Waymarks Contender no.60 February 2010

Waymarks Contender 60 (more recent back numbers may be found on my Waymarks Magazine blog) cick here Waymarks Magazine

 (No.59 is now inserted below)

Report of Open Air Preaching

December 2^nd LUTON T.C.  At this time of the year the street gets more crowded. The Big Issue boy is here and as soon as he saw me he held out his hand; not that I might shake it but that he might get some money. He got nothing so he had some scathing words to say about Christianity. The greatest Gift he continues to spurn.

Then there is the “Santa Hat” man a few feet away shouting his wares. Realising he could not compete with me in decibel output, he moved away. Two women are here also, selling their “lucky” sprigs of lavender to passers by.  These all heard the gospel preached.

Thankfully the canned Jingle Bells haven’t started blaring out yet. With this I cannot compete.

The Muslims stayed away today. They were too busy throwing eggs at Baroness Warsi, (a Muslim Peer, who was visiting the town) no doubt.

January 18^th LUTON T.C.  With the Haiti earthquake in mind, I preached on Proverbs 1: 26, I also will laugh at your calamity; I will mock when your fear cometh. Alas, passers-by maintained their blank expressions, unimpressed by the pleading voice of Scripture and unconcerned regarding the fate before them, far worse than 10,000 Haiti disasters, to go down into the everlasting flames of the Lake of Fire.

The Archbishop of York was asked on air why God allowed such suffering as we have seen in Haiti. He mumbled and bumbled and refused to answer the question.

We remind sinners that God has placed a curse on His creation because of sin. We tell them of Christ’s prophetic words, …there shall be….earthquakes, in divers places. Matt. 24: 7. Then we urge them to flee to the cross for refuge.

From my archives, 1960.

We were returning from a NATO exercise in Libya to our base in Scotland when our pilot was taken ill so we had three days enforced stay in Malta. I decided to do some sightseeing and went out of the base to catch the bus into Valletta. To my horror another NCO of our squadron, corporal J, was waiting there whose company I would never have voluntarily sought. He was an evil living man, almost always drunk when off duty.

 I felt that as a believer I should be sociable to towards this man on this occasion and we travelled together into town. He invited me to join him for a drink, which I declined so he came with me to a café where we both had a lemonade. He left after half an hour or so and I felt guilty that I hadn’t witnessed to him on the journey or in the café. But the following night he sought me out and told me he wanted to talk to me. He told me he had been impressed that I should be willing to talk to the likes of him and then he poured out his sad story that had resulted in his wife walking out on him. He asked that I should write to her and persuade her to give him another chance. I replied that I would have to tell her that he was still a foul-mouthed drunken whoremonger. His only hope was to turn to the Lord and be saved. He was very angry at this and said he might have known I would just give him religion. So he left me and we never spoke to each other again.

I left the squadron shortly after this event, but two months later I received a letter from another believer, a member of that same squadron, who knew nothing of my dealings with J. He asked me if I remembered  J and wrote how surprised they had been when he walked into their gospel meeting (in Nicosia) and got saved that same night.

More from my archives

June 15^th 2000  LEIGHTON BUZZARD, by the Cross  (a mediaeval monument in the High Street). There were two rough looking men sitting on the Cross steps when I arrived so I walked down the High Street, hoping they would be gone when I returned. Alas, they had not gone so I decided I had better get on with preaching. After a few minutes one got up and came and stood next to me, trying to look at the Bible, which I was holding. He had long straggly hair, tattoos on his face and arms and had a beer can in his hand. I thought I was in for a class A confrontation!

 His first words to me were, “my grandfather used to preach in the open air, up in Shropshire.” Twenty minutes later we were praying together. By then he had told me his sorry story¾a car accident, a motorbike accident, a divorce, prison, loss of employment, drunkenness, drugs, psychiatric treatment …. Did God really care for him? He was in tears and I admit that my eyes were filled with tears as well. O yes! God cares. The cross tells us that God cares.

Satan cares too. There was instant satanic interference. Curtis, the old road-sweeper, was sitting there as well, and a man came up to speak to him, plainly thinking we were all involved in the same discussion, and pushed between the two of us, interrupting our conversation. However, this burdened young man moved round him to continue speaking to me.

His name is Simon. We prayed together. He took a tract. How easily I could have pronounced him saved there and then! Then his mobile phone rang¾cursed instrument of the pit¾ and he left me.

July 3^rd LUTON T C.,  A group of Muslim youths surrounded me, firing questions from all sides. They were generally polite but the ‘discussion’ was quite lively. The usual nonsense had been put forward several times that the Bible had been changed. Repeated invitations to cite one case of the Bible being changed went unheeded. Then a young woman came up, placed herself by my side, and attempted to take charge of the discussion. She was, she told us, a Christian, a member of the Church of Latter-Day Saints, and yes, the Bible had been changed in lots of places. This woman plainly needed a public rebuke, which she got.

Before she left us she attempted to shake hands with the leading Muslim lad (but made no attempt to shake hands with me) who looked at her with disdain. He wouldn’t shake hands with a woman, he said, because Islam did not permit it. He turned to a young Asian woman standing with them and said he wouldn’t shake hands with her either, even though she was his sister. She smiled dutifully.

It was evident once again that Muslims thrive on the lies put out by the Textual Critics, My Bible has not been ‘changed’. Only the modern parodies of Scripture, masquerading as ‘versions’ do this. They also believed the lie that the Lord and His disciples spoke Aramaic, and that the Gospel writers did not know the Lord personally. We certainly had a wide ranging discussion but the important thing is that they also heard the Gospel preached.  

AV Verses Vindicated

Proverbs 18: 24

A man that hath friends must show himself friendly: and there is a friend that sticketh closer than a brother.

“Some friends play at friendship but a true friend sticks closer than brother.” NRSV

“He that maketh many friend doeth it to his own destruction but there is a friend that sticketh closer than a brother.” RV

 “A man of many friends will come to ruin but there is a friend that sticketh closer than a brother.” JND

The three alternative readings quoted above turn Scripture on its head.  The AV reading tells us that we must display a friendly nature towards our friends , otherwise we may expect to lose them. There is however a Friend Whose care surpasses even that shown by a brother.

JND tells us that if we are in a church fellowship and all like minded in the things of the Lord, because the members are therefore our friends, we can expect ruin.

The friend sticking closer than a brother must point us to the Saviour. He said ye are my friends if ye do whatsoever I command you. John 15: 14.

Daniel 12: 4

....many shall run to and fro (shut), and knowledge (dah-ath) shall be increased.

