Tuesday, January 25, 2011

Traitors: Heady, Highminded - Gail Riplinger

Traitors, Heady, Highminded: D.A. Waite Denies KJB Inspiration
Traitors, Heady, Highminded: D.A. Waite Denies KJB Inspiration
Click to enlarge

“TRAITORS, HEADY, HIGHMINDED
…from such turn away” (2 Tim. 3:4) by G.A. Riplinger

D.A. WAITE denies the inspiration of our Holy Bible, makes his Dean Burgon Society members sign a document stating that they will never refer to our English Holy Bible as 'inspired.' In his most recent 'talk,' he states that our King James Bible should not be called "pure," nor should it be called "perfect." He promotes a new book which denies “Perfection of Translation.” He writes to others, chiding good men who believe in inspiration, specifically Dr.Mickey Carter, Dr. Jeff Fugate, and Gail Riplinger. The Bible warns of men who have "crept in unawares." Judas was able to betray our Saviour, because he was one of the disciples.
WAS he motivated to deny our Holy Bible’s inspiration by his association with the revision of the KJB, called The Easy Reading KJB, which his son, who created The Defined King James Bible, worked on? Do the definitions in his son’s Defined King James Bible sometimes match the heresy and error in new versions? Were these errors caused, in part, by his son’s use of secularized modern English Dictionaries and the corrupt lexicons of Thayer, Brown, Driver, and Briggs? This e-book on CD-ROM answers all of these questions and more.
D.A. WAITE's denial of the inspiration of our King James Bible no doubt stems from his years of using corrupt lexicons, and particularly from his blind adherence to the Trinitarian Bible Society's slightly tainted Scrivener Greek New Testament and Ginsburg Old Testament, which he sells (See the N.T. preface and the O.T. preface a few pages from the end). When viewed through such specked glasses, it is no wonder his Holy Bible looks less than inspired.
Waite’s ‘Bible For Today’ newsletter (BFT Update) has begun an attack on those who believe their Holy Bible is inspired. Because a scriptural dissertation, proving our Bible is not inspired, cannot be written, he has resorted to childish harassment and malicious personal accusations. Because Hazardous Materials so soundly proved that, in the minutae, their Scrivener/Ginsburg Greek and Hebrew editions, are faulty, he has scrambled rabidly, grasping any straw to keep people from reading the new book.
The "falling away" is in full swing.

by Gail Riplinger

http://www.hacalumni.com/pdfs/Waite.pdf 

Tuesday, December 28, 2010

Logic Must Prove the King James Bible

Logic Must Prove the King James Bible

(Loyal Pastor of First Baptist Church of Ham
mond, Indiana for over 42 years)



Matthew 24:35, "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away."
I'm not attacking the Catholic church tonight. I'm not a Catholic. Maybe you noticed the sign out in front of our church that says, "First Baptist." I never think I'm being unkind if I have the same thing on the inside that we have on the outside. I want you to listen carefully. I'm going to state some facts about the Catholic church. They are facts; they are not railing accusations. They are facts, and any Catholic who is honest will tell you that what I'm going to say is true about the Catholic church. It is not a matter of my making false accusations; it's a matter of record.
I am also going to say some things about the Charismatics tonight. I'm more Catholic than I am charismatic. I've got more respect for the pope than I do the P.T.L. Club, and I mean that.  However, my respect for the pope is not really soaring!  Don't get mad now.  I want to help you.  I'm simply saying that I'm going to give you some facts.  I'm going to give some facts about the Charismatics, and if a charismatic is honest, he will agree with the facts I'm going to give. There will be no accusations, no gossip and no slander; I will just give facts that any charismatic would give.
Also, I'm going to say some things tonight about Protestantism. In fact, I may not miss anybody tonight. Everything I say will be factual. I will be the kind of thing with which even the people about whom I speak will agree. So I want you to listen. With the battle raging as it is about the King James Bible, I think that any pastor ought to alert his people.
When I was a boy, from the time I remember-- I remember back when I was two and three years of age-- until I went into the paratroopers in World War II when I was 18, my mother would read to me for 30 minutes every night from the Bible. Then she would hold it up and say, "This is the Word of God!" She did not say, "The manuscripts from which we got this are the Word of God." My mom didn't even know what a manuscript was. She just knew she had a Book that was the Word of God. That's all she knew. So, she said, "This is the Word of God." I would look at it, and I would have to say three times, "Mama, the Bible is the Word of God. The Bible is the Word of God. The Bible is the Word of God."
I have Mama's Bible-- the same one she read-- in my office. I've had it there for years. I don't know how old it is, but I suspect it is 55 or 60 years old. It is the same Bible she used to hold up. I was thumbing through it the other day. On the inside, it says on the title page, "King James Bible." That's what it says. You know it worked. It's amazing how well Mama did before she found out that it wasn't the Word of God.
I've been going to Baptist churches for 51 years. Every pastor I've ever had preached from the King James Bible. He always said to the crowd, "Open your Bibles and let's hear what the Lord says." These pastors were not unfortunate enough to have sat at the feet of those with lower education-- which calls itself "higher education."
It is amazing how well this nation did when we didn't know how ignorant we were. (Are you listening?) This is my fifth pastorate. I've seen miracles in my pastorates. I've preached over 41,000 times, and I've never yet preached a sermon that wasn't preached from the King James Bible. I really don't know what I've missed. To be quite frank with you, I've seen fellows who preach from other Bibles, and I somehow get the idea THEY are missing something. Dr. Evans, I've never seen a fellow really whoop it up about any other Bible. I've never heard a fellow say, "Blessed be God, let's look in the Book. Let's look in the Douay Version."
Did you ever go to mass and have the priest get up and say, "Hallelujah for the Word of God!" Don't get mad at me! I'm telling the truth. If you don't believe it, go next Sunday and see. He will usually use that prayer book and not a Bible.
Follow me. I've taught you about the Textus Receptus, Westcott and Hort, those manuscripts from which came the Douay Version that the Catholics use and the American Standard Version, which is highly overrated. The Westcott and Hort manuscripts came from the Vatican manuscripts that were hidden in the Vatican for years-- from whence came the Catholic Bible.
The Textus Receptus manuscripts are those from which we have gotten the King James, and they have been the evangelistic manuscripts, if you please. I won't go into that. I'm a Textus Receptus man. I haven't got a bit of patience with Westcott and Hort. Not a bit! In fact, I really have a hard time not being bitter against my Greek professors in college who taught me from Westcott and Hort Greek manuscripts. It upsets me greatly.
This is the message. The question at hand is this: Where is the final authority for church building and for Christian living? There are four different final authorities in American Christendom. I'm not talking about Mormonism and those who have other books. I'm talking about Christendom. There are four basic final authorities.
 

