to their syntax. To be properly translated, Greek words must be ―parsed,‖ that is analyzed in terms of their grammatical constituents; parts of speech must be identified and their syntactic relations ascertained. An English dictionary does not deal with the fine points involved in Greek translation. Although epi may, in some instances, be translated as ―in,‖ this is not the normal definition of the word epi. We doubt the OED explains that epi ―can be‖ translated as ‗in‘ only if it occurs in specific relationships to other words and identifies those grammatical relationships. Wesley Perschbacher‘s New Analytical Greek
121
Lexicon, an invaluable tool which parses every word in the Greek New Testament, identifies the occasions on which epi ―can be‖ translated as ―in‖: ―in, of locality, Mark 8:4, et al;...in the presence of, especially in a judicial sense, 2 Cor. 7:14, Acts 25:9;...in the case of, in respect of, John 6:2, Gal. 3:16; in the time of, at the time of, Acts 11:28; Rom. 1:10, et al...in the neighborhood or society of, Acts 28:14...in order to...Matt. 3:7...‖ In Revelation 13:16, 14:9 and 20:4, the Greek article ―the‖ before the noun ―hand‖ in the prepositional phrase ―in the hand‖ renders the word ―hand‖ in the accusative case, which requires its translation to be ―upon.‖ Perschbacher‘s New Analytical Greek Lexicon (#1909) states ―‗epi‘,...with the acc., upon”. Confirming Perschbacher‘s Lexicon, Learn New Testament Greek by John H. Dobson, states that ―epi‖ means ―on, on top of‖ (―Prepositions followed by an accusative case,‖ p. 186). In other words, when the preposition ‗epi‘ is present with a noun in the accusative case, its meaning is ―upon, on.‖ Had God intended Revelation 13:16, 4:9 and 20:4 to be translated ―in the hand‖ or ―in the forehead,‖ He would have used a different Greek word —―en‖ (See: Strong‘s Concordance #1909 and #1722). It is noteworthy that the KJV Translators correctly translated the word ―epi‖ as ―upon‖ in Revelation 20:4, in the phrase pertaining to the mark on the forehead, however, they mistranslated the same Greek word as ―in‖ pertaining to the hands in the next prepositional phrase: ―And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark UPON their foreheads, or IN their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.‖ (Rev. 20:4) In Revelation 13:16, 14:1 and 14:9, however, epi is mistranslated ―in,‖ with reference to the mark on the foreheads of the 144,000 and the mark of the Beast: ―And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark IN their right hand, or IN their foreheads:‖ (Rev. 13:16) ―And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father‘s name written IN their foreheads.‖ (Rev. 14:1) ―And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man do homage to the beast and his image, and receive his mark IN his forehead, or IN his hand, The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.‖ (Rev. 14:9,10) Why did the KJV translators vary the translation of ―epi‖ in these identical prepositional phrases, when the syntax requires the translation to be ―on‖ or ―upon‖? The answer is found in the Bishop‘s Bible and previous English translations, including the Wycliffe Bible which was based on the Latin Vulgate. (The reader can compare these Bible versions at: http://www.studylight.org/)
122
In Latin, the word ―in‖ is used for both ―in‖ and ―on‖ regardless of syntax, and it appears that the translator(s) of the Wycliffe Bible chose to translate the Latin word ―in‖ and all of the subsequent English translations followed suit. The point is that the Greek Textus Receptus was not the authority of the 1611 Translators in these verses; rather they followed the Bishop‘s Bible and previous English Bibles, all of which derived their readings from the Latin Vulgate! Although King James had commanded them to follow the Bishop‘s Bible, they were not to depart from the Greek Text, which they obviously did: ―FOR the better ordering of the proceedings of the translators, his Majesty recommended the following rules to them, to be very carefully observed:— 1. The ordinary bible, read in the church, commonly called the Bishop‘s Bible, to be followed, and as little altered as the original will permit... 14. These translations to be used when they agree better with the text than the Bishop‘s Bible, viz. Tyndal‘s, Coverdale‘s, Matthews‘, Wilchurch‘s, Geneva.