“many shall be running back and forth, and evil shall increase.” NRSV

If dah-ath is to be translated as evil, then the tree of knowledge of good and evil (Gen. 2: 9, first mention in OT) becomes “the tree of evil of good and evil”. Which shows the Bible mutilators up as plain stupid.

The critics want us to know that many shall run to and fro cannot possibly mean “many shall run to and fro.”

Wm. Macdonald, regarding running to and fro,  tells his readers, “ Tregelles renders it, ‘many shall scrutinize the book from end to end’”, but neither of this pair may be described as Bible lovers.

The Hebrew word shut is used 13 times in the underlying text of the Authorized Bible.

Eight times it is applied to the movement of persons. Twice of Satan, where he speaks of going to and fro in the earth (Job 1: 7, 2: 2), twice of the Lord, the eyes of the Lord run to and fro throughout the whole earth, (2 Chron. 16: 9, Zech. 4: 10)

We therefore understand he phrase in Daniel 12: 4 to be consistent with other Scriptures, and that persons are involved in travel. We use aircraft and trains etc now but some assume that when this prophecy is fulfilled (which could be less than four years from now) modern transport will not exist.

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge (Prov.1: 7) and almost always the word is used in a good sense in the OT. Fools reject it.

We suggest therefore that many itinerant preachers will be moving to and fro, turning many to righteousness, (v.3), in that day.

Beware those who look for mystical interpretations of Scripture and will not accept the plain and obvious meaning.

John 2: 11

This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his glory: and his disciples believed on him.

“This beginning of his signs did Jesus in Cana of Galilee…”  RV

“This beginning of signs did Jesus in Cana of Galilee….”.     JND

“This, the first of his signs, Jesus did at Cana in Galilee…”    ESV

“This beginning of signs Jesus did in Cana of Galilee….”      NKJV

“This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee….” D-RB (Douay-Rheims Bible)

Modern versions, almost without exception translate the Greek semeion into ‘sign’.

The translators of the Authorized Version translated the Greek word as ‘sign’, ‘wonder’, ‘token’ ‘miracle’ according to the context.

Performing a sign, however wonderful, is no evidence of deity. Miracles are the prerogative of deity.

Miracles are signs of deity but signs may have nothing to do with deity.

The word miracle adequately translates semeion in the above verse. Bible believers will know therefore that the miracle performed in turning water into wine was a sign of Jesus’s deity. Any alternative translation would leave room for doubt.

It should be noted that English definitions of Greek words, used in modern  versions, are frequentlu drawn from polluted sources. Thayer was a Unitarian, Liddell kept company with a paedophile and a Sodomite. Vine relied heavily on the works of Nazi war criminal. They supply only what THEY think a Greek word might mean.

We read in an article recently  that in John 2: 11, “John used the word sign”. Such a careless slip!  He should have written  Modern English versions use the word sign. And this we all know anyway.

‘Sign’ in not an Anglicized  form of the Greek word semion. “Sign’ is derived from the Latin signum  and was not used in the English language until 1175AD when it appeared (in Middle English) as ‘signe’.

Titus 2:  4, 5

That they may teach the young women to be….keepers at home

“….diligent in home work….” JND

“….to be good housewives….” GNB

“….working at home….” ESV

The JFB Commentary  tells us “The oldest manuscripts read, ‘Workers at home”. We bear in mind that the early churches rejected the spurious manuscripts containing this alteration. Hence one such was found discarded in a popish dustbin in the 19^th cent. (Sinaiticus)

In the Bishops Bible we read “house kepers” and the Geneva has “keeping at home”, which conveys adequately the sense of the phrase. It is all one word in Greek;  oikuros which itself is made up from oikos=a dwelling, and ouros= a stayer at home.

The failure of so many to obey this verse has contributed to the break up of family life and through this the destruction of effective church life.  

 

Our Unblemished Bible ( first published in Waymarks Newsletter, 1994)

     Looking through an old Bible of mine recently, I discovered that I had written in the margin against Prov.18:24, "the A.V. is misleading here. Better, “a man of friends cometh to ruin”.  That, I had  written  at least 20 (1974) years ago. I have learned a lot since then, particularly that the A.V. is misleading nowhere. But why did I write it? Because one of our eminent Bible-teachers had told us from the platform that the verse was misleading. I hadn't checked it out. I had accepted his word for it . I was not a good Berean in those days! I don't suppose that preacher had checked it out either. He had accepted it, probably, from some apostate scholar's lexicon or commentary, or because Darby or Vine said so.

     Nowadays I investigate every so-called correction thrust upon us and have not yet found an occasion where the A.V. needed to be altered. Thus, I want you to see, I do not hold to the A.V. out of any blind or bigotted tradition. If there are mistakes I want to know about them. I have found none yet. I have collected together sufficient tools to satisfy myself on the accuracy of any word in the A.V. I can therefore discover which ancient manuscripts were used for any particular reading and why they were used in preference to any alternative reading.

     The ordinary believer need not be taken up with such an exercise. I do so simply to encourage others to maintain their full confidence in the A.V. as the word of God; Scripture without spot and without blemish. Spots and blemishes in the Bible would be as dead flies causing the ointment of the apothecary to send forth a stinking savour (Eccles.10:1.). This is why we have a Bible without error. God cannot deny Himself. What precious ointment His word is to our souls!

An answer to the misleading article in Precious Seed Nov. ’09, titled, “I don’t know when I was saved – is my profession of salvation genuine?” by R Collings.

R Collings writes concerning his own experience: “No dramatic conversion took place and no radical change of behaviour was possible…..’getting saved’ was perceived as a necessary event – but humanly speaking it was far from being momentous”

We have to remind Mr Collings of words spoken by him a few years ago at the New Year conference held in Cowley Road Gospel Hall, Uxbridge.

I was invited to open the conference in prayer, during which I gave thanks on behalf of all for the day in which we were converted. Mr Collings, the first speaker, opened his ministry by assuring the congregation that he had never experienced a conversion. His words were not misunderstood. Some of us commented on his statement during the tea interval and I discussed it with the other speaker, Mr M Radcliffe. We thought he had committed spiritual Hari Kari. We thought he had signed himself out of the Ministering Brethren Fraternity. But no! He was invited back again to Uxbridge and has continued his unconverted career ever since. The Uxbridge Brethren thought it a trifling matter that the preacher had not been converted.

Conversions do not need to be “dramatic”. Mine certainly was not. I sat in my seat and trusted Christ at the end of a Gospel Meeting. I remember the day and the hour because of other happenings at that time.

