Please leave me a comment if you see any videos missing in any posts, so I may replace them if I can. Thank you!

Wednesday, March 31, 2010

MORE HERESIES: Dogma from the Catholic Encyclopaedia

This is an UPDATE of my original post of January 6, 2010:



Dogma from the Catholic Encyclopaedia



CE 300 Baptism by immersion changed to affusion (sprinkle).

CE 300 Prayers for the dead. (Against Deut. 18 & Yesha Yahu 8).

CE 310 Making the "sign" of the CROSS.

CE 325 Anathema (death) decreed to anyone who adds or changes the creed of faith of Nice. (See years 1586 & 1560).

CE 370 Council of Laodicea rejects Apocrypha, calls Sabbath observers "Judaizers", worthy of death.

CE 375 Veneration of angels and dead saints.

CE 394 The Sacrament of the Mass
Missal Recitata, Low Mass, priest + 1
Missal Cantata, Sung Mass, priest + 1
Missal Solemn is, High Mass, priest + 2
Missal Poritificalis, Bishop + priest+?

CE 431 The worship of Miryam (Mary).

CE 431 Miryam "Queen of Heaven" (against Yerme Yahu 7:18, 44:17, 44:25).

CE 431 Miryam "ever virgin" (against Matt. 1:25, Mark. C3, Yn. 22-4).

CE 431 Miryam "Mediatrix" (against 1 Tim. 2:5, Matt. 11:28, Eccl. 9:6).
Priest craft began to dress in "priestly garb".

CE 526 Sacrament of "Extreme Unction".

CE 593 Doctrine of "Purgatory" - by Gregory
(against John 5:24, l John 1:7-9, 2:1,2, Romans 8:1).

CE 600 Latin language only language permitted for prayer
(against 1 Cor. 14:9).

CE 709 Kissing the feet of pope is ordered
(against Acts 10:25,26, Rev. 19:10).

CE 750 Temporal Power of pope declared
(against Matt. 4:8,9, 20:25,26, John 18:38).

CE 754 Council of Constantinople ordered removal of all images and abolition of image worship.

CE 785 Miryam "co-redemptorist" (against Acts 4:12, Ps. 14:7, Israelites/Hebrews 7:25).

CE 788 Miriam "worship" (against Romans1:25, Yesha Yah u 42:8, John 7:10).

CE 788 Worship of cross, relies, and images re-authorized (against Exod.20A;
Deut. 27:15, Ps. 115).

CE 850 Fabrication and use of holy water".

CE 890 Veneration of St. Joseph, husband of Miryam.

CE 965 Baptism of the bells - ceremony of actually 'baptizing" bells to ward off demons and to call the elect to vespers when blessed bells are rung.

CE 995 Canonization of dead saints (against Romans 1:7, 1 Cor. 12).
Kanaan Ministries: The Four Elements (02/2003) 108

CE 998 Fasting on "Fri-days' & during "Lent" (against Matt. 15:11, 1 Cor. 10:25, 1 Tim. 4:1-8).

CE 1079 Celibacy of priesthood/priest craft declared (married priests ordered to cast oft wives, against 1 Tim. 3:2-5, 3:12; Matt. 8:14,15).

CE 1090 Institution of rosary prayer beads, or "chaplet" (against Matt. 6:7,
Deut. 18, Yesha Yahu 8 - also, Buddhism, Shinto, and Islam practice
prayer bead counting).

CE 1190 Sale of indulgences (against Eph. 2:6-10). For those of you who
don't know, this was a practice of people actually paying the clergy
money to have punishment time taken oft from burning in "Purgatory"
after their death. They probably weren't swimming in their own gene
pool to be swindled so easily, but they were just kept uneducated.

CE 1215 Dogma of "trans-substantiation" declared (against Luke 22:19,20,
Mark 13:21, John 6:35, Mt. 24:23-28, 1 Cor. 11:26 ~
this was truly a case of the idiot looking at the finger!).

CE 1215 Confession of sins to priest ordered (against Ps. 51:1-10,
Luke 7:48 & 15:21, 1 John 1:8,9).

CE 1220 Adoration of the wafer "host" (matzah adoration! Against John 4:24).

CE 1229 Scriptures forbidden to "laymen"
(against John 5:39, 8:31, 2 Tim. 3:15-17).

CE 1265 Miryam's house moved by angel to Loren to Italy.

CE 1287 Scapular protection decreed (brown cloth talisman with picture of
virgin packed with tea leaves proclaimed to contain supernatural
powers or 'virtues" to protect wearer.

CE 1414 "Chalice" forbidden to laity at "communion" (a radical distortion of the
Passover Seder, the annual remembrance of Jesus' death).

CE 1439 Dogma of seven sacraments (against Matt. 28:19,20, & 26:26-28).

CE 1439 Purgatory declared valid dogma (against Matt. 25:46, Luke 23:43).

CE 1508 Miryam Mother of GOD' (against Matt. 12:46-50, Mark. 8:19-21, Acts 1:14).

CE 1545 Church tradition equal to Scripture (against Matt. 15:6, Mark 7:7-13,
Col. 2:8 ~ also adds all of above and many other dogma to Council of Nice!).

CE 1560 Creed of pope Pius IV decreed (against Gal. 1:13).

CE 1580 Pope declared to be "LORD GOD.

CE 1593 "Ave Maria" adopted.

CE 1710 Stuffed donkey in Verona, Italy, at Church of the Madonna of the Organs,
decreed to be the actual animal Rabbi Yahushual Yahusha ha
Mashiach entered Yerushallyim on.

CE 1854 Immaculate Conception of Virgin Miryam (against Romans 3:23, &
5:12, Ps. 51:5, Yerme Yahu 17:9).

CE 1864 Miryam 'sinless (against Luke 1:46,47, Romans 3:10-19, & 23).

CE 1870 Papal infallibility decreed (against 2 Thess. 2:2-12, Rev. 17:1-9,

CE 1907 All sciences condemned.

CE 1922 Pope declared to be "Jesus"


You know, as it turned out, I was married to a man who claimed to be Jesus Christ! Obviously, it turned out he was a diagnosed Paranoid Schizophrenic!

Could these extremely egotistical popes have been victims of such a mental disease, too? Or is the explanation a whole lot simpler, that these are Children of the Devil, in a Devil's Cult?

Sadly, for neither there to be a cure!

As a Roman Catholic, I was completely unaware of any of its sordid history! But, upon learning the truth, I was quick to leave it! Unknowingly at the time, I was to learn that it is exactly such that is instructed throughout the word of God! Praise God, I would not remain in anything so sordid!

Proverbs 23:29-30 (King James Bible)

29 Who hath woe? who hath sorrow? who hath contentions? who hath babbling? who hath wounds without cause? who hath redness of eyes?
30 They that tarry long at the wine; they that go to seek mixed wine.

The preached ECUMENICAL movement is a movement of the Devil!
God is PURE! HE would never mix with filth!

Revelation's dire admonition to be of most concern:

Revelation 3:13-22 (King James Bible)

13 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.
14 And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God;
15 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot.
16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.
17 Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:
18 I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see.
19 As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.
20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.
21 To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.
22 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.

Revelation 18:4 (King James Bible)

4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.


I have come to the realization that I have been incorrectly stating the origin of the bible verses I post, for which I very much apologize! I am on an ever-learning quest, and this has just been made clear to me!

There is no such thing as a KING JAMES VERSION!


"IT IS THE ACTUAL TRANSLATION FROM THE ANTIOCHIAN TEXTUS RECEPTUS, responsible for every REVIVAL since the day of Pentecost!" - John Knox

When it was first printed, the cover read simply THE HOLY BIBLE!

It became King James "Version" when the money-mongers decided on copyrighting versions!

The King James Bible is and has always been of PUBLIC DOMAIN!

May God continually enlighten all those who want to learn THE TRUTH!

See also History of the Papacy by Rev. J.A. Wylie, LL.D.




Monday, March 29, 2010

A slight deviation from my plan: the NASV "version," which leads to the Authorized King James Bible!

I am continuously shaking my head at how things are made to fall in place for me. As I said before, I KNOW it to be the Holy Spirit guiding me evermore!