‖ (―History of the King James Version‖) In the excerpt quoted above from In Awe of Thy Word, Gail Riplinger stated: ―Over ten years ago the bestseller, New Age Bible Versions, warned of the one letter change from ―in‖ to ‗on.‘‖ This is not true. In Awe of Thy Word was published in 2003 and the first printing of New Age Bible Versions in March 1993 did not warn about the letter change. Furthermore, in the first edition of NABV, Gail interpreted Rev. 13:16 in terms of a brand (charagma) ―on‖ the hand or ―on‖ the forehead. In so doing, she tacitly recognized the normal definition of the Greek word epi and its correct translation — on, upon. We have reproduced below the relevant portion of New Age Bible Versions (pp. 99-103) as it appeared in two different editions in order to show that a significant revision occurred between the 1st printing in March 1993 and the 5th printing in August of 1994. Such reproduction is permitted for purposes of criticism, comment and research under the Fair Use Provision of the U.S. Copyright Law. (See Notes below) In the parallel sections reprinted below, the first column contains the 1st printing with the original words that were removed highlighted in blue, and the 2nd column has the 5th printing with the words that were added highlighted in red. We have taken the liberty to underline certain prepositional phrases prefixed by ―in‖ and ―on‖ which reveal Gail Riplinger‘s choice of prepositions when referring to location of the mark (charagma) of the beast. In this chapter, she is making a case that modern versions will sanction receiving the ―name‖ of the beast ―on‖ their foreheads. In the process of critiquing new versions‘ addition of the words ―and his name‖ to Rev. 14:1, the 1st printing states that the number and mark of the beast will be on the forehead. Note as well in the 1st printing, especially the removed portions, that Gail referred to the name and the Mark of the Beast as a ―brand‖ that idolaters ―inscribe on‖ their hand or forehead. However, by the 5th printing, this very correct interpretation was edited out and replaced by ―news‖ about the microchip implant — with the caveat that ―new versions will deceive many...into believing that the forbidden mark is on, not in, the hand or forehead.‖
123
New Age Bible Versions Copyright © by G.A. Riplinger, 1993. Published by A.V. Publications, Box 388, Munroe Falls, Ohio 44162
New Age Bible Versions Copyright © by G.A. Riplinger, 1993. Published by A.V. Publications, Box 388, Munroe Falls, Ohio 44162
First Printing, March 1993
First Printing, March 1993 Fifth Printing, August 1994
Chapter 6 His Mark & Masquerade (…) 99
Chapter 6 His Mark & Masquerade (…) 99
The Mark: Christ or Antichrist The Mark: Christ or Antichrist And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father‘s name written in their foreheads. Rev. 14:1
And I looked, and, lo, a Lamb stood on the mount Sion and with him an hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father‘s name written in their foreheads. Rev. 14:1
This verse, along with Revelation 22:4, reveal that at some point in time, whether symbolically or literally, the Lamb will have ―his Father‘s name‖ written in his servants‘ foreheads. Revelation 7:3 and 9:4 attest similarly to God‘s people being ―sealed in their foreheads.‖ In his typical counterfeit counterpoise, we see the deceiver afoot, working through the antichrist. Revelation 13:16 foresees his forgery.
This verse, along with Revelation 22:4, reveal that at some point in time, whether symbolically or literally, the Lamb will have ―his Father‘s name‖ written in his servants‘ foreheads. Revelation 7:3 and 9:4 attest similarly to God‘s people being ―sealed in their foreheads.‖ In his typical counterfeit counterpoise, we see the deceiver afoot, working through the antichrist. Revelation 13:16 foresees his forgery.
And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name…and his number is six hundred threescore and six [666].
And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name…and his number is six hundred threescore and six [666].
All new versions, based on a tiny percentage of corrupt Greek manuscripts, make the fatefully frightening addition of three words in Revelation 14:1.
All new versions, based on a tiny percentage of corrupt Greek manuscripts, make the fatefully frightening addition of three words in Revelation 14:1.
