Lesson 7- Do You Have the True Holy Spirit Inspired Bible

LESSON 7

Do You Have the True Holy Spirit Inspired Bible?

How was the Bible Preserved?

AMBASSADOR CHRISTIAN COLLEGE‐Dr. Keith Slough

Introduction

Have you ever been confused by how many new Bible versions on the market today? Which one is the best? Which one is the most accurate? And how would you know? How can you be certain you are reading the best translation? When a new Believer walks into a Christian book store to purchase his first Bible, he has so many choices that the Bible itself confuses him! Yet, God is not the author of confusion! (1 Corinthians 14:32).

This article could be one of the most important articles you will ever read. For we have proved in past issues that the Bible is indeed the supernaturally inspired Word of Almighty God. The Bible was inspired in the Hebrew (Old Testament) and the Greek (New Testament) languages. Since most of us cannot read the original languages that God has preserved for us, we depend on a translation. But in the English language there are so many different translations with different renderings ‐in some cases even contradicting other Bible versions! This is very serious. As a serious Bible student you must not choose a Bible for your personal study just because you feel it is "easier to read." Rather we must find one that is the truest translation to the ORIGINAL INSPIRED TEXTS! We must find a translation that is a word for word literal translation of the very Words of the Holy Spirit and we should settle for nothing less!

The new Bible versions are based on the new text created in the 19th century by two Anglican priests, one who was an avowed OCCULTIST and COMMUNIST and the other who did not believe in the Blood atonement of Christ! Their names respectively were Westcott and Hort.

These men invented a new text that never existed before (a 19th century "novelty") and the new Bible versions are based on their text. However it has recently been shown that their new "eclectic method" was unsound and very unscholarly. The New Introduction to the Nestle's 26th Edition of the Westcott‐Hart Text makes an interesting statement. They write: "The age of Westcott and Hort is definitely over"! (Cited by G.A. Riplinger in New Age Bible Versions, page 494).

"Scholarly books, articles and critical editions of the Greek New Testament are slowly abandoning the readings of Westcott and Hort in their 'Newest' Greek texts. Yet the pews are piled high with the W‐H [Westcott‐Hort] offerings like the NIV, NASB, and Living Bible" (Ibid, page 399).

"Subsequent scholarship has tended to recognize Hort's mistake. The W‐H critical theory is erroneous at every point"! (Wilbur N. Pickering, The Identity of the New Testament Text, italics added, see pages 38, 42, 96, and 90). This issue you are about to read will permanently remove the confusion many Christians have had concerning the new Bible versions and which Bible is the preferred or for accuracy. God has now revealed the truth concerning His inspired Word. It behooves each of us to take seriously what Jesus told us in the last chapter of the Word of God, that if men add their own words to His Word, the plagues described in this book would be added to us. And if we take away the inspired words of this Book then OUR NAMES will be TAKEN OUT OF THE BOOK OF LIFE! (Revelation 22: 18‐19).

2 | P a g e

Heaven and Earth Shall Pass Away, But My Words Shall Not Pass Away!

So said Jesus Christ; God inspired the Bible. It is His Word to mankind. Was God able to preserve it accurately down through the ages for us today? Or was God unable to keep His Word pure for all mankind? Read here the proof that the Almighty God does indeed have the power and the will to preserve His inspired Word to all generations!

Has the Bible been preserved accurately for thousands of years? How can we be sure? What was the method of preserving the Bible from the time it was written under inspiration?

We know that God INSPIRED the Bible. It is His Word ‐His revelation to mankind. But has God also had the power ‐and the will ‐to preserve it accurately for us to read today? The Apostle Paul addresses this question in Romans 3 where he says that God committed the Scriptures to the Jews for preservation. "What advantage then hath the Jew? ... Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God"! (Romans 3:1‐2).

This word "oracles" in Greek is logia, meaning the WRITTEN WORDS of God. And to this day, the Jewish scribes have indeed carefully and meticulously preserved Old Testament scriptures as they were originally inspired, in the Hebrew language! Someone may object by saying, "Yes but the Jews never became believers in Christ ‐never became converted Christians. How can we be sure they have preserved God's Word accurately?"

Notice Paul's answer: "For what if some did not be believe? Shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar"! (verses 3‐4).

God is faithful to His Word. He will not allow it to become corrupted so that we cannot know His true Word ‐His revelation to mankind.

Now this does not mean that some men did not corrupt the Hebrew texts. In Egypt and Samaria they did indeed. How then can we know the true inspired text?

Notice! God inspired Paul to tell us that the Jews were given the job of accurately preserving His Word! Not the Egyptians, Samaritans or other groups that did not have the DIVINE COMMISSION to preserve God's Word. God is faithful to His Word and He has seen to it that the Masoretic Hebrew text (the text preserved by the Jews) has been preserved accurately through all these centuries. In 1947 when the Dead Sea Scrolls were found which radiometric dating determined were as old as two centuries before the birth of Christ, they were like the modern Hebrew Text that the Jews have preserved for 3,000 years! How was this possible?

Remember how Jesus found the Jewish leaders to be so fanatical in being so exacting about every little jot or title of the Law? The same was true in their preservation of the Old Testament. They were almost fanatical about every single jot and title being correct. The Jews explain that when a scribe finished the entire manuscript that they had a middle word in the center of the text that they looked for. They would count all the words of the text up to the center of the manuscript. If that numbered word was not the one they expected to find as the middle word, they therefore knew that either a word had been added or accidentally deleted.

3 | P a g e

Perhaps there was no more than one mistake in the entire text. Yet the rule was that they were required to BURN the entire manuscript!!

They refused to allow any Biblical manuscript to EXIST that was not absolutely perfectly ACCURATE! And that is how God's Word has been preserved so accurately until our day today!

As the apostle Paul stated, God is faithful to His Word. Notice what God has said about His Word in Psalm 12:6‐7. "The WORDS of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shall keep them [His WORDS!], O LORD, thou shalt PRESERVE THEM from this generation [when they were written] forever"!

God promised to preserve His Word forever! He has the power to do it. And He also had the will to do it! Think! Does it make sense that God would have inspired about 40 men over a period of 1500 years to write His Word and then have no interest in its preservation?

Now what about the New Testament? Jesus said this: "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but MY WORDS shall not pass away"!! (Matt. 24:35).

We still have them therefore just as the Holy Spirit inspired them to be preserved all the way into the 21st century! They still exist! If we question that or deny that, then we question the very integrity and honesty of Jesus Christ Himself. And if Jesus was not honest about it, and we can't believe Him ‐ if the New Testament also was not preserved faithfully and accurately as GOD INSPIRED IT, then we can't believe anything else Jesus said either!

Either the entire Bible ‐both Old and New Testaments ‐ have been preserved down through the centuries, accurately, or you cannot have faith in Christ! He either lied about it or didn't have the power to do what He said. Either way you and I would be in real trouble if God has no power to keep His Promise. We already know it was His will to preserve the Bible. He said He would. Therefore He did! It is as simple as that!

There are people today however that profess to be believers who also believe that the New Testament was not preserved accurately and that God allowed it to become terribly corrupted.

The only thing left for them to do, if they don't want to be hypocrites, is to throw away the Bible and even their belief in salvation. For our faith in salvation is based on the Word of God. If God did not preserve it accurately, then WE HAVE NO BASIS FOR OUR FAITH! There is no alternative!