All conversions are sudden, dynamic, supernatural. This is without exception. Certainly the actual date is somewhat irrelevant  but the experience cannot be forgotten. It is the moment when the Holy Spirit takes up residence in the newly born soul.

Conversion is commanded in Acts 3.  Repent ye therefore and be converted. Being saved is the ensuing and ongoing experience of the new born soul. One is not saved without the initial conversion.

Can an infant do this? Of course, if they are able to confess with their mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in their heart that God has raised Him from the dead. They will understand as did the Ethiopian that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. On the other hand we do not read in the New Testament of a single child conversion or even that infants were preached to.

Consider also the Lord’s words, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Matt. 18: 3. Note that becoming as little children is placed AFTER conversion. Some may argue themselves deeper into hell by insisting that a different Greek word is used in this verse. Just remember hat the Lord spoke Hebrew (always, we believe) and speaks to us in English. So, the unconverted remains outside of salvation.

A decisive conscious action is required on the part of all who respond to the gospel call. It is repent ye and believe the gospel. It happens at a given moment on a particular day. Can one pass from death to life and never be aware of it?

We cannot take seriously Mr Colling’s issue in the title to his article. In the 54 years since I was converted I have not heard ONE soul claim that one has to remember when one was saved in order to have salvation. This is a red herring on his part to hide his lack.

The reality of a profession of faith begins with a decisive conversion. A change will be witnessed in the life of such a one. As far as visible works of righteousness are concerned, the tares cannot be distinguished from the wheat until the harvest. A believer will of course love the brethren. He will also love his neighbour. He will love his enemies. The unconverted tares may put up a good show but they fail at the end.

R Colling’s final paragraph is most deceptive. I quote: “obviously there must have been a time when, and a place where, you first believed but it is not a requisite of salvation that you can recall either of them”

So one may just drift into salvation? You wake up one fine morning and think,  “Oh, I must have been saved”. One can exercise repentance toward God and faith toward the Lord Jesus Christ and have no recollection of the event???

We say this again. Time and place are not so important that they must be remembered. I remember my conversion because I made a note of the date at the time . It was 15^th October 1955, at approx. 9.05 pm.

I do not remember where, other than it was in the town of Ipswich.

The experience of conversion CANNOT BE FORGOTTEN. If you cannot recall that once you consciously trusted Christ for the forgiveness of sins, you may assume you are still in the kingdom of darkness despite any light that flickers around you.

So now we have it. Our assemblies consist of a mixed multitude of converted and unconverted souls. And of course one can be a conference speaker and remain a child of hell, as all are who have failed to be converted.

 

Christ our Substitute

John Macarthur wrote, “The substitutionary death of Christ is an essential truth of the Christian faith”. (biblebb.com). With this I concur. This foundational truth is being undermined by certain Calvinistic men who move among our churches saying that Christ was not a substitute for all.

I quote an article in the Brethren magazine Believer’s Magazine Nov. 2009,

If we fail to distinguish these two aspects [propitiation and substitution] of the work of Christ at the cross, diverse errors will follow. On the one hand we might end up believing that Christ’s death was only for the elect or, on the other, that he was the substitute for all. The one error would mean there could be no truly free offer in the gospel whilst the other would necessarily result in universalism [which is utter nonsense -RS].

Propitiation is an aspect of Christ’s substitutionary work. Macarthur quoted Leon Morris,

"Redemption is substitutionary, for it means that Christ paid the price that we could not pay, paid it in our stead, and we go free.  Justification interprets our salvation judicially, and as the New Testament sees it Christ took our legal liability, took it in our stead.  Reconciliation means the making of people to be at one by the taking away of the cause of hostility.  In this case the cause is sin, and Christ removed that cause for us.  We could not deal with sin.  He could and did, and did it in such a way that it is reckoned to us.  Propitiation points us to the removal of the divine wrath, and Christ has done this by bearing the wrath for us.  It was our sin which drew it down; it was He who bore it. . . .  Was there a price to be paid? He paid it.  Was there a victory to be won? He won it.  Was there a penalty to be borne? He bore it.  Was there a judgment to be faced? He faced it" justification, reconciliation, removal of sin, and propitiation are all corollaries of the substitutionary work of Christ on the cross. [my emphasis] The Atonement; L Morris

The attempt to split propitiation and substitution is dangerous. Seeing that Christ’s substitutionary death propitiated God is vital. The BM article appears to be saying that Christ died for all, but not for all. This is seen in the comment on Matthew 20: 28 where we read,

[I]t must be noted that our Saviour said in Matthew 20: 28 that He would give His life “a ransom for many”. “Many” should never be confused with “all” in relation to the work of Calvary. The two words are not the same in their extent. Paul speaks of provision made on behalf of all; Matthew speaks of Christ being the substitute instead of “many”.

Actually, in this context, Matthew was writing of Christ as a ransom. He doesn’t mention substitution. Calvinists believe that many DOES mean all (i.e. All the elect),
The word “many” means a large number and cannot be limited to the elect without contradicting 1 Tim. 2: 16 and 1 John 2: 2.
The Calvinistic view is that there as a greater number besides the many for whom Christ was not and can never be their Substitute because they never believe.
This doctrine of conflict in Christ’s sacrifice between propitiation and substitution is taught in the book The Glory of His Grace under the chapter heading Propitiation Versus Substitiution by D West. Published by Assembly Testimony. “Versus” indicates conflict.
Those who read Believer’s Magazine  and Assembly Testimony will need to read  with care and discernment. They are tainted with the writings of Calvinists.