―…the Lamb, standing on Mount Zion, and with him 144,000 who had his name and his Father‘s name written on their foreheads.‖ NIV
―…the Lamb, standing on Mount Zion, and with him 144,000 who had his name and his Father‘s name written on their foreheads.‖ NIV
100 100 Will the unwary reading Revelation 14:1 in a recent version, be persuaded that the bible sanctions and encourages the taking of ―his name‖ on their forehead before they receive his Father‘s name?
Will the unwary reading Revelation 14:1 in a recent version, be persuaded that the bible sanctions and encourages the taking of ―his name‖ before they
124
receive his Father‘s name? Dr. Carl Sanders, developer of the hypodermically inserted Positive Identification Microchip (pim I Samuel 13:21 NKJV), now warns Christian audiences that new versions will deceive many, as they did him, into believing that the forbidden mark is on, not in, the hand or forehead. Is the U.S. government‘s top secret laboratory at Los Alamos creating this microchip and digitizing the Rockefeller Foundation supported Dead Sea Scrolls because the scrolls prescribe all of the elements necessary to coerse [sic] people to conform to the one world political and religious system of the antichrist?1 With the microdensitometer ―You can actually move letters around in the manuscript‖ allowing manipulation of ―the evidence‖, warns one researcher. The scrolls, created by the esoteric Essenes already call for: 1) confiscation of personal property, 2) two messiahs, one political and one religious (Rev. 19:20), 3) the Sons of Light, ―ruled by the angel of light‖ (II Cor. 11:14), 4) an Arabic Mahdi whose ‗Name‘ and initiation, if rejected bring death and imprisonment during a 7 year period.2 The NIV mimics this ‗Name‘ over 80 times and prescribes death for those who will not bear it. In the tribulation (and new versions) ―his name‖ is in and ―the Lord Jesus‖ is out. Will ―another Jesus‖ (II Corinthians 11:4) brand his followers with the mark of the beast, after ―his ministers‖ (II Corinthians 11:5) have prodded them with skewed bible verses? The smoke of Satan‘s branding iron ascends forever.
(Already Rev. Sun Myung Moon [who spiritualist Arthur Ford calls, ―the New Age voice of religious thought‖] calls himself ―the Lamb‖ and claims that Christ‘s ―new name‖ mentioned in Revelation 3:12 is Sun Myung Moon.1) NIV, NASB, et al. The Name the name which thou has given me his name and his Father‘s name written on their foreheads calling on His name I bear on my body the brand marks of Jesus
3 John 1:7 John 17:11 Rev 14:1
Acts 22:16 Gal. 6:17
KJV name‘s Those whom thou has given me his Father‘s name written in their foreheads calling on the name of the Lord I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus
New versions are mimicking ‗the Name‘ seen in the esoteric Dead Sea Scrolls; these tell of an Arabic Mahdi whose ‗Name‘ and initiation, if rejected, brings death and imprisonment during a 7 year period. (See Theodore Gaster, The Dead Sea Scriptures, (Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor Books, 1976 pp. 29, 38, 57, 85, 121, 181, et al.) In the tribulation (and new versions) ―his name‖ is in and ―the Lord Jesus‖ is out. Will ―another Jesus‖ (II Corinthians 11:4) brand his followers with the mark of the beast, after ―his ministers‖ (II Corinthians 11:5) have prodded them with skewed bible verses? The smoke of Satan‘s branding iron ascends forever.