My plan was to continue by posting about the translators who sat on the Committee commissioned by King James at the request of some who were disturbed by the corruption existent in the Bibles "allowed" at the time, having come from the Roman Catholic days of King Henry VIII.

But, as it happened, this morning, checking out a friend invitation on YouTube led me to another, gtrjunky, to whom I had already subscribed previously, whose videos are extremely good.

Here I digress:
Back in the early 70's I was given a Bible by Mrs. Culpepper, who was the wife of the West Jackson Baptist Assistant Pastor, whom I had befriended. It sat, dutifully accomplishing its purpose, I suppose, of just being an ornament gathering dust, somewhere. It was a New American Standard Bible translation.

Through the health hardships I encountered in the late 80's, it was given more prominence when moved to the coffee table. But, there too it sat once I was "comforted" by a verse here and there. Mind you, at this time, I used to go to Bible studies in many locales, but, never a firm study that would go through an entire book of the Bible.

Thus, by the time I finally "awoke" subsequent to my son's death, this Bible sat as new as the day in which it was given to me. Here some 25 years had past!

I continued using it, to the point of needing to buy another for it had become so worn out, so I bought and used another NASB, although a study version, until I grew further in the word of God, mentored by the best, such as Dave ( and his wife, Mary, and came to realize it was, nevertheless, a corrupted volume, for it did not have ALL the words of God! My post "What Bible Are You Reading?" which shows the omissions in the comparison chart provided.

Proverbs 30:5 (King James Version)

5 Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.

Deuteronomy 8:3 (King James Version)

3 And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live.

Luke 4:4 (King James Version)

4 And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.

Matthew 4:4 (King James Version)

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

Were His EVERY WORD not so important, would such a statement have been repeated over and over, throughout the Old and New Testaments, using the same words, "EVERY WORD THAT PROCEEDETH OUT OF THE MOUTH OF GOD," and even by Christ, Himself?

Psalm 138:2 (King James Version)

2 I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.

So now we are back to gtrjunky. I looked at his profile, and there he says he reads the NASB. What could I do? What should I do? Just close my eyes? No! This is contrary to what I believe we should do to help others. We as good Christians must show them the truth. Whether they accept it or not is entirely up to them. I have done that which God commands. And, it is quite obvious, gtrjunky ( produces marvelous Christian videos! I treasure the subscription I have with his channel!

So I decided to look into the NASB committee, the men and women who may have adjudicated this or that be entered or not, and what "originals" had they used to come to such decisions. I was in for a big surprise, which ties in perfectly well with my plan of posting about the men who sat on the King James Bible Committee! But this post about the NASB translation needs to preface it!

The following is entirely copied from the Preserved Word Ministries (

(I have taken the liberty of highlighting in red the area that will serve as my entry into my next post regarding the caliber of the men who comprised the KJV Committee!)

NASB Committe Member turns KJV, denounces NASB
Frank Logsdon: I’m afraid I’m in trouble with the Lord

Posted by Luke Mounsey
November 1, 2001

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

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

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

Below is his speech, in its entirety, rejecting the NASB, and endorsing the Textus Receptus and the KJV.

Two questions were handed me tonight which if I could answer them would take care of almost all the other questions:
"Please tell us why we should use the Authorized Version and why the New American Standard is not a good version, and the background from which it came."

"What is your opinion of the 1881, 1901 and other variations of the Bible in relation to the Authorized Version?"

May I point out to you very specifically, not that you do not know but to stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance, we are in the end time. And this end time is characterized by a falling away, and of course that is apostasy. That is the meaning of the word: Falling away from truth. And when there is a falling away from truth, concurrently there is always confusion because they are sort of Siamese twins.

With confusion there is mental and heart disturbance, and people naturally come short of the high standard of the Lord. Everything we have or ever will have will be found here [in the Bible], as we have said so many times. All that God does for us, in us, with us, through us, to us must come by the way of this Word. It's the only material the Spirit of God uses to produce life and to promote it. Name it, and it has to be here.

So you can understand why the archenemy of God and man would want to do something to destroy this book. I ought to whisper to you, and this is no compliment to the devil, but he knows it can't be destroyed. He tried to destroy the Living Word. You don't see this depicted on Christmas cards, but the night Jesus Christ was born the devil was there in that stable with one third of the fallen angels whom he had dragged down, to devour the manchild as soon as He was born. Rev. 12:5. Now he couldn't do it. Just think. Satan was there when Jesus was born, with all of those cohorts, those fallen angels, for one purpose: to devour the manchild. He couldn't do it. So failing to abort the Saviorhood of Jesus Christ both at the manger and at the cross--when he said come down from the cross, that is, before your work is finished come down--he is going to do what he knows is the next most effective thing, that is try to destroy the Written Word.

You understand, I am sure, there are places in this book where you can't differentiate between the Living Word and the Written Word. You know that. John 14:6--"I am the life." John 6:63--"My words are life." Different life? The same life. You can't differentiate because after all the Written Word is the breath, if you please, of God, and Jesus Christ is God made flesh or the Word that came to earth.


Nevertheless, getting back to this, the devil is too wise to try to destroy the Bible. He knows he can't. He can't destroy the Word of God. But he can do a lot of things to try to supplant it, or to corrupt it in the minds and hearts of God's people.

Now he can only do it in one of two ways: either by adding to the Scriptures or by subtracting from the Scriptures. And you mark it down in your little red book: He's too wise to add to because those who have been in the Word for a long time would say, "Wait a minute; this is not in the Bible." So he subtracts from it. The deletions are absolutely frightening.

For instance, there are in the revisions (1881 and 1901), so we are told 5337 deletions, subtractions if you please. And here is the way it is done. It is done so subtly that very few would discover it. For instance, in the New American Standard we are told that 16 times the word "Christ" is gone. When you are reading through you perhaps wouldn't miss many of them. Some you might. And 10 or 12 times the word "Lord" is gone. For instance, if you were in a church when the pastor is speaking on the words of the Lord Jesus in his temptation, "Get thee behind me, Satan," if you have a New American Standard you wouldn't even find it. It's not even in there. And there are so many such deletions.

So this is done in order to get around it and further blind the minds and hearts of people, even though it may be done conscientiously. There isn't any worse kind of error than to have conscientious error. If you are conscientiously wrong it's a terrible situation to be in.

Nevertheless, when there is an omission that might be observed, they put in the margin, "Not in the oldest manuscripts." But they don't tell you what those oldest manuscripts are. What oldest manuscripts? Or they say, "Not in the best manuscripts. "What are the best manuscripts? They don't tell you. You see how subtle that is? The average man sees a little note in the margin which says "not in the better manuscripts" and he takes for granted they are scholars and they must know, and then he goes on. That's how easily one can be deceived.


Let's go back to say 352 A.D., when Constantine, the Old Pagan Wolf, as he was called, was concerned because his kingdom was threatened with a schism. There were those who held to the Babylon doctrine of the mother and child coming up through history, and there were others who held to the Roman doctrine of mother and child. In order to cement his kingdom, he felt he ought to bring about a Bible that would satisfy both sides which were threatening to destroy his kingdom. So he called upon Eusebius. (There were two men of that period called by this name, but I am referring to Eusebius the historian.)

Who was Eusebius? He was a protege of Origin. And who was Origin? Origin was one who believed that Christ was a created being, like the Jehovah's Witnesses, therefore he's not divine. Now a man who studies under a teacher like that certainly would imbibe some of it. Nevertheless, Eusebius brought into being a Bible that would somehow or other not offend those who had the Babylonian doctrine or those who had the Roman doctrine of the mother and the child.


There are two copies of those Bibles in existence, A and B, the Codex Sinaiticus and the Codex Vaticanus. And where are they? They are in the custodial care of Rome. Now almost all of our revisions, of recent years in particular, come through that stream. And that necessitates this comment: There is the false and the true streams of manuscripts. And either our manuscripts come through the false stream, or they come through the approved stream of manuscripts.

When people speak of the oldest manuscripts, they usually mean the A and the B, the Codex Sinaiticus and the Codex Vaticanus. But nobody has seen [Vaticanus. It has] been under lock and key in Rome. And the only copies we have are the copies that Rome decided to give to the outside world, and I don't trust them one inch. Never, never, never! And I'll tell you why in just a moment.