ROMANS 5:6 REFUTES "LIMITED ATONEMENT " by D Waite

"For when we were yet without strength, in due time CHRIST DIED FOR THE UNGODLY. "
1. Romans 5:6 And The FALSE interpretation Of The "LIMITED ATONEMENT" People.
Again, let us repeat, that the "LIMITED ATONEMENT' people would take this clear verse to teach the very opposite of that for which it was intended by Paul and by God , the Author of Scripture. They claim that it teaches that the death of the Lord Jesus Christ on the Cross of Calvary had merit, benefit, and was really LIMITED only to the ELECT, or those who would one day accept and receive Christ as Savior, but that this death had nothing whatever to do with the "sins of the world" in general, whether saved or lost! This is heresy, and clearly contrary to the revealed Word of God!
2. Romans 5:6 Clearly Interpreted As Evidence For The "LIMITED ATONEMENT "
When Paul wrote that "CHRIST DIED FOR THE UNGODLY," there can be no question whatsoever but that His death on Calvary's cross was for the sins of the entire world of "ungodly" people. The word "ungodly" has to refer to the UNSAVED, LOST, HELL DESERVING SINNERS The word, "hyper" is used, meaning that this death was not only "instead of, and in place of "the ungodly" people, but also "for their benefit." This is the sense of the word "for " It is clear, therefore, from this context, that the "we" refer to "we" as sinful human beings of Adam's race--whether elect or non-elect! Can any other meaning be read into the words, "CHRIST DIED FOR THE UNGODLY"?! The "LIMITED ATONEMENT" people like to interpret the words "UNGODLY" as "UNGODLY ELECT PEOPLE" but the context makes no provision for such a stretching of word- meanings "UNGODLY" obviously extents to every man, woman, and child, since all have sinned and are hence "ungodly" and have come short of the glory of God. It is for these unsaved, lost, hell-deserving, hell-bound sinners that the Lord Jesus Christ "DIED " Hence, here is clear proof of an "UNLIMITED ATONEMENT" of Christ on the Cross!

Verbal Inspiration

by A J Pollock (taken from Biblecentre.org)

Alone of all God's creation has man been given powers of reading and writing. It is unthinkable that God should have given these powers unless He intended to use them as channels to His creatures. Many people seem to think that God made this universe as a watchmaker might make a watch endowed with perpetual motion, and, winding it up, thenceforth take no interest or concern in it. Such an idea is perfectly puerile, and if it were not so tragic in its consequences it would be ludicrous to see this attempt of evolutionists and higher critics and modernists to bow the Almighty out of His own universe.
It is obviously reasonable that there should be a Book of God in which man might learn something of God and of his own relation to God, and of that vast eternity to which he is hastening with such speed.
And if there is such a Book it is just as obviously reasonable that it must be inspired of God, for it must in the nature of things contain information beyond man's powers of mind or observation. "Canst thou by searching find out God?" (Job 11:7). "For since the beginning of the world men have not heard, nor perceived by the ear, neither hath the eye seen, O God, beside Thee, what He hath prepared for him that waiteth for Him" (Isa. 64:4).
How exalted is God's Word is seen when we read, "Thou hast magnified They Word ABOVE all they name" (Ps. 138:2). God's name is inexpressibly blessed, but the making of it known for His creature's blessing is still dearer to His heart, and He makes it known through His Word. So the Lord said in that most wonderful prayer recorded in John 17, "Thy word [whether spoken or written] is truth" (verse 17).
Surely God's Word is kept by Him pure, and is inspired word by word. There must be much that the creature can receive as revelation, but which he can never fathom.
It is reported that Earl Balfour, speaking on the Atonement, said "If it were not too vast for our intellectual comprehension, it would be too narrow for our spiritual need." And this can be said of the whole book. If I could understand its heights and depths it would prove that it was written by a finite mind, whose thoughts, though they might be beyond my initiation, were not beyond my comprehension. It is the greatest satisfaction, the greatest rest intellectually to the renewed mind, that though the Bible bears every mark of having been produced mediately by human instrumentality, yet it is immediately the product of the Divine mind.
The necessity of verbal inspiration can be well illustrated. The head of a firm called his typist into his office and dictated a message as follows: "We regret exceedingly that we have misunderstood your instructions, and we are now proceeding to execute your esteemed order." The typist produced the letter as follows: "We regret exceedingly that we have misunderstood your instructions, and we are not proceeding to execute your esteemed order." (Italics ours). One letter of one word exactly reversed the meaning intended. What need for verbal exactitude! Very especially is this so in the book that deals with our eternal destiny. 1 Peter 1:10-12 tells us that the Old Testament prophets did not themselves understand the import of their own writings - that "it was revealed that NOT unto themselves but unto us they did minister the things which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the Gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven." Here were men living in different centuries, occupying different positions, such as law-giver, shepherd, king herdsman, etc., and they produced books, as it has been well put "without collusion or contradiction" - and in addition they could not know fully the things of which they wrote! Had they not been verbally inspired, the result would have been a hotch-potch of incoherent and contradictory ideas.
It may be asked how verbal inspiration can be maintained without setting aside the personality - the individuality - of the writer. For instance, in reading Isaiah and Amos, Paul and Peter, we are conscious that they are men of different calibres. Paul is analytical, logical, yet withal very human, full of heart and affection. Peter is a man of lesser intellectual force than Paul. One was called from his fishing, the other had graduated at the feet of that great Jewish professor - Gamaliel.
Permit an illustration. Suppose a banquet. A number of jellies are on the tables. Some are plain and some are ornamented with fruits and flowers, some are large and some small. It can be easily seen in what mould the jellies have been shaped. The moulds have given shape to the jellies. Yet how much of the mould is in the jelly? They are pure jelly, with no trace whatever of the mould in them.
The illustration is a pure one, but it serves our purpose. God can and does use the personality and order of mind of the different writers; everything on that line is natural and understandable, yet the original Scriptures are wholly and verbally inspired of God. "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God" (2 Tim. 3:16), wrote the Apostle Paul, and that without reservation or qualification. A few illustrations will show how full this statement is.

• Heb.12:27 lays emphasis on a phrase as governing the passage. Verse 26 quotes Haggai 2:6; and verse 27 reiterates and emphasizes the phrase, "Yet once more" as being authoritative because of this Scripture.
• John 10:34-36 bases an argument on the use of the word "gods," quoting from Psalm 82:6.
• Gal. 3:16 bases an argument on this use of the singular number and not the plural. In our English bibles it turns on the use of a letter - "seed" and not "seeds," quoting from Gen. 22:18.
• Gal. 4:9 draws particular attention to the voice of the verb, that it is passive and not active.
• John 8:58 owes its significance to the use of the present tense in contradistinction to the past tense of the verb - "Before Abraham was, I am". 

Taking these five passages as a whole, we are emphatically taught that "the Scripture cannot be broken," so far as to change a phrase, a word, the number of a noun, the voice or tense of a verb.
It is remarkable that foresight is attributed to the Scriptures, thus identifying them with their Divine Author, who alone could foretell what would happen in the distant future. This is seen in Gal. 3:8.
Gal. 3:22 gives the Scriptures as acting in a universal and judicial way, again identifying them with their Divine Author, who alone is competent to come to this conclusion.
Rome. 9:17 speaks of the Scriptures speaking to Pharaoh the Word of God, whereas it was Moses who thus spoke, and at the time no line of Scripture had been written. God told Moses to utter these words to Pharaoh, and afterwards inspired Moses to give us the record of them, thus again identifying the Scriptures with Himself in a truly remarkable way. No wonder the inspired Psalmist wrote the words: "Thou hast magnified Thy Word ABOVE all Thy name" (Ps. 138:2).
May God bless His Word specially in this day when everything Divine is being called in question, and exalt it in all our hearts, for Christ's name's sake.
A J Pollock

By the Way….