Thank God He has the power and the will to preserve His Word. And He did indeed preserve it faithfully and accurately!

Who Preserved the New Testament?

God tells us "For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek" etc. where He is concerned (Romans 10:12). True He did commission the Hebrews to preserve the Hebrew Scriptures but He also gave the Greek New Testament Scriptures to the Greeks to preserve. The Jews did not accept Jesus or the scriptures of the New Testament. But the Greeks did. And just as the Jews preserved the Hebrew Scriptures in their original language so did the Greeks preserve the Greek scriptures in their own language. Remember Romans 3:3‐4? Whether they

4 | P a g e

were truly converted or really believed on Jesus or not is irrelevant where God is concerned, Paul wrote: "Shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? God forbid"! So we are not dealing with the faithfulness of men, but the faithfulness of God! However those who preserved the Greek New Testament Scriptures did profess Christianity. Now how were both the Hebrew and Greek scriptures preserved accurately?

First there were the "autographs" ‐ the actual original writing by the author ‐ that is, the very piece of paper the author laid his hand on, written in his own handwriting. While we do not have in our possession the "autographs" of any of the Old or New Testament scriptures, we have accurate copies by the thousands! When old copies eventually began to wear out due to use, a newer copy was made with extreme care so as to preserve the "original" reading as God had inspired it.

These copies are called "the Originals." While some agnostics and skeptics say the "Originals" do not exist, JESUS SAID THEY DO! They will continue to exist until "heaven and earth shall pass away"! (Matthew 24:35). Therefore the "Originals" exist today and have God's blessing on them!

The Old Testament Original manuscripts are caned the Masoretic text and the New Testament Original manuscripts are called the Byzantine Text. Any Samaritan or Egyptian He‐ brew manuscripts that vary from the Original Hebrew text is therefore corrupt and should not be used! Any Greek text not agreeing with the Original Greek (or Byzantine) text is all corrupt and not the one that Jesus said would be accurately PRESERVED till heaven and earth pass away.

Thus we have a promise in both Old and New Testaments that God's original inspired revelation to mankind would never pass away! It still exists to reveal God's thoughts accurately to us today! We have proved that the Bible is indeed an inspired Book ‐ supernaturally written by prophets who heard directly from the Creator God. Now we must ask the question, which translation is the best to use?

Since our reading audience is primarily English, the question we must ask and answer is which English translation today is the most accurate to the ORIGINAL INSPIRED Old and New Testament text of the Bible? This is one of the most important questions facing true Christians today. For if you are truly serious about learning the will of God for your life, you must study His true Word!

5 | P a g e

WHICH TRANSLATIONOF THE BIBLE is the Best to use?

Which Original language texts "never passed away" as Jesus promised?

What Hebrew and Greek texts have always been preserved and never lost to the church? Read here what those texts are and which Translation was taken from the ORIGINAL Holy Spirit­Inspired Old and New Testament manuscripts.

For those manuscripts constitute the true WORD OF GOD.

WHICH TRANSLATION of the Holy Bible is the most accurate to the original Hebrew and Greek manuscripts? Not all Bibles are equal. Some are more accurate than others. It is very important that each Christian learn the answer to this most important question! Remember, the Holy Spirit of God inspired the Bible. We must not carelessly choose a Bible to be our main study Bible ‐ the primary one we read that is carelessly translated or liberally paraphrased so that we are not actually reading God's Word but rather the words of men!

I have known people who have chosen liberal paraphrase and read that all the time as their main study Bible. Once in a Bible study at a church where I was teaching, the Chairman of the deacons interrupted me and flatly contradicted what I was teaching. I was surprised for what he said clearly was not found in the Holy Bible. Yet he maintained that it was! I was teaching that night on the resurrection and he loudly denounced what I was teaching saying the Bible said just the opposite! So naturally I demanded then and there that he produce his scriptural proof.

He did! But he produced it from a liberal paraphrase that flatly contradicted what the original Greek text said! I was astonished! I admonished this sincere but deceived church member to stop using this liberal paraphrase but he refused. It was easy for him to disagree with the doctrines I was teaching as long as he was using this perverted "bible." Maybe you are using the same "bible" this man used and you naively expect to hear the very Word of God from such a book. You might as well read a comic book. Jesus said, "Take heed what you hear"! (Mark 4:24) After getting to know this man over nearly two years I noticed that his spiritual life and his Christian character were very weak. Could there have been a connection?

6 | P a g e

God's Word Will Never Pass Away

Jesus said "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but MY WORDS shall not pass away"!

(Matthew 24:35). Psalm 119:89 states: "Forever, O Lord, THY WORD is settled in heaven." There is no room for guesswork when it comes to the Word of God. Psalm 119: 152 "Concerning thy testimonies, I have known of old that thou hast founded them forever"! His testimonies ‐His words ‐ will never pass away. We therefore can be sure just what the true Word of God is and not be left to confusion! Psalm 119:160 says, "THY WORD is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth forever"!

Psalm 138:2 states: "for thou hast magnified THY WORD above all thy name"! Here we see that God has magnified His Word even above His own Name! ‐and one of the very 10 Commandments deals with hallowing the Name of God! Therefore we see that the Word of God is extremely important! God would not have carelessly allowed men to determine what writings were to become Holy Scripture or to tamper with the sacred writings to the point that we cannot know what the true INSPIRED Word of God is!

Notice Isaiah 40:8. "The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but THE WORD OF OUR GOD shall stand forever"! We see clearly then that it was God's will to accurately PRESERVE His Word.

This is why Jesus said that His words would never pass away until heaven and earth pass away!

(Matthew 24:35).

Jesus also said: "For verily 1 say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one title shall in no wise pass from the Law, till all be fulfilled" (Matthew 5:18). The Greek word translated "fulfilled" here is a totally different Greek word than the word translated "fulfill" in verse 1 7.

Christ came to "fulfill" the Law in His own personal life. The Greek word "fulfill" in verse 17 is pleroo and means to "fill to the full" implying to fulfill the law fully with OBEDIENCE. Strong's concordance says it implies "to cram to the full."

But the word translated "fulfilled" in verse 18 is a totally different Greek word. This word, ginomai means ''to come to pass" or "to be accomplished." What must "come to pass" before one single jot or title of the Law of Moses passes away? Jesus said it was the very last prophecy found in the Bible ‐ that heaven and earth would "pass away"! (Read this in Revelation 21:1). So this means that the Law of Moses ‐ not a single commandment, statute, or ordinance ‐ has "passed away" but is still in force and effect ‐ thereby being obligatory upon Christians today (see Matthew 5:19 and Luke 16:17!).

But also since that is true we therefore see the necessity for its PERFECT PRESERVATION as well, since it must be preserved till heaven and earth pass away if we are required to obey it till then! That is quite logical. We therefore still have His Word today, preserved accurately and God will continue to see to its preservation as long as heaven and earth stand in its current form! This is why the apostle Peter wrote that "the Word of God ... liveth and abideth forever"!

(1 Peter 1:23). "But the Word of the Lord endureth forever" (verse 25).

7 | P a g e

How the Bible Was Preserved Accurately

Skeptics sometimes point out that on occasion there are "textual variants" in manuscripts.

