The Best or the Perfect
thou shalt have a perfect and just weight, a perfect and just measure
shalt thou have
regards to "the
Book of all books", the Authorized Bible (the KJB) ... it is now a very popular
and common occurrence to hear folk refer to it as "the
version, or "the most preferred", or "the most reliable", or "the most
accurate bible on today's market", and so on.
Yes, you would've no doubt heard this sort of tripe many a times and maybe been part of it
yourself! However, we will see from this article that these
statements fall short off the mark and are nothing more than a cop-out
or convenient brush-off at the end of the day. We will also
discover that God Himself goes beyond these statements and testifies
to the fact that "his work (what He
inspires, reveals and keeps)
perfect (Deut. 32:4)"! Meaning, when all is said and done ... the
AB is either the word of
or it is not. Or, God is either true or He is not.
Meaning, He does not let anyone off the hook, as there is simply no
middle ground of compromise found here! Howabout that!?
Okay, now let's get more reinforcement on these facts by looking further into the word (coz, you wont get it anywhere else - thatz for sure!):
Cut by the word
For a start, by immersing ourselves in the scripture we find these three (destructive) things the word of God is likened to:
1. A fire (Jer. 23:29). Meaning, it burns out the dross and additives of man.
2. A hammer (Jer. 23:29). Meaning, it smashes to pieces false doctrine.
3. A sword (Eph. 6:17). Meaning, it divides the chaff from the wheat, truth from error, the self-appointed from the appointed (Jer. 23:27), and those who want the true facts from those who look for alibis.
In recent weeks (after I first wrote this) I have received letters from correspondents requesting I not write in defence of the Holy Bible (the AB) as it was dividing the Body. In these letters I have been accused of using false doctrine. In response, three questions I have put to these dear folk in order for them to substantiate their claims. Here are these three questions in their categorized form:
1. Can you please tell me what false doctrine have I been propagating?
2. How do you know I have been propagating false doctrine? In other words ... from what source do you get your revelational claim to compare with what I have been apparently saying? Or, what is your findings based on?
3. If the Authorized Bible is not the word of God then where can I find the word of God? How can I get a hold of a copy in the language I speak? I really need to know? Tah!
Yes, there is an apparent division today ... of those who simply believe the book they hold in their hand is the word of God, and those who don't!
the record, as
I have already shared in the
Book, I never liked the AB once-upon-a-time myself. Yes,
too used to ignorantly promote the modern versions, discredit the AB,
did not like the idea of having to change bibles one bit, if I happened
to be wrong. Therefore, I am fully aware of all the arguments
of the fence. I have also researched great quantities of material
from both the so-called 'King James Only-ists' camp, as well as the
Only-ists' camp, to the scaredy-cat who would rather conveniently take
on the fence. However, as always,
I will endeavour
facts in the clearest, and plainest way I can. So please read
of what I say and check it out yourself, before you accuse me of
other than trying to glorify the word, bring honour to our Lord's
name, and not compromise the gospel. Also, please don't write
tackling me on my presentation unless you can answer all three
above? Just remember (as they are very simple questions), I
therefore expect simple answers. Wouldn't you say this is fair
How long halt ye between two opinions?
Furthermore, in this treatise we will examine the following in order to ascertain truth and destroy false arguments set against God's precious word at the same time:
The convenient teaching, "God has given us a reasonably good bible, but not perfect!" The fable taught: "Although all bibles are man-made they are based on the inspired original scriptures, where only the Holy Spirit can sort out the muddle, revealing the true intended meaning." Making the Holy Ghost our final authority of course.
How we can't rely on the scriptures as a source of revelation if they "can't be trusted!" Why the modern versions smokescreen Jesus being the Rock while supporting, or hinting, Peter being the Rock.
A little closer to home in Christendom, there is a similar school of thought which says, "the Holy Bible (that's the so-called Authorized Version, the King James) is the best translation but not a perfect translation." Or, howabout ... "I read from the Authorized myself, because it is the most accurate of versions!" Oh boy!