And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up forever: and they have no rest day or night, who worship the beast and his image and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name. (Revelation 14:11)
And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up forever: and they have no rest day or night, who worship the beast and his image and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name. (Revelation 14:11)
NIV, NASB, et al. his name and his Rev 14:1 Father‘s name written on their foreheads his name Acts 22:16 the Lev. Name 24:11 When he Lev. blasphemes the 24:16 Name, he must be put to death (NIV)
101 One bible commentator notes and Old Testament elusion [sic] to the distinction between the New Testament charagma, mark of the rebellious, and the graphomai of God. They have corrupted themselves, their spot [Hebrew: mum] is not the spot of his children. Deut. 32:5
I bear on my body the brand marks of Jesus tattoo upon the
The comment reads:
125
Gal. 6:17
Is. 44:5
KJV his Father‘s name written in their foreheads the name of the Lord the name of the LORD When he blasphemeth the name of the LORD, shall be put to death I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus subscribe with his
This may refer to the marks of idolaters who inscribe on their arms or foreheads…[a] sign of their particular deity. The practice is very ancient…2
hand the name (LB) Your people bear your Name (NIV) I bear on my body the brand marks of Jesus the name which thou has given me Name
Recent versions completely obscure this clue translating that verse, not from the Jewish Masoretic text but from either the Peshitta or the Greek Septuagint, both of which contain numerous corruptions. (Sounding rather cruel, they read, in effect, that certain people aren‘t ‗his‘ because of their defect. Curiously though, most new versions translate ‗mum‘ as ‗spot‘, not as ‗defect‘, in Job 31:7; their inconsistency rears its head frequently.)
Dan. 9:19
Gal. 6:17
John 17:11 3 John 1:7, Acts 5:41
hand unto the LORD Thy people are called by this name I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus those whom thou has given me name
The number of “his name”. . .is 666
The number of “his name”. . .is 666
There are two modes of communication: 1.) direct and explicit (i.e., the word of God and its doctrines) 2.) indirect and implicit (i.e., symbols and rituals). God uses the first method; Satan uses the second means. The number 666 in the form of a mobius symbol appears on the cover the New King James Version (NKJV), just as it does on the cover of The Aquarian Conspiracy, the most popular New Age book. Its meaning is mantled to NKJV readers, a maneuver set in motion by Vera Alger and others who call for the use of such ―symbols…to conceal certain knowledge from the masses.‖3 Aquarian Conspiracy fans are privy to the ‗conspiracy‘.
There are two modes of communication: 1.) direct and explicit (i.e., the word of God and its doctrines) 2.) indirect and implicit (i.e., symbols and rituals). God uses the first method; Satan uses the second means. The number 666 in the form of a mobius symbol appears on the cover the New King James Version (NKJV), just as it does on the cover of The Aquarian Conspiracy, the most popular New Age book. Its meaning is mantled to NKJV readers, a maneuver set in motion by Vera Alger and others who call for the use of such ―symbols…to conceal certain knowledge from the masses.‖3 Aquarian Conspiracy fans are privy to the ‗conspiracy‘.
What makes it a symbol for people is this strange power to communicate to some and not to others.4
What makes it a symbol for people is this strange power to communicate to some and not to others.4
Luciferians say it is ―recognizable by those who have received certain instructions.‖5 Alice Bailey adds:
Luciferians say it is ―recognizable by those who have received certain instructions.‖5 Alice Bailey adds:
102 102 [T]he number 666 has to do with…the Greater Initiation…the initiate is defined as one who has…expressed 666.6
[T]he number 666 has to do with…the Greater Initiation…the initiate is defined as one who has…expressed 666.6
The Keys of Enoch ―instructs the reader to use the numerical sequence 6-6-6 as frequently as possible:‖7
The Keys of Enoch ―instructs the reader to use the numerical sequence 6-6-6 as frequently as possible:‖7
1. [T]o be an ―outer and visible sign of an inner and spiritual reality.‖ [The NKJV denies the deity of Christ a half dozen times.]8 2. ―[T]o invoke Lord Maitreya.‖ 9 3. ―[T]o attract higher intelligences from...other dimensions.‖10
1. [T]o be an ―outer and visible sign of an inner and spiritual reality.‖ [The NKJV denies the deity of Christ a half dozen times.]8 2. ―[T]o invoke Lord Maitreya.‖ 9 3. ―[T]o attract higher intelligences
126
from...other dimensions.‖10 New Agers heed the call and parade the 666 shaped mobius. The Mobius Group, based in Los Angeles, is a leader in investigating ―psychic phenomena.‖ They give much press to the spirits still lingering in Cambridge from Westcott‘s Ghostly Guild.11 While New Agers hang 666 over their door, new versions try to push its negative connotations out the back door. A note in the NASB and Living Bible nudges readers to believe the number to avoid is not 666, but 616. Their readers are not told that only two insignificant documents, manuscripts C and 11 record this error.