That is to say, a word may be left out, or an extra word added. How did this happen? And how can we be certain of the TRUE inspired reading? The answer is quite simple.

Sometimes scribes would individually copy a new manuscript from an existing older one by reading line upon line and writing down what they read. There was however a faster and perhaps more accurate way that was sometimes used. The rabbi or chief scribe would stand before a group of scribes and read the sacred Text of the Bible word for word and the scribes would simply write down in a new manuscript what was being read aloud. Thus if a classroom had 50 scribes with new manuscripts then the scribe reading the Text would have to read it only one time for 50 new manuscripts to be written.

How then were certain variations allowed into the Text? If there were a large group of scribes writing down what the chief scribe was reading, it is humanly possible that one scribe might misunderstand a word. Or that one scribe might forget to cross a ''t'' or dot an "i" (or their equivalent in the Hebrew or Greek text they were writing) or misspell a word in a certain line ‐ even write the same word twice (as many of us have done not realizing it) or at a certain moment cough or sneeze and not hear the word. That is a very human possibility no matter how accurate the scribes tried to be.

How then can we ascertain what the true original wording was? Very simple. Let's go back to our example of a classroom numbering 50 scribes, all copying what was being read to them aloud by a chief scribe. If one of the scribes misspelled a certain word, what are the chances that the other 49 scribes would have accidentally misspelled that same word? Or if a scribe accidentally left out a word or perhaps wrote the word "and" twice (as you and I have done many times) what would be the chance that the other 49 scribes would have added that same word twice? Why, it would be so astronomical as to be IMPOSSIBLE! Therefore we can be assured that the vast majority of manuscripts extant constitute a consensus of what the original inspired Text was.

What is the Textus Receptus?

This Latin term "Textus Receptus," means the "Received Text." When Erasmus in the Middle Ages decided to collate the existing Byzantine manuscripts of the New Testament in his day, he compared them line upon line. Now going back to our example, let's assume he used 50 manuscripts of varying ages. When he found a variant in one manuscript he would have compared the other 49 manuscripts available to him (using this example). Assuming that each of the scribes would have made a dozen or more scribal errors, it is still true that no two scribes

8 | P a g e

would have made the same error. Thus the rule that scholars have long followed is that if 95 percent or more of the manuscripts contain a certain reading but only a tiny minority contain a variant reading, logically we would understand the majority texts to be accurate.

Jesus said His Words would never pass away. So the majority texts would be correct based on all common sense and all logic! The Byzantine Text is the original Greek New Testament Text.

Erasmus simply collated them and made yet another manuscript based on such comparison of all the various Byzantine texts. When 95 to 99 percent of them were in agreement, he copied that reading. When he found a variant in one or a handful of manuscripts he discarded it. And that is how we can be assured that the Byzantine Greek Text in the Textus Receptus from which the King James Version of the Bible was translated, is accurate. Erasmus however wrote five editions of his famous Textus Receptus. He compared diligently and attempted to improve on previous editions where typographical errors were made. Erasmus also knew he had made one mistake in the third edition. This deals with the so‐called Johannine Comma. In his first two manuscripts this verse was not written into the text. But Roman Catholic pressure forced him under duress to add a verse from the Roman Catholic Latin Vulgate Bible in First John that not a single Byzantine Greek text contained. After much arguing, he was forced to add this spurious verse which he knew was not a part of the inspired New Testament Greek Text.

Bruce M. Metzger explains the origin of this spurious verse: "In an unguarded moment Erasmus promised that he would insert the Comma Johanneum, as it is called [1 John 5:7], in future editions if a single Greek manuscript could be found that contained the passage. At length such a copy was found ‐ or made to order! As it now appears, the Greek manuscript had probably been written in Oxford about 1520 [a year after the publication of the second edition] by a Franciscan friar named Froy (or Roy) who took the disputed words from the Latin Vulgate.

Erasmus stood by his promise and inserted the passage in his third edition (1522), but he indicates in a lengthy footnote his suspicions that the manuscript had been prepared expressly in order to confute him"! (Bruce M. Metzger, The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration, 2nd ed., page 101). But Erasmus then quickly updated his famous Textus Receptus and in his fourth edition left out the spurious verse! Before he died he eventually wrote yet a fifth edition, also leaving out the spurious "Johannine Comma."

As many of our readers know this so‐called "Johannine Comma" is found in First John 5:7 which is the foundational verse found in the Catholic Vulgate Bible from which the Catholic doc‐ trine of the Trinity is based. However Flavius knew it was not a part of the original inspired New Testament text. The margin of most King James Version Bibles will read, as mine does besides First John 5:7, "It is generally agreed that v. 7 has no real authority, and has been inserted" (The Scofield Reference Bible. original edition, King James Version, page 1325).

In his book The King James Version Debate. D.A Carson explains how the spurious 1 John 5:7 found its way even into the Latin Vulgate.

"It probably sprang from allegorical exegesis of the three witnesses [mentioned as the Spirit, the water, and the blood in verse 8]" and had been merely written in the margin as a "note."

Carson adds, "It appears in no copy of the Latin Vulgate before about AD.800"!

9 | P a g e

Even the Catholic Bible did not contain this spurious verse seven centuries after John had originally written this epistle in the Greek! Some Latin scribe apparently assumed 1 John 5:7 belonged in the text and added it perhaps sincerely but in ignorance.

It is unfortunate, as all scholars agree, that the translators of our King James Bible decided to use Erasmus' third edition of the Textus Receptus which contains this flagrant insertion.

However in nearly all other places the text of the King James Version is a truly remarkable and accurate Text.

From a website on the Internet entitled The Textus Receptus we read: “Erasmus” third edition of 1522 contained one truly unfortunate innovation: The 'Three Heavenly Witnesses' in 1 John 5:7‐8. These were derived from the recently‐written Codex 61, and (as the famous story goes) included by Erasmus 'for the sake of his oath.' Sadly, they have been found in almost every TR edition since." Most of the later copies that were made were unfortunately taken from Erasmus' third edition.

The New Bible Versions

It is very unfortunate that the new version editors decided to discard the original Masoretic Hebrew Text of the Old Testament and the original Byzantine Text of the New Testament in favor of a novelty text created by two men who were Anglican priests of the Church of England in the 1800s. If you use the New International Version (NIV), the New American Standard Bible (NASB), the Revised Standard Version (RSV), the Contemporary English Version, The Good News for Modern Man, the Living Bible, the New World Translation and almost all others, you are using a translation based on this corrupt text. The two men who created this novelty text in the 19th century were B.F. Westcott and F.J.A Hort. Their text today is known as the "Westcott and Hort Text." It violated the long‐standing rules of manuscript transmission and used an entirely new approach. Remember, Erasmus used the scholarly method of collating and comparing all the manuscripts available and yielded to the majority reading. But Westcott and Hort did just the opposite! They used what is called an "Eclectic" method. This means they searched through various old manuscripts and arbitrarily picked and chose what they wanted for their new "bible"! When the Majority Text (the Byzantine Text) did not agree with their personal doctrinal bias, they searched high and low for any manuscript that would leave out that verse or change the true reading and they would insert that verse into their New Greek text, thus making their text say what they wanted it to say.