With this type of reasoning, the subtle slurs continue ... "The scriptures cannot be the pure word of God can they?" Or, "A perfect translation cannot be found!" Herez another ... "There are too many inconsistencies with scripture!" ... as the brush-off continues. What they are saying in actual effect, is the word of God has not been preserved and kept, contradicting a whole host of scriptures (Ps. 12: 6-7; 119:128, 138, 152, Ps. Pr. 30:5) rendering scripture unreliable. Therefore, justifiably concluding the author God, as unreliable.
In other words, just as you either believe Jesus is who He says He is, or you don't (making Him God's anointed or a fraud); the Holy Bible can only be what is says it is ... the record of the incorruptible word, or a hoax. It can only be one or the other. And guess what? Can God lie? The incorruptible word is either one and the same as scripture, or God's simply messed up.
Now the amazing thing about these translation neutralists is they usually get upset (for some reason) when someone promotes the AB as the Divine record. "Call it a good translation, but don't call it God's Book!" is the notion. However, they somehow give little, or no attention, to someone who would promote the NIV or the NASB, etc., even if it's in a commercialized sense ($$$!!!)! Isn't this amazing? Why is this so? Why the hostile reaction to the King Jimmy, counteracting the gross silence of all the other perverted versions, which are supposed to be far worse? What absolute irony! Again, hypocrisy would be a better word. Especially when some of these dingalings admit outwardly to all the errors in the modern versions along side their more superior and better King Jammie, even though it still does not quite get everything right. Yeah, right!!
have sat in the
audience of various translation neutralists (some anointed and bringing
a good message, by the way) who
have committed a good portion of their message, or used their sermon
the way through, at getting in the odd dig when they can, in
down the AB. Where there has always been an absence of exposing
versions, which blatantly undermine the Divinity of our Saviour.
In other words, they would rather spend their time in undermining the
AB while paying no attention to those undermining the deity of Christ
through their watered down versions.
In fact, I have found this type of biased textual positioning a very common, regular occurrence. Funny? Uncanny? Strange? Yes! In plainer English ... how can they have the audacity to continually criticize the "most perfect" book, and the most proven and fruitful, yet ignore the more popularized, corrupted versions? Ladies and Gentlemen ... these things ought not so to be! What strange times we are living in.
... when the AB was
as genuine, authentic, and preached with passion and conviction; there
was genuine revivals and
biblical awakenings. In contrast though, is it by accident that
when the apostate
were first being introduced, the Great Apostasy started coming into
effect? If you are going to
the gospel down, and bring Christ down, what would you expect?
simply, one is the product of the other!
It is written
Here'za sensible question ... "Whatta'bout the word becoming flesh?"
Many would not have a problem here, pointing out Jesus is the Word (with a capital W), would they?
Then whatta'bout the believer receiving the engrafted word?
How can they do this? While avoiding the abstract that is! How can they receive the engrafted word through bypassing the esoteric or the mystical?
Read Luke 4:4 (mutilated in many modern versions) ... "And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God."
The above scripture not only points out the importance of living by every word of God, but also reinforces the authority in the written word, the scripture. How do we know man shall live by every word of God? Answer: Because it is written! How does one become a good Berean? Answer: By searching the scriptures daily to confirm the spoken word spoken by the apostles. Therefore, just as the Holy Ghost backs up the truth, so the scriptures back up the word:
Acts 17:11 ... "in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so."
So what was the Bereans final authority? Dumb de dumb dumb ... the word or the scriptures? According to the above they are one and the same. Furthermore, we can clearly see here that the Bereans used the scriptures (the written word) to confirm the spoken word. You see, while they are one and the same, it is the written word which is the final back-stop in the end. Where the buck stops, to put it in other words. Therefore, it does not take rocket science to see what our final authority iz ... the written word! And where is it found?
even plain logic would say, if it is not
written, then how do we know
what (or where) God's word is (remember - this was my question at the
beginning)? Some would
the answer would lie in what Jesus said. True, but
how do we know that Jesus
said it? There is no other way than simply knowing and believing
... it is
what if the argument was true, "How do we know what is written to be fully
true?" James 1:17 puts it this way:
"Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning."
