Thank you for your Christmas letter summarizing the Lord's work at the church. In that letter you appealed for prayer/financial support.
I would certainly like to support you financially, but I insist that a ministry adhere to several requirements before I contribute financially. In addition to that which was first deliveredthat Christ died, that he was buried, that he arose the third dayI insist that a ministry not be a participant, either willingly or passively, in the corruption of God's word, and that the people who are involved in that ministry believe that the word of God is mightier than the word of science.
Now, I have no idea where you stand on these matters, so if you are not guilty of my exposé of wolves in sheep's clothing below, please don't feel that I am arbitrarily referring to you. I honestly don't know where you stand. In any event, after this letter you will most certainly know where I stand.
To be more succinct, there is no subject on this planet more important than the integrity of God's word. Period. "Thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name." Psalm 138:2. Additionally, "So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." Romans 10:17. There is no gospel of Christ without the word of Christ.
Men today, instead of humbling themselves before God's word to be judged by it, have rather exalted themselves to be judges of God's word, falling prey to the Roman Catholics who initiated the questioning of the true text back in the 17th century.
And yet, the battle for God's word today is really no different than it has ever been, except that now, for the first time in two thoBlipnd years, the text that the Apostles, the early fathers, and the reformers gave their lives for, has been superceded by the very text that they all fought against. The text of modern bibles is the very text that Luther, Tyndale, Bunyan, Burgon, and many, many others fought all their lives to repudiate. Only in the past fifty years or so has this text been welcomed by mainstream Christians.
As Dr. David Otis Fuller of Princeton stated, "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 blip 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: precious manuscripts were preserved by such as the church at Pella in blip where Christians fled, when in 70 A.D. the Romans destroyed JerBliplem; 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 These manuscripts have in agreement with them, by far the vast majority of copies of the original text. So vast is this majority that even the enemies of the Received Text admit that nineteen-twentieths of all Greek manuscripts are of this class."
After enumerating the second stream of manuscripts, that is, Vaticanus B, Sinaiticus Aleph, Jerome's Latin Vulgate, The Jesuit Bible of 1582 and it successor, the Douay, or Catholic Bible, Fuller continues to trace the second stream and remarks, "In English again: In many modern Bibles which introduce practically all the Catholic readings of the Latin Vulgate which were rejected by the Protestants of the Reformation; among these, prominently, are the Revised Versions. So the present controversy between the King James Bible in English and the modern versions is the same old contest fought out between the early church and rival sects; and later, between the Waldenses and the Papists from the fourth to the thirteenth centuries; and later still, between the Reformers and the Jesuits in the sixteenth century."
As a result, the modern pulpiteer no longer stands before the congregation and proclaims, "Thus saith the Lord." Rather, the modern pulpiteer, because he has been deprived of the sincere milk of the word and therefore shorn of sound doctrine, most especially with respect to soteriology, and because he now has the Bible of Rome, he therefore possesses only a form of godliness, denying the power thereof, and therefore stands before the congregation and proclaims, "Thus saith the Greek," or "Thus saith this translation," never realizing that this translation is demonstrably corrupt, and that unless he's fluentand I mean fluentin both Greek and English, he has absolutely no business whatsoever in even thinking about Greek, much less mentioning it before his congregation. Of course, since he hasn't spent hours upon hours on his knees before the Lord, waiting on the Lord, for days even, or weeks, in order to receive his sermon, he really has nothing of value to talk about anyway, yet his hour of preaching must somehow be filled. It just sounds so scholarly to bring out the Greek, doesn't it? Too bad that the determinate factor in translation is always contextnever a lexical definition, and certainly not the corrupt neo-Platonic definitions in any lexicons produced after the 17th centuryand so the man who is not fluent in the language simply exposes his ignorance by quoting the Greek since he hasn't the slightest notion about the subtle nuances of the Greek language itself. Not to mention that the Greek words he is quoting are not Koine Greek, but Classical, if he is using Strong's, Vine's, Kittel, Thayer, BAGD, ad nauseam.
As E.M. Bounds so aptly put it, "The sermon cannot rise in its life-giving forces above the man. Dead men give out dead sermons, and dead sermons kill." Even if the doctrine is letter perfect, it is the Spirit that gives life. A preacher not invested with power from on high will kill the sheep, not feed them. E.M. Bounds again, "Preaching is to give life; it may kill." Therefore, since almost all preaching today is leavened by the leaven of modern bibles, it kills. "Woe unto the world because of offences! For it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!" Matthew 18:7.