It is regrettable that the new versions, while written in very understandable English, have resorted to this corrupt Westcott and Hort novelty which they falsely in some cases refer to as the "original" Greek text. It is not. The Westcott and Hort text novelty did not even exist until it was invented in the 19th century!!!

In The Identity of the New Testament Text by Wilbur N. Pickering we read, "Westcott and Hort are generally credited with having furnished the death blow [to the original Byzantine

10 | P a g e

Greek Text that has been accurately preserved for nearly 1900 years]. Subsequent scholarship has tended to recognize Hort's mistake. The W‐H [Westcott‐Hort] critical theory is erroneous at every point" (pages 38,42,96,90 italics added). Edward Hills, a graduate of Yale University and Westminster Theological Seminary who has a Masters in theology from Columbia University and earned his Ph.D. from Harvard, in his well researched book entitled, The King James Version Defended, writes: "Modern speech bibles are unscholarly" (page 219).

Here is a scholar who tells us that the new Bible versions are not accurate translations of the Word of God from the original Hebrew and Greek text. Should we therefore use them?

E.W. Colwell is considered to be the premier North American New Testament Greek scholar and who was past president of the University of Chicago who authored such books as Studies in Methodology in Textual Criticism of the New Testament writes: "Scholars now believe that most errors were made deliberately... the variant readings in the New‐Testament were created for theological or dogmatic reasons. Most of the manuals now in print (including mine!)" he adds, "will tell you that these variations were the fruit of careless treatment..." (E.W. Colwell, What is the Best New Testament?" pages 53, 49 italics added).

Here is a scholar who states that the Westcott‐Hort novelty from which nearly all modern Bible translations have been made was deliberately corrupted by the editors so as to provide a basis for their personal doctrinal bias! It is not a scholarly work. And it certainly cannot be called the inspired Word of God. As an example, the Westcott and Hort text leaves out the expression "GOD was manifest in the flesh" in their new versions, from First Timothy 3:16. Yet this statement which does appear in our King James Version Bible is indeed found in the original Greek Text! The Westcott and Hort text reads, "HE was manifest in the flesh." This DENIES the Deity of Christ! Why do the new Bible translations choose the word "he" over the word "God"? G.A. Riplinger answers: "The omission of 'God' in the new versions is based on its deletion in 1881 by the Westcott and Hort revision which Metzger ways, 'was taken as the basis for the by G.A. Riplinger sounds like a rather present United Bible Societies' edition.' silly title. What does the New Age omission resulted from the doctrinal Movement have to do with the new stance of the 1881 committee, not from any overwhelming manuscript evidence” (G.A. Riplinger, New Age Bible Versions, page 353 italics added). It was learned that the committee contained two Unitarian members.

Unitarians do not believe in the Deity of Christ or the inspiration of the Bible. One wonders why they were even allowed on such a committee!

Riplinger adds that of all the hundreds of Greek manuscripts only five late manuscripts (9th, 12th and 13th century manuscripts) omit the name "God"! Only five! The vast majority of ALL Greek texts read as does the King James Version, "GOD was manifest in the flesh" (I Timothy 3: 16). This then, is the true rendering and is exactly what the Holy Spirit inspired the apostle Paul to write in First Timothy 3:16. Why then did they choose to write in their New Greek text the ambiguous word "he" and delete the original Holy Spirit inspired Greek word "God"? It was personal doctrinal bias among the members of the committee who did not want to believe in the Biblical doctrine of the Deity of Christ!!

11 | P a g e

"The earliest witnesses support the inclusion of 'God'" says Riplinger. "Dionysius of Alexandria A.D. 265, Gregory of Nyssa A.D. 394, and Didymus A.D. 398. In addition, Ignatious A.D. 110, Bamabus and Hippolytus A.D. 235, and Diodorus of Tarsus A.D. 370 allude to the inclusion of 'God." Of writers before A.D. 400, Origen, the exiled HERETIC, stands alone in omit‐ ting 'God’"!! (Ibid, pages 352‐353, emphasis added).

Actually the word "he" was added and was not contained in any Greek text, not even those five late manuscripts. Rather they contained the word "who" which is a pronoun referring back to "God." There is simply no Greek texts supporting the new Bible versions use of the word "he."

Can We Trust the New Bible Versions?

The book, New Age Bible Versions by G. A. Riplinger sounds like a rather silly title. What does the New Age Movement have to do with the new Bible versions? The author points out that some of the editors of the new versions are not true Bible believing Christians but are rather involved to a lesser or greater extent in today's New Age Movement! Even Westcott and Hort were involved in the Occult of the 19th century ‐what is today called, "the New Age Movement."

And there are other problems with new versions. One of the editors of the highly acclaimed New International Version (NIV) is an avowed HOMOSEXUAL!! Why such a person was even allowed on a committee of Bible translators?! That in itself is SCANDALOUS! Virginia Mollenkott, NIV translator, is an openly‐avowed lesbian homosexual who also authored a book entitled Sensuous Spirituality. In her book she admitted her belief that "The whole society must be brought into harmony with the One as the New Consciousness produces the New Age" (cited by Riplinger, New Age Bible Versions, page 77).

Anyone who has studied the New Age Movement recognizes that this phraseology is not Christian but standard New Age jargon! They refer to "the One" which is the god of this world and not the God of the Bible!

NIV translator Mollenkott blasphemously speaks of God saying, "To refer to God Herself seems to me a humanly just way of referring to the One who is neither male nor female" (Ibid, page 80 italics added).

"The monism I'm talking about" says Mollenkott, "assumes that god is so all inclusive that she is involved in every cell of those who are thought in her mind and embodiments of her image" (ibid, page 88, italics added). This is blasphemy. And notice the small "g" on the name "God." Did the NIV translators not know Mollenkott was a practicing homosexual? Was it something she acquired after translating the Holy Word of God? Notice her own admission: "My lesbianism has always been a part of me" says Mollenkott. (Episcopal, Witness, June 1991 italics added.

Cited in Riplinger). "Her pro‐homosexual book, Is the Homosexual My Neighbor?, echoes her

12 | P a g e

NIV's assertion that the bible census only the criminal offences like 'prostitution' and 'violent gang rape,' not 'sincere homosexuals ... drawn to someone of the same sex” (Riplinger, page 176).

The “effeminate” men (homosexuals) of the Greek (and King James Version) are subtly translated as “homosexual offenders” in the NIV, NASB and others. Pat Robertson a few years ago on his 700 Club told his audience about a time when he was counseling with a homosexual, telling him that it was a perversion and that the Bible condemned it. The homosexual told him, “No, the Bible does not condemn effeminacy or sodomy. Rather it condemns ‘homosexual offenders,’ and you have just offended me! Therefore, condemnation is on you!” Robertson was naturally shocked by his answer. But check these new versions for yourself. They are translated (or mistranslated) in such a way to allow a homosexual to feel that anyone who would dare offend him stands guilty before God! Rather than the Greek “effeminate” (as correctly translated by the King James Version) the New International Version (NIV) and New American Standard Version (NASB) translate this word as “male prostitutes” or “homosexual offenders”.

Such is the horrible and blatant mistranslations found in the New Bible Versions!