Is the word of God a good gift? Yes! Ps. 119:39 ... "for thy judgments are good"!
Is the word of God a perfect gift? Yes! Ps. 19:7. "The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple".
Is the word from above? Yes! Is. 55:11. "So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it".
Is the word of God without variableness, neither shadow of turning? Yes! 2 Tim. 2:19. "Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure (making wise the simple)".
How do we know?
If "ALL scripture is inspired by God", according to 1st Timothy, then how can an individual get hold of these copies today, hold them in his hand and say with confidence, "Thus saith the Lord!" "For it is written!" "This is God's word", without a shadow of a doubt! Would it not still be scattered around the world in various places, as in libraries, archives and museums? Or hidden away as fragmented manuscripts, or as bits and pieces of misplaced, or lost, ancient scripts? Or found by comparing and compiling all the imperfect bible versions together, until, by process of elimination, the right verses start matching each other. And where the interpretations and translators, and textual experts, would somehow find total agreement together?
This type of reasoning (or wishful thinking) is filled with all types of flaws, as one would have to depend on the Holy Spirit, as the final backup, in sorting out which scripts were inspired, and which could not be used in the Canon. However, the reason the Holy Ghost could not be used as the final decider in sound doctrine as opposed to fake, is because this doctrine by itself, would contradict the scriptures in the first place. This would give divine jurisdiction as above the word and over everything else as authority. Even above the name of Jesus (Ps. 138:2) ... the meaning changed in the modern versions by the way!
Scripture is clear that the Spirit of truth was sent to back-up the Word (the Lord Jesus Christ - Jn. 15:26,16:13-14, 1 Jn. 5:7 - omitted in the modern versions), not the other way around. The Spirit is subservient to the word, in other words. If it wasn't (hypothetically speaking), this would leave us with only one other choice in order to decide the Canon of scripture in sequence and complete order, for us, the receiver. This 'one and only' other choice could be none other than relying on the knowledge and the wisdom of the scholar.
However, this would also be ruled out by scripture, as scripture is very plain about not putting your trust in man: "Cursed be the man that trusteth in man". This trust is nothing to do with everyday domestic life on earth, by the way. How would a believer be able to travel on a plane, buy a product, or make an investment (or have open heart surgery performed), if there was not a trust element made in people doing their job competently?
What we are dealing with here is spiritual things! The things which belong to God! When Salvation is at stake! And man, irrespective of his IQ or credentials, or how intellectually and academically qualified he may be, can never claim to know or have authority by leaning on his own understanding (Pr. 3:5). In fact, his education can often be to his demise if it has not been dealt with at the cross. Paul counted his religious background and education not only loss, but dung, in order to win Christ (Php. 3: 3-8). Divine knowledge and wisdom is what is important, which is only from above (making wise the simple). This is why Jesus said, "be not ye called Rabbi"! Or Master! Or Father! (Or Pastor)?
"For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?"
If all else fails with these "trained" blokes (no matter how plausible and godly these wise guys come across), when you challenge them on their unscriptural claims and they run out of ammunition, they will unscripturally threaten you with libel or legal action, through the worlds courts. It's happened to little ole me, and it will probably happen to you. Proves which side of the fence they are really on. The ratbags!! (:<( )
Getting back to the issue ... how do we know it is written?
If the final say in all things pertaining to life and faith could not be the scholar (as this would be trusting in the arm of flesh) and could not be the Holy Ghost (due to the biblical function of the Spirit witnessing to the word - not the word to the Spirit), this would only leave the scriptures to speak for themselves. However, do and can the scriptures speak? After all, aren't they just mere words penned on fabric? Not according to scripture! They are the living, God breathed oracles of God:
Acts 7:38. "This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us".
Does the scripture speak? That's the words penned on fabric, by the way! Does the scripture speak for itself?:
"For what saith the
Rom. 9:17; 10:11; 1 Tim. 5:18. "For the scripture saith"!
Gal. 3:8. "And the scripture, foreseeing that God would ... (wow, what authority they have - they even speak if they know the future!!)"