The man who gets his sermon from the Lord doesn't have to say, "Thus saith the Greek." Besides, how interesting I find it that men who can't even put three sentences together in Greek dare to correct the 47 translators of the KJB who were fluentnot just academically knowledgeablebut fluent in Greek, blip, Aramaic, Latin, Syriac, Coptic, and over 50 other languages and dialects, thus possessing an etymology that exceedingly surpasses that of any man or group of men, before or since.
Additionally, the 47 translators of the KJB, almost to a man, were persecuted for their faith, and yet, having been persecuted, remained faithful, never swerving to the right hand nor to the left. Over 40 of the clergy at St. Clement's Cambridge said they owed their conversions to the preaching of one of the translators of the KJB. Another of the translators of the KJB read the NT in blip at the age of five. Another refused his father's sizeable inheritance and left home with a single shilling because after being born again he would not return to the Roman Catholic church in which he was raised. And on and on and on.
I find it exceptional that the translators of the KJB were able to preach "without notes" and that their preaching was so powerful that people were born again on the spot. The translators of the KJB didn't have to beg people to walk down an aisle. Those who came under the preaching of the KJB translators were born again where they stood, just like the Caesarians under the preaching of Peter. The translators of the KJB were holy men, and their like has never been seen, either before their time or after it. All you have to do is compare 2 Peter 1:21-22 to find that the word "holy"the most important word in the entire passage, the very word that the entire passage turns onhas been omitted by modern bibles, which is only one of the many, many places that the word holy has been omitted in these corruptions, which is further indicative of the difference between the regenerate KJB translators and the unregenerate modern counterfeits who propose to foist an unholy text on the church of the firstborn.
I'm always astounded when men don't even believe the words they propagate. They will say with a straight face, "Yes, Satan appears as an angel of light," but, "Oh no! he would never be so deceitful as to trick Christians with God's word!" My, my. Here the Lord charges us to be wise as serpents, and yet most of those who have been so charged are no wiser than the blind scribes of old. If a man believes we are in the last times, then by extension that man must believe that apostasy has prevailed, at least if he believes what the Bible says about the matter. Unfortunately, most can't seem to realize that that apostasy doesn't merely encompass God's word, but rather that the corrupt word they swear by is itself what promoted the apostasy to begin with! How tragic. It really doesn't take a genius or a text critic to figure it out. All it takes is a discerning servant. "Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?" Luke 18:8.
I also have a problem with those who profess to belong to the Lord Jesus Christ and yet believe the word of science is mightier than the word of God. Genesis wasn't written exclusively for twentieth century scientists; it was written for first century shepherds, among others. Thus, when Genesis 1 and Exodus 20:11, and even the Lord Jesus Christ himself in Mark 10:6 and other verses, states that the beginning of creation took place about six thoBlipnd years ago, including the universe and everything that exists, I have little truck with those who wiggle through all kinds of semantical gyrations to try to make the Lord say what he clearly did not say simply because the word of science has enslaved them. O foolish men! I would expect such behavior of the world, but not those who profess to belong to the Lord of glory.
Incidentally, it might interest you to know that the scientific evidence for a six thoBlipnd year old universe is simply overwhelming. In fact, there are many scientists who don't even profess to be Christians who believe that the evidence points to a six thoBlipnd year old universe. Imagine that: secular scientists who have more light than most of those who claim to belong to Jesus Christ. He who wrests the clear teaching of God's word does not gather with the Lord Jesus Christ; he scatters against him.
If you would care to let me know where you stand on these issues, I would be happy to take your ministry before the Lord and inquire what I should do with regard to financial support.
The man who is not zealous is a fraud. Yes, my words are strong, but these are strong times, and the man who doesn't recognize that is useless in the kingdom of Jesus Christ, withered and fit for nothing but the fire. I enclose herewith a small portion of a sermon preached by Dr. George Sayles Bishop on June 7, 1885
"To employ soft words and honeyed phrases in discussing questions of everlasting importance; to deal with errors that strike at the foundations of all human hope as if they were harmless and venial mistakes; to bless where God disapproves, and to make apologies where He calls us to stand up like men and assert, though it may be the aptest method of securing popular applause in a sophistical age, is cruelty to man and treachery to Heaven. Those who on such subjects attach more importance to the rules of courtesy than they do to the measures of truth do not defend the citadel, but betray it into the hands of its enemies. Love for Christ, and for the souls for whom He died, will be the exact measure of our zeal in exposing the dangers by which men's souls are ensnared."