None of our scholars today have seen Codex B [Vaticanus], unless they've seen just a page or two through a glass case. But that's not enough to get the feel of the whole thing, just to see a page that is open at one place. So here we have the stream of manuscripts and the stream of Greek texts coming down through the "custodial care" of Rome. And if it's in the custodial care of Rome, I don't want anything to do with it. I've come to this place now: I can't stand toe to toe with the scholars, with those who have delved into the manuscripts and textual criticism for years and years. I've had too many other things to do. And you haven't been able to, either. So what do you do? I don't argue with them anymore. I'm not going to argue with any of them. I'm just going to ask, On what manuscript or manuscripts is this version based? And if it's based upon a manuscript that came down through this Roman stream, I don't want anything to do with it.


You say, How can we know? Well, when God was ready to tell the world through a converted monk that the just shall live by faith, he raised up a man--and I'm sure that God raised him up; couldn't be otherwise--by the name of Erasmus. Erasmus is said by those who seem to know--scholars, we have to take their word for something--that he was the wisest man this side of Solomon that ever lived. It was said that he could do ten days work in one day. Brilliant. I forgot how many languages he spoke; they say he was at home in eighteen or twenty different languages as easily as we can move around in the English language.

He knew the manuscripts that were available, and he brought about a Greek text. Now he was so brilliant that the pope offered him--that is to keep him, I suppose, from doing this Greek text--offered him the position of a cardinal, which is a high-ranking position for those in the Catholic Church. I know a little bit about it because my father's people were from Ireland and were Roman Catholic all the way back. I have three cousins in Chicago who are priests. I have a cousin in the Chicago area who is a nun. That was quite an offer to be offered the position of a cardinal, yet he refused it.

The British government, I am told, offered him one of the highest positions possible in the British commonwealth. And at his own price he turned it down. Germany did the same thing, but he turned it down because he felt God had called him to bring about the pure Greek text.

All of this goes off into so many areas. We have a friend in one of our Baptist churches, very delightful chap, very educated, and he speaks against Erasmus because he had some attachment to the Roman church. Even our friend Peter Ruckman speaks against Erasmus. But how could you speak against a man, claiming that he is Roman, when he turned down the offer of a cardinalship and campaigned against monasticism, against the liturgy of the Catholic church, and was detested by the Catholic people?

And not only that, but listen to this: Do you know one of the reasons the Jesuits came into being under Loyola? Their main project was to supplant the Erasmus text, get it out of the way somehow, just undermine it. And this is their pledge. You can go to the library and get this directly, if you care. They said, `In order to supplant the Erasmus text we'll send our men to Protestant seminaries, Protestant Bible schools; we'll get them into teaching positions in seminaries; we'll get them into pulpits of churches.' To do what?
The whole aim around the world is to destroy the Erasmus text, and the Authorized Version of course came from the Erasmus text.

Getting back to this one matter that really impresses me a great deal. When God was ready to tell the world that the just shall live by faith, he got hold of the heart of Luther and he tacked his thesis to the door--"the just shall live by faith"--and took all the persecution that comes to one who turns against the church of Rome. If the just shall live by faith, where do we get faith? Romans 10:17--"Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God." If they're going to have pure faith they had to have the pure Word of God. Doesn't that make sense? And so God raised up Erasmus to bring about what was called the pure Greek text, and had it completed when Luther came thundering forth "the just shall live by faith. "He had the Greek text of Erasmus to translate. Someone put it this way: Erasmus laid the egg and Luther hatched it. Just at the right time he had the text, and all he had to do was to translate it into German.

I think I mentioned the other night, since there is so much concern about these versions and paraphrases and so on, it is a marvelous opportunity for the devil to get in his strokes, you know. Through computerized procedures they have tried to determine the accuracy right down the line. You have lists of those in various books. The Authorized Version is right at the top. Friends, you can say the Authorized Version is absolutely correct. How correct? 100% correct! Because biblical correctness is predicated upon doctrinal accuracy, and not one enemy of this Book of God has ever proved a wrong doctrine in the Authorized Version. You've never heard of anyone's intellect being thwarted because he believed this Authorized Version, have you? And you never will. You've never heard of anyone anytime going astray who embraced the precepts of the Authorized Version, and you never will.

I tell you, I used to laugh with others when a person would try to slander the intelligence, perhaps, of some who say, "Well, if the Authorized Version was good enough for Paul it's good enough for me. "You get a lot of ha, ha's. Say, that perhaps is true. If this is the Word of God, and Paul had the Word of God, then things equal to the same thing are equal to each other. We have the Book that Paul had! It's true there could be, and perhaps should be, some few corrections of words that are archaic. And a few places where it could read just a little more freely.

But after all, as I said to the men this morning in the class, just think of the countless millions of dollars of God's money spent on all these versions and translations which could have been spent on God's service. There are 100 of them right now. Think of it.

When I say corrected, I mean just some of the archaic words such as "he who lets will let until he be taken out of the way." Now we don't use the word that way, but you can find out what it means by taking just a moment to look it up. Back in Jeremiah 4:22 we read, "My people are Scottish." There wouldn't be two people in the congregation that would know what that means. But I like it because when I looked it up, I found that it had more meaning than any other word you could put there. It means thick headed. God says, "I can't get through to you because you are thick headed. "And maybe He wants it to stay there. If a persons looks it up he gets a better understanding of it than if another word were put in there to change it. There are places where I believe the Spirit of God led the translators of the Authorized Version.

You read their biographies. They were mighty men of God; spent as much as five hours daily in prayer; and some of them knew twenty-some languages. And it was before modernism filled the air, and before their attention was diverted by so many other things, television and so on.

Actually, after I've listened in so many places to all these arguments and I've listened to the scholars and sat with the translators, to be honest with you I haven't found anything seriously wrong anywhere with the Authorized Version. Really. Really! Just a couple of archaic words that are not in usage today. Well, they could be changed. I personally don't think the "thous" and the "thees" should be changed. God's thoughts are above our thoughts, higher than our thoughts, and these words are expression of His thoughts, and I like to see it a little different here and there from men's ways and men's thoughts.

Actually I don't think there is anything wrong with this [the Authorized Version], and it has been tested for 362 years. Are you ready to throw it overboard because the scholars have come along and said, "Well now, this is better; reads better; you can understand it better"? I mean to tell you, with all their self-justification [of the new, easier to read versions], people know less and less about God's Word.


To begin with, the revisers for the 1881 weren't to be revisers; they weren't to bring out a new Book. They were revisers to bring some of the words up to date because the language had changed. They were to be revisers, but the fact is--and believe me, this can't be refuted--there wasn't enough in the Authorized Version to revise to make it worth the while, to cater to the ego of scholars.

So when they saw that there wasn't much to revise, here they had their committee arranged. One was a Unitarian, a man by the name of Smith. That's why you find on verses concerning the incarnation there's something wrong. Such as 1 Timothy 3:16--"By common consent great is the mystery of godliness. "Don't you believe that the mystery of godliness depends upon what man thinks, or his opinion. The verse continues in the 1881 version--"he who was manifest in the flesh. "You've been manifest in the flesh; I've been manifest; [that statement alone is meaningless]. It's God who was manifest in the flesh. Do you see the Unitarian flavor there? He got in some blows somewhere, and that must be one of them.

But nevertheless, they didn't have enough to revise. So what are they going to do?

Well, two brilliant Cambridge scholars by the name of Dr. Hort and Dr. Westcott had been collaborating on a new Greek text built on the Codex Sinaiticus and the Codex Vaticanus which they believed were the very best manuscripts, held by Rome. So they said to the committee when they saw there wasn't enough to revise--I don't know if they said these exact words, but they said, "We would suggest that we bring about a new version. "And they had those men pledge themselves to secrecy that they wouldn't tell anybody about the text they were using until after the book was out. Afraid, I guess, that they would be curbed, that the King of England or somebody would prevent them.