New Agers heed the call and parade the 666 shaped mobius. The Mobius Group, based in Los Angeles, is a leader in investigating ―psychic phenomena.‖ They give much press to the spirits still lingering in Cambridge from Westcott‘s Ghostly Guild.11 While New Agers hang 666 over their door, new versions try to push its negative connotations out the back door. A note in the NASB and Living Bible nudges readers to believe the number to avoid is not 666, but 616. Their readers are not told that only two insignificant documents, manuscripts C and 11 record this error.
The Mark and Image of the Virgin The Mark and Image of the Virgin For thousands of years the mark has been looming in the world‘s cultural and religious scaffolding, ready to be unleashed at the advent of the antichrist. The 500 million Buddhists worldwide revere effigies of Gautama Buddha and Buddhist ‗saints‘ with a mark on their forehead and on their hand. The 800 million Roman Catholics sport spots on their forehead as a part of their yearly Ash Wednesday service. Daily doses of cow excrement don the foreheads of Hindu Krishna devotees. Surveying the meaning behind this ancient practice may forearm us as to the nature of the religious system of the antichrist. Scholars tell us the forehead mark represents, ―the eternal Virgin. . .the One itself.‖ New Agers disclose that this is Lucifer.
For thousands of years the mark has been looming in the world‘s cultural and religious scaffolding, ready to be unleashed at the advent of the antichrist. The 500 million Buddhists worldwide revere effigies of Gautama Buddha and Buddhist ‗saints‘ with a mark on their forehead and on their hand. The 800 million Roman Catholics sport spots on their forehead as a part of their yearly Ash Wednesday service. Daily doses of cow excrement don the foreheads of Hindu Krishna devotees. Surveying the meaning behind this ancient practice may forearm us as to the nature of the religious system of the antichrist. Scholars tell us the forehead mark represents, ―the eternal Virgin. . .the One itself.‖ New Agers disclose that this is Lucifer.
103 103 The point-bindu is a standard religious symbol throughout the world. . .bindi—the red spot that Hindu women wear on their forehead. It is nothing other than a form of the bindi of esoteric origin. . .and other mystical disciplines. . .[I]t is an affirmation that she is Shakti, the feminine power. . .The concept of supreme power as female. . .[arises] from submerged prehistoric mother cults of the earliest people of the subcontinent. The Goddess is he source of all, the universal creator, as eternal Virgin (Kumari). . .She is the One itself.12
The point-bindu is a standard religious symbol throughout the world. . .bindi—the red spot that Hindu women wear on their forehead. It is nothing other than a form of the bindi of esoteric origin. . .and other mystical disciplines. . .[I]t is an affirmation that she is Shakti, the feminine power. . .The concept of supreme power as female. . .[arises] from submerged prehistoric mother cults of the earliest people of the subcontinent. The Goddess is he source of all, the universal creator, as eternal Virgin (Kumari). . .She is the One itself.12 Even though most of the world‘s religious systems are pantheistic, that is, worship of ‗the One‘,—the Virgin or Mother Goddess has perennially been the tangible icon through which that nature god has been addressed and venerated. An engraving on a goddess icon from ancient Egypt reads, ―I am all that has been, or that is, or that shall be.‖13
Even though most of the world‘s religious systems are pantheistic, that is, worship of ‗the One‘,—the Virgin or Mother Goddess has perennially been the tangible icon through which that nature god has been addressed and venerated. An engraving on a goddess icon from ancient Egypt reads, ―I am all that has been, or that is, or that shall be.‖13
127
The bible opens to expose this accomplice, a talking image, that takes victims by the hand to receive their mark.
The bible opens to expose this accomplice, a talking image, that takes victims by the hand to receive their mark.