A glossy brochure came through my door recently. It advertised a range of university courses for home study. One caught my eye titled “Lost Christianities: Christian Scriptures and the Battles over Authentication”. This course is run by Professor Bart D. Ehrman, M.Div., Ph.D., Princeton Theological Seminary.

Ehrman is an outstanding scholar and a leading world expert in Textual Criticism. His works have a great impact on the production of modern versions of the New Testament. But Ehrman has been described in the Washington Post, March 5th 2006, as “the fundamentalist scholar who peered so hard into the origins of Christianity that he lost his faith altogether.”

He claims to have had a “born-again experience” while he was a sophomore, but later abandoned this position, preferring to accept the teaching of his apostate professor, that Mark in his gospel made a mistake. This put Ehrman well on the road of apostasy himself and he ended up denying fundamental Bible teaching, in particular the resurrection of Christ. It was not long before he believed the Bible to be full of error.

On the American TV show The Colbert Report [ which I watched – RS] Ehrman said he was an agnostic and did not believe in God. — Waymarks no.50 August 2007

 There follows in this course description some staggering deceptions:

First we read; “In the first centuries after Christ, there was no ‘official’ New Testament. Early Christians read and fervently followed many scriptures than we have today.

Answer: All the original manuscripts of the New Testament were written by the end of the FIRST Century. The early Christians did not need apostate clerics and critics to tell them what was Scripture and what not. So Ehrman libels those early believers by suggesting they FERVENTLY FOLLOWED perversions and parodies of Scripture which they knew to be false.  

Next we are supplied with further lies: Relying on these writings, some Christians believed that there were 2, 12, or as many as 30 gods. Some thought that a malicious deity created the world. Some maintained that Christ’s resurrection had nothing to do with salvation; others insisted that Christ never died at all.

Answer: It is malicious mischief to suggest that such people could be Christian. Christians believe the Bible. Ehrman’s “bible” does not relate to truth and reality.

Then we read: What did these other scriptures say? Do they exist today? How could such ideas be considered Christian? If such beliefs were once common, why do they no longer exist? This course by an award winning teacher and author address these fascinating questions wi9th objectivity and rigour.

Answer: Those early believers were Spirit directed. They carefully preserved the Scriptures for us as they recopied them and handed them down. There were of course mockers even  those early days who did their best to alter Scripture and deceive the saints of God.

The purpose of this course is to destroy faith.

For further reading and study, “For Ever settled” by Dr. Jack Moorman is highly recommended.

Truth and Tidings mag has two articles by Dr Mark Sweetnam of Trinity College Dublin, titled “How We got our Bible. Here we can read: continue

                                 2 "Preserved"

Rampant rationalism rules the day.

Modern preachers have their own way.

“The Bible’s wrong”, they always say,

─And press on to apostasy.

A scholarship devoid of truth,

A “We know better”, dream forsooth.

The ancient lie now long in tooth.

─!Tis “Hath God said?” in mockery.

The critic doesn't like the text!

With our AV he's really vexed.

We wonder what he'll bring out next,

─PERversions born of treachery


**************

Waymarks Contender 59  

Report of Open Air Preaching

September 9^th  LUTON TOWN CENTRE.. S- was there when I arrived today. He had arranged a selection of gospels and tracts along the top of the wall. He gets his supplies from reliable sources so in this he is doing a good work. But he is very confused doctrinally and rejects the Trinity. He doesn’t stay when I come, for which I was thankful.

A lady spoke to me and told me she was a church member but seemingly has never been saved. She took a tract. Then a man came by who told me he had often listened to me. He had been a keen believer, he told me, in his young days but questioned God’s omnipotence. He did not believe God could create the universe out of nothing. He obviously believed in something far more fantastic; the eternality of matter.

He also was very jealous of me because I had faith and he had none. He then gave me a little of his history; born in Ukraine 1939. His name is john.

He is desperate to find peace with God but had to learn it could not be obtained on his terms. I told him to go home and get alone with God. He should repent of his sins and put his trust in Christ. He accepted a gospel of John and asked me to be sure to be here next week. I will do my best.

While we were yet speaking, another came. It was Peter. He has many doubts despite having confessed faith in Christ on this spot some twenty years ago. He is back in his flat and has a social worker to keep an eye on him.

September 16^th  LTC.  Alas, John did not show up. A wino demanded a pound from me. I do not support winos so he was told he would get nothing from me. Before my reader judges me for such lack of benevolence I will point out that I have on a number of occasions bought food for those I thought to be in need. This man pronounced me to be the Antichrist and added numerous obscenities to his description of me. I had on me three 50p coins and no more. Exit from the car park required one pound.

 listen and then to talk. They told me they had listened to me several times in the past but I did not recognise them. They claimed to be Christians and I thought they were probably Baptists, or from somemainline evangelicals. They are accepted, not because they have modified their heretical views but because the evangelical world is apostate anyway and doesn’t see anything wrong in their doctrines.

They deny the Trinity and the deity of Christ. They deny the existence of the devil, and much else that is false.

November 4^th LTC. A Big Issue seller  was on my usual spot when I arrived today. I gave him a copy of John’s Gospel and he responded by putting one of his magazines in my carrier. I felt obliged to give him something for it. He then remained next to me and listened to 20 minutes gospel preaching. To which he made no response.

A Nigerian man prayed over me. This is an occupational hazard. Those who do it are usually charismatic and will get no Amen from me.

November 11^th LTC. The Big Issue seller expected another donation today.

 I preached and a Muslim stood listening. I did not wish to engage in a profitless debate with him so I preached and preached. Eventually I had to stop and he stepped in. He was very polite and courteous but reacted as do the JW’s; change the subject if he couldn’t answer and deny all facts presented. This included the fact of Calvary. He told me the Lord wasn’t crucified but was taken alive into heaven.

He tried me also on the integrity of the Bible. They are all different apparently! How like the Koran, I replied. He was quickly put right on the integrity of the AV Bible, which was written by Henry V. according to him. Such is the deep ignorance of these people.

 Then another man interrupted to tell me if I had real faith I wouldn’t need a mobility scooter. Such was his contempt for the preaching of the gospel. For a few minutes I was dealing with enemies of the gospel on two fronts. A bit like Paul with the Stoics and Epicureans maybe.