Such perversion and lack of holiness found in the new Bible versions allows NIV translator Mollenkott to hold a whole new (and unbiblical) theology. For example she has shown she does not even understand the Gospel of Christ! She writes: "I can no longer worship in a theological context that depicts God as an abusive parent and Jesus as the obedient trusting child"! (Riplinger, page 271). So what theology has she adopted?

It cannot be the theology of true Christianity. And if she influenced the NIV (New International Version) then millions of deluded Christians have been influenced into wrong doctrines. Did she have any influence on the translation? Yes! And her influence was quite significant. In fact she was responsible for a number of changes that otherwise would not have appeared in the NIV.

"The NIV Story, by NIV editor Burton Goddard (p. 65), says stylists like Mollenkott made 'significant changes' to the NIV text" (Ibid, page 82 italics added for emphasis). This avowed ho‐ mosexual made "significant" changes to the NIV Bible! Do you really want to use the New International Version now?

New Bible Versions Not True to ANY Greek Text

It has also been shown that the new Bible versions are not even true to their Westcott and Hort text which they have chosen to use. But when it was convenient, the editors simply ADDED their own words not found in either the Hebrew or Greek texts being used.

For example, in the book The NIV, The Making of a Contemporary Translation, Larry Walker states: "The committee did not feel absolutely bound to the Hebrew text"!! (emphasis added).

This is where the translators of the King James Version differed so greatly from today's modern Bible translations. F or they were under orders from the king of England to PERFECTLY

13 | P a g e

TRANSLATE word for word from the Holy Spirit‐inspired Hebrew and Greek texts of the Holy Word of God. They were not allowed to take such liberties as do the modern language bibles. In fact, the translators took their job so seriously, that when the Hebrew or Greek text could not intelligibly be translated and understood; italicized words were added to make the text clearer.

For example in your King James Version in Psalm 23:1 we read "The Lord is my shepherd."

Notice the word "is" is written in italics. (For example, this word italic is written in italics).

In this publication italicized words are used for emphasis ‐to draw attention to the importance of a certain word or phrase. Not so in the King James Bible! The italicized words were ADDED by the translators to make the meanings clearer but such italicized words do not appear in the original Holy Spirit inspired text. Yet rather than contradict the original intended meaning, they were added to make the Hebrew or Greek passage clearer to the English reader.

Another example I will use is Psalm 100. Notice there are added words to the original text written in italics in verses 3, 4, and 5. Now read Psalm 100 yourself leaving out the italicized words. You can still understand it! But the translators added these words so as to make the translation more readable. However such italicized words alerted the king (who had commissioned this translation) that these words were not inspired by the Holy Spirit but had been added by the translators to make the sentence easier to understand. The newer translations don't abide by this practice and add or take out words that God actually inspired, at will! But they do not alert the reader when they have done this!

Again Riplinger gives an example of where the NIV adds words to the sacred text that are not in the Greek completely changing the meaning of the Word of God! "The NIV uses some very 'original' Greek in Hebrews 11:11. The words in bold are not found in any Greek manuscripts “(Riplinger, page 215).

Here is the quotation. The King James Version translated word for word from the original inspired Greek reads: "Through faith also Sara herself received strength to conceive seed, and was delivered of a child when she was past age, because she judged him faithful who had promised.”

Notice the Word of God says this about Sarah! But the NIV reads: "By faith Abraham even though he was past age and Sara herself was barren ‐ was enabled to become a father because he considered him faithful who had made the promise"! (Hebrews 11: 11). (Again, the words in boldface do not appear in any Greek text ‐ not even the Westcott and Hort text that the NIV translators chose to use!).

Here the NIV without warrant from the Inspired Greek text (or even the Westcott and Hort novelty created by them in the 19th century) makes the Bible say WHAT THEY WANT IT TO SAY. These words are not the Word of God but the words of men!! We should be careful to add to sacred text as Jesus warns us that if we add to His Word judgment will be added to us and if we take away from the Words of God, He will take away our part out of the book of life (Revelation 22:18‐19). This is very serious. All ministers must be careful to remember this when attempting to teach or establish doctrine using these new versions!

14 | P a g e

The New American Standard Bible states in Isaiah 26:3, "The steadfast of mind Thou will keep in perfect peace." (What happened to the modern English they brag so much about and are supposed to be using?) But the original Hebrew states, "Thou wilt keep him in perfect peace, whose mind is stayed on thee"! Big difference! We are promised perfect peace if we keep our minds "stayed" on God!

Another example of how the new Bible versions leave out the Holy Spirit inspired Greek text can be found in Ephesians. I have before me the original Greek Text of the New Testament.

In Ephesians 3:9 we read the following. The original Greek reads: "θεο τψ τα παντα κτισαντι δια Іησον Χριστον."

Notice the last three words. These words are left out of the new Bible versions. The translation of the inspired Greek text reads: "God created all things by Jesus Christ" (Ephesians 3:9).

Compare this now to your King James Version and then again to your NASB, NIV, New World Translations and others. Notice they have left out this most important part of God's Word where the Holy Spirit shows the Deity of Christ ‐that He ‐Christ ‐was in the Beginning and created all things. But you would not know this truth if you read the new Bible versions!

In the Interlinear Greek‐English New Testament by Green we read a rather interesting editorial in the Preface. Green writes: "This book is intended to fill a very real need in this day of proliferating translations, so called. The fact is that most of them are paraphrases, which is merely another name for a commentary, an interpretation. However, since these modern 'scholars' are hiding their muti‐ lation of the word of God by claiming that their productions ARE the word of God, something must be done to protect the men of our day against these ill commentaries parading as 'translations.' (It is true that in at least one case there is an admission that it is a 'paraphrase' ‐ this is not even true! According to Webster, a translation is an exact rendering from one language to another; but a paraphrase is a FREE translation from another language.... But this man [who wrote the specific paraphrase to which he refers] who seemingly admits that he has done a 'rewrite' job on the Bible, calling it a paraphrase, has violated the basic rule of paraphrasing that he has ignored whole phrases of Greek words, inserting instead his own theological beliefs AND THIS WITHOUT ANY INDICATION THAT HE IS COMMENTING ‐in fact, on the front, he not only calls his production a Bible, but a living one. We do not believe the Living One we know will acknowledge it as His word).

"This book [the Greek‐English Interlinear by Green] is intended to be a help to those who want to know what God has really said. And it does this in several ways, (1) It gives the original Greek, in the Textus Receptus, the much maligned received text; (2) It gives the literal meaning of the Greek words. In all those other productions parading as the Bible, they dare not put all the words they have added in bold or italic type ‐it would warn everyone that this is not the words of God by which we each are commanded to make the foundation of our lives"! (Green, Greek‐English Interlinear page I of Preface; all capitalizations in original).

15 | P a g e

As you can see, the new Bible versions are "productions parading as the Bible" but are not truly the very words inspired by the Holy Spirit of Almighty God!

Comparison of the Sinaiticus and the Vaticanus

I am much indebted to G.A. Riplinger for the research included in this section on these two manuscripts. Riplinger writes concerning the Vaticanus manuscript: "The use of recent technology such as the vidicon camera, which creates a digital form of faint writing, recording it on a magnetic tape and reproducing it by an electro‐optical process, reveals that B [the Vaticanus] has been altered by at least two hands, one being as late as the twelfth century.