Gal. 3:22. "But the scripture hath concluded ... (it appears to finish with them! What complete, absolute authority!!)"
Gal. 4:30. "Nevertheless what saith the scripture?"
Js. 4:5. "Do ye think that the scripture saith in vain ... ? (well, do you?)"
1 Pet. 2:6. "Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture ... (it is all there folks - sign, sealed, and delivered!!)"
Mere words are man's words, as "the pen of the scribes are in vain". The Lord's word is life and eternal. His word is always spoken first, then recorded as final authority. God is never afraid or never shies off backing up what He says.
1/1. Here is the spoken word:
Ex. 24:3. "And Moses came and told the people all the words of the LORD, and all the judgments: and all the people answered with one voice, and said, All the words which the LORD hath said will we do."
The Lord never leaves out anything (or loses it), but records His complete word (and keeps it preserved).
2. Here is the written word this time (the scriptures):
Ex. 24:4. "And Moses wrote all the words of the LORD"
2/1. Here is the spoken word again:
Josh. 3:9. "And Joshua said unto the children of Israel, Come hither, and hear the words of the LORD your God."
2. Followed by the record ... the written word again:
Josh. 24:26. "And Joshua wrote these words in the book of the law of God, and took a great stone, and set it up there under an oak, that was by the sanctuary of the LORD."
3/1. As a third witness ... the spoken word again:
Jer. 36:4. "Then Jeremiah called Baruch the son of Neriah: and Baruch wrote from the mouth of Jeremiah all the words of the LORD, which he had spoken unto him, upon a roll of a book."
2. Once more the written word:
Jer. 36:6. "Therefore go thou, and read in the roll, which thou hast written from my mouth, the words of the LORD"
Repeating the order (scripturally):
God speaks (the spoken word).
Then His word is recorded (the written word).
Compiled in a book (the scriptures - the written word).
To be read (the spoken word).
Jer. 36:8. "And Baruch the son of Neriah did according to all that Jeremiah the prophet commanded him, reading in the book, the words of the LORD in the LORD'S house."
What do we hear from in order to obey?:
Jer. 36:11. "When Michaiah the son of Gemariah, the son of Shaphan, had heard out of the book all the words of the LORD"
The scriptures point to, speak of, and endorse a book:
Jer. 30:2. "Thus speaketh the LORD God of Israel, saying, Write thee all the words that I have spoken unto thee in a book."
It appears to be God's will for his word's to be contained (1 Pet. 2:6) in a book!
1 Kings 11:41. "And the rest of the acts of Solomon, and all that he did, and his wisdom, are they not written in the book of the acts of Solomon?"
If they are, then they must carry weight. Divine weight. And be adhered to in obedience.
1 Kings 15:23. The rest of all the acts ... are they not written in the book of the chronicles (1 Kings 14:19, 14:29, 15:7, 15:31, 16:5, 16:14, 16:20, 16:27, 22:39, 22:45, 1:18, 8:23, 10:34, 12:19, 13:8, 13:12, 14:6, 14:15, 14:18 14:28, 15:6, 15:11, 15:15, 15:21, 15:26, 15:31, 15:36, 16:19, 20:20, 21:17, 21:25, 23:28, 24:5) ...?
The book is the Lord's authority. It can't be anything else:
1 Chr. 29:29. "Now the acts of David the king, first and last, behold, they are written in the book of Samuel the seer"
The acts are recorded in the book! Same goes for the NT ... the book of Acts (of the apostles record).
Scripture must be proving a point:
2 Chr. 12:15. "Now the acts of ... are they not written in the book of ... (9:29, 16:11, 17:9, 20:34, 24:27, 25:4, 25:26, 27:7, 28:26, 32:32, 33:18)"?
The Lord places importance in looking to the book:
Neh. 8:8. "So they read in the book in the law of God distinctly (that's a good Berean!), and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading."
To get sense and understanding from the Lord!
The Lord places importance on searching record in the book and finding answers:
Ezra 4:15. "That search may be made in the book of the records of thy fathers: so shalt thou find in the book of the records (seek and ye shall find!)"