1. SOME VIEW THE CHURCH AS THE FINAL AUTHORITY.
This is fact. Any honest Catholic priest will tell you that the Catholic position on the final authority is that the church has final authority. If you want to go a little farther than that, if the pope speaks ex cathedra, he is the final authority. Ask any Catholic or read any Catholic doctrine, and both will tell you that. I'm not trying to be critical. I'm telling you the truth. If a Catholic priest were standing here, he'd tell you the same thing.
Our Catholic friends believe that the church is the final authority. If the pope speaks ex cathedra, that's God speaking. I'm not being critical; I'm being factual. There is a second final authority.
 

2. SOME VIEW EXPERIENCE AS THE FINAL AUTHORITY.
In other words, "It happened to me, so it's true. I was there when it happened, and I ought to know. I had an experience. I saw Jesus. I saw a vision. I have a word of knowledge." This is the charismatic position. Ask them. They will say, "I have a message from God, so this is God talking. God gave me a message." (The foolish thing about that is, if that is true, you had better start writing more Bible.)
When this happens, people believe the final authority comes from experience. God has supposedly given someone a message. Someone talks in tongues, and somebody else interprets what God said. However, the truth is, all that God has ever said to man is right here in this Book. This is it. This is God's complete revelation to man!
By the way, that is the basis of the whole thing: What is the final authority? There has to be some place, ladies and gentlemen, where we can say, "This is it, and what this says is the final word." So, our Catholic friends say the church is the final authority. Our charismatic friends go beyond the Bible and say human experience is the final authority.
 

3. SOME VIEW HUMAN REASONING AS THE FINAL AUTHORITY.
That's what liberal people say. "Every man is searching for the truth, and every man gets a portion of it; so, nobody is wrong, and nobody is right. We are all searching, so it doesn't seem to me that God would make a Hell; therefore, there is no Hell. It doesn't make sense to me that God would let anybody go to Hell, so God wouldn't let anybody go to Hell. It doesn't make sense to me that God would regenerate anybody, so there is no such thing as regeneration." That's what most of our Protestant friends believe, and all the humanist crowd believes it. That's what the liberal believes. That's what 95% of all the people in the seminaries in America believe. That's what 95% of all the faculty and students in religious colleges in America believe-- the final authority is the human mind or human reasoning.
The average Protestant church in Hammond believes that. "I don't see how there could be a place with golden streets. If I don't see how there could be, there isn't one." That is idolatry in its most pagan form. "My mind is my God. What I can't conceive of, I won't believe. What I can't understand, I won't accept. So, I'll trim the Bible down to fit what I can believe. I just can't believe there is a God of wrath, so there is no God of wrath."
All right, we have the first three answers to the question, "What is the final authority?" The church is, according to our Catholic friends. Human experience is, according to our charismatic friends. Human reasoning is, according to our liberal and Protestant friends.
 