And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many would not worship the image of the beast should be killed. And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their forehead. Revelation 13:15,16
And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many would not worship the image of the beast should be killed. And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their forehead. Revelation 13:15,16 An image of ‗the Virgin‘ appearing in Marienfried, Germany to Barbara Reuss, speaks, calling for the taking of a mark on the forehead. This phantom pronounces to all:
An image of ‗the Virgin‘ appearing in Marienfried, Germany to Barbara Reuss, speaks, calling for the taking of a mark on the forehead. This phantom pronounces to all:
I am the Sign of the living God. I place my sign on the forehead of my children.14
I am the Sign of the living God. I place my sign on the forehead of my children.14 Just as the esoteric Virgin is the image or outward manifestation of ‗the One‘, so this apparition in Germany calls itself the ‗sign of God‘. This commonality, among others, identifies this talking entity, not as Mary, but as ‗the Virgin‘, of esotericism. The scriptures identify ‗the Sign‘ as Satan himself.
Just as the esoteric Virgin is the image or outward manifestation of ‗the One‘, so this apparition in Germany calls itself the ‗sign of God‘. This commonality, among others, identifies this talking entity, not as Mary, but as ‗the Virgin‘, of esotericism. The scriptures identify ‗the Sign‘ as Satan himself.
Even him whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders. II Thessalonians 2:9
Even him whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders. II Thessalonians 2:9
128
How do we account for Gail Riplinger‘s sudden shift in the interpretation of Bible prophecy in New Age Bible Versions? Should Christians revise their interpretation of Bible prophecy according to the news, as Gail Riplinger has done, or ―prove all things‖ according to the Greek Textus Receptus, which she has regrettably placed on the ―KJV-Only Index of Forbidden Books‖? In the 1st printing of New Age Bible Versions, Gail revealed accurate information about the name, number and Mark of the Beast:
The Name of the Beast will be given “on” the forehead. “On their forehead” was removed by the 5th Printing; ―Will the unwary reading Revelation 14:1 in a recent version, be persuaded that the bible sanctions and encourages the taking of ‗his name‘ on their forehead before they receive his Father‘s name?‖ (NABV, 1st Printing, March 1993, p. 100; revised in 5th Printing)
The Name of the Beast will be associated with an initiation rite, i.e., the Luciferic Initiation. ―New versions are mimicking ‗the Name‘ seen in the esoteric Dead Sea Scrolls; these tell of an Arabic Mahdi whose ‗Name’ and initiation, if rejected, brings death and imprisonment during a 7 year period. (See Theodore Gaster, The Dead Sea Scriptures, (Garden City, N.Y.: Anchor Books, 1976 pp. 29, 38, 57, 85, 121, 181, et al.)‖ (NABV, 1st Printing, March 1993, p. 100; removed in 5th Printing)
The Mark of the Beast will be a “brand” and not an implant. ―Will ‗another Jesus‘ (II Corinthians 11:4) brand his followers with the mark of the beast?‖ (NABV, 1st Printing, March 1993, p. 100; removed in 5th Printing)
The Mark of the Beast will be a charagma, a “mark” which idolaters “inscribe on their arms or foreheads.” Furthermore, these marks are symbols of the deities they worship. ―One bible commentator notes and Old Testament elusion [sic] to the distinction between the New Testament charagma, mark of the rebellious, and the graphomai of God. ‗They have corrupted themselves, their spot [Hebrew: mum] is not the spot of his children. Deut. 32:5‘ The comment reads: ‗This may refer to the marks of idolaters who inscribe on their arms or foreheads…[a] sign of their particular deity. The practice is very ancient…2‘‖ (NABV, 1st Printing, March 1993, p. 101; removed in 5th Printing)
The Greek word for ―mark‖ in all of the relevant verses is "charagma," that is, a ―stamp‖ or ―mark‖ that is branded, imprinted or engraved ON the forehead or hand (rather than implanted in the skin) of a follower of the Antichrist. 5480 charagma {khar'-ag-mah} from the same as 5482: TDNT - 9:416,1308; n n AV - mark 8, graven 1; 9 1) a stamp, an imprinted mark 1a) of the mark stamped ON the forehead or the right hand as the badge of the followers of the Antichrist 1b) the mark branded UPON horses 2) thing carved, sculpture, graven work 2a) of idolatrous images
129