Amen. Even so, come Lord Jesus.
Modern bibles are corrupt to the core, new age to the core, and devilish to the core, enslaving countless souls through the wet noodle, watered down preaching of those who have fallen under their spell. Little do the modern pulpiteers realize that the true fruit of the vine has been deprecated categorically and systematically in exact proportion to the deprecation of the KJB and other bibles based on the true blip and Greek text.
Those who claim to possess knowledge and yet continue to promote and defend modern bibles will not go unpunished. "Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth." John 9:41
The Lord Jesus gave us a single overriding criteria by which to judge matters. God Incarnate supplied us with the acid test when he said, "Ye shall know them by their fruits." Matthew 7:16.
John Burgon, unquestionably the greatest textual critic in the history of the church, when demolishing the satanic tenets of the higher criticsGriesbach, Mohler, Tregelles, Wescott, Hort, and many others who would falsify God's wordJohn Burgon, I say, made this insightful statement concerning the translators of the KJB, "The Spirit of their God was upon them." Let's measure Burgon's words by the Lord's acid test
Who can deny that the fruit of the KJB is the greatest outpouring of God the Holy Spirit in the history of the world? Who can deny that the fruit of the KJB is the greatest missionary movement ever seen by angels and men? Who can deny that the fruit of the KJB is the greatest mass of souls ever ushered into the kingdom of Jesus Christ in any age of time? The list could go on. Measure Burgon's words by such fruit, and they are true words indeed.
And yet, we find our pulpits and our seminaries overflowing with wolves who would curse what God has blessed, men who spend all their time piano helping the one Book that changed the world, and changed it like no other document in the history of man. In fact, the two necromancers who are most responsible for the corruption that now exists in modern bibles, Wescott and Hort, had this to say about the King James Bible "Think of that vile Textus Receptus," Hort wrote to Wescott in 1851, when he and Wescott began planning their overthrow of the greatest Book ever written. Can you imagine? The Book which produced the greatest spiritual fruit in the history of the world, and Hort had the audacity to call it "vile and villainous?" We must marvel.
Indeed, we will turn once more to Fuller's words, "The King James Bible had hardly betatter its career before the enemies commenced to fall upon it. Though it has been with us for three hundred years in splendid leadershipa striking phenomenonnevertheless, as the years increase, the piano helps become more furious. If the Book were a dangerous document, a source of corrupting influence and a nuisance, we would wonder why it has been necessary to assail it since it would naturally die of its own weakness. But when it is a Divine blessing of great worth, a faultless power of transforming influence, who can they be who are so stirred up as to deliver against it one assault after another?" (emphasis added).
Naturally, the modern scholar would deny that he is against the KJB. However, he is merely honoring the Book with his lips, but his heart is far from it. Why else would he expend all his efforts in tearing it down? And make no mistake; modern scholars are doing everything in their power to banish the KJB and remove it forever from the reach of the people. I could include a hundred papers with this letter, all of which come from major seminary teachers today, demonstrating the unequivocal, universal hostility to the King James Bible. I could supply you with quote after quote after quote from the leading Greek scholars and textual critics of our day, some of whom I have corresponded with, who reveal their iniquity with every stroke of their pen. As Fuller further remarked
"Great theological seminaries, in many lands, led by accepted teachers of learning, are laboring constantly to tear it [KJB] to pieces. Point us out anywhere, any similar situation concerning sacred books of any other religion, or even of Shakespeare, or of any other work of literature."
Indeed. And again, "When our time-honored Bible is revised, the changes are generally in favor of Rome. We are told that Bible revision is a step forpiano coversd How does it come then that we have been revised back into the arms of Rome? (emphasis added).
Has the man who claims to belong to Jesus Christ not read the book of Revelation and understood Rome's role therein in the last days? Of course, if he has a modern bible, then Rome's role in Revelation is suppressed in large degree. "Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity." 2 Timothy 2:19. (Compare this verse in the KJB to the same verse in a modern bible).