Metzger admits, 'A few passages therefore remain to show the original appearance of the first hand.' The corrector 'omitted [things] he believed to be incorrect. " "B [the Vaticanus] agrees with the Textus Receptus only about 50% of the time. It differs from the Majority Greek in nearly 8000 places, amounting to about one change per verse. It omits several thousand key words from the Gospels, nearly 1000 complete sentences, and 500 clauses. It adds approximately 500 words, substitutes or modifies nearly 2000 and transposes word order in about 2000 places. It has nearly 600 readings that do not occur in any other manuscript. These affect almost 1000 words.

"B [the Vaticanus] does not consider the following as part of the Bible: Revelation, Phil., Titus, I and II Timothy, large parts of Samuel, Kings, Nehemiah, the Psalms, and Genesis. B omits crucial parts of Mark and Luke. In their place it adds apocryphal books such as Bel and the Dragon, Tobit, Judith and the Epistle of Barnabas. In Job, for example, it has 400 'half‐verses' of Theodotian, a follower of...Marcion [the heretic!].

"Protestant theologians question its lack of use by anyone for 1300 years then its sudden 'discovery' in the Vatican in 1481. Its immediate use to suppress the Reformation and its subsequent release in 1582, as the Jesuit‐Rheims Bible, are logical, considering the omission of anti‐Catholic sections and books (i.e., Hebrews 9:14, Revelation, etc.). Its Catholic 'tone' is evidenced by the fact that at Vatican Council, each bishop was given his own copy with an intro‐ duction by Jesuit priest, Carlo Martini. Protestant researchers have never been permitted to examine the ACTUAL manuscript and work only from copies provided by the Vatican"(ibid, pages 551‐552, emphasis added). Can we really trust this Roman Catholic manuscript over the original Byzantine Greek Text?

Hardly.

Yet nearly all new Bible versions are based on the Roman Catholic manuscript which Christians are not permitted to examine.

Interesting, why aren't they?

Continue: The Vaticanus "agrees essentially with Origen's Hexapla, omitting the deity of Christ frequently and making other Gnostic or Arian alterations" (ibid, page 552).

Origen was a known heretic. The Vaticanus may have very likely been a copy made from his

16 | P a g e

textual corruptions!!

Now, what about the other of the "two oldest" manuscripts, the Sinaiticus? Remember, this manuscript was considered corrupt and had been cast off where it was found by Constantine von Tischendorf in a trash can!

Riplinger continues: "Princeton Professor, Bruce Metzger's recent Manuscripts of the Greek Bible reveals: In the light of such CARELESSNESS in transcription, it is not surprising that a good many correctors (as many as nine) have been at work on the manuscript"!

If that many "correctors" were needed then the Sinaiticus obviously was riddled with errors!! So if the initial Sinaiticus text was filled with errors we can easily see why it had been disposed of when found in the 1800s! So therefore can we trust this manuscript today even after the correctors" supposedly corrected it?

And what standard did they compare the Sinaiticus against to "correct" it? Apparently they used the original Byzantine Text which is the one Christians used down through the centuries anyway! Then why not continue to use the original in the first place?

But continue the quotation: “Tischendorf's edition of the manuscript enumerates some 14,800 places where SOME ALTERATION has been made to the text”!

INCREDIBLE!! !

Yet this manuscript and the Vaticanus together are the basis for the new Bible versions sold in your Christian Book Stores all across America today!

Continue: "[With] more recent detailed scrutiny of the manuscript by the use of ultra‐violet lamp, Milne and Skeat discovered that the original reading in the manuscript was ERASED ... [in places]"! (ibid, page 552 emphasis added). Therefore the Sinaiticus is not truly one of the "oldest" manuscripts in existence! The parchment may be old but the readings are from a later period!

Remember the "Majority Text" refers to the original Greek text ‐ the Byzantine Text, from which our King James Version was translated and which was the only text PRESERVED for Chris‐ tians throughout the history of the church until the 19th century! Jesus said His Word would be preserved and would not "pass away." Only the Byzantine Greek Text can make that claim! It has always been available to the church through history since the apostles originally wrote the New Testament! Continue: "F.H.A. Scrivener's Full Collation of the Codex Sinaiticus with the Received Text of the New Testament and other researchers (See Dean Burgon's The Revision Revised) find: 'There are about 9000 changes in this text from that of the Majority and Tradi‐ tional Text [the original Greek or Byzantine Greek] amounting to one difference in every verse.

It omits some 4000 words from the Gospels, adds 1000, repositions 2000 and alters another 1000. It has approximately 1,500 readings that appear in NO other manuscript; this affects nearly 3000 words. The following omissions are just a few examples.

“The end of Mark and John.

"Thirty‐nine words from John 19:20, 21; twenty words from John 20:5,6; nineteen words from Mark 1 :32‐34; fourteen words from Mark 15:47.

17 | P a g e

"John 5:4, Matthew 16:2,3, Romans 16:24, Mark 16:9‐20, ... Acts 8:37, Genesis 23:19‐24, 46, Numbers 5:27 ‐ 7:20, I Chron. 9:27 ‐ 10:27.

"Exodus, Joshua, 1 and 2 Samuel, 1 and 2 Kings, Hosea, Amos, Micah, Ezekiel, Daniel, and Judges.

"In Luke 8, for example, 19 out of 34 words are changed. In Matthew chapter one, sixty words are changed.

"It adds Apocryphal books, such as Bel and The Dragon, Tobit, Judith, The Epistle of Barnabas and The Shepherd of Hennas, among others" (Ibid, pages 552‐553 emphasis added).

Amazing!!!

Referencing scholar Bruce Metzger the author adds that not only do these two corrupt manuscripts ‐ the Vaticanus and the Sinaiticus ‐ disagree with the original Greek (the Byzantine "Majority Text"), but they even disagree with each other!

"1.Metzger says that Sinaiticus and Vaticanus do not agree with the majority of manuscripts.

"2. Not only do they disagree with the Majority of manuscripts, but they do not agree with each other. The 8000 changes in B [the Vaticanus] and the 9000 changes in Aleph [the Sinaiticus] are not the same changes. When their changes are added together, they alter the Majority text in about 13,000 places. This is two changes for every verse. Together they omit 4000 words, add 2000, transpose 3500, and modify 2000.

"3. They disagree with each other a dozen times on every page.

"4. Colwell says they disagree 70% of the time and in almost every verse of the gospels.

Burgon says, 'It is easier to find two consecutive verses in which these manuscripts differ than two in which they agree"!!

Yet sincere Christians who go to the Bible Book Stores across America do not realize that these modern versions are primarily based on these two CORRUPT manuscripts!!

Think! How can these two manuscripts be "the best" when they disagree with each other? If either one was the "original" Greek Text, then the other would be considered a horrible PERVERSION of the true Text!

Both are corrupt and must not be used as the true Word of God! Westcott and Hort did the world a tremendous disservice when they attempted to "rewrite" the Greek text using these two corrupt manuscripts as the basis for their new "Bible." The editors of the New Bible Versions have likewise done the world a tremendous disservice when they decided to use the Westcott and Hort novelty of the 19th century rather than go back to the ORIGINAL Holy Spirit inspired Byzantine Greek text for the New Testament and the original Holy Spirit inspired Masoretic Hebrew text for the Old Testament.