Twice British royalty refused to have anything to do with the 1881 revision. But at any rate it was deception to begin with. Their own text hadn't even been published yet, hadn't stood the scrutiny of the public. So the 1881 was built upon that. And the only fundamentalist who stayed on the board was Dr. F.H.A. Scrivener, and before he died he felt he had to break his promise to this group of men, and he let the world know that they took advantage after advantage in the text. That's where we've gotten the number of something like 5,337 deletions. [That was his count.] And he said, "Every time I raised an objection I was voted down, and they took liberties with God's Word. "He was right there at almost every meeting, and he revealed that to the world before he died.

Now when the 1881 came out many people liked it because it said Jehovah instead of Lord in many places. Well, that's minor; you can say that with the Authorized Version. But it was scarcely 10 years before it proved to be a failure. That is, it didn't get anywhere.


Within 10 years they started communicating with spiritual leaders on this side of the water to work with them on another printing called the 1901 edition, feeling, I suppose, that if the Americans cooperated that they would have a wider sales range. Well, just think. When the 1901 came out it had gone 10 years when it was practically a failure, because in 1911 in the third centenary of the Authorized Version the publishers had 34 outstanding scholars to go over the Authorized Version and see what legitimate changes could be made here and there. You know, they took the 1901 edition and they could only take two out of every 100 corrections in that. Only two percent. And immediately they discovered that the 1901 was not trustworthy. And it didn't go very long until it died out. In all of my pastorates I can only remember one person who ever owned one of those 1901 American Standard Version Bibles.


Back in 1956-57 Mr. F. Dewey Lockman of the Lockman Foundation contacted me. He was one of the dearest friends we've ever had for 25 years, a big man, some 300 pounds, snow white hair, one of the most terrific businessmen I have ever met. I always said he was like Nehemiah; he was building a wall. You couldn't get in his way when he had his mind on something; he went right to it; he couldn't be daunted. I never saw anything like it; most unusual man. I spent weeks and weeks and weeks in their home, real close friends of the family.

Well, he discovered that the copyright [on the American Standard Version of 1901] was just as loose as a fumbled ball on a football field. Nobody wanted it. The publishers didn't want it. It didn't get anywhere. Mr. Lockman got in touch with me and said, "Would you and Ann come out and spend some weeks with us, and we'll work on a feasibility report; I can pick up the copyright to the 1901 if it seems advisable."

Well, up to that time I thought the Westcott and Hort was the text. You were intelligent if you believed the Westcott and Hort. Some of the finest people in the world believe in that Greek text, the finest leaders that we have today. You'd be surprised; if I told you you wouldn't believe it. They haven't gone into it just as I hadn't gone into it; [they're] just taking it for granted.

At any rate we went out and started on a feasibility report, and I encouraged him to go ahead with it. I'm afraid I'm in trouble with the Lord, because I encouraged him to go ahead with it. We laid the groundwork; I wrote the format; I helped to interview some of the translators; I sat with the translators; I wrote the preface. When you see the preface to the New American Standard, those are my words.

I got one of the fifty deluxe copies which were printed; mine was number seven, with a light blue cover. But it was rather big and I couldn't carry it with me, and I never really looked at it. I just took for granted that it was done as we started it, you know, until some of my friends across the country began to learn that I had some part in it and they started saying, "What about this; what about that?"

Dr. David Otis Fuller in Grand Rapids [Michigan]. I've known him for 35 years, and he would say (he would call me Frank; I'd call him Duke), "Frank, what about this? You had a part in it; what about this; what about that?" And at first I thought, now, wait a minute; let's don't go overboard; let's don't be too critical. You know how you justify yourself the last minute.

But I finally got to the place where I said, "Ann, I'm in trouble; I can't refute these arguments; it's wrong; it's terribly wrong; it's frightfully wrong; and what am I going to do about it?" Well, I went through some real soul searching for about four months, and I sat down and wrote one of the most difficult letters of my life, I think.

I wrote to my friend Dewey, and I said, "Dewey, I don't want to add to your problems," (he had lost his wife some three years before; I was there for the funeral; also a doctor had made a mistake in operating on a cataract and he had lost the sight of one eye and had to have an operation on the other one; he had a slight heart attack; had sugar diabetes; a man seventy- four years of age) "but I can no longer ignore these criticisms I am hearing and I can't refute them. The only thing I can do--and dear Brother, I haven't a thing against you and I can witness at the judgment of Christ and before men wherever I go that you were 100% sincere," (he wasn't schooled in language or anything; he was just a business man; he did it for money; he did it conscientiously; he wanted it absolutely right and he thought it was right; I guess nobody pointed out some of these things to him) "I must under God renounce every attachment to the New American Standard."

I have a copy of the letter. I have his letter. I've shown it to some people. The Roberts saw it; Mike saw it. He stated that he was bowled over; he was shocked beyond words. He said that was putting it mildly, but he said, "I will write you in three weeks, and I still love you. To me you're going to be Franklin, my friend, throughout the course. "And he said, "I'll write you in three weeks."

But he won't write me now. He was to be married. He sent an invitation to come to the reception. Standing in the courtroom, in the county court by the desk, the clerk said, "What is your full name, Sir?" And he said, "Franklin Dewey.." And that is the last word he spoke on this earth. So he was buried two days before he was supposed to be married, and he's with the Lord. And he loves the Lord. He knows different now.

I tell you, dear people, somebody is going to have to stand. If you must stand against everyone else, stand. Don't get obnoxious; don't argue. There's no sense in arguing.

But nevertheless, that's where the New American stands in connection with the Authorized Version.

I just jotted down what these versions, translations, and paraphrases are doing

One, they cause widespread confusion, because everywhere we go people say, What do you think of this; what do you think of that? What do young people think when they hear all of that?

Two, they discourage memorization. Who's going to memorize when each one has a different Bible, a different translation
Three, they obviate the use of a concordance. Where are you going to find a concordance for the Good News for Modern Man and all these others? You aren't going to find one. We're going to have a concordance for every one; you're going to have to have a lot of concordances.
Four, they provide opportunity for perverting the truth. There are all these translations and versions, each one trying to get a little different slant from the others. They must make it different, because if it isn't different why have a new version? It makes a marvelous opportunity for the devil to slip in his perverting influence.

Five, these many translations make teaching of the Bible difficult. And I'm finding that more and more as I go around the country. I mentioned this thing the other night. How could a mathematics professor or instructor teach a certain problem in a class if the class had six or eight different textbooks? How about that? How could you do it?

Six, they elicit profitless argumentation. Because everywhere we go they say this one is more accurate. Which one is more accurate? How do they know? And this is not a reflection against those saying this, because I would have done this a few years ago.

Lest I forget, in one of these questions somebody said, "How can we know that we have the whole truth?" Well, just simply by believing God. And what do I mean by that? John 16:13--"When he the Spirit of Truth is come he will guide you into" how much? Tell me. Tell me, now. "All truth." And if we don't have all truth, the Holy Spirit isn't doing His work. We have to have all truth for Him to lead us into all truth. And there are many, many other passages which teach this.

If we could hear His voice we would have no trouble learning His Word from the Authorized Version. Let me tell you this: You might not be able to answer the arguments, and you won't be [able to]. I can't answer some of them, either. Some of these university professors come along and say, What about this; what about that? They go into areas that I haven't even had time to get into.

As I said to you a couple of minutes ago. You don't need to defend yourself, and you don't need to defend God's Word. Don't defend it; you don't need to defend it; you don't need to apologize for it. Just say, "Well, did this version or this translation come down through the Roman stream? If so, count me out. Whatever you say about Erasmus and Tyndale, that's what I want."

And besides this, we've had the AV for 362 years. It's been tested as no other piece of literature has ever been tested. Word by word; syllable by syllable. And think even until this moment no one has ever found any wrong doctrine in it, and that's the main thing. He that wills to do the will of God shall KNOW the doctrine.

Well, time is up. Let's be people of the Book. It took my mother to heaven; and my dad, my grandfather, my grandmother. It was Moody's Book; it was Livingstone's Book. J.C. Studd gave up his fortune to take this Book to Africa. And I don't feel ashamed to carry it the rest of my journey. It's God's Book.

"Our Father, we thank Thee and praise Thee for Thy Word. Help us to love it, and preach it, and teach it, and tell everybody we can the Good News through thy Word. In Jesus' name. Amen."