4. SOME VIEW THE BIBLE AS THE FINAL AUTHORITY.
Every church in America in Christendom who had services this morning had a preacher who stood up and preached what he believed. He either preached that he believed that the final authority is the church, or that the final authority is human experience, or that the final authority is human reasoning, or that the final authority is the Bible.
The only authority that we as independent Baptists believe is the Bible. There was a day when I could say Baptists, but the truth is, most of the Southern Baptist colleges and seminaries are staffed by professors who don't believe that the Bible is the final authority. I may as well say it all. There's not a single Southern Baptist college or seminary to which I'd recommend anybody to go any more. None! I went to a Southern Baptist college and seminary. Thirty-five years ago, I heard a professor in my seminary say that he didn't believe the resurrection. He said that the resurrection was a bunch of blindfolded spirits in a vacuum. He said it. I was there. Think what they are saying now!
Consequently, independent Baptists believe that the only final authority for practice and doctrine of the Christian and the church is the Bible. I cannot speak ex cathedra. I cannot speak and say, "This is truth." All I can say is, "The Bible is truth." You see, I can't say, "I'm going to speak now, and this is God speaking through me." I don't much like people to pray, "Dear God, put the words in the mouth of our preacher." I think you can say, "Lead our preacher"; but if God puts the words in my mouth, we'd have more Bible.
See, I have no power in this church but the power of influence. Sometimes I wish I had more. Sometimes I wish I had power to make you ladies dress like I think you ought to dress. Sometimes I wish I had the power to make you adults have rules about your teenagers that I think you ought to have, but all I can do is influence you. I have no power. Officially, I have one vote in this church; that's all. I have no vote at deacon's meeting and one vote as a member of this church. The only power I have is my vote and the power of influence.
It was a good day for me when I decided that I was going to make my final authority the Word of God. I was taught in Southern Baptist schools to believe that the Southern Baptist program was it. One day I decided to just read my Bible and reorganize my church. I did. I decided to get the book of Acts and read it word for word to see what the New Testament church was all about. I cast aside all the tradition I had been taught, all the jargon I had been taught, all the catechisms to which I had been taught to swear allegiance, and I decided I was going to try to find out what kind of church the New Testament church really was.
Dr. Curtis Hutson gave the best compliment to First Baptist Church of Hammond that has ever been given in the SWORD OF THE LORD. He said that he was here for Pastors' School. He told how many conversions and baptisms we had the Sunday before. Then he said, "If God were writing the book of Acts today, He would write about the First Baptist Church of Hammond." That's the ultimate compliment.
You see, I decided that I was going to get my Bible down and decide what I thought the New Testament church was scripturally; then, that's what I was going to have in my church. I believe with all of my soul that the First Baptist Church of Hammond is as near as is humanly possible to being what the church in Jerusalem was 2,000 years ago. Where did I get that? I got it from the Bible. Do you know why we are scattered abroad winning souls all over this area? It's because the church in Jerusalem was "scattered abroad," and they "went every where preaching the word." (Acts 8:4) Do you know why we go house to house, knocking on doors? We do it because it says in Acts 5:42, "And daily in the temple, and in every house, they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ." We do it because that's what they did in the Bible.
Somebody says, "Well, we have different kinds of churches. You have a soul-winning church, and we have a deeper-life church." In the first place, it's a lie. There's no life as deep as a soul-winning life. However, they say, "We just have different kinds of churches." No, we don't. WE have a church, and you don't! Brother, the Bible is our charter to exist. If the Bible is not your final authority in practice and doctrine, then you are not a church. You might have the word "church" on the outside, but you are not a church.
Since the Word of God is our authority,-- hear me carefully-- we simply must have it. That's a profound statement. We've got to have it! I mean, shall we have an authority we can't find? Would God tell us His Word is the final authority and leave us without His Word? We must have a copy or we may as well join our Catholic friends and let the church be the basis for truth. If we have no Word of God, and if the Bible is not the Word of God, then we have only three other alternatives. We've got to say the final authority will be the church, or human experience, or human reasoning.
I'm saying, if we have no Bible that is the Word of God, then we have no way to go to the Book for the final authority. If one word in this Bible is not true, we don't know which one it is; so, once again, the mind of man or experience or the church is going to have to decide which one is true and which one is not true. If we are going to believe that the Word of God is the final authority, we've got to have a copy of it.
Let me ask you a question. Would God call a man to preach His Word and not give it to him? God calls a man and says, "I'm calling you. Spend you life preaching the Gospel. Preach the Word!" So, wouldn't He give him a copy of His Word?
I've said this so often, and I'll say it again and again. I would step down from behind this pulpit tonight and never walk in it again to preach if I didn't have the Word of God in my hand. I would not waste your time nor take your money unless I could say to you, "You have the Word of God. I have it, and it is preached here." I'm an honest man. This is what I've said before, and I'll say it again. If I did not believe that the Book I hold in my hand tonight was God's Word, I'd find out where it was. I'd go there and get a copy, print some copies for you and give you a copy. I mean, brother, if we don't have the Word of God in our hands, we have no place to go except to the human mind, human experience or the collective human mind which is the church. God would not reach down and give a divine call to a man and say, "I call you to preach My Word, but there is no copy of it any more."
I don't like a statement of faith that says, "We believe the Bible is the Word of God in the original manuscripts." In the first place, there are no original manuscripts anywhere in the world tonight. None! If the Word of God was only the original manuscripts, there is no Word of God available for mankind today. If I did not believe the Bible I hold in my hand was the Word of God, and I believed there were some manuscripts, I'd get on an airplane, fly to where they were, break in the building if I had to, get the original manuscripts, make copies of them and give you a copy. I'm not going to stand here as an imposter preaching a Book that is not the Word of God and giving you instructions on how to live from a Book that is not the Word of God! I'm not going to do it! I'm just not going to do it!
Would God tell His people to live by the Word and not give it to them? Let me say this. Of all the nations on the face of this earth, America is the center of world evangelization. America is the only hope for the world to have the Gospel. Do you think that God would not give His Word to America? The countries of this world look to America for missionaries. They look to America for preachers. Every great movement of God in the world today was founded by a ministry or movement that was propelled by American evangelization. The mission movement was founded basically, by Hudson Taylor. Now, wait a minute. Of all the nations on the face of this earth, it just seems to me that God would give the key nation the Word of God.
Check the history of Christianity in America, and see how well we've done without all these extra Bibles. Check the history of the church in America from 1950 back, before every little preacher had the misfortune to sit at the feet of a college theologian. Do you know what? We won't have people who are just theologians teaching Bible at Hyles-Anderson College. Every teacher of Bible at Hyles-Anderson College is a preacher. We won't hire a theologian. No way! You say, "Are you opposed to theologians?" No, I'm just leery and wary of them. I am wary of those who dare to sit in judgment on the Bible. Brother, it seems to me if there is any place in the world where you ought to have your faith in the Bible stabilized, it's a Christian college or Christian seminary. Wherever the truth is, that's where you get your faith shaken.
That's one reason why some things bother me. It bothers me when people say, "We believe that the Bible, in the original manuscripts, is the Word of God." If that's true, we have no Bible. Did you hear what I said? We have no Bible. One day they did, but WE don't.
Dr. Ed Hindson of Liberty Baptist College said concerning 1st John 5:7, "Thus, according to John's account here, 'there are three that bear record in heaven.'  The rest of verse 7 and the first nine words of verse 8 are not in the original and are not to be considered as part of the Word of God."  I'd like to ask Mr. Hindson a question: "When did you see the original?"  How does he know they are not in the original?  Look at me now.  How does he know?  The only way an honest man can say they are not in the original manuscripts is to have seen them, and they are not available.  Now, he could say they are not in some of the manuscripts that are considered the most ancient.  I personally think he was saying that they are not in the Westcott and Hort.  I can't prove that.
Before I get too rough on him, look at your Scofield Bible in 1st John 5:7, the verse Dr. Hindson quoted. Folks, I have no axes to grind.  I have nobody's feelings to hurt.  I've just got to have the Word of God; that's all.  I've got to have it! The Bible says the Word of God is what we are supposed to preach.  The Bible says, "Preach the Word."
Now, look at your Scofield Bible—1st John 5:7, "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one." Now look at that little "o" there in front of verse 7. Look in the center reference, and find the "o". Mr. Scofield says, "It is generally agreed that v. 7 has no real authority, and has been inserted."
I'd like to ask Mr. Scofield when he saw the original.  He never saw it.  Somebody who thought he was intellectual told that to somebody who thought he was intellectual who told somebody who thought he was intellectual.  Listen, we don't want the intellectual community to think of us as being nincompoops, but I'd rather have a nincompoop with a revelation from God than to have an intellectual without a revelation from God.
We've got to have a final authority!  If this Book is not true, then the church or human reasoning or human experience is the final authority.  Listen!  There are only two-- God and man.  If God is not the final authority, man is the final authority.  If we have no final authority in a book, then man has got to discern what God says; if man discerns what God says, then man becomes the final authority instead of God.  So, Mr. Scofield had problems the day he came to this verse.  How does he know?  Pray tell me, what in the world he could have ever seen that would make him say that?  He didn't see anything.  He sat in somebody's Bible class and some Dr. Mess-'em-Up or Dr. McFuddle or Dr. Broad Stomach stood up and said, "Well, in the original manuscript..." which sounds scholarly; but nobody in our generation has seen them.  Dr. So-and-So hasn't seen them, the professor in the seminary hasn't seen them and the college Bible professor hasn't seen them.  Either what I hold in my hand is the Word of God, or we don't have any Word of God.  I don't believe God would leave us without His Word.  I don't believe that.  I JUST DON'T BELIEVE IT!
We need a Bible that we can understand and a Bible that is God's Word. It looks like anybody would agree that if God gives us the command to preach the Word, He would give us the Word to preach. That's logical. If God wants to say to a nation, "You are the custodian of world evangelization for a generation or two or three or four," it looks like God would give that nation the Word of God.
What is it? I would say it ought to be the one that has worked. Which one has worked? The one I hold in my hand right now. I has worked! It will work!
I'd like to say the same to our friends in the charismatic movement. You say, "Why do you stress it?" I stress it because the charismatic crowd is trying to teach our crowd every day that they've got something we don't have. Tonight, before I walked into this pulpit, one of our fine ladies came and told me of one of our men who has been swept aside. One of our good faithful men has been swept aside by the charismatic crowd. As pastor of this church, it is my job to warn you of wolves who are dressed like sheep.
If we don't have a Bible that's the Word of God, we've got to go to human reasoning. If God says to a church, "Build your church on My Word," God's got to give us His Word. Listen, God wouldn't be God is He told us to do something we couldn't do. Everything that God has ever commanded us to do, He has given us the wherewithal to obey that commandment. God has never commanded man to do anything that was unreasonable or impossible for man to do. When God calls a man to preach and says, "Preach the Word," God would have to give him a Word to preach. If God says to a church, "Build your church on My Word," to be God, He's got to give that church the Word of God.
Our Methodists seminaries say, "It's not verbally inspired." There was a day when John Wesley started that movement. He said the Bible was inspired, and they had the fire back in those days!
The Presbyterian seminaries say, "The Bible is not the Word of God," but John Calvin believed it, and they had the fire! John Knox and others believed it!
I'm saying that we've either go to admit this is the Word of God or we have to flee to the church, or to human reasoning or human experience as being the final authority. If there is no Word of God today, we have no other recourse. If God has not given us His Word, we have to decide what is God's Word. That's human reasoning.
By the way, basing a doctrine on human experience is idolatry. Basing a doctrine on the church being the final authority is idolatry. The church is the idol. Letting the pope speak ex cathedra and saying that it is God Who is speaking is idolatry. You're making him as God.
Human reasoning says that what we can reason, we'll believe. That's idolatry. So the truth is, you've got one choice of two. Either this Bible is the Word of God or we have no other place to turn but to idolatry. Did you hear me? Either this is the Word of God, or there is no place to turn but idolatry. Our three choices are human reasoning, human experience or the church, and they are each a form of idolatry. They are all three the same because making the church the final authority is done so by human reasoning. That means Catholicism is humanism, and the charismatic movement is humanism. It is man saying, "I was there. I felt it. God spoke, and here's what He said." That's human reasoning. It's humanism. So either this is the Word of God, or there is nothing left but humanism.
I'll tell you this. To whatever degree this Book is not believed, that society has the exact proportionate belief in humanism because there are only two choices available: God and man. If God hasn't told us what to do, man has got to tell us what to do. When a country does not believe this Book, it is totally humanistic. When a country leans away from this Book, it leans toward humanism. When a country is divided about this Book, it is divided about humanism.
I just don't believe that God would say, "Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature," (Mark 16:15) and not give us His Word to take with us. I just don't believe that God would say, "Train up a child in the way he should go," (Proverbs 22:6) and write the words of God "upon the door posts of thine house," (Deuteronomy 11:20) and "teach them your children," (Deuteronomy 11:19) unless there were a Word of God.
I don't think God would say, "Start a Bible college. Send out young men to proclaim the truth," unless God had given us the truth. I just don't believe that God would send young men to the mission fields without the Word of God. I don't think God would send Rick Martin halfway around the world to proclaim His Word without giving him a copy of it. I don't think God would send young men out from this church to build soul-winning churches without giving them His Word.
With all of my soul, I believe that the final authority for faith and practice for a church and for a life is the Word of God. I do not believe that I'm the final authority; nor the bishops or the cardinals-- nor are the Cubs or the White Sox!
Not long ago, then there was no pope, a fellow said, "I think Ernie Banks ought to be the next pope." "Why?" "Well, the Cardinals have had it long enough. It's time the Cubs got to have a pope!"
I'm not the final authority. "El papa" is not the final authority. He can wave his magic wand all he wants to. He can rustle his skirts all over the country. I'm simply saying, the Bible is the final authority, not man. I don't care what he is called, it is not man!
You say, "You're criticizing the pope." Whatever I've said about pope, I've said about me. FIRST I said, I'M NOT the final authority. THEN I said, "HE'S NOT the final authority." So our people have as much right to get mad as you Catholics do. Mr. Oral Roberts is not the final authority. The Bible is the final authority. I just don't believe God would leave us down here without a copy of His Word.
How can we know which is the real Bible? Well, you can scratch off the Revised Standard Version because the liberals put that one together. You can scratch off any Bible that came from Wescott and Hort because that comes from the Vatican manuscripts. I'd suggest you find the one that has worked.

Find the one that widows have read; find the one over which they've wept and prayed for their children. Find the one that dear mothers in the history of our country have read, loved and taught. Find the one for which faithful evangelists have given their lives and for which missionaries have circled the globe. Find the one that has caused people to leave home, family and friends to carry its message. Find it! Find the one Dwight Moody used. Find out which one Billy Sunday used. Find the one the great soul-winning churches in America use.

Find the one tested by time. Find the one that Adolph Hitler said he would destroy, but couldn't! Find the one about which Thomas Paine spoke when he said, "Within one generation, the Bible will not be printed anymore." However, as soon as he died, the same printing press on which he printed that garbage was used to print more Bibles. Find the one they can't destroy. Find the one that has stood the test of time. Find the one that liberals have tried to destroy, Hitlers have tried to burn, Mussolinis have tried to outlaw and Khrushchevs and Stalins have tried to burn! Find it! The Bible says, "My words shall not pass away." (Matthew 24:35) Find the one that has stood the test of time!
Don't find one that has a hippie on the outside of it and bunch of hippie jargon on the inside of it. Find the one that has stood the test of time! You say, "I don't understand those 'thees' and 'thous.'" "Thee" means "you." "Thou" means "you." "I" means "me." "We" means "us." You know it, and you know you know it! Not only that, but the Holy Spirit of God lives inside of you, and He's the author of this Book. If you can't understand a part of it, ask Him to teach you, and He will do it. He wrote it! We've got to have a Bible! We have got to have a Bible!
You say, "Boy, that's right. I'll tell you what, I believe it from cover to cover." Try OPENING the covers. "Boy, I believe every word of it." QUOTE a few of them! If we had Scripture quoting tonight, we've got Sunday school teachers here who know only, "Jesus wept," and if somebody said that verse before your turn came, you'd say, "He got mine." Read it! Memorize it! Study it! Love it! Teach it! Preach it! Live in it! It's the Word of God! You can depend on it.
Every jot and every tittle shall come to pass. Not one comma and not one punctuation mark shall pass away. Matthew 5:18, "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." Matthew 24:35, "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away." I checked those words, "pass away," a little bit; a synonym for that phrase would be, "My word will always be alive." There never will be a day when somebody says, "Beloved, we are gathered here in the presence of 'Gawd' and these witnesses to remember the word of 'Gawd' that died." We never will! It will always be there. It always will.
I can't believe that God would give us a Great Commission and tell us to teach it, preach it and spread it, and not give us the truth to teach and preach and spread. 
[added comment: the following is sang to the tune of The Old-Time Religion]
It was good for our fathers;
It was good for our fathers;
It was good for our fathers;
And it's good enough for me;
It was good for my mama;
It was good for my mama;
It was good for my mama;
And it's good enough for me.
Let us pray.

More Life Changing Sermons by Dr. Jack Hyles:

Sunday, December 26, 2010

EASTER, OR PASSOVER? - Jack A. Moorman


EASTER, OR PASSOVER?
By Jack A. Moorman

Conies, Brass & Easter, Answers to twenty-one "problem" passages in the King James, Authorized Version. pp. 15-17, By Jack A. Moorman


THE CRITIC SAYS: "A most unfortunate translation! In each of the 28 other New Testament passages the Greek ‘pascha’ is translated `Passover.' The same is true of the Hebrew pesach, it is always `Passover.' Why this one exception in Acts 12:4? Further, the word `Easter' was not used in the Christian sense until much later." • "And because he saw it pleased the Jews, he proceeded further to take Peter also. (Then were the days of unleavened bread. And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quarternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people" (Acts 12:3,4). 

ANSWER: You may be surprised to know that the word "passover" did not even exist before William Tyndale coined it for his Version of 1526-31. His was also the first English Bible to use "Easter." Previously the Hebrew and Greek were left untranslated. For example, in Wycliffe's Bible, which was based on the Latin, we find pask or paske.
An article which appeared in The Trinitarian Bible Society Quarterly Record states:
"When Tyndale applied his talents to the translation of the New Testament from Greek into English, he was not satisfied with the use of a completely foreign word, and decided to take into account the fact that the season of the passover was known generally to English people as `Easter' ... Tyndale has ester or easter fourteen times, ester-lambe eleven times, esterfest once, and paschall lambe three times." "When he began his translation of the Pentateuch, he was again faced with the problem in Exodus 12:11 and twenty- one other places, and no doubt recognizing that easter in this context would be an anachronism he coined a new word, passover and used it consistently in all twenty-two places. It is, therefore, to Tyndale that our language is indebted for this meaningful and appropriate word" (date of article not known).
The English version after Tyndale followed his example in the Old Testament and increasingly replaced "Easter" with "Passover" in the New Testament. When we come to the Authorized Version there remained but one instance of the word "Easter"—Acts 12:4. It is precisely in this one passage that "Easter" must be used, and the translation "Passover" would have conflicted with the immediate context. In their rush to accuse the Authorized Version of error many have not taken the time to consider what the passage actually says: "(Then were the days of unleavened bread.)...intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people." 

To begin with, the Passover occurred before the feast of unleavened bread, not after
 
• "And in the fourteenth day of the first month is the passover of the Lord. And in the fifteenth day of this month is the feast of unleavened bread–seven days shall unleavened bread be eaten" (Num. 28:16,17). See also Mark 14:12; 1 Cor. 5:7,8, etc.
Herod put Peter in prison during the days of unleavened bread, and therefore after the Passover. The argument that the translation "Passover" should have been used as it is intended to refer to the entire period, is ruled out by the inclusion of "these were the days of unleavened bread." Scripture does not use the word "Passover" to refer to the entire period. 

Peloubet's Bible Dictionary says: "Strictly speaking the Passover only applied to the Paschal supper, and the feast of unleavened bread followed" (p. 486). 

Therefore, as the Passover had already been observed, and the days of unleavened bread were in progress, and yet Herod was still waiting for "after pascha," we can only conclude that the word must be taken in a broader sense. History in fact does indicate a pagan and Christian interchange with the word through the translation "Easter."
A.W. Watts writes: "The Latin and Greek word for Easter is pascha, which is simply a form of Hebrew word for passover–pesach" (Easter–Its Story and Meaning, p. 36).
Thus, the word came to be associated with both Christian and pagan observance. And it was to this latter that Herod was referring. 

In an excellent study, from which some of the above has been drawn, Raymond Blanton explains (in quotations from Alexander Hislop) that Easter is Isthar, the queen of heaven and goddess of spring. Blanton says, "The `pascha' that Herod was waiting for was evidently the celebration of the death and resurrection of Tammuz, the Sun god. The sunrise services today are a continuation of that pagan worship."
"...the great annual festival in commemoration of the death and resurrection of Tammuz, which was celebrated by alternate weeping and rejoicing and which, in many countries, was considerably later that the Christian festival, being observed in Palestine and Assyria in June. To conciliate the Pagans to nominal Christianity, Rome, pursing its usual policy, took measures to get the Christian and Pagan festival amalgamated, and, by complicated but skillful adjustment of the calendar, it was found no difficult matter, in general, to get Paganism and Christianity to shake hands" (Alexander Hislop, The Two Babylons, p. 105).
Continuing his quotation from Hislop, Blanton shows: "The term Easter is of pagan origin. It bears its Chaldean origin on its very forehead. Easter is nothing else than Astarte, one of the titles of Beltis, the queen of heaven" (p. 103). The connection between the word Easter and Tammuz is thus: "The wife of Tammuz was Isthar (Astarte), who is called Mother Nature, who being refreshed by spring rains brings life. When Tammuz died, she followed him into the underworld or realm of Eresh-Kigal, queen of the dead. In her deep grief Astarte persuaded Eresh-Kigal to allow her messenger to sprinkle Astarte and Tammuz with the water of life. By this sprinkling they had power to return in the light of the sun for six months. After which the same cycle must be repeated. 

"Thus, the goddess of spring or the dawn goddess is responsible for the resurrection of Tammuz. Easter is a joint worship of the two. This Satanic myth is interwoven with the sun's cycle of vernal equinox (dawn) and autumn equanox (sunset)." (from The Flaming Torch, Jan-Mar. 1987) 

Dake’s Bible adds, "Easter . . . is derived from Ishtar, one of the Babylonian titles of an idol goddess, the Queen of Heaven. The Saxon goddess Eastre is the same as the Astarte, the Syrian Venus, called Ashtoreth in the Old Testamnet. It was the worship of this woman by Israel that was such an abomination to God" (1 Sam. 7:3; 1 Ki. 11:5, 33; 2 Ki. 23:13; Jer. 7:18; 44:18) (p. 137 N.T.) 

This was the "pascha" that Herod was waiting for before releasing Peter. As an Edomite, he and his people had a long association with Babylon and her mystery religion (cf. Gen. 14:1-4). 


Conies, Brass & Easter by Jack A. Moorman
is available from:
Fundamental Evangelistic Association
P.O. Box 6278
Los Osos, California 93412
(805) 528-3534 : Fax (805) 528-4971

Tuesday, December 14, 2010

This Old Book - R.B. Ouellette

This Old Book

I heard the old time preachers speak without one reference to the Greek,
"This precious Book within my hand is God's own word on which I stand."

And then the scholars came along and said the preacher had it wrong:
"Conflations here, rescissions there, and scribal errors everywhere."
A book "essentially correct," but not in every last respect.
"A'fairly certain' word they say, "To light our path and guide our way."

Then in despair I bowed my head. "We have no word of God," I said.
"If some of this old Book is wrong, pray tell, what else does not belong?"
Will still more manuscripts be found to make us go another round?
Correcting, changing, taking out; creating questions, fear, and doubt?

Must more discoveries come to light before we finally get it right?
Will precious doctrines fade away because of what the scholars say?
How many errors must we purge because of what the scholars urge?
How many versions must we make? How many changes can we take?

How will we ever know we're through - that we possess a scripture true?
If man must find God's word, my friend, when will the changes ever end?

Then to the Book again I fled to find out what my Father said.
"Forever settled...never fade" - This promise God the Spirit made.
"A thousand generations hence" - that seems a pretty strong defense.

A "perfect Book?" Then it must be, man can't improve what God gave me.
We have a Book completely true, instructing us in all we do.
Preserved by God, not found by men, inscribed by God the Spirit's pen.

If God or scholars you must choose, be sure the "experts" always lose.
Don't give to them a second look; Just keep believing this old Book.


Preached by R.B. Ouellette at Woodland Baptist Church, Winston-Salem, NC on May 1, 2007.

Wednesday, December 1, 2010

The Answer Book by Samuel C. Gipp



"A man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend." - Proverbs 27:17

The Answer Book by Dr. Samuel C. Gipp
The Answer Book by Samuel C. Gipp

Dr. Samuel C. Gipp, author of An Understandable History of the Bible, answers 62 common questions about the King James Bible.