In the first printing of NABV, the Mark of the Beast was the symbol of Lucifer branded on the skin during an initiation rite. By the 5th printing the Mark of the Beast had become a surgically implanted device that was not associated with religious worship but having only commercial value. Whereas the ―mark of Lucifer‖ will be branded on idolaters in places of worship during the Tribulation period, the RFID Microchip will be implanted on the masses in outpatient clinics. We can readily understand why a brand received by an idolater during the Luciferic Initiation will seal his/her eternal destiny in the Lake of Fire. However, it makes no sense that God would eternally condemn a man, woman or child for receiving an RFID microchip in a hospital or clinic or government facility. In fact, God even commands obedience to governing authorities, with the exception of obeying laws that compel the Christian to disobey His Word, for example, to commit murder. In contrast, God sternly forbids the worship of false gods and the practice of witchcraft, including tattoos, as abominations with eternal consequences: ―Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;‖ (Exod. 20:4-5) ―Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.‖ (Exod. 22:18) ―Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh fOR THE DEAD, nor print any marks upon you: I am the LORD.‖ (Lev. 19:28) ―There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch, Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer. For all that do these things are an abomination unto the LORD: and because of these abominations the LORD thy God doth drive them out from before thee.‖ (Deut. 18:10-12) ―And the rest of the men which were not killed by these plagues yet repented not of the works of their hands, that they should not worship devils, and idols of gold, and silver, and brass, and stone, and of wood: which neither can see, nor hear, nor walk: Neither repented they of their murders, nor of their sorceries, nor of their fornication, nor of their thefts.‖ (Rev. 9:21) ―And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.‖ (Rev. 9:21) Another perhaps inadvertent disclosure in the first printing of New Age Bible Versions was Gail‘s blunt acknowledgement of the corrupt nature of the Syriac Peshitta: ―...the Peshitta or the Greek Septuagint, both of which contain numerous corruptions.‖ (NABV, 1st Printing, March 1993, p.100) This presumably unintentional admission was hastily withdrawn and does not appear in the 5th printing. Elsewhere in New Age Bible Versions (5th Printing), Gail states the opposite: ―the Sinaitic Version (third century), the Gothic Version (fourth century) and the Peshitta Syriac (now dated much earlier than the fifth century) agree with the KJV.‖ (NABV, p. 488) (For the ―numerous corruptions‖ in the Syriac Peshitta, which KJV-Only propaganda classifies with the Traditional Text, see: ―The Semitic New Testament‖)
130
Finally, Gail did not forget to misrepresent the New King James Version, even though the NKJV follows the Textus Receptus in all verses pertaining to the Mark of the Beast. Writes Gail: ―The merchants of the ‗mark‘ can swear on a wobbly stack of NKJVs that ‗The Bible says its ok‘ to take the I.D. marker.‖ (Awe, p. 101) ―The NKJV denies the deity of Christ a half dozen times.‖ (NABV, p. 102) / not true ―All new versions, based on a tiny percentage of corrupt Greek manuscripts, make the
fatefully frightening addition of three words in Revelation 14:1. / NKJV does not add these words ―…the Lamb, standing on Mount Zion, and with him 144,000 who had his name and his Father‘s name written on their foreheads.‖ NIV ―The number 666 in the form of a mobius symbol appears on the cover the New King James Version (NKJV)‖ (NABV, p. 101) Concerning the symbol on the cover of the Thomas Nelson NKJV, let us remember the old axiom about judging a book by its cover. Just as we cannot judge the text of 1611 King James Version by pagan woodcuts, headpieces and tailpieces that were added by the printer, Robert Barker, so we cannot judge the text of the New King James Version by a book cover designed by the publisher Thomas Nelson, Inc. Many New King James Bibles do not have the Thomas Nelson cover, just as pagan woodcuts and headpieces vanished from King James Bibles. Gail Riplinger makes much ado about the ―mobius‖ being an occult symbol and a visual representation of 666. How much more significant in terms of historic and Biblical import is the number 666 in the form of the 6-pointed star (misnamed the Star of David) which occultists have for three millennia venerated as the Seal of Solomon, the apostate king who led Israel into idolatry. This pagan symbol was used by King Solomon as a powerful talisman for his idolatrous worship of the goddess, Ashtaroth, and the gods, Chemosh and Molech, and so is it used in the occult world today. ―II Kings 23:13 is explicit: ‗And the high places that were before Jerusalem, which were on the right hand of the mount of corruption, which Solomon the king of Israel had builded for Ashtoreth the abomination of the Zidonians, and for Chemosh the abomination of the Moabites, and for Milcom the abomination of the children of Ammon, did the king defile.