The following is taken from:


Logsdon moved to Largo, Florida, in his senior years and died there August 13, 1987. His widow, subsequently moved to Wheaton, Illinois. In the early 1980s an audio cassette of Logsdon's testimony in regard to Bible versions was sent to me by Dr. David Otis Fuller, who passed away in 1988.

I have three witnesses to Logsdon's involvement with the NASV. First, there is Logsdon's own spoken testimony which we have on audio cassette. This has been authenticated by Christians who knew him. Second, we know that Logsdon's widow in Wheaton, Illinois, has authenticated his testimony in regard to the NASV. Third, we have a copy of a letter from Logsdon to Cecil Carter of Prince George, British Columbia, June 9, 1977. I have known Brother Carter for many years. He is a faithful elder in a Brethren assembly and a respected member of his community. He said he was a friend of Lockman and as such was invited to come out to California and help launch the venture.

According to his own testimony and that of his widow, that is precisely what he did. Logsdon was a highly respected Bible teacher and author, and there is certainly no reason why he would have lied about these matters. He had nothing to gain thereby. To the contrary, he was considered a nut by many of his peers for taking a stand against the modern versions.

I have had the pleasure of speaking with Dr. Frank Logsdon before he died, and was able to point out to him that Christ was taken out 52 times and the Lord 38 times and he was shocked. At the time that this was taped he said Christ was out 16 times and the Lord 10 times, well sadly as we have discovered it is much worse.

[Les Garrett, P.O. Box 748, Ulverstone, Tasmania, Australia 7315]

IN HIS (Dr. Frank Logsdon) OWN WORDS:



Sunday, March 28, 2010

Another King after God's own Heart!

There can be no doubt that if David, a man after God's own heart, who was directly selected by God to be king, and "the Spirit of the Lord came upon David from that day forward," so was King James VI of Scotland and I of England, after His heart, and was made to commission a pure venue for God's word!

I don't remember being moved to tears, before, as I was, in reading with such delight, that which was his EXEMPLARY LIFE before God and men! He was a King who united kingdoms, and brought peace to his people, in the union of Scotland, England and Ireland into Great Britain (as he liked to call it)!

There was peace during his reign--both with his subjects and foreign powers. His motto was "Beati Pacifici,"--Blessed are the peacemakers.

He was a devoted husband, dearly in love with his wife, who bore him 9 children, and to whom he wrote beautiful poetry! He composed "one of the most excellent treaties on marriage ever penned."

His extreme consideration extended to women in general, when he penned
his Counterblast to Tobacco, where King James wrote regarding reasons why men should not smoke:

"Moreover, which is a great iniquity, and against all humanity, the husband shall not be ashamed to reduce thereby his delicate wholesome and clean complexioned wife to that extremity, that either she must also corrupt her sweet breath therewith or else resolve to live in a perpetual stinking torment."

I have no doubt he did not mean to be funny, but I had tears in my eyes while laughing at this, too!

He was a concerned father and sovereign King, who wrote 3 books as a guide for government for his oldest son, Henry, whom he expected would be king after him, which got out and were published; he subsequently publishing them himself so his work would not be perverted. Together, they were called Basilicon Doron, which means "The kingly gift!"

"Basilicon Doron is a short treatise, only 153 pages long. It consists of three short volumes, the first of which is "A King's Christian Duetie Towards God." James D'israeli said, "James had formed the most elevated conception of the virtues and duties of a monarch."

"In Basilicon Doron, King James' understanding of Christian discipleship, style and prose are at their best. He skillfully intertwines sacred scripture with godly and Christian advice. The King offers his son this important advice on knowing God:

"Diligently read his word, & earnestly...pray for the right understanding thereof. Search the scriptures saith Christ for they will bear testimony of me. The whole Scriptures saith Paul are profitable to teach, to improve, to correct, and to instruct in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect unto all good works.

"The whole Scripture contayneth but two things: a command and a prohibition. Obey in both... The worship of God is wholy grounded upon the Scripture, quickened by faith."

This a king who bore the burden of a crown at the age of 13 months, and knew full well of its weight! Reformation leader John Knox, who later was persecuted by the Roman Catholic Church, preached the sermon at his coronation. I'd say that alone bode well for this king-to-be! At the tender age of 12 he took on full responsibility of his position!

Where the word of a king is, there is power.

"King James believed in the Divine Right of Kings and the monarch's duty to reign according to God's law and the public good. (James' defense of the divine right of kings is now often scorned and held in contempt; when, however, we examine his Workes, we find that the king's defense of the divine right was a loud, staunch protest against papal interference in kingdoms and the resulting Roman Catholic recusancy and murder of kings.)"

Gee! Whoda thunk?! Popes engaged in murders?! Yeah, TRULY, "True Catholic theology - including FAITH-to-FAITH 'apostolic' succession," in the words of that one (in)famous person a few of us reading this know, murdering popes to have been very common throughout the ages, especially during these the Inquisition years, some 75 popes in succession, one after another, TO TORTURE AND MURDER TRUE CHRISTIANS, TO INCLUDE CHILDREN, FOR AS MUCH AS OWNING A BIBLE, AS IT IS TO THIS VERY DAY, as late as 1992! Habemus Papa, indeed! Habemus another EXECUTIONER!

True Christians today are being harassed in Serbia, where the Roman Catholic Church has engaged the local government to help prohibit preaching the Gospel!

Matthew 7:18 (King James Version)

"A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit,
neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit."
These were words spoken by Jesus!

No tree to be found more corrupt than the one in the Vatican's orchard!!

King James became a very learned man, as it would have been expected of him, mastering many languages. He was a prolific writer, having left a few tomes behind!

This "First Booke" of Basilicon Doron contains excellent Christian advice from the King. He boils it down to--read the scriptures, obey them, and pray.
"Diligently read his word, & earnestly...pray for the right understanding thereof. Search the scriptures saith Christ for they will bear testimony of me. The whole Scriptures saith Paul are profitable to teach, to improve, to correct, and to instruct in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect unto all good works."


"As a Scotsman ruling over the English, the King endured much racism and slander--especially from the once powerful English Lords and Ladies who he replaced with his Scottish countrymen. Unfortunately, many of today's historians look to the writings of hostile sources such as Sir Anthony Weldon and Francis Osborne as accurate descriptions of this great king.
"One of the king's detractors, Sir Anthony Weldon, was knighted by King James but was subsequently dismissed after King James found racist writings by Weldon about the King's native Scotland. Many historians today quote Weldon as if he were a reliable historical source. Examples of Weldon's racism are found in his treatise entitled, "A Perfect Description of the People and Country of Scotland" where he says that the Scots are a "stinking people" who hold "fornication...but a pastime". He also said,

"...their flesh naturally abhors cleanness. Their breath commonly stinks of be chained in marriage with one of them, were to be tied to a dead carcass, and cast into a stinking ditch....I do wonder that...King James should be born in so stinking a town as Edinburgh in lousy Scotland."

"Despite this obvious bias, historians continue to consult the writings of Anthony Weldon who intimated that King James had inordinate affections towards other men--but he did not do this until 25 years after King James was dead and could not defend himself. Today's sodomite/homosexual community is touting the King as one of their own, which he was not. These misinformed sources, virtually without exception, fail to mention that King James and his Queen had nine children together. You can read about the rumors in this article or check out an excellently researched book on the subject by Stephen Coston, Sr. entitled, King James: Unjustly Accused?."

Well, whoda thunk, again!! Yellow journalism flourishing in those days, too! And, according to the manner in which this "National Inquirer" type has been so insidious, and pernicious, perhaps this the type to get a Pulitzer Prize, too, I suppose, if it were today! If Al Gore gets an Academy Award, and Barack Obama a Peace Prize...

The Catholic religion was also an enemy of King James. Papists (as Roman Catholics were then known) attempted to assassinate him a number of times. Most notably, in 1605 Roman Catholic Guy Fawkes attempted to blow up Parliament when the king was to have been present. The conspiracy was discovered and all co-conspirators were executed. This failed attempt is celebrated on November 5 in England each year and is known as Guy Fawkes Night.