All this drew a small crowd which is very unusual these days.   

(TIP. Don’t preach in the open air if you are not familiar with the Book)

AV Verses Vindicated

Mark 13: 14

But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not…

Modern versions omit spoken of by Daniel the prophet. They together (including the RV and JND) attack the integrity of the book of Daniel. The authority for these words in Mark is overwhelming. Daniel described an event yet future, and from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days. (Daniel 12: 11)

A denial of the prophecies of Daniel is apostasy. Suggestions that this prophecy was fulfilled in AD 70 are based on unbelief.

Matthew 24: 14

And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all (holos= complete; altogether; every whit) the world for a witness unto all the nations and then shall the end come.

“And these glad tidings of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole habitable earth,    JND

Note that when a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be taxed (Lk. 2: 1) the Greek word holos was not used. The decree did not apply outside the Roman Empire.

JND changed the meaning of holos to “not all, but part of” He did this in many places where holos is used... He made these changes without any authority but his own.

The only place where habitable occurs in the AV Bible is Prov. 8: 31, Rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth;

Some men live in parts of the world regarded as uninhabitable. Darby will not have these to be evangelised.

Who now decides which parts of the earth are habitable? The answer: The United Nations Division for Sustainable Development—Agenda 21. The object of this is to bring the habitable earth under the control of a ruling elite. This is why we are seeing the “Global Warming” lobby gaining strength.

We also see the religious side of the “One Ruler for the World” growing also.

This is what the Bahá'í’s have to say about it:-

The well-being of mankind, its peace and security are unattainable, unless and until its unity is firmly established. Bahá'u'lláh (1817-1892)

The successful execution of the programmes enunciated in Agenda 21 will greatly depend on the willingness of the peoples and nations of the world to recognise the vital link between global transformation and spiritual principles. In the Bahá'í view, "the storm battering at the foundation of society will not be stilled unless and until spiritual principles are actively engaged in the search for solutions." Primary among the spiritual principles which must guide the systematic implementation of Agenda 21 is the oneness of humanity. It is this cardinal principle that Bahá'ís believe will provide the spiritual, moral and ethical underpinnings for the successful translation of Agenda 21 into practical action in all parts of the world and at all levels of human society.

Now we see what JND started with his mischievous mutilations of Scripture. Scofield latched on to this with his “inhabited earth” footnotes. (See Lk. 2: 1). Some may conclude that the Doctrine of Sustainable Land Development is God-given. But what spirit was really behind JND in his translation?

Some information above is gleaned from libertytothecaptives.net

Luke 14: 5

Which of you shall have an ass or an ox fallen into a pit….

 “Which of you, if his son or his ox fall into a well…”  WV

“Suppose one of you has a child or an ox that falls into a well…” NIrV

“Which of you, having a son or an ox that has fallen into a well…” ESV

Griesbach, Greek scholar (?) and notorious Bible hater appears among the first (Critical Greek and English Testament; Bagster; undated 19th C.) to  produce a Greek New Testament (1805 AD) reading uios (son) in place of onos (ass)

Bible students will need to be wary of commentaries that are based on corrupt readings. The Bible Knowledge Commentary attributes error to the Lord Jesus, by having Him say “He (Christ) said that the guests would help a son or an ox in distress on the Sabbath, so it was totally appropriate to heal this poor individual.” — BKC; J Walvoord and B Zuck.

This reduces the Lord’s charge against the lawyers and Pharisees to mere gentle chiding, whereas the Lord was exposing the hypocrisy of these God haters. Compare Lk. 13: 15.

John 7: 53-8: 11

And every man went unto his own house…..Neither do I condemn thee: go and sin no more.

“[John 7: 53] and the first eleven verses of the following chapter are wanting in several MSS. Some of those which retain the paragraph mark it with obelisks, as a proof of spuriousness. Those which do retain it have it with such a variety of reading as is no where else found in the sacred writings. Professor Griesbach leaves the whole paragraph in the text with notes of doubtfulness. Most of the modern critics consider it as resting on no solid authority.” — Adam Clarke.

Clarke was an 18^th C. Methodist theologian. He rejected the eternal sonship of Christ.). He makes plain where he stood regarding the verbal inspiration and faithful preservation of Scripture. He didn’t believe it. This passage remains rejected by the Textual Critics and Christendom at large.

Bible teachers and many brethren who regard themselves as fundamentalist have allowed themselves to be influenced by the Textual Critics and rationalistic commentators.

Dr D Sorenson writes, “The Scofield Reference Bilbe, perhaps more than any other one edition, was the Bible of choice by Fundamentalists of America in the twentieth century. However C. I. Scofield also taught that Vaticanus and Sinaiticus were the earliest and best manuscripts available. …..

In John 7: 53, Scofield adds a footnote: ‘John 7: 53-8: 11 is not found in some of the most ancient manuscripts.” — Touch not the Unclean Thing; David H Sorenson.

Scofield’s main reason for rejecting this passage was that it is not found in Vaticanus and Sinaiticus and therefore has no real authority.

The two popish manuscripts are seriously depraved and stand against the vast majority of manuscripts containing the passage.  (see Few Fundamentalists Have Investigated the Issue in By The Way…  below)

Acts 2: 30

….God had sworn an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne.

“he would put one of his descendants on his throne.” NRSV

“he would set on of his descendants on his throne.” ESV

“ of the fruit of his loins to set upon his throne.” JND

Note 2 John 1: 7, for many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. A fundamental doctrine is attacked by the changes to the AV reading of Acts 2: 30.

In resurrection also Christ was seen in the flesh. (Luke 24: 39) and therefore in His second coming He will be seen in the flesh. Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and today, and for ever.

Darby chose to reject the words according to the flesh preferring to follow the course of modern rationalism and denying the manuscript evidence in front of him. Their removal destroys the gospel set out by Paul in the Roman epistle: Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh.

It is a fallacious argument to say that as the phrase “according to the flesh” is mentioned in Romans it doesn’t matter if it is missing in Acts. The fact is the words have been maliciously removed in modern versions.

Romans 1: 16

For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ:….

“for I am not ashamed of the gospel:” RV, NRSV,  ESV,  etc.

“For I am not ashamed of the glad tidings;” JND

“The words, ‘of Christ’, which follow here, are not found in the oldest and best manuscripts.” —JFB Commentary.

The “oldest and best” manuscripts are those rejected by the early churches. Hence they have been preserved in monastery dustbins and Vatican vaults.