Why did they do it?

The editors of the new Bible versions realized that if they used the same original Hebrew and Greek texts used by the King James Version that there would essentially be no difference except for the replacement of archaic English words such as "thou" and "thine" etc. In essence they would only have ended up writing another King James Version but in modern English much like the New King James Version of today. This they emphatically did not want to do. After all,

18 | P a g e

publishers know they must make a profit. Therefore in order to "sell" more Bibles they wanted a different Bible altogether. And when you use the NIV, NASB, the Living Bible, the Revised Standard Version or New World Translation used by the Jehovah's Witnesses, you are indeed using a totally different "Bible." For each of these Bibles were based on the corrupt Westcott and Hort text!!

Alleged Problems with the King James Version

I have a very valued personally autographed copy of the book Final Authority by scholar William Grady, Ph.D. In this nearly 400‐page hardbound book Dr. Grady answers the arguments against the accuracy of the King James Version. It has been alleged by those who hate the inspired Hebrew and Greek text upon which the King James Version was based that 20,000 "textual errors" were found as early as 1659 in the KJV. Grady points out that these were typographical errors and not scriptural errors. But most detractors fail to mention this (Grady, Final Authority, page 168).

Many of these were simply the misspelling of proper names! (ibid. page 172).

Grady states: "The sum total of all litho logical errors in any edition of the Authorized [King James] Version would still produce a text that is SUPERIOR to any of the modern revisions translated from the polluted text of Westcott and Hort" (ibid, page 172 italics his).

But what about The Revised Standard Version written in the 1950s? It was written "by a committee of 95 scholars assembled by the National Council of Churches. Thirty of the men had Communist affiliations with at least 90 different Communist front organizations! (ibid, page 280, emphasis his). It is well known by its members that the National Council of Churches was originally known by the name of Federal Council of Churches at which time they were went public with their COMMUNIST beliefs. Yet many churches ‐ some of our largest and most respectable denominations ‐ are still members of this Communist organization! Unbelievable!

The BEST Translation We see clearly now that the best translation is the one which was based upon the inspired and original Hebrew and Greek Texts. The Samaritans and Egyptians corrupted their copies of the Old Testament Hebrew and should not be used. Some of the modern versions have "gone back to Egypt" in using these corrupt manuscripts. God gave His sacred Word of the inspired Hebrew Old Testament to the Jews. Only their Masoretic Hebrew text has God's authority and has been preserved accurately. God gave the Greek New Testament text to the Byzantine Greeks for preservation. Only those copies that have continued down through the church age, preserved by the Greeks themselves have God's authority, thereby representing His truly inspired Word of God! The Alexandrian text and any others from Egypt of the New Testament again were written by

19 | P a g e

the Egyptians ‐ not by the Greeks. When a text differs from that preserved by the Greeks in the Byzantine tradition which God authorized then it is to be abandoned.

Remember Jesus said HIS WORDS‐ those inspired by the Holy Spirit would never pass away.

Yet the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus had indeed "passed away" into obscurity until recent times.

Since these differ from those that "have not passed away" down through the centuries and since they differ so greatly from the Byzantine Greek text (which is the "Original") then we are not to use them.

The King James Version, though it does contain archaic English words such as "thou" and "thine" nevertheless was a faithful word for word translation from the original inspired Hebrew and Greek texts and is therefore the absolute most accurate translation in the English language!

We should only use (for a study Bible) that translation which is the truest to the original inspired Hebrew and Greek texts. And that Bible is indisputably the Authorized King James Version. All others should only be used for an occasional reference but by no means should they ever be considered to be the "Word of God"! They are not!

Regretful Translation

Read what the Editor of the New American Standard Version had to say: "I must under God renounce every attachment to the New American Standard Version. I'm afraid I'm in trouble with the Lord. We laid the ground work; I wrote the format. I wrote the preface I'm in trouble; I can't refute these arguments; its' wrong, terribly wrong; it's frighteningly wrong; and what am I going to do about it.

"When questions began to reach me at first I was quite offended. I used to laugh with others… However, in attempting to answer; I began to sense that something was not right about the New American Standard Version. I can no longer ignore the criticisms I am hearing and I can't refute them… The deletions are absolutely frightening ... there are so many…Are we so naive that we do not suspect Satanic deception in all of this?

"Upon investigation, I wrote my very dear friend, Mr. Lockman [the publisher of the NASV], explaining that I was forced to renounce all attachment to the NASV. The product is grievous to my heart…I don't want anything to do with it.

"The finest leaders that we have today... haven't gone into it [the corrupted Greek text they used], just as I hadn't gone into it ... that's how easily one can be deceived....

"You can say the Authorized Version [KJV] is absolutely correct." (From Dr. Frank Logsdon, Editor of the New American Standard Bible, cited in New ~ Bible Versions by Riplinger, page iii).

Which translation will you be using from now on?

20 | P a g e

How to Choose a Good BIBLE!

What type of Bible should a serious student of the Word of God purchase?

Should we buy the cheapest one we can find or should we invest in a reference Bible? Should we look for a Bible with study notes, concordances, maps, center reference margins, etc.?

IT IS IMPORTANT THAT every really serious student of the Bible purchase a good study Bible.

Many Bibles simply have the text but nothing else to help a serious Bible student learn essential facts. Have you ever leafed through a Gideon Bible in a motel room? It contains the basic text of the Bible but does not contain a marginal reference, concordance, maps, etc.

Every real Christian should become a serious student (disciple) of the Word of God. Many Christians read the Bible from time to time yet they do not take the necessary time to really study the Word of God. How sad! For we are commanded by God to "study" to show ourselves approved unto God, a workman that needs not to be ashamed rightly dividing the Word of truth (II Timothy 2: 15). If we do not study the Bible we will not rightly understand His Word and will be led astray by false doctrines and false teachers. We will be led astray by the traditions of men because we simply do not know the Word of God. This is tragic for the child of God. It is God's desire that you be "filled with the knowledge of His will" (Colossians 1:9). God's will is defined in the Bible as His Word! To be filled with the knowledge of His will is to know His Word! And that is God's desire for His children.

How then should a Christian choose a good study Bible to begin studying the Word of Truth?

Things to Keep in Mind

A serious student of the Word of God should invest in a good Bible because many hours will be spent pouring over its pages.

One thing that is tremendously helpful when beginning an intense study of the Word of God is to use the same Bible all the time. This way you become accustomed to certain passages being on a specific page. When someone says, "show me in the Bible where it says such and such," you may not remember where you read it, but you can close your eyes and will remember seeing that passage at the top or bottom of the page and can simply leaf through the Bible and find things so much faster that way. People, who jump from one Bible to another get confused, can't remember what they have read, and don't learn as fast. I am speaking from personal experience. I also carry a Bible in my car, but it is a copy of the one I keep at home for study purposes. So when I am away from home I can read that Bible and then remember what I read and where I read it.

21 | P a g e

It is not important for the Christian to "memorize" chapter and verse. It is only important that we remember and understand what God has said. As a rule I never try to memorize Scripture. Many pastors teach their new converts to do this.

And we teach children to memorize. However some Christians will memorize whole sections of scripture yet without the understanding. It is preferable to read and understand the Scripture. When we do that, we will then remember what we have read even though we did not attempt to "memorize" the scripture.