"King James was an evangelist of the true gospel, which automatically made him an enemy of Rome. King James strongly delineated the errors of Roman superstition and spurned them, yet he treated papists subjects fairly. Catholic ambassador Nicolo Molin said this of King James:

"He is a Protestant...the King tries to extend his Protestant religion to the whole island. The King is a bitter enemy of our religion. He frequently speaks of it in terms of contempt. He is all the harsher because of this last conspiracy against his life...He understood that the Jesuits had a hand in it."



"In 1607, colonists sent by the Virginia Company arrived in Jamestowne, Virginia. Jamestowne (James' namesake) went on to become the first permanent English settlement on the American mainland making King James VI & I founding monarch of the United States. Jamestowne, established over a decade before the pilgrims landed in Massachusetts, is known today as "the place where America began". On a trip to JAMEStown, VA one can visit the site of "JAMES Forte" on the "JAMES River" in "JAMES City County" located on "JAMES Island".

"King James the VI and I is the founding monarch of the United States. Under his reign, we have the first successful colonies planted on the American mainland--Virginia, Massachusetts, and Nova Scotia (Latin for New Scotland) in SE Canada. The King himself ordered, wrote and authorized the Evangelistic Grant Charter to settle the Colony of Virginia:

"To make habitation...and to deduce a colony of sundry of our people into that part of America, commonly called propagating of Christian religion to such people as yet live in bring a settled and quiet government."

"In January of 1604, the King called the Hampton Court Conference in order to hear of things "pretended to be amiss" in the church. At this conference, Dr. John Reynolds, a Puritan, requested of the King a new translation of the Bible because those that were allowed during the reigns of Henry the VIII and Edward the VI were corrupt."

Indeed they were since these were the translations made by Roman Catholics, using sources from Alexandria and the Latin Vulgate, corrupt to the extreme!


"King James wrote extensively on a variety of subjects. Fortunately, in 1616, the bishop of his chapel compiled many of the king's writings in one volume entitled, "The Workes of the Most High and Mightie Prince, Iames, by the Grace of God, King of Great Britaine, France and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, &c. (in Jacobean typography, the letter "I" can represent "I" or "J". Iames = James) In reading The Workes, we find that although King James was a highly learned scholar and statesman, his writings are forthright, cogent, pungent, lively, interesting, unpretentious, and easy to read. An excellent summary of these fascinating works can be found here.

"In The Workes, one finds that King James was a contender for the faith of Jesus Christ and cared about the spiritual well-being of his kingdom. He even wrote Christian meditations for his people and his court. His writings are still relevant today and are important sources for understading the nature of law and government.

"The sun set on King James the great monarch on March 27, 1625 at Theobolds Park in Herts, England. He was 59 years old when he died and was buried at Westminster Abbey. Unlike many Scottish monarchs, King James died in his bed at peace with his subjects and foreign countries. He also passed Royal power on, intact, to an adult son which was also quite unusual."

MY GOODNESS! There is much, much more should anyone wish to read it! I am here but giving you a condensed version of this a most GODLY MAN!

I confess, I feel a pang in my heart, longing that the likes of him were more common!
I pray when it is my time to go through the "pearly gates," he be one whom I may meet!

All of the above, with a few personal notes, was taken from

An upcoming post will have bios of the more famous of the Committee formed to work on the King James Bible, and how it came about! Look for



Saturday, March 27, 2010

The NIV translation: Could it possibly get any worse? Sadly, the answer is YES!!

I don't know why I did not see this earlier, but, two days ago I found it!
I wasn't looking for it, so, I guess it is that it found me!

I wouldn't think the "behind the scenes" aspect of it could have gotten any more indigestible than the previous post, but it has!

Thus, hold on fast to your seats for this gets to be an even raunchier discovery than "simply" (if such a word could be used!) having had Virginia Mollenkott on the NIV English Editorial board.

Deuteronomy 8:3 (King James Version)

And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live.

Matthew 4:4 (King James Version)

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

The following is from

Dr. Marten Woudstra, Sodomite/Homosexual,

The following is a report by Mr. Michael Penfold of England, UK.
Reprinted with kind permission.

"James White's book The King James Only Controversy (Bethany House Publishers, 1995) includes a question and answer section. One of the questions reads, 'I've been told that there were homosexuals on the NIV translation committee. Is this true?' On pages 245-246 of his book James White gives the following answer. 'No, it is not [true]. But due to the consistent bearing of false witness by many KJV Only advocates, Dr. Kenneth Barker, Executive Director of the NIV Translation Centre, had to write a response to the accusation, which I quote below:

[Dr. Barker writes]: 'It has come to my attention that false rumours are circulating, in both oral and written form, that the NIV is soft on sodomy (that is, homosexual sins). The alleged reason for this is that some NIV translators and editors were homosexuals and lesbians. These charges have no basis in fact. Thus they are simply untrue. And those who make such false charges could be legitimately sued for libel, slander and defamation of character. Here are the facts. It is true that in the earliest stages of translation work on the NIV (in the late 1960s and early 1970s), Virginia Mollenkott was consulted briefly and only in a minor way on matters of English style. At that time she had the reputation of being a committed evangelical Christian with expertise in contemporary English idiom and usage. Nothing was known of her lesbian views. Those did not begin to surface until years later in some of her writings. If we had known in the sixties what became public knowledge only years later, we would not have consulted her at all. But it must be stressed that she did not influence the NIV translators and editors in any of their final decisions.'

"This is a very cleverly worded statement and one which we can allow Virginia Mollenkott to answer herself. In a letter to me [Michael J. Penfold] dated Dec. 18th 1996, in reply to my investigation into her true role on the NIV, Mollenkott wrote the following revealing letter:

"[Virginia Mollenkott writes] 'I worked on the NIV during the entire time it was being translated and reviewed, although I was never free to attend the summer sessions even when I was invited to do so. Elisabeth Elliot and I were the Stylistic Consultants: our job was simply to make sure the translation would communicate clearly to modern American readers, and that the style was as smooth and understandable as possible. I was never removed, sacked, or made redundant from my work on the NIV; if I were, my name would not have appeared on the list sent out by the IBS. It was Dr. Edwin Palmer, who lived near my college, who invited me to work on the NIV. He had heard me speak and respected my integrity and my knowledge. So far as I know, nobody including Dr. Palmer suspected that I was lesbian while I was working on the NIV; it was information I kept private at that time. Dr. Palmer always sent me the batches of translating to review, and I always returned them (with my comments) to him. I have not kept track of which of my suggestions made it into the final version; I am a busy person, and it was a labour love in the scriptures. I do not think anything concerning homosexuality was in any of the batches I reviewed. I do not consider the NIV more gay-friendly than most modern translations, so I do not understand why anybody would want to bash the NIV because a closeted lesbian worked on it. I was not a translator; if I were I would have argued that the word/concept "homosexual" is too anachronistic to be utilised in translating an ancient text. But I was a stylist and nobody asked me. I no longer have any contact with the NIV-CBT, but I am often amused to remember that I frequently refused my $5 an hour stipend because I heard the project was running out of money. At the time I was naive about how many millions of dollars are made by a successful Bible translation! Please tell Kenneth Barker for me that although there is much controversy about homosexuality among Biblical scholars, to my knowledge nobody denies that the Bible condemns lying about other people. He should be ashamed of his attempt to rewrite history.

"'Somewhere in my files is the letter I got thanking me for my work on the NIV when the project was completed. I also have the slipcase version sent out to the whole NIV team in 1978 by Zondervan; and I have the tenth-anniversary edition sent out to the whole team in 1988 by the International Bible Society. Various other editions were also sent out gratis to the translation committee and stylists, but I have received nothing since 1988 that I can remember. Because I am idealistic and sincere, it never occurred to me that anyone would lie about my contributions, so I was not meticulous about keeping records. Thank you for anything you can do to set the record straight. You may utilise this letter to do so, and I'd appreciate you sending me a copy of anything you generate. Sincerely, Virginia Ramey Mollenkott.'

"Why could not Dr. Barker have told the truth in the first place? Taking Mollenkott's words at their face value, the NIV publicity machine has nothing to worry about. Does their anxiety to distance the NIV from homosexual associations reveal something more sinister?