The words “of Christ” are found in the majority of manuscripts. They have been removed too often from other verses for us to regard it as accidental on the part of scribes. This is a wilful satanic attack on Scripture.

What gospel is it where Christ is removed? All that is left is an anaemic mess that offends no one and brings none to the Saviour.

Romans 10: 15

How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things.

“How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news.” NRSV etc.

The gospel of peace is rejected in modern versions. It is not wanted by the earthling who lusts rather for material things. Peace with God is brought through preaching.   It calls for repentance and faith and does not fit in with modern evangelicalism.

The words gospel of peace are well established in the majority of manuscripts and ancient translations. There is no peace, saith my God, to the wicked. Isa. 57: 21

Romans 14: 10

….for we must all stand before the judgment seat (bema)  of Christ.

“for we will all stand before the judgment seat of God.”  ESV, NRSV

“for we shall all be placed before the judgment-seat of God.” JND

Altering the Scripture to read judgment seat of God makes Christ a liar, for He said The Father judgeth no man but hath committed all judgment unto the Son. John 5: 20.

The judgment seat of Christ has to do with believers (we must all stand). But God has a throne. It is not described as a bema. It is  where all unbelievers will stand, at the end of time and it is a throne. There will be no pleading one’s case at this throne. All present will be consigned to the lake of fire. Rev. 20: 15

It is a false notion to believe that the whole human race will appear before God at the end of time.

Chronological Study Bible NKJV. Review reviewed

The CSBNKJV has been reviewed in Believer’s Magazine October 2009. It received a very favourable write up and can be bought from J Ritchie Ltd for £30.99 by any wishing to be ripped off. (£18.74 from The Book Depository). It claims to be “the first study bible arranged in chronological order so presenting the text of the Bible in the order of events as they unfolded”.

Our reviewer tells us “there are transition comments to prepare you for the text that follows”. He doesn’t tell you that the result is a regurgitation of the old Higher Criticism combined with an attack on the verbal inspiration of Scripture.

The authorship of the books of Isaiah and Daniel are questioned.

Concerning Isaiah we read,

The latter chapters of the book of Isaiah have for centuries been recognised as different from the earlier chapters……Many scholars [sic] hold that these oracles [ch.40-ch.55] came from an unknown prophet who lived in Cyrus’s own time….. some scholars[sic] suggest that Second Isaiah [note the capitals!] may have been the one who preserved the collection of Isaiah’s oracles found in Isa. 1-39.

…..Others though, accept the traditional association of these words with the original Isaiah……These chapters speak of a future event: the glorious return from exile that will be authorized by Cyrus the Persian.

The yet future fulfilment of Isaiah’s prophecy is regarding Israel is totally rejected by  the final  sentence of the quote above. The return under Cyrus was only partial. God called him His anointed but THE ANOINTED (Messiah) is yet to return to lead all His people into the Millennial land.

Daniel is also divided. We read on p.1067 of the CSB,

Historical specificity  such as appears in Dan. 11 is rare in biblical prophecy. It is especially remarkable since Daniel’s exile is placed more than 400 years before the events so minutely described in the visio0n (Dan. 1: 1-7). Because of this, many scholars [sic] suggest that the visions of Da. 7-12 were actually written in Palestine during the persecutions of Antiochus IV (167 B.C.) and attributed after the fact to the famous exile Daniel.

If this should be true, which thankfully it is not, then parts of our Bible were written by liars and deceivers impersonating the prophets.

We recommend the reading of Sir Robert Anderson’s book, Daniel in the Critic’s Den.

The  CSBNKJV has a red letter heading over Exodus Chapter 14: “The Red Sea Crossing” and we read at 14: 21 “So Moses stretched out his hand over the sea and the Lord caused the sea to go back by a strong east wind all that night, and made the sea into dry land., and the waters were divided”.

Yet we look at a map of the journey made by the children of Israel, and note that it does not take them over the red Sea at all. This is the view of the Higher Critics who cannot admit to a God Who performs miracles.

The Red Sea miracle is confirmed by Psalm 106: 9, He rebuked the Red sea also, and it was dried up: so he led them through the depths, as through the wilderness.

Then there is the matter of the NKJV itself.—

The New King James Bible was first published in 1979. It is a deadly version because its editors have succeeded in deceiving the body of Christ on two main points:

(1) That it's a King James Bible (which is a lie), and
(2) That it's based on the Textus Receptus (which is only a partial truth).

It is essential to know that many of the word changes between the original KJV and the NKJV are not changes which result from removing archaisms, etc. Instead, many are changes which clearly reveal that, contrary to their agreed basis, the NKJV translators departed from the original KJV and its underlying Greek text, the Textus Receptus, in favour of the very same wording found in versions translated from corrupted Greek texts. — Dr. M E Todd

It is regrettable that J Ritchie Ltd through its magazine, Believer’s Magazine, edited by John Grant, should attempt to foist this work of apostasy on its readers.

                                                   

By the Way….

(The following article was found on the cnview.com website)

WHY I EXPOSE ERROR AND WARN BELIEVERS
I am grieved for those who cannot understand my concerns and my warnings. I am not "attacking" the ministers who are obviously in error. I have nothing against them personally. I praise the Lord for every good thing in them and for every soul saved under their ministries. But souls saved are "in spite of ", not "because of " many of their messages. God’s Word will not return to Him void. (Isaiah 55:11) I cannot and will not ignore the things they are doing "publicly" which I believe will eventually destroy thousands of sound churches and which will break down Godly walls between truth and error.
There are also those who are heretics deceiving the masses. Those ministers who deny the infallibility and inerrancy of the Bible, the Virgin Birth, the Lordship of Christ, the Blood Atonement, the Bodily Resurrection, the Eternal Sonship, etc. These I reject and alert others of their heresy. [Some of these men are found on Gospel Hall platforms, which is my reason for publishing this article here. – RS]
The Bible commands men of God to judge the teaching and ministries of other men in order to protect the truth and the people of God. We are to mark those who cause divisions contrary to apostolic doctrine (Romans 16:17). This requires a careful examination and evaluation. The believers in the church at Corinth were instructed to judge one another (1 Cor. 14:29). That principle applies also to ministries outside of one’s own church, especially to very "public ministries" which influence vast numbers of people.
Paul rebuked Peter publicly for his hypocrisy. (Gal. 2:11-14). Was Paul "attacking" Peter? Of course not. He was bringing him back to the truth.
Truth is more important than unity because without truth men cannot be saved and walk in the will of God. It is truth, not unity, which is the light in this dark world. John said, "I have no greater joy than to hear that my children walk in truth" (3 John 1:4). God tells me to mark and avoid those who teach contrary to the apostolic doctrine (Romans 16:17). He tells me to earnestly CONTEND for the faith once delivered to the saints (Jude 1:3). "Contend" means to strive, to fight. Trouble and striving are not wrong in themselves. The Lord Jesus Christ stirred up much trouble, as did all of the Old Testament prophets and New Testament apostles. Trouble is not wrong, when it is caused by contending for the truth. . The Lord God has put a love in my heart for His Truth. He imparted to me the spirit described by King David: "Therefore I esteem all thy precepts concerning all things to be right; and I hate every false way" (Psalm 119:128).
Ever since I was saved I have had something within me that has stirred me up for the Truth. I believe that Something is the Holy Spirit. One of His names is the Spirit of TRUTH (John 14:17; 15:26; 16:13 )
Matt 18:15 Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. (KJV)
This verse is directed to those whose brother offended them "personally". It does not tell us how to handle "public hypocrisy or false teachings".
Titus 1:9 Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers. (KJV)
Titus 1:10 For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision: (KJV)
Titus 1:11 Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre's sake. (KJV)
Titus 1:12 One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said, The Cretians are alway liars, evil beasts, slow bellies. (KJV)
Titus 1:13 This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith; (KJV)
I cannot stop their mouths but I can try and warn as many people as I can.
Sincerely,
Andy Neckar
Editor, Christian News & Views