Realize that God is not impressed with our ability to memorize anything. Rather He is impressed with our diligence to obey His voice (Deuteronomy 28:1).

Also over many years I have advised all serious students of the Word of God to use as their primary study Bible one with a center reference margin. Throughout the text small letters will appear that refer you to the same letter in the margin where you will be given other scriptures to "cross‐reference" and add to your knowledge this way. Many times the margin will give you the Greek word and the definition right in the margin to help you in your understanding.

Of course sometimes errors may occur as well. No comments made by the editors in the margins are helpful. Most of the time they are, but remember these are comments made by men and are not inspired.

A good example how the center reference margin can be helpful can be found in John 1:3 where we read, "All things were made by Him; and without Him was not anything made that was made."

This is referring to Jesus Christ as verses 1 and 2 shows. Beside the first word in verse 3 in my Bible is the letter "d" which refers me to the margin. In the margin beside the letter "d," are five additional scriptures dealing with this subject, the first being Ephesians 3:9.

Now if I was a beginning Bible student I may not be familiar with Ephesians 3:9 so if T turned to that scripture and read it I would learn additional information. For Paul writes in that verse, the last part, "God, who created all things by Jesus Christ"!

Now you have an additional scripture to help you to understand what the apostle John was writing in his Gospel.

Sometimes the marginal reference will refer you to an Old Testament prophecy.

For example in John 3:16 we read that God gave "His only begotten Son." Beside the word "Son" is a letter referring me to the margin where I read the scripture "Isaiah 9:6." This is a prophecy about the birth of the Messiah.

By using a center reference margin you can easily increase your knowledge of the Bible. This is helpful to all serious Bible students but especially to those who have only been studying the Bible for the first a few years.

Now on occasion the editors who include these marginal notes will make a mistake. For example in Revelation 1: 10 John writes: "I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day..." Some margins will have a marginal note by this statement which will refer the reader to a scripture dealing with "the first day of the week." As all scholars without exception agree, this expression "the Lord's Day" refers to "the Great and Terrible Day of the Lord" found throughout the prophecies

22 | P a g e

of the Old Testament. It is the time of God's wrath on the beast power ‐the final judgment on the rebellious nations of the world at the End Time in which the heavenly signs will occur (Joel 2:1, 10; 3:15). The whole book of Joel deals with the Day of the Lord. Also the whole book of Revelation deals with the Day of the Lord. Seven trumpets are to sound and Jesus returns at the seventh and "last trumpet" (I Corinthians 15:52).

Jesus said this Day of the Lord (identified by the heavenly signs) will occur "immediately after the Tribulation" (Matthew 24:29).

So if you have a marginal reference erroneously referring you to the first day of the week, this is only the opinion of a particular editor. No where does the entire book of Revelation ever mention "the first day of the week." Therefore we should use the marginal notes but remember that they are not a part of Scripture and let the Word of God be the determining factor as to the truth of a particular verse.

But most of the time the marginal notes are a very great help to the eager Bible student who wants to learn as much as he can from the Word of God. I was challenged to begin my study of the Bible over 30 years ago, and I still find the marginal references very helpful. No serious Bible student should be without one!

Reference Bibles

It is very helpful to the serious student to purchase a Bible with a concordance in the back of the Bible. This is a reference that has many words in the text. For example, if I am trying to remember where I read something in the Old Testament for example on a certain subject, I could check the concordance in the back I could look up a certain word I remember and that one word would lead me to the verse I am searching for.

Now the concordances in the back of Bibles are very much abridged. Only about half of the words I look up are included in these very brief concordances.

For this purpose a serious student of the Bible will want to purchase Strong's Exhaustive Concordance. This reference work is the number one concordance in the world, containing all the words found in the Bible! (Except on those rare occasions where even they may have missed a word!).

The price of a Strong's Concordance is still in the twenties as it was when I got my Strong's back in the 1960s. Again no serious student of the Word of God should be without an exhaustive concordance.

Personally I use the Scofield Reference Bible of the KJV. I prefer the Original Scofield over the New Scofield Bible as the original contains the exact text of the King James Version.

While we must be wary of all footnotes at the bottom of the pages of such reference Bibles, the Scofield Bible is one of the most helpful and the vast majority of his notes are very scrip‐ turally accurate. It has been one of the most popular Reference Bibles of all times and with for good reason.

23 | P a g e

Historical notes and other references make Bible study more interesting. Plus the dates for the books provide added information. I hope this information is helpful. And Happy Studying!

24 | P a g e

Make the Study of the Word of God Your Top Priority!

What is the most important priority in your life? Is it sports? Is it amusements? Is it your career and making money? To be a truly successful Christian, we must make the study of the Word of God our FIRST priority! If we study, meditate in, and OBEY HIS WORD, God promises to prosper our lives and make us successful (Joshua 1:7­9).

The time is growing short. NOW is the time to begin really STUDYING the Bible to learn the truth of God and begin applying it in our lives!

I

first began reading the Bible when I was probably about nine or 10 years old. I started with the Book of Genesis. By the time I was 12 I knew the basic story of Genesis, who Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were and how 'God had promised Abraham tremendous blessings for following Him. But so far I had never studied the Bible. Thus far I had only done what many professing Christians have done; I had just read it. (Well of course many professing Christians seldom even read the Holy Word of God. And that is a real tragedy in itself).

But when I was 14 years old all that changed. God began to deal with me. He called me to an understanding of His Word. It was then that I was challenged on a number of doctrines that I had never heard be fore. All my life I had been raised to attend church weekly and faithfully yet I had never heard of the Millennial Reign of Christ on this Earth. Rather I had assumed Christ was taking all of us to Heaven at His return. This was one of the first new truths God was showing me. And then other new truths were presented to me. I began listening to various radio preachers at that time to learn more about God’s Word. Not wanting to be deceived by false prophets or false doctrines I did what most people would have done. I went to various ministers in area and asked them to tell me the truth.

But this only confused me. One minister would answer one way but another minister from a different denomination would answer me another way. At that point I simply didn't know what to believe. Therefore the only thing left was to begin studying the Bible to find out for myself what God's truth really was. Thus at the age of 14 I began my first intensive STUDY of the Holy Bible.

At that early age, having little knowledge of the Bible, it took me a great time to find the Scriptures that I needed to prove the various doctrines I was hearing. I had to sift through the scriptures comparing the various doctrines I was learning one doctrine at a time. It took me years to learn the truth. But perseverance eventually paid off.

I learned to totally shelve everything I had ever learned from the denominations and churches of men, and rely only on the Bible for truth. And when I did that the Holy Spirit became my teacher. The vast majority of the truth I know today I learned in my bedroom and in my prayer closet, learning one doctrine at a time. And the truths I was learning were

25 | P a g e

astounding!

You will learn those same truths by reading each issue of this publication along with your Bible!

In the next issue you will learn how to understand the Bible. There are 12 important steps you should know about in arriving at the truth of God. The next issue will show you how to really understand the Bible. It will be one of the most important things you will ever learn where studying God's Word is concerned.

Make your study of the Word of God the top priority in your life and God will begin opening up your mind to the most wonderful truths you could ever imagine. And love, peace and joy will follow. May God guide you into all His truth!

26 | P a g e