‘…King Solomon built an altar for Ashtoreth, worshipped her, and also practiced Moloch rituals. It was at this time that the hexagram or sixpointed star came to be called the Seal of Solomon... Solomon’s Seal was accepted as occult by the occult world. King Solomon was deeply involved in witchcraft and occultism. According to The Sorcerer’s Handbook, ‗King Solomon, traditionally known as an arch magician, used a spell to banish infernal beings sent by the king of demons to extract human hearts…‘” (O.J. Graham, The Six-Pointed Star, pp. 24-5, 29, 32) ―Interestingly enough you will notice that the emblem is made up of three pairs of triangles with their apexes touching. Each pair collectively represents the number 6, which qualifies the whole symbol as a graphical representation of 666.‖ (―Sects, Symbolism & the Mark of the Beast‖)
131
God has provided important clues in His Word which point to the Seal of Solomon as the Mark of the Beast: ―Now the weight of gold that came to SOLOMON in one year was SIX HUNDRED THREESCORE AND SIX talents of gold...‖ (1 Kings 10:14) ―Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the NUMBER OF A MAN; and his number is SIX HUNDRED THREESCORE AND SIX.‖ (Rev. 13:18) For further evidence that the Seal of Solomon is the Mark of the Beast, please see these reports on our website, Watch Unto Prayer (http://watch-unto-prayer.org): THE REVELATION OF THE ANTICHRIST ~ As the Second Coming of King Solomon THE SIX-POINTED STAR: THE MARK OF THE BEAST ~ Star of David or Star of Remphan? DESIGNER MARKS OF THE BEAST ~ Why the Mark of the Beast is NOT the Microchip Implant HEEDING BIBLE PROPHECY: The Mark of the Beast 17.B The New King James Version correctly and consistently translates the Greek word epi as ―on‖ in all of the prophecies concerning the Mark of the Beast. ―He causes all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or ON their foreheads,‖ (Rev. 13:16, NKJV) ―Then a third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, ‗If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives his mark ON his forehead or ON his hand, he himself shall also drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out full strength into the cup of His indignation. He shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb.‘‖ (Rev. 14:9-10, NKJV) ―And I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was committed to them. Then I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness to Jesus and for the word of God, who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received his mark ON their foreheads or ON their hands. And they lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.‖ (Rev. 20:4, NKJV) Can it be that the accurate translation of these crucial verses (which have end-time and eternal ramifications) accounts for the relentless campaign to discredit the New King James Version? We have little doubt. The fact that the NKJV reflects the Greek Textus Receptus in these verses alone would be sufficient reason for the Antichrist system to conspire against it and to promote in its place a translation that carries a false reading. For the endgame of the KJV-Only conspiracy is not only to eliminate the Textus Receptus—and along with it Greek resources which translate epi as ―on‖—but also Fundamental Christians who believe the Greek Textus Receptus must be the only basis for New Testament translation. When the microchip implant becomes mandatory, many Christians will rebel against the U.S. Government, while other Christians will endure starvation rather than take the chip implant, having been deceived that it is the Mark of the Beast. Those who take up arms against the U.S. Government will provide legal justification for the persecution and elimination of all Fundamental Christians. Either way, whether through organized rebellion or starvation, Fundamental Christianity will be eliminated, with it, the Greek Textus Receptus.
WATCH UNTO PRAYER http://watch-unto-prayer.org
132
NOTES http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107 § 107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use:
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include â&#x20AC;&#x201D; (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; (2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
133