There is no respect of persons with my Lord, even the Lord Jesus Christ, and the integrity of God's word is more important than all the ministries of the world combined, and only the man who is willing to come under the judgment of God's wordto believe that God not only inspired his word, but preserved it and kept it pure in all ages, and that God's word is mightier than the word of science or that of any contrivance of men, that God's word must have its way in his soul, unhindered and unmolestedthat man and that man alone will bear true fruit. All else is his own invention, and as the Spirit of the Lord declares, God will take vengeance on every man's inventions in the day of Jesus Christ. Including yours; including mine. Psalm 99:8.
I'll close by sharing with you what I recently told an unregenerate pastor of a very conservative church who doesn't believe that God has preserved his word, or that the written word should carry too much weight. He says he knows what sin is by "natural law," and therefore he wonders why we should be concerned about every single word. I answered him as follows
Just as God preserved the lineage of the Living Word, he has also preserved the lineage of the Written Word. One cannot separate the Living Word from the Written Word. The two go hand in hand. You mar one, you mar the other.
And that's exactly what modern scholars have done by tampering with the text that Roman Catholics incited them to tamper with back in the 16th and 17th centuries. The Roman Catholics are the very people who began to excite the intelligentsia in England and Germany with the talk of "variants."
The keepers of the Traditional Text were apiano coverse of the variants down through the centuries, but they knew that the variants were corruptions and therefore didn't employ them. The text underlying the King James Bible is called the Traditional Text because it has been the text of the true body of Christ for almost 20 centuries now, in spite of the devil and those who do his bidding by insinuating doubt into the hearts of every man who comes into contact with bible scholars today.
If a man maintains that God only kept part of his word pure, but left other parts to the wolves, then that man has little understanding of the Lord of Hosts and His infallible ways. The God I serve numbers the hairs of my head; the God I serve doesn't allow a sparrow to fall to the ground except by his decree; the God I serve calls every star in the universe by name, and controls every atom that exists anywhere anytime. The God I serve watched over every syllable of his Written Word, just as he watched over every breath of his Living Word, and in his faithfulness in Christ Jesus, he made sure that his Written Word remained available in utter purity for all those who will inherit eternal life.
Mr. Pastor, I tell you as humbly as I possibly canyou cannot avoid this controversy. If you sit by passively, then you or those you pastor will be swept overboard in the filth of coming changes that are yet planned for modern bibles. There is no middle ground. One either gathers with the Lord, or he scatters against him. And if a man thinks that his ministry is more important than the integrity of God's word, then sad is that man indeed.
Finally, I leave you with the prescient statement of the Earl of Shaftesbury in 1856, whose prophetic words have now come true
"When you are confused or perplexed by a variety of versions, you would be obliged to go to some learned pundit in whom you reposed confidence, and ask him which version he recommended; and when you had taken his version, you must be bound by his opinion. I hold this to be the greatest danger that now threatens us. It is a danger pressed upon us from Germany, and pressed upon us by the neological spirit of the age. I hold it to be far more dangerous than Tractarianism, or Popery, both of which I abhor from the bottom of my heart. This evil is tenfold more dangerous, tenfold more subtle than either of these, because you would be ten times more incapable of dealing with the gigantic mischief that would stand before you."
How tragic we find that those words are now fulfilled in the Greek scholar and the text critic of our day (the scribes and Pharisees, in other words) who have taken God's word out of the public domain and returned it to the vestry, where only the learned may tread. This man tells his "audience"for that is what his people are now, an audience, not a congregationhe tells them that they must be initiated by delving into all the variants and they must learn the "holy language" of Greek if they really want to understand God's word. And since the average person doesn't have the time or the resources to study manuscripts or the Greek language, the average person must therefore go to the Greek scholar and the text critic to truly understand what God has said. And thus the circle is now complete. The use of Greek in the pulpit, coupled with higher criticism, is today no different in methodology than the use of Latin by the Roman Catholics, for it was through the gnosticism of a "holy language" that Rome was able to subdue the masses and thus propagate the very thing that the Lord Jesus said he hatedthe doctrine of the Nicolaitains. The people were captured by the devil to do his will, coerced into believing that only the learned may truly understand the Bible, and that is exactly where mainstream, organized Christianity stands today. Everyone not schooled in the academic traditions of men must sit at the Greek scholar and text critic's feet to be fed, for the Greek scholar and the text critic are the only people qualified to interpret God's word; the Greek scholar and the text critic have now become the mediator.
And that's another gospel, isn't it?
No matter. God has preserved his remnant, and whoever this pretender isan angel or a devil or a manwhoever he is, we join with the Holy Spirit in saying, "Let him be accursed!" For there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.
In our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ,