Waymarks 44
Report of Open Air Preaching
16th November LUTON
TOWN CENTRE. Market Hill. Preached as usual, beginning by quoting John 3:16 –
19. A young girl came and stood next to me. As she didn’t interrupt, I turned
to speak to her, which was a mistake. Her first question was “Have you
considered the Church of the Latter Day Saints?” I think she called it by a
different name, but I can’t remember it.
I
explained that I came across this evil cult 50 years ago and I would like to
ask her a question, “What think ye of Christ? Do you acknowledge Him to be the
Son of God, eternal, uncreated?” “Oh
yes” came the reply, “our church teaches that”. So you acknowledge Him to be in
full possession of Deity, in equality with the Father, the fullness of the
Godhead residing in Him?” “Definitely not” she replied. “So you just lied to
me, didn’t you?” “Do you not know that Christ said, ‘before Abraham was, I
Am’?”
I
tried to warn her away from this pernicious cult and turn to Christ for
salvation but she turned away, and her parting shot was, “I hope you soon find
the way!” I just had time to tell her I
found The Way more than 50 years ago.
I
started to preach and again was interrupted. Two young men had a theological
problem. It seemed they believed in Creation, but why didn’t\the Bible say more
about it? “Isn’t there enough?” I asked. “How much does one need in order to
believe it?”
They
tried a different approach. “Why does the Bible talk about a man going about
naked and causing trouble for his son?” I had to think about this one. “I think
you are talking about Noah after the flood.” I replied. I explained this
incident to them and told them why this record was given in Scripture. This
seemed to satisfy them so they went on their way. I think they were Muslims.
8th December DUNSTABLE Ashton Square. A woman tapped my arm as I was preaching. When I
stopped she told me how God had spoken to her fifteen years ago, and had given
her instructions as to how He was going to judge the world. She was not
permitted to pass these instructions on lest she was recognized. I tried to
tell her that God had written it all down for anybody to read,. She confessed
she had never read the Bible. I started to tell her how she might avoid this
judgment but it became clear that the poor woman had mental problems. The
roadsweeper who stopped near to us was, she declared, a spy. He was searching
the rubbish to collect evidence against her, she told me. However she did
accept a copy of The Reason Why but she couldn’t understand why I was
giving it to her. Her name is Mary. (I ask people their names so that I can
pray for them.)
4th January LTC.
George Street. I began in my usual way by quoting John 3: 16 but was not half
way through the verse when I was interrupted. A man wanted me to hear his life
story. This I have discovered is often a prelude to a request for the bus fare
home or for the price of a cup\of tea. It was bus fare in the case of this man.
But he slipped up by telling me he was living rough. He was also clean shaven.
However, as he had accepted a Reason Why from me, I thought a pound
towards his fare might induce him to read it.
I
did manage to give him a little of my life story ─ the bit where I got saved.
11th January LTC.
A young woman stood listening to the gospel. She appeared to approve of what
she heard. When I finished she came over to speak to me, and asked me what were
my ecclesiastical connections. I told her where I met with other Christians
should she be interested in coming along. I took her to be a believer but then
noticed that she was carrying a wad of papers and I could just see the heading
on the top one. It read Our Lady, help of Christians. I thought
therefore if she found no fault in my preaching I must be losing my grip. Then
it struck me that she was seriously brainwashed, accepting all\my statements as
within her own experience. That is, being RC she would believe herself to be
“born again”, “converted” ,”saved” “on the way to heaven” “forgiven” or
whatever. This is a ruse of popery. One must not think that a person who
regularly attends mass, thereby blaspheming the name of Christ, could be a
saved person.
1st February
LTC. When I began to preach several Asians came and sat nearby. It seemed a
little ominous but they did not oppose me in any way. Of course, if they were
faithful to the Koran they would kill me and along with all non-muslims. At
present, in this country they are afraid of the consequences. But today they
listened to the gospel and maybe one soul might be brought into the light. They
heard today that the true and living God is the One Saviour God and is Father
of the only begotten Son, Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the world.
We
have to bear in mind that Muslims are brainwashed into their religion. Fear and
violence are the tools used in brainwashing. More than one child told me when I
was teaching, that they were beaten by the imams for not learning the Koran
fast enough. The imams would knuckle them on their heads. This goes on in England today.
One child told me her cousin received brain damage by this treatment. When the
call comes we do not doubt that all the “peace loving” moderate Muslims will
rise up.
Why
did “moderate” Muslims stage a demonstration against a few cartoons that had
been published months earlier? Why do they not demonstrate against Saudi
Muslims who hold Mohammed in contempt?
AV Verses Vindicated
Matthew 9: 13
But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not
sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
“to repentance” is missing from
modern versions. This explains why repentance is missing from modern preaching.
The Lord said, except ye repent ye shall all likewise perish. The
removal of repentance ensures that multitudes of false Christians will go to
the lake of fire.
The words are well attested in
the Greek manuscripts and were removed in a few spurious manuscripts.
We note that J N Darby chopped
these Spirit given words from his own translation. This will account for the
unwillingness to preach repentance by those who follow Darby today.
Matthew 12: 40
For
as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son
of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
Some
do not like the idea of Jonah being swallowed by a whale. They have even
suggested, quite falsely, that whales have never been known in the
Mediterranean Sea. They think it was a great fish. The biggest fish, the whale
shark, is incapable of swallowing anything but plankton. ketos (whale)
is found here only in the New Testament and scholars are unable to determine
its derivation. It is better then simply to believe the Bible.
The
whale is mentioned in Gen. 1:21, and God created great whales (tanniyn =
land or sea monster), Job 7: 2, Am I a sea, or a whale and the same
Hebrew word is found again in Ezek. 32: 2 Thou art as a whale.
We
learn in Jonah 1:17 The Lord had prepared a great fish and in 2: 10 The
Lord spoke unto the fish and it vomited out Jonah upon the dry ground. (dag=
fish; often used collectively-Strong). No fish can swallow a man whole. The word dag
is inclusive. Its first usage in Gen. 9: 2 reveals this. Three classes of
creatures are mentioned; beasts of the earth, fowls of the air, and fishes of
the sea. Whales therefore must fit into one of these three categories.
Believers do not swallow the great lie of evolution so they know whales are
categorized with the fishes of the sea.
John 18: 5,6
I am he. (ego eime)
Those who claim this to be an
expression of deity, and that he should be omitted from the reading will
have to grant the same for the man who received his sight in John 9: 9.
He identified himself
likewise with the words “I am he,” (ego eime)
See my notes on John 18: 5,6
in AV Verses Vindicated, Vol.1, Matt – Romans.
Acts 4: 24
And when they heard that, they
lifted up their voice to God with one accord, and said, Lord, thou art God, which hast made heaven, and earth, and
the sea, and all that in them is:
Modern versions alter Thou art God to “thou art he”. Men do not like the deity of God to be acknowledged. The expression is in the Received Text.
By the Way....
I
thought that What is wrong with the Brethren in issue No.43 would raise
a few eyebrows if not objections. Only one person asked to be removed from my
mailing list. At least I know that one person
So,
a little more about our non-discerning teaching fraternity. One of them told me
a long time ago that he did not ask questions concerning internal problems in
any assembly he might visit. No of course not. One might not feel so free to
visit an assembly if one knew a leading brother there thought the Lord capable
of any sin. One’s engagements might dwindle if “judgments” are made.
There
exists in Luton and Dunstable a Fellowship of Churches. There are two in fact
that overlap. There is the united South Bedfordshire Missionary organisation,
comprising Onslow Road Gospel Hall,
Selbourne Gospel Hall, Birdsfoot Lane Felllowship, and Langdale Evangelical
Church. This latter is
also a member of Dunstable Fellowship of Evangelical Churches, together with West Street
Baptist Church
and Dunstable Baptist Church.
Most of the Brethren “Teachers” have no qualms associating with this liberal
neo-evangelical conglomeration. They tell me they don’t agree with it but maybe
their ministry will have an impact. So they don’t really believe in separation.
A
correspondent writes,
“I
realize that some do not appreciate your critical style of writing, but if it
promotes a study of the Scriptures, so that one might rightly divide them, and
they become better workmen for Him, I cannot see why they raise so many
objections.”
Those
who object to my criticisms are usually supportive of the Critical Text! It is
this CT, promoted by our teaching fraternity, that is the main object of my
criticisms. Those who hold to the CT tend to be very uncritical of it, and very
undiscerning. Very few have examined the issues involved. They hold to it with
a blind and bigoted tenacity. The very foundation of the faith is a Bible we
can trust implicitly from cover to cover. That is how it was for me fifty years
ago. Now I have to make choices; do I believe my Bible or do I believe the
preacher? It is often impossible to do both. But for me there is in fact no
choice. Let God be true and every man a liar.
If
a man criticises my Bible I shall be very wary of his doctrines. If I hear him
do this once I shall not go and listen to him the second time.
We read in the Ritchie publication Believers Magazine, February 2006, these words,
''After the darkness of those three hours.-.. what joy, what relief it
must have been to Him now to cry ''Father" taking His position again as
the Son of God."
Thus Brethren now
teach that for three hours Christ ceased to hold the position of the Son of God.
The implication of this statement is Christ was not God’s Son for three hours.
The writer goes on,
".... Back from the Godforsaken position, back into the Father's
hands...."
Was the Son of God
ever out of the Father's hands?
Was Isaac on Moriah
out of Abraham's hands? Did God the Father show less love to His S on than did
Abraham to Isaac ? Did Isaac cease to be Abraham’s son for a while? Was Christ
indeed only forsaken for the three hours
of darkness? This view depends on
the twisting of Scripture to read "Why didst Thou forsake me?"
The same expression
occurs in 2 Tim. 4: 10, Demas hath forsaken me. I understand that the
same Greek word and tense is used in both places. So perhaps Demas DID forsake
Paul for a while but was restored by the time Paul wrote his epistle?
Campbell Morgan wrote
concerning the three hours of darkness,
I submit thoughtfully that no interpretation of that darkness is to be
trusted save that of the Lord who experienced it. Has He flung any light on the
darkness which will enable us to apprehend the meaning of the darkness? Did any
word escape His lips that will help us to explain those silent hours? I think
the answer is to be found in these narratives, and to that teaching of the Lord
we appeal in order that we may consider the meaning of the darkness, and the
passing of the darkness, and thereafter attempt reverently to look back at the
transaction in the darkness.
The Lord said This
is your hour and the power of darkness. (Lk. 22: 53) God is light, and
in him is no darkness at all (1 John 1: 5). What communion hath light
with darkness? (2 Cor. 6: 14) Have no fellowship with the unfruitful
works of darkness. (Eph. 5: 11)
Satan rules the
darkness of this world (Eph. 6: 12).
The kingdom of the beast is to be full\of darkness.
The awful darkness of those three hours was permitted
by the Father. There is no Scripture
that tells us what took place during those hours and therefore it is not for us
to know.
Another strange
teaching I heard recently is, I quote, “on earth the Lord laid aside his
manifestations of deity”. If changing
water into wine is not a manifestation of deity then it must have been some
kind of conjuring trick. John tells us the miracle was a manifestation of His
glory. Such glory, openly displayed there at Cana,
was the glory pertaining to deity.
There in the New
Bradwell Gospel Hall we heard a direct attack on the person of Christ. It was
made by B Chapman, a trustee of the liberal Counties organisation which is
interdenominational and promotes female preachers.
New Cambridge Paragraph Bible
We
reviewed the New Cambridge Paragraph
Bible in Issue no.40. We pointed out it is an attempt to return the AV to its pre-1629 condition. Thus all the typological errors have been
replaced. Even obvious printers errors have been replaced.
We are rather surprised
therefore to read a favourable review on
Ian Paisley's Website .
Paisley wrote a book ''A
plea for the old Sword '-
A defence of the AV
Bible which is well worth reading.
Now we learn that '
Some of the more antiquated aspects, have been 'eased out" And the
Apocrypha has been' eased back in" . so what about Paisley’s
“old Sword”. Does he think that after all, in line with all reformists, that it
is a bit blunt after all? And it seems he is not so anti- Rome after all. The Apocrypha has been returned
to this neo-AV Bible.
Inspiration and Infallibility of Scripture according to J N Darby
Darby
was unswerving in his belief that the Bible was the inspired, infallible Word of
God, absolutely authoritative and faithfully transmitted from the original
autographs. If the world itself were to disappear and be annihilated, asserts
Darby, "and the word of God alone remained as an invisible thread over the
abyss, my soul would trust in it. After deep exercise of soul I was brought by
grace to feel I could entirely. I never found it fail me since. I have often
failed; but I never found it failed me." ─Larry V Crutchfield; John
Nelson Darby; Defender of the Faith.
If
Darby thought this about the Bible, why did he rewrite it? Or was he speaking
of his own version?
Dishonour to the Holy Spirit according to W E Vine
(taken
from The Mistaken Term, “The Brethren” by W E Vine)
[Those
meeting in Gospel Halls] cannot help what others call them, but that any in
such companies should tacitly accept this unscriptural title [of Brethren] is
greatly to be deprecated. Its use is dishonouring to the Spirit of God and a
falsification of the actual position of any Scripturally formed assembly. The
flippant or jocular way in which the appellation, or some modification of it
such as "the P.B.'s" or "the Plyms," is sometimes used, is
also to be deprecated. The work of the Holy Spirit in enabling believers to
gather according to the Scriptures, to be formed into local assemblies by His
power and with the recognition of His rights and prerogatives to provide
spiritual gifts for the care of each company, and to control and guide their
worship, is all too sacred to permit of the use of such terms. There are those
who do so who have never discovered the truth from the Word of God, and are
ignorant of what the Scriptures teach as to assembly principles and of the way
in which they are being maintained. Such epithets are part of the
misunderstanding or taunts which those who are faithful to Christ have to
endure, but let them never be accepted or used by any members of such
assemblies themselves.
Any
other forms of gathering than what is practiced by those “mistakenly called the
brethren” is, wrote Vine, the traditions of the systems of Christendom. In
other words, Baptists, Methodists, Free Evangelical Churches, ets, dishonour
the Holy Spirit by their very association. Their ecclesiastical practices have
to be regarded as anathema and the true brother will shun them.
I
happen to agree with what was taught by Vine and others concerning the local
assembly of believers relating to most of our practices. I have been in
assembly fellowship for 50 years and entered by deep personal conviction which
is not the case for most. I am not considering going elsewhere. But there is an
aspect that disturbs me very much concerning our leading brethren. I include
those who were in at the beginning of the Gospel Hall era , Darby, Kelly,
Wigram, up to present times. There is a united
hostility to the Authorized Bible and there always has been. There is a united
hostility to the preaching of repentance and there always has been. So can our leaders be trusted in what they
teach?
W E
Vine had no problems having fellowship with the Brethren apostate, F F Bruce.
They were both scholars. Bruce, in his forward to Vine’s Dictionary, tells how
Vine drew on the wells of infidelity to produce his Dictionary. He leaned
heavily on the Nazi Kittel for definitions of Greek words. Kittel was a Nazi
war criminal and was tried and found guilty at Nuremberg.
Vine
thought that an educated godless Jew hater was of far more value than a saved
ploughboy in touch with his God.
If our
leaders are desperately wrong in fundamental issues how could they be so
dogmatically right in how we meet together? I only ask because I would like to
know. I can think of no matter more fundamental than whether God has given us a
trustworthy Bible or not. The Brethren say “NOT”!
Who are the Overcomers?
The
overcomers of Scripture are believers of course.
One
of the clearest verses on this is 1 John 5: 4 For whatsoever is born of God
overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even
our faith.
The
born again believer overcomes the world. This is not merely a goal to aim at.
It is a victory won and held on the grounds of faith. The non-overcomer is
without faith.
1
John 5: 5. says Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth
that Jesus is the Son of God. The person who never overcomes the world does
not believe Jesus to be the Son of God. We note that in the defective gospel
now being preached there is no call to believe Jesus to be the Son of God. 9
The
overcomers at Ephesus
(Rev. 2) will eat of the tree of life.
The non-overcomers therefore will not eat of the tree of life. I.e. they miss
heaven.
At
Smyrna the
overcomer will not be hurt of the second death. The, non-overcomer therefore
goes to the Lake
of Fire.
Pergamos
overcomers likewise will enjoy the blessings of eternal life throughout
eternity and the overcomers will miss out. The Thyatiran overcomers marked by
faithfulness, will sit in judgment over the nations. The Sardian overcomers
will be clothed in white raiment and their names are secure in the book of
life. The non-overcomer will perish, his name being excluded from the book of
life. The Philadelphian overcomer has a secure place in heaven. The
non-overcomer we believe has a place in hell.
Finally,
at Laodicea the
overcomer shares with Christ upon His
throne.
In
all these seven churches the overcoming is associated with the trials that had
to be borne. Read also Re. 21: 7 He
that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall
be my son. It is seen that the overcomer is the one with an inheritance and
is among the sons of God.
The
young men (believers) have overcome the wicked one 1 John 2: 13. They are not exhorted to overcome Satan, They
have done it through being converted.
Little
children (in the faith) have overcome the evil spirits with their false
doctrines. 1 John 4: 4.
The
converted soul is an overcomer. All true believers are overcomers. This does
not teach sinless perfection but the converse denies the eternal security of
the soul.
Why I pray using “Thee” and “Thou”
I
pray privately and publicly using “thee” and “thou” because that is how I was
taught when I first got saved in 1955. My teachers taught me by example. They
were all young men under the age of 25 and they came from a variety of
denominations. We were all servicemen.
In
those days no one thought of praying differently. This was largely because we
all held to the Authorized Bible. This
version maintained the singular forms even though they had passed out of common
usage in the English language before it was printed in 1611 AD. They were kept
because they made an accurate translation from the Greek and Hebrew. Their
usage in prayer gives a more reverent approach to the Father.
I
pray using these singular personal pronouns not because of tradition . I was
not brought up in Christian circles.
I
was able to pray in this manner from the day I got saved. This had nothing to
do with my education. I listened and learned.
I
find that usually those who pray in modern style have little regard for the AV
Bible and move in liberal neo-evangelical circles.
“Thee
and thou” forms are still maintained in wedding services and other ceremonial
occasions; e.g “I Tom Brown, take thee, Mary Jones, to be my lawful wedded wife”.
There is a connotation of intimacy and affection in this.
I
thank God for the English language which allows me to address deity in terms
not found generally on the lips of the ungodly. If other languages do not allow
this its users are that much the poorer.
A Lucky Dip Religion
Some
people have a “lucky dip” religion. Their only recourse to a personal time of
devotion is when they read their daily notes on the tear-off calendar. Or, in
times of emergency they will open their bible at random in order to seek
guidance.
Most of us know the story of one man who did
this. In a crisis he opened his bible for advice and read, concerning Judas,”He went and hanged
himself”. This was not quite what he wanted so he had another try. This time he
read, “That thou doest, do quickly”.
Elective Grace
I have put in the box below
every verse of Scripture relating to “elective grace”.
|
|
Elective grace is an old
wive’s fable, derived from Calvinism. It is taught nowhere in Scripture and
such a fable maligns the nature of God.
Critica Biblica
Critica
Biblica, or Critical Notes on the Old testament Writings, was written by T K Cheyne, d.Litt., D.D,, Oriel
Professor of the Interpretation of Holy Scripture at Oxford and Formerly Fellow of Balliol
College, Canon of Rochester.
The
humble ploughboy would have been deeply awed by such a learned gentleman. But
we fear that as his book was published in 1904, he has long since been
consigned to the everlasting flames of hell. The book reveals a burning hatred
towards God and towards the work of the Holy Spirit.
I
will give you but one example of his work and I think you will then agree with
me as to his eternal fate. (unless he got converted at a later date. If he was
converted he would no doubt have been at great pains to withdraw his
blasphemous works from circulation.}
Cheynes
comments on Jonah,
The story in the Book of Jonah is, in fact, most
probably a Midrash on 2 Ki. xiv. 25, explaining how the capital of Jerahmeel
escaped destruction. ....The story of the tempest and the lot-casting may have
once had an independent existence, and referred to some other person than
jonah. it looks much like folk-lore. The “great fish” seems an editorial
edition in the style of the reference to the dragon in Jer. li. 34, 44; it
implies the favourite dragon-myth.. In iii. 3 the editor [the reader must
understand that Jonah didn’t write Jonah] fell into much error.
Those
who deny the account in Jonah of his being swallowed by a whale, Mtt. 12: 40,
deny Christ, His death and resurrection. Those who argue that the word should
be fish will argue themselves into hell. Those who argue that there
were/are no whales in the Mediterranean are
too ignorant to bother with.
The
second largest animal ever to have lived on this planet, the Fin Whale, is
still seen in the Med. it grows up to 24 meters in length and weighs up to 80
tons. It feeds by swallowing large amounts at a time causing their throat
furrows to expand.
The
biggest fish is the Whale Shark which is a plankton eater (cannot swallow
humans). The biggest fish do not have bellies as does the fin whale. Belly
means hollow; cavity.
Cheynes
was a mocker and today he has many sons and daughters.
******
QUOTE:
“ When I go on a school visit I don’t go in with both guns blazing”.
"Wherefore
I take you to record this day, that I am pure from the
blood of all men. For I have not shunned to declare unto you all the
counsel of God." Acts 20:26-27
blood of all men. For I have not shunned to declare unto you all the
counsel of God." Acts 20:26-27
QUOTE:
“We find that headteachers are very appreciative of our visits”.
Woe
nto you, when all men shall speak well of you! for so did their fathers to the
false prophets. Luke 6: 26
Elder: Do you really believe your Bible from
cover to cover?
Young
man: Yes.
Elder:
And do you believe it word for word?
Young
man: Yes
Elder:
And syllable by syllable?
Young
man: Yes.
Elder:
You’re obviously a KJV-Onlyer. A fanatic and an extremist. We won’t allow you
to preach on our platform.
How not to defend the AVaccording to the English Churchman.
The English Churchman is
a fortnightly newspaper. It carries a lot of anti-Rome news and is strongly
Reformist. In the issue number 7679, 6th & 13th January 2006, E T
Kirkland has an article “how not to defend the AV”.
He
is angry with believers who believe the Authorized Version implicitly. These he
describes as KJVOnlyers who “resort to neo-orthodox Bartianism (sic)”.
Possibly he meant Barthianism. The article was very poorly proof-read.
Kirkland
bases his argument in favour of a defective Authorized Bible on the grounds
that there are two people who make outrageous claims for its perfection. These
two are Ruckman and Riplinger. These two do indeed make strange claims for the
AV and both are abusive towards those who disagree with them. They are extremists
and their views are not shared by the majority of Bible believers. Kirkland knows this but
they are useful to him in his attack.
Kirkland claims that God has preserved His word but not in
modern versions. He does not go so far as to say the AV is the preserved word
of God for then he would have to claim that God had preserved a lot of
imperfections with it. The conclusion would be that the AV merely contains the
word of God, or most of it, along with all the blemishes.
Kirkland’s god is indeed a god of blemishes. Kirkland appears never to have experienced a
Biblical conversion. He writes, “the AV is the word of God, not because we say
so, nor on the grounds of a mystical experience.” This is an ambiguous
statement. We suspect he is referring to those who have been born again and
hold to the Authorized Bible by faith. He
is an ardent Calvinist.
The
following issue of the EC continued to denigrate the AV Bible with an
attack by W D Lewis. Most of his attack was based also on Ruckman and
Riplinger. He also found fault with J Moorman over his article on the terms
Holy Spirit and Holy Ghost as found in the AV Bible. Those who have read
Moorman’s Conies, Brass & Easter (Lewis appears unaware this is a
collection of articles) where this discussion is found, even if they do
not agree with him (I do) will be compelled to admit this is an acceptable and
balanced explanation of why the two terms are kept in the AV. Lewis scathingly
points out that the Mormans use the AV, “and make a distinction between “Holy
Ghost” and “Holy Spirit”. In Mormanism the “Holy Ghost” is a personage, or a
god, but the “Holy Spirit” is an impersonal force. Of course, this very strange
doctrine was never held by the early Church, and is not held by mainstream
Christianity today.”
We
note Lewis is unable to fault Dr Moorman’s exegesis. His remarks plainly do not
relate to Dr Moorman’s words at all.
The
English Churchman while containing much useful information, is committed
to the errors of Calvinism and the denigration of the Authorized Bible. The Trinitarian
Bible Society is in the same camp along with Bible League.
I
have no problems believing an omnipotent God is able to preserve His word
inerrantly between the covers of one Book. The blemishes are in the eye of the
beholder.
The
following article is taken from the Way of Life Website. It deals with an issue
that is denied by many among us today. viz. that doctrine is not affected by
changes in the modern versions.
DO THE MODERN VERSIONS CHANGE DOCTRINE?
[Distributed
by Way of Life Literature?s Fundamental Baptist Information Service. Copyright
by David W. Cloud. These articles cannot be stored on BBS or Internet sites and
cannot be sold or placed by themselves or with other material in any electronic
format for sale, but may be distributed for free by e-mail or by print. They
must be left intact and nothing removed or changed, including these
informational headers. This is a listing for Fundamental Baptists and other
fundamentalist, Bible-believing Christians. Our goal is not devotional but is
TO PROVIDE INFORMATION TO ASSIST PREACHERS IN THE PROTECTION OF THE CHURCHES IN
THIS APOSTATE HOUR. If you desire to receive this type of material on a regular
basis, e-mail us, give us your name, address, and the name of the church you
are a member of, and request to be placed on the list.
Please
note that this is not a free service. We take up a quarterly offering to fund
this ministry, and each subscriber is expected to participate. To unsubscribe
or to submit a change of address, send your name and the request to
fbns@wayoflife.org. This is not an automated list. Changes in the database
often require two to four days to activate. Some of these articles are from O
Timothy magazine. David W. Cloud, Editor. O Timothy is a monthly magazine in
its 17th year of publication. Subscription is $20/yr. Way of Life publishes
many helpful books. The catalog is located at the web site -
http://www.wayoflife.org.]
February
11, 1996 (David W. Cloud, Fundamental Baptist Information Service, P.O. Box
610368, Port Huron, MI 48061, fbns@wayoflife.org) - The following material
first appeared in /O Timothy/ magazine, Volume 12, Issue 3, 1995.
Many
contend that the modern Greek texts and the new versions do not change
doctrine. These do not understand the nature of the changes which have been
made. This is something akin to Neo-orthodoxy. The critical text is not a
frontal attack on truth; it is a clever infiltration. The attack of the modern
versions is not tanks blasting; it is termites eating. The modern versions
don't wholly omit doctrines (unless it is the doctrine of fasting) but they
undermine many doctrines, and doctrine in general, by deleting repetitious
passages, omitting titles of Christ, deleting a key passage here and there,
questioning other key passages—a little cut here, a little doubt there. It is
easy to underestimate the overall effect. The eclectic Greek text upon which
the modern versions are founded is a shorter text than the Received Text
underlying the King James Bible. The modern text omits thousands of words and
phrases, an amount of text equaling the entire books of 1 and 2 Peter.
The
area of repetition is an interesting one. In Genesis 41:32 Joseph explains to
Pharaoh why God repeated the dream. It was to reinforce the authority and
impact of the message. Jesus Christ often used the term "verily,
verily" to emphasize the importance of what He was saying. Many phrases
are repeated almost to tediousness in the Bible. "They shall know that I
am the Lord" in Ezekiel is an example. Peter's vision prior to his being
sent to Cornelius shows how God uses repetition to reinforce a point. He
repeated the vision three times. This is the purpose of biblical repetition.
Yet the critical text and the modern versions reduce the repetition and thereby
reduce the power and impact of God's Word in a subtle yet very real manner. For
example, Matthew 4:4 and Luke 4:4 have the same warning that man lives by every
word of God. That message is weakened in the modern versions by the omission of
the last half of the verse in Luke 4:4. Christ's sermon on Hell in Mark 9 contains
another example. That is a passage that shook me up before I was saved. It is
probably the most powerful sermon on Hell in the Bible. Three times Christ
repeated His warning that Hell is a place "where their worm dieth not, and
the fire is not quenched" (verses 44,46,48).
This
sermon in the modern versions is not as hot. It is hot, because the fire is
still there in verse 44, but it is not as hot as the sermon in the Received
Text and the KJV, because verses 46 and 48 are omitted.
By
removing some of the repetition of the Bible, the modern versions weaken the
overall standard of doctrine. The critical text is shorter roughly by the
amount of text equal to the entire books of 1 and 2 Peter. And the critical
text is weak; it is soft; it is less forceful; overall it is more hesitant in
presenting the great doctrines of the faith. It IS a theologically corrupt
text.
See
also "Bible Doctrines Affected by Modern Versions"
<../../articles/doctrine.htm>
TREGELLES AND CO
This statement is taken
from brethren.org.nz/about the brethren.
A comparatively large proportion of the first generation
of Brethren were well-trained biblical scholars. Many brought into the
movement, and continued to build on, credible theological degrees. The
contribution of some like G.V.Wigram and S.P.Tregelles to philology and textual
criticism is still respected in academic circles today. This dependence on
those who have offered their biblical scholarship in the service of our
churches has continued though often
publicly deprecated right up to today.
W.E.Vine and F.F.Bruce are household names to my generation, not only to those
who are Christian Brethren but also to evangelical households - globally. The
recent calls for a return to the study of our biblical roots highlight the
importance of all of us especially the full-time bible teachers amongst us digging
deeper in serious study of the scriptures once more. The swing in New Zealand
during the 1980s and 1990s to a merely subjective personal spiritual experience
has proved inadequate as a foundation for effective faith. We are witnessing a
fresh hunger for the objective, but personally experienced, teaching of the
Word of God to give some depth to spiritual claims. This is an open invitation
to re-present for the good of the whole Christian community what we claim to
have known as central in our movement since the beginning.
The
four men mentioned were scholars indeed. Their hostility to the Received Text
has been well documented. Bruce’s hostility to evangelical truth is well known.
These men have done much towards the apostasy of “Brethrenism” and, it seems,
towards the apostasy of evangelical Christendom generally.
We
note that a “subjective personal spiritual experience” is decried among New Zealand assemblies. Does this
mean that in the 1980s and 1990s many false professions were being made? Does
it mean that for 20 years those who got saved showed an opposition to the
critical text brigade and now they have been overcome? I don’t know. A return
to what these four men promoted will bring disaster.
"Shadows Changed"
See, the rows are
emptied of their wards,
The cobwebs hang
across the mildewed boards;
Windows are smashed;
the door hangs off, and more—
A torn Youth Praise lies wretched on the floor.
"What made them
go?” I whispered to my ancient guide.
"An evil spirit
passed this way, and passing, lied.
Soughing low to that
murmuring throng,
'You cannot trust
your Bible for the wording is all wrong!'"
"They should not
have listened!" I cried with dread.
My mentor shook his
wizened head.
Mere lackeys to the
Foe’s great force.
He charmed them into
thinking they were wise,
Thus folly brought
them to this sad demise."
"So all is
lost?" I searched my friend's wan face.
"Not so!"
he cried and pushed into my embrace
A Book. —The Old One,
with language that we'd once adored.
I read; the shadows
changed, and looking up, I saw my Lord.
R S
Waymarks is published quarterly by me, Ron Smith, Luton, UK.
Articles are mine where credits are not given. UK residents may receive a paper
copy by emailing me at waymarks@ntlworld.com
No comments:
Post a Comment