"In the light of the following, I believe it does, as it has now come to light that THE CHAIRMAN OF THE NIV'S OLD TESTAMENT TRANSLATION COMMITTEE, DR. MARTEN H. WOUDSTRA, WAS A HOMOSEXUAL. This is much more serious than Mollenkott's involvement. Here we have one of the leading scholars on the NIV CBT who is a homosexual. Obviously this fact compromises the whole project, especially as this fact was well known by his colleagues for many years. However, only now is this fact coming to the notice of the general public through articles like the one you are reading.

"Dr. Woudstra, who died in the early 1990s, was a long-time friend of Evangelicals Concerned Inc. This organisation was founded in 1976 by New York psychologist, Dr. Ralph Blair, as a nation-wide task force and fellowship for gay and lesbian 'evangelical Christians' and their friends. ECI's address is 311 East 72nd Street, New York, NY 10021. They can be found on the internet at

"It was during a series of research phone calls to Dr. Blair that I first confirmed the fact of Dr. Woudstra's homosexuality. Blair and Dr. Woudstra were friends. Dr. Woudstra had been on the mailing list of Evangelicals Concerned from its inception, and although he had no formal ties with ECI, on one of his many trips to New York he called in and had tea with Dr. Blair. Dr Blair told me that Dr. Woudstra shared the viewpoint of ECI that lifelong 'loving monogamous relationships' between gay men or women were acceptable to God. He believed that there was nothing in the Old Testament (his special area of technical expertise) that corresponded to 'homosexual orientation'. The 'sodomy' of the OT simply involved temple rites and gang rape (Gen 19). Notice the similarity between this view and that of Virginia Mollenkott. Dr. Blair clearly stated to me on the phone on 23rd September 1997 that Dr. Woudstra, a lifelong bachelor, was a homosexual. He intimated that other members of the NIV translation committee were also quietly supportive of ECI, but he was not able to tell me who they were (for obvious reasons). He later called them 'bigger' names than Dr. Woudstra.

"As to Dr. Marten Woudstra theologically, he was once the OT Professor at Calvin Seminary, the college of the Christian Reformed Church (Dutch Calvinistic). Over 70% of this denomination's churches now use the NIV. Dr. Woudstra was considered very 'conservative' within Calvin Seminary. He wrote the Joshua Commentary in the New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Eerdmans) which was also contributed to by such illustrious 'evangelical' names as F.F. Bruce.

"In 1973 the Christian Reformed Church published their official position relative to homosexuality. There is currently discussion, debate and disagreement over the issue of homosexuality within the CRC as in the wider Reformed denominations. For instance, the CRC's sister denomination, the Reformed Church of the Netherlands, took the position in 1979 of actually approving homosexual behaviour within certain bounds. This is a more liberal position than the CRC has ever yet taken. Is it not incredible to think how far the CRC has travelled over the years when one considers some of the former teachers, professors and presidents Calvin Seminary has had, such as Harry Bultema, Herman Hoeksema, H.J. Kuiper, Louis Berkof and William Hendrikson, to name a few.

"In 1970, the CRC Synod appointed a six man committee to study homosexuality. Its report was adopted by the same Synod in 1973. One of the six, Clarence Boomsma, was four times moderator of the CRC and pastor of two CRC churches. In fact Boomsma held the record for the longest pastorate in the CRC; 35 years in the CRC church in Grand Rapids, near the Calvin Seminary.

"I called Clarence Boomsma on the phone in October 1997, and had a long talk about Dr. Woudstra since he had know him for many years and had been his friend. HE TOLD ME THAT DR. WOUDSTRA ASSISTED THEM IN WRITING THE REPORT ON HOMOSEXUALITY. I have a copy of the complete report in my office. It takes a compromised 'middle line' between the Biblical anti-homosexuality absolute, and the Reformed Church of the Netherlands liberal acceptance of homosexual behaviour within certain bounds.

"Let me quote a few lines from the report (Report 42, Art. 53, 1973):

"'In fact, its [homosexuality] origin is so unclear as to be finally a mystery' (page 613)

"'As the cause of homosexuality is uncertain, so is the possibility of correcting it' (page 614)

"'Responsibility and the possibility of personal guilt for the homosexual arises at the point where he must decide what he will do with his sexuality. It is here that the Christian homosexual must ask what God's will is for him in the same way as the Christian heterosexual must ask what he must do in obedience to God with his sex drive' (page 616)

"[Note here the clever but wrong comparison being drawn. For a man to desire sexual relations with a woman is not wrong within the marriage relationship. However, for a man to desire sexual relations with another man is always wrong in all circumstances].

"'From this story [Genesis 19, Sodom & Gomorrah] read as an isolated incident we cannot conclude however that homosexualism is here condemned' (page 617).

"[Note that this report took the position that a person may be a homosexual by birth (homosexualism) due to the fallen and irregular nature of humanity, but should not practice homosexual acts (homosexuality)!]

"'In how far the prohibition of homosexualism [in Lev 18:21 & 20:13] is binding on us is therefore a question that remains' (page 619).

"'It has been suggested that the use of these words [malakoi and arsenokoitai in I Cor 6:9-10] stresses the activity rather than the condition of homosexuality' (page 619)

"[Note this vital belief of Dr. Woudstra. This is the reasoning behind the very clever translation in the NIV in I Cor 6 'homosexual offenders'. Thus the NIV here allows a person to be a homosexual, as long as they don't offend.]

"The report refers constantly to the 'Christian homosexual', and urges that he 'deserves the same acceptance, recognition, compassion and help that is given to any person (page 626). Since the report urges a fully functional place in the church for 'Christian homosexuals' is it any wonder that, according the Boomsma, the CRC has currently (1997) one openly 'celibate' homosexual minister who has 'come out'. All through the report one is struck with the similarities it bears to the views of Virginia Mollenkott. Even the title of her book 'Is The Homosexual My Neighbour' finds an echo on page 631 of the CRC's Homosexuality Committee's 1973 report where paragraph 2 begins 'Love for the homosexual neighbour...'

"The 1973 report advised homosexual ministers to seek pastoral and psychological help to cope with their desires, but stopped short of condoning homosexual practice. Boomsma felt that although the CRC should understand and 'sympathise' (page 630) with the struggle homosexuals faced, for which they may bear minimal responsibility (page 631), it could not make an exception and allow such people to engage in 'homosexual activity' that is wrong. This is still the view of the CRC in general.

"Taking the scriptural principle of two witnesses, I will now add the comments of Clarence Boomsma regarding the sexuality of his friend Dr. Woudstra, the Chairman of the NIV Old Testament Committee. Boomsma made the following statement to me on the phone on 25th October 1997; I wrote it down verbatim: 'It is generally believed among us [Christian Reformed Church and Calvin Seminary] that Dr. Woudstra was a homosexual.'

"I asked Boomsma if Dr. Woudstra was an 'active' homosexual. Although he knew Dr. Woudstra's views on homosexuality very well and holds in his possession a written dissertation by Dr. Woudstra on the subject, he did not feel free to comment on its contents. However, he did tell me about a '[homosexual] incident' in Dr. Woudstra's career in which his professorship was at stake. Woudstra survived and was not fired by the Seminary.

"Boomsma also spoke of Dr. Woudstra's frequent trips to New York 'which like all large cities has a large homosexual population'. On his return Woudstra would tell Boomsma how much he enjoyed the 'plays' in New York. I asked were these 'gay plays'. Boomsma would only say that New York has a large gay culture and is dotted with gay bars, and it was his impression that his friend, Dr. Woudstra, took part in this side of New York's social scene.

"I submit this research as I feel it has a direct bearing on how the NIV treats homosexuality. By removing the word sodomy and sodomite from the Old Testament, the language is changed and new ideas are introduced. By speaking of homosexual 'offenders' in I Corinthians ch. 6, the NIV allows for people to be homosexual as long as they don't 'offend' by being 'active'; and this is the position of the Christian Reformed Church, Calvin Seminary, Evangelicals Concerned, and who knows, quite a few other members of the NIV Translation Committee other than the late Dr. Woudstra. The fact that Leviticus denounces homosexuality in total does not worry them as such ethical condemnations do not apply today! ''A corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit'' (Matthew 7:17)."