□”Few Fundamentalists have investigated the Issue (of Textual Criticism) From Touch not the Unclean Thing.

Notwithstanding men such as Scofield and Clearwaters and numerous other Fundamentalist leaders in between, it is doubtful if many of them ever did any serious research into the history and lineage of the critical text. Had they spent the time and effort that many in later years did in researching the origins of the critical text, it is doubtful they would have continued their support. It was only in the last half of ok twentieth century that conservative scholars such as Edward Hills David Otis Fuller, Theodore Letis, Donald Waite, Jakob Van Bruggen Dell Johnson, and others began to publish their research into the prob­lems clinging to the critical text. For the most part, these men have been ignored or dismissed as right-wing extremists. However, the evidence uncovered by them has not and will not go away. Fundamentalists are going to have to confront the extensive evidence of apostasy associated with the critical text from Origen to Metzger. If separation is an inviolable foundation of Fundamentalism, Fundamentalists are going to have to admit the apostasy connected with the critical text.”

*****

Two Solemn Verses

Mark 8: 38  Whosoever shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous generation, of him shall the Son of man also be ashamed when He cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.

A full appreciation of Christ requires also an unashamed acceptance of His word. The Textual critics plainly do not do this. They question many of the Lord’s words. 

 John 12: 48 He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judges him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.

WHY DOES UNBELEF PREDOMINATE IN BIBLICAL SCHOLARSHIP TODAY? ( Taken from O Timothy Oct. 09;  “Bart Ehrmann’s Problem is God” by David Cloud.)

The fact that unbelief predominates in the field of biblical scholarship today is a fulfillment of Bible prophecy and is further proof of its infallibility. Some 2,000 years ago, the apostle Paul looked down through the corridor of time and made the following prediction about the last days: “This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. ... Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. ... Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. ... But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived. ... For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables” (2 Timothy 3:1, 5, 7, 13, 4:3-4).

Paul prophesied that the course of the church age will be characterized by increasing apostasy from the truth, by an onslaught of false teachers who will deny the faith, and that is exactly what we see today.

And the apostle Peter concurred: “But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. And through covetousness shall

they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not” (2 Peter 2:1-3).

Jude saw the same thing: ““Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints. For there are certain men crept in unawares, who

were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into

lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ ... These are murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men's persons in admiration because of advantage. But, beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ; how that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts. These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit” (Jude 1:3-4, 16-19).

These prophecies describe the coming and judgment of Bible teachers who will deny Christ as Lord, which is exactly what Bart Ehrman and his liberal buddies have done.

If the New Testament is a pack of myths and lies, how does it contain such precise prophecies?

NO FACT DISCOUNTS THE BIBLE’S DIVINE INSPIRATION

No fact of science or history or archaeology has ever proven that the Bible is not what it claims to be, the infallible Word of God. The Bart Ehrmans of this world are simply huffing and puffing.

One doesn’t have to be a historian and a multi-lingual scholar to see that the Bible is a miracle upon its very face. Its scientific accuracy, its amazing unity, its candor, its power to change lives, its doctrine of

salvation by grace without works, and many other things prove that it is the Word of God, and all of Bart Ehrman’s huffing and puffing cannot change this. I have studied the Bible diligently for 36 years and have examined the alleged “discrepancies” and errors, and I have found that the Bible is true and its critics are in error. I concur with what the late Robert Dick Wilson, “Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints. For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation,

ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ ... These are murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men's persons in admiration because of advantage. But, beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ; how that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts. These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the

Spirit” (Jude 1:3-4, 16-19).

These prophecies describe the coming and judgment of Bible teachers who will deny Christ as Lord, which is exactly what Bart Ehrman and his liberal buddies have done.

If the New Testament is a pack of myths and lies, how does it contain such precise prophecies?

Jesus, and shall it ever be,
A mortal man, ashamed of Thee?
Ashamed of Thee, whom angels praise,
Whose glories shine through endless days?

Ashamed of Jesus! sooner far
Let night disown each radiant star!
’Tis midnight with my soul, till He,
Bright Morning Star, bid darkness flee.

Ashamed of Jesus! O as soon
Let morning blush to own the sun!
He sheds the beams of light divine
O’er this benighted soul of mine.

Ashamed of Jesus! that dear Friend
On Whom my hopes of Heav’n depend!
No; when I blush, be this my shame,
That I no more revere His Name.

Ashamed of Jesus! yes, I may
When I’ve no guilt to wash away;
No tear to wipe, no good to crave,
No fears to quell, no soul to save.

Ashamed of Jesus! empty pride!
I’ll boast a Saviour crucified,
And O may this my portion be,
My Saviour not ashamed of me!

Joseph Grigg 1769

Rversions born of treachery.

But yet there is preserved for men.

The inspired Word through writers’ pen.

Kept safe from men of haughty den.

                               ─Enduring through eternity.

                        Settled thus it is in heaven.

                       God's own Word devoid of leaven.

                     Well said, Psalm 12 verse 6 and 7'

                            ─Speak forth AV in majesty.

R S