The reason for this book is two-fold. First, it was written to answer the raft of questions used by critics
of the King James Bible to attack and destroy the faith of anyone who really BELIEVES that the Bible
is infallible. The style is such that its arguments can be understood and advanced by one who has NOT
had the benefit (or curse) of a Bible college education. This brings us to the second reason for its existence.
Some time ago a leader of a large fundamental movement made the statement, "What really fires me is...
these guys with a High School education debating textual criticism."

That is the second purpose of this book. For years those faithful folk who have not been to college have
been bullied around for their lack of formal education by an arm load of D.D.'s who seek to keep them
"in the dark." Many of these people have done more serious study of the Bible issue in the privacy of
their homes than the honorarily doctored critics have in college classrooms. Yet the common man is
often intimidated by the "trick" questions asked by his "educated" foe. The critic feels invincible in his
armor of education.

This book is written so that the ordinary Christian will be properly equipped to defend him or herself
from the fiery darts of their pompous foes. In fact, they may even punch a few holes in their armor.

» Click here to order this book and many others online.



Questions

  1. Shouldn't We Be Loyal to the Originals?
  2. Isn't "Easter" a Mistranslation?
  3. Was King James a Homosexual?
  4. What About the Archaic Words?
  5. Hasn't the King James Bible Been Revised?
  6. Don't the Best Manuscripts Support the New Versions?
  7. Don't We Need Perfect Bibles in Other Languages?
  8. Where Do Bible Manuscripts Come From?
  9. What is the LXX?
  10. Was the King James Bible Good Enough for Paul?
  11. What About the Italicized Words?
  12. Aren't There Great Men Who Use Other Versions?
  13. Where Was the Bible Before 1611?
  14. Did the A.V. Translators Claim to be Inspired?
  15. Aren't Today's Scholars Better Equipped to Translate?
  16. How Did King James Authorize His Translation?
  17. Who Was the King James Bible Translated For?
  18. Is the King James Bible the Word of God Because I Got Saved Through It?
  19. Are King James Bible Believers Church Splitters?
  20. Aren't All King James Bible Believers Name Callers?
  21. Do King James Bible Believers Worship the Bible?
  22. Aren't King James Bible Believers a Cult?
  23. Is it Heresy to Believe the King James Bible is Perfect?
  24. Who Was Dean Burgon?
  25. What is Different Between a 'TR Man' and 'KJV Man?'
  26. Will a Bible Education Help Clear Up the Issue?
  27. Do People Who Use Other Versions Hate God?
  28. Is the King James Bible Inspired or Preserved?
  29. Can a Translation be Inspired?
  30. Can a Translation be as Good as the Originals?
  31. Can't We Find the Fundamentals in Other Bibles?
  32. How Can So Many People be Wrong About the KJV?
  33. Is it Wrong to Call the Holy Spirit "it?"
  34. Didn't the KJV Contain the Apocrypha at First?
  35. Can Someone Get Saved Using Another Version?
  36. What About the Testimony of the Dead Sea Scrolls?
  37. What About All the "Thees" and "Thous?"
  38. Is the New King James Version an Improvement?
  39. Is the New Scofield Bible a King James Bible?
  40. Is the New International Version Trustworthy?
  41. Do New Manuscripts Support the King James Bible?
  42. Aren't Modem Translations Easier to Understand?
  43. Is the Devil Behind the Confusion of Bible Versions?
  44. Who Were Wescott and Hort?
  45. Can a Person of Greek Ethnic Origin Understand the Greek New Testament and English Bible Better?
  46. What is a Ruckmanite?
  47. What About the Nuggets Found Only in the Greek?
  48. Wasn't the Textus Receptus Named After 1611?
  49. Were the KJV Translators Baby Sprinklers?
  50. If Believing the King James Bible is Contrary to the Stand My Alma Mater Takes What Should I Do?
  51. What is Progressive Revelation?
  52. Is Believing the KJV the Historic Position?
  53. Should We Make An Issue Out of Bible Translations?
  54. Shouldn't We Respect the Education of the Many Drs. in the Issue of the Bible?
  55. Shouldn't We Emphasize the Love of Jesus?
  56. What About When My Lexicon and Bible Contradict?
  57. Was Erasmus a Good Roman Catholic?
  58. How Many Mistakes Are in the King James Bible?
  59. What About My Friends and Future If I Stand for the King James Bible?
  60. What About a Contradiction That Can't be Explained?
  61. What If There Really Are Mistakes in the King James Bible?
  62. I'm Convinced That the King James Bible is the Infallible Word of God. Now What Should I Do?

Appendix #1
Appendix #2



Author's Note

All reference to "the Bible," "the Holy Bible," "God's Perfect Bible," "Holy Scripture," etc, are references to the Authorized Version of 1611, also known as the King James Bible, unless otherwise defined by the immediate context of a passage.
Also: Although each question is handled individually, some of the later questions build on the answer of a previous question. For that reason it is advisable to read this book from start to finish rather than by skipping around to the questions that most interest you.
» Click here to order this book and many others online.
Thank you,
Dr. Samuel C. Gipp



© 2010 Dr. Sam Gipp | 3166 Wildwood Circle | Massillon, OH 44646 | 330-685-2578