Michael Penfold, November 1997 P.O.Box 26, Bicester, Oxon. OX6 8PB, England UK.


| Eternal Life | Hell is Real | The Gospel According to John |
| My Testimony |Why I Read the Authorized KJV Bible|
| The Hymnal | Messianic Prophecies Fulfilled by Jesus Christ |
| Epistle Dedicatory to the Authorized King James of 1611 |

Jesus Christ is the Only Way to God / Internet Bible Church /


Well, whatever else there be, I don't know that I care to delve into it! I am simply dismayed at the careless and casual manner with which the word of our God has been handled, and know my system couldn't take any worse!

Interestingly, just today I viewed a video that gave the background of some who worked on the KJV bible, which was so very uplifting! Amazing were the solid qualifications given! I shall investigate further and place a post about it later on!



Tuesday, March 23, 2010

The COUNTERFEIT translations! (further completed with examples)

The realization that I was just not on the right path didn't come to me until my beloved son's death! Then, and only then, did I seek God's word for what it was to come to mean in my life: THE TRUTH!


I have come upon it having taken a very long and sinuous route. I have been a "church-hopper" most of my adult life, never finding exactly that which I needed, which I could not well identify!

I found that each and every church lacked that which I needed most: THE UNDENIABLE TRUTH! Not a single pastor did I find that had the courage to LIVE THAT WHICH THEY PREACHED. Some even lacked the courage to preach that which they should! It would scare people away!

Finally, I have come to realize that the truth was not to be found in a church, but on the Internet, through which I have been bathed in the realization of God's word! God has placed in my path the most wonderful mentors I could have ever wished for, through whose videos and phone conversations I have come to learn more than I could ever have, anywhere else! These have been Dave and Mary (BereanBeacon) and Mack (random331)

I have come to feel so very "empowered" by the Holy Spirit, Who never fails to provide me with just the right answer with which to do battle! I am in awe of such power, for I, alone, could never do it! It has meant such fulfillment to be able to meet the challenges that come before me!

John 18:35-37 (King James Version)

35 Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief priests have delivered thee unto me: what hast thou done?
36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.
37 Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.


"Intent, in the pursuit of truth, is prior to content, or to the availability of it. The love of truth and the willingness to submit to its demands is the first step."-Ravi Zacharias. To put it simply in the pursuit of truth, intent is prior to content. Our generation is full of skeptics, the university campuses are flooded with students who graduate claiming they can never really know anything. 'Truth is merely relative' they proclaim, but is it? Does this generation really want truth? Martin Luther King Jr. once said; "Take the first step in faith. You don't have to see the whole staircase, just take the first step."

Thus, as Ravi Zacharias says: INTENT IS PRIOR TO CONTENT!!

One HAS to want to hear the truth... in order to accept it! As did the Bereans!

Acts 17:10-12 (King James Version)

10And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews.
11These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
12Therefore many of them believed; also of honourable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few.

"To give truth to him who loves it not is to only give him more multiplied reasons for misinterpretation." - George McDonald

Oh! Can I ever so vouch for this! I have learned to distinguish between the honest questions from the asinine ones that are posed to me on my channels! One is just never finished answering them, always another and another cropping up, these intent on just being a pain rather than painstakingly checking things out! In today's Internet age, this can never be an excuse! One can, and should, verify most anything! No one need believe in what he is told! VERIFY!! VERIFY!! I always do!

I utilized the videos I have in just a couple of posts ago to send to my friends in my RainhadoCanto4 YouTube channel, never ever having imagined the literal uproar I was to face from this one YouTuber whom I had as a friend. It got nasty, but, just as usual, God provided me with immediate responses, responses I had just learned about the day before!! Coincidence? No! The Holy Spirit!

This is why, again, I am posting something about the KJV and the NIV, specifically, both of which were the points of contention with this now ex-friend, for I had to free myself of such a toxic personality!

"Egotism is a deadly disease that affects many preachers, most of whom never discover the cure. A good definition of egotism is 'A hypodermic that God allows a man to administer to himself to deaden the pain of being a fool.' " -- This person having, presumably, written all about the End Times!! I haven't read it, but, as angry as he got, I am willing to bet he uses the NIV throughout!

Well, he was to learn something about the NIV which he did not like! To have it co-written by an AVOWED HOMOSEXUAL since a very early age, with the word "sodomite" EXCLUDED from it, is plenty proof that this person should never have been the "translator" of the PURE word of God!

The following comparisons between the Authorized version of the KJV and the NIV have been gotten from :

Deuteronomy 23:17 There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel.
Deuteronomy 23:17 No Israelite man or woman is to become a shrine prostitute.

1 Kings 14:24 And there were also sodomites in the land: and they did according to all the abominations of the nations which the LORD cast out before the children of Israel.
1 Kings 14:24 There were even male shrine prostitutes in the land; the people engaged in all the detestable practices of the nations the LORD had driven out before the Israelites.

1 Kings 15:12 And he took away the sodomites out of the land, and removed all the idols that his fathers had made.
1 Kings 15:12 He expelled the male shrine prostitutes from the land and got rid of all the idols his fathers had made.

1 Kings 22:46 And the remnant of the sodomites, which remained in the days of his father Asa, he took out of the land.
1 Kings 22:46 He rid the land of the rest of the male shrine prostitutes who remained there even after the reign of his father Asa.

2 Kings 23:7 And he brake down the houses of the sodomites, that were by the house of the LORD, where the women wove hangings for the grove.
2 Kings 23:7 He also tore down the quarters of the male shrine prostitutes, which were in the temple of the LORD and where women did weaving for Asherah.

Neither is Pastor Billy Crone going to discard the NIV in the NFBC's pews: he has a boatload of videos he's made and sent out the world over in which he quotes from the NIV!

As says Webmaster William Odom:

And the really Bad, Evil, Wrong and Apostate happening of today.
Is this NEW WORD Of GOD. I am speaking of these New Bible Versions.

I mean really, just look at this list of Bibles,
AMP Amplified Version
ASV American Standard Version
CEV Contemporary English Version
KJ21 21st Century King James Version
NAB New American Bible (RC)
NASB New American Standard Bible
NCV New Century Version
NIV New International Version
NIVI New International Version Inclusive
NKJV New King James Version
NLT New Living Translation (The Book)
NRSV New Revised Standard Version
RSV Revised Standard Version
RV Revised Version
TEV Today's English Version
(Good News For Modern Man)

Please can we all just stick to one Bible.
The Holy Bible we all know ,
love and can Trust.
The 1611 King James Bible.

....Webmaster William Odom

Every one of which is COPYRIGHTED!

Psalm 12:6-7 (King James Version)

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

John 8:46-48 (King James Version)

46Which of you convinceth me of sin? And if I say the truth, why do ye not believe me?
47He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.

I pray you listen, INTENTLY, to what Dr. Ruckman says! Here he shows how the Psalm 12:6-7 works out to be the truth! I pray any who HONESTLY mean to find the truth, do search for it with an open heart and in prayer!

Well, I had already blocked this my ex-friend who has inspired this post when it was that I received the following from Dave to extend to him:

"Well, you are in total agreement with the Muslims, who use the same corrupt translations and commentaries to attack the KJV1611, so the next time you meet a Muslim give him a handshake and hug.

"A Muslim and The Bible Translations -"

PLEASE, do copy and paste the above link and view it!
It has a wealth of information!

It is sad, indeed, that we Christians do not do our homework before we take the word of others, to include pastors, who insist on having the NIV in their so-called "Bible" churches' pews, IN SPITE OF KNOWING THE TRUTH!! WHAT A SHAME!

But, have no doubt, they will have to answer for it soon enough!

May God bless one and all!

John 8:30-32 (King James Version)

30As he spake these words, many believed on him.
31Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed;
32And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

John 14:6 (King James Version)
6Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Proverbs 4:11-13 (King James Version)

11I have taught thee in the way of wisdom; I have led thee in right paths.
12When thou goest, thy steps shall not be straitened; and when thou runnest, thou shalt not stumble.
13Take fast hold of instruction; let her not go: keep her; for she is thy life.