True, there were other books written in history in regards to God and Israel, and mentioned in scripture. There's the book of Nathan the prophet, of Gad the seer, Iddo the seer, the book of Jasher, and the prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite. Also, there may have been more. However, they were not included in the canon of scripture as they are no longer kept, even though they may have been accurate records and accounts. Scripture gives the reason: Ecc. 12: 12-13 ... "my son, be admonished: of making many books there is no end; and much study is a weariness of the flesh." Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: "Fear God, and keep his commandments (where do we find 'em?): for this is the whole duty of man."
In other words ... the compiled volume must have a beginning and a conclusion ... because research and study (as I have found) can have no end. Anything outside of the volume of the book cannot be used as final authority as it would not be classified as inspired and a part of His word. Therefore, what the Lord has incorporated into the canon must be adequate and complete for receiving Divine wisdom, revelation, instruction, and the things pertaining to salvation.
The Lord puts His seal on the book at the end of the book, as well as at the beginning (De. 4:2), and in the middle (Pr. 30:6) ... the confirmation of three witnesses:
Rev. 22: 18-19. "For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life (perverted in the modern versions), and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book."
Even if books were written about Jesus' ministry while on earth (as there has been countless since), the world would not be able to contain them according to John 21:25. This is why we are to neither "give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do (1 Tim. 1:4)". Anything else other than the Divine record would only be extra biblical commentary and not be profitable for "doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness".
Conclusion: The whole purpose of God's book, is to fear the Lord and obey His commandments. Therefore, it is our responsibility to ascertain what is God's book and what is not, in knowing His purpose and ways. And in order to obey Him:
Is. 34:16. "Seek ye out of the book of the LORD, and read".
can we, if we
don't know where it
How do we know, and how can we "study, to shew thyself approved unto
a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of
truth"; unless we seek out and read God's record?
Because the book is hid from those who trust in their own education. It is obscured from those who trust in their own theology (Is. 29:12). It is veiled from the intellectually clever. The brilliant minds who believe they are God ordained to correct scripture, can never be successful in carving up God's word, as the written word can never be destroyed (Jer. 36:32). "Thou shalt keep them (every word that is), O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever."
Therefore, the word of God is open to those who are deaf and revealed to those who are blind (Is. 29:18). Has our deafness and blindness been revealed to us, both personally and individually? Or are we too clever? Because, if it hasn't ... then we can't be hearing or seeing!
How translation neutralists love to quote 1 Corinthians 2:9:
"Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him."
Like, we have to wait to get to heaven to get revelation. Because like all Alexandrians, they leave out the rest of the text. Let's look at the next verse (verse 10) keeping everything within context. Here it is:
"But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit"!
Moreover, how do we know this? The answer lies in quoting the other missing portion from the beginning of verse 9 this time:
"But as it is written"!
Marvelous!! Tremendous!! The scriptures do speak for themselves! Revelation is for the here and now; for the blind and deaf, and those who would not count themselves worthy.
This is also interesting: The beginning of the New Testament begins with the opening of the book (Matt 1:1). Jesus commenced His ministry by opening the book (Luke. 4:17). The NT continually reinforces the importance and authority of the book (Mk. 12:26, Lk. 3:4, 4:20, 20:42, Acts 1:20, 7:42, Gal. 3:10, Phil. 4:3, Heb. 9:19, 10:7, Rev. 3:5, 5: 2-5, 9, 13:8, 17:8, 20:12,15, 22:19).
What authority! What reliability! What attainability! What wealth of wisdom and knowledge! We can abuse it, or we can use it. If a person is only keen on the Lord being the authority, not himself (nor his brains), then he will just 'use it'. As the saying goes ... "if you use it, you won't lose it!"
If God is a God of order, without contradiction and confusion, would He not have put all the volume of the books (mentioned above) into one book we now call the Holy Bible? The issue is not what God did with the penned originals. What if they were destroyed by the elements or man (Jer. chapters 36, 45 & 51) ? Of course they can be kept by God as He promised! And kept when translated from one language to another. Like the OT Hebrew being re-recorded in parts of the NT and translated over to Greek.
You don't have to have a heap of letters in front of your name to know the original penned autographs are no longer attainable due to the erosion of time. Jesus, Paul, and the apostles never read from the originals, but from copies of copies of copies of the originals. They were not even thinking about the originals. Today this is a red herring ... a side issue made into a mountain. Building a Strawman in other words. A subtle way in destroying a believer's foundation in the scriptures so he would have to depend on a qualified human being to give him the original intended meaning. The real issue is whether the Lord has fulfilled His promise in keeping and preserving His word as the divine record. The issue is whether the Lord kept His word as promised ... that "all the promises of God in him are yea, and in him Amen"!
many times of
late have I heard the
"I believe the KJV is the best translation today, but has
Or, "the KJ Bible is the most accurate and is therefore why I endorse
It's quite ironic that most people (not all) who make statements like
are the first to criticize the Holy Bible. By doing so they
the Lord never kept His promise by looking after His word as a
and kept record, which can be accessed by, and give revelation to, a
imbecile and nincompoop like myself. What a tremendous Lord we
A book for today
To believe emphatically the Holy Bible is God's inspired, breathed, inerrant word, and God's final back-up in all matters of life and faith, shining above the modern leavened versions, is only something I came to over a period of time. As I have already said, it has nothing to do with being taught it from man, over a time span (brainwashed, in other words). Nor is it anything to do with me having it "all sown up" intellectually wise, presenting a neatly, presented, bundled commodity. But because the Lord says He comes in the volume of the book. For there it is written of Him. " To do thy will, O God". Both Testaments bearing witness to this fact ... Ps. 40:7 and Heb. 10:7.
I was not even subjected to all the so-called 'KJV Only' teaching at the time. Nor was I looking for it. Nor did I realize "King James" was only a hundred and something years nickname for the Holy Bible (making it sound like just one of many of the umpteen versions which were coming on the religious market at the time). I didn't want to get rid of my tattered NASB for one moment. I had no choice! It came from believing the Lord would not contradict Himself in regards to the Divinity of Jesus, where the issues of life and death, and salvation hung. Jesus was the issue! His Name was at stake! The debate over what was the original Greek, or Hebrew, or what this manuscript or that commentary said, was a side issue. So was the name King James, or "whoever" he was (he was the King who authorized its public use at the time dummy)! If the Lord was true, then so would His record be in regards to His Book. Therefore, His Book would prove itself, and nothing else. Scripture is very clear the only source on earth where Jesus can be found is through His written record ... "Lo, I come: in the volume of the book it is written of me"! The scriptures "are they which testify of me"!
F'instance! Have you ever been taught (by man) how to get the correct interpretation of who the rock in scripture is? Was it Peter (as the Catholics say) or was it Jesus (as the Protestants say)? Man can correctly analyse Peter is petros in Greek - a stone. Whereas the translation in Greek for the rock is petra, which is a slab or bedrock ... the foundation who the church would be built on, meaning Jesus (1 Cor. 3:11)!
Good news! If you go to the Holy Bible you will get your answer direct, without mumbo jumbo, and without being educated by flesh and blood. The word of God is direct and sharper than any two edged sword. It cuts away the dross much more efficiently than the methods of man:
John 1:42. "And he brought him to Jesus. And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, A stone." (Notice how "a" is in a capital letter!)
Therefore, Peter could not be the rock the church was going to be built on as the RCC claims. Hence, the Holy Bible is speaking for itself! The only way to believe it of course, is to believe it is the word of God. Period!
Now what do the Modern Versions say in regards to the end of John 1:42 ... "which is by interpretation, A stone"?:
Here it is ... "which means Peter"!
This changes things entirely. Therefore, once again you have to go 'beyond' the scriptures, to the scholar, to get the "original" meaning. It is either a stone or Peter! One must be right, and the other wrong. The question is ... what did God intend it to say in the first place? What did He intend it to mean? What was the Spirit saying? Remembering, the Spirit only agrees with the word. Not the other way around. In other words, you cannot use the Holy Ghost as the final authority as mentioned earlier.
The Good News Bible goes even further into error in John 1:42 ... "a rock"! Now Catholics may have a case after all!
The Living Bible ... "the rock"!? This is Jesus, not Peter! Now Catholics do have a case! Unless, of course, the translators got it wrong.
About three years ago a prominent, world renowned preacher was in town. I took my 14 year old son to hear him (actually, I helped another brother run these meetings). He brought an excellent message. He was preaching from the NASB, which he promoted in a big (commercial) way on his web site (which has since been removed). He began sharing about Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, in the burning fiery furnace (Dan. 3: 23-25). When he came to verse 25 in the NASB, about the fourth man in the furnace, it read (as most of the modern versions do):
"and the appearance of the fourth is like a son of the gods!" Notice "a" not "the"! A son not the Son (capital "s")!
This forth man was either Jesus or it was not Jesus. The modern versions say it wasn't, just like they say, or hint it in Matthew 27:54.
The Holy Bible says in Dan. 3:25. "He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God." Bingo!!
Again witnessing to Jesus' Divinity, the New Testament says in the Holy Bible in Matthew 27:54, "Now when the centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jesus, saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared greatly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God." Bingo!!
Now check out a modern version. Again and again it will undermine Jesus' Divinity, or the hope of the centurion, by changing the verse or questioning it's authenticity by a side note.
In these two witnesses from each Testament, the Lord was either being exalted and glorified, or He was not. Both renderings can't be right as they are poles apart. Which rendering is correct ... the Holy Bible's or the modern versions?
The preacher at the meeting went onto expound in great depth, in a very pain staking intellectual way, going into the Hebrew and what this Rabbi quoted, and that Rabbi said; this commentary quoted and that commentary said; in order to get to the bottom of the true apparent meaning, and get his point across. His conclusion, in a big round about way (in agreement with the AB, to our relief) ... the Son of God.
My 14 year old son gently leaned over to me and said quietly in my ear, "Dad, if only he had of used the true English Version, it would have made it a lot easier for everyone, as he would not have had to beat around the bush!" Clear, plain speech, out of the mouth of Babes eh! The "things which are not, to bring to nought things that are". The reason why scripture says the Lord will not use the wise and noble ... "Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men"!
Just to finish here: Is Jesus the Word or a god? The NWT says He is (Jn. 1:1). But of course the JWs use the version that states he is a god. This is from Origen's root line by the way. Origen believed Jesus was a created being, and the modern versions come from the same source through Wescott and Hort, who advocated "universal salvation", evolution, and Mariology.
Is Jesus the only begotten Son? Or is He the only begotten God? The NASB says He is the only begotten God in John 1:18 (backing the same belief as the JWs). The NIV omits begotten in places putting Jesus on a par with the saints ... a son of God. The NIV also says in 1 Timothy 3:16.
"He appeared in a body ... "
The AB says:
"And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh ... "
The AB is straight to the point that Jesus is God!
Isaiah 9:3 in the NIV:
"You have enlarged the nation and increased their joy"
The AB says:
"Thou hast multiplied the nation, and not increased the joy" ...
NASB: "... Judah is also unruly against God, Even against the Holy one who is faithful."
The AB: " ... but Judah yet ruleth with God, and is faithful with the saints."
Which one is correct ... the NASB or the AB? Bearing in mind they are both saying complete opposites. One version must be lying, coz they both can't be telling the truth as truth is always consistent and does not contradict itself.
These few verses are just a drop in the bucket (and there are many, many other verses changed or omitted completely) as pages and pages could be written. Please consider and ponder over what you have just read ... Is Jesus 'a son of the gods'? Is He the begotten God? Is He a saviour (like another prophet, just another mouth piece, or another good teacher), or is He the Saviour?
Again, is Peter the rock, or is Jesus the rock? Deuteronomy 32:4 (the same verse we opened with) sums it all up:
Rock, his work is perfect!
Feel free to down load, or make copies of any article on The Radical Pilgrim, on the request that its contents are not changed, or sold; along with a link to its Home Page.