of Modern Versions
Copyright © 2017 by Neville Salvetti
All rights reserved. This book or any portion thereof may not be reproduced or used in any manner whatsoever without the express written permission of the publisher except for the use of brief quotations in a book review or scholarly journal.
First Printing: 2016
Second Printing 2017
150 Forest Road
MIRANDA, NSW, Australia 2228
Table of Contents
Do not think that the 20% of changes made to the King James Version by modern Bibles were made to improve the text to make it more accurate
Satan needs to change Christianity if he wants to merge its belief system with that of other religions to make it part of his one world religion, a religion that anyone can belong too.
Note: it is not a one world denomination but a one world belief system all can belong too!
He has to change what Christian, believe to make it able to fellowship with other religions so he has to change The Bible to make it say what he needs it to say to be able to change Christianity to what he needs it to believe.
Now you know why the King James Version had 20%, of it changed so that its belief system would align with that if other religions so that ‘Christians’ could fellowship with them without reacting to their belief system or finding doctrinal fault with them.
He has succeeded because there is now a church (Place of worship in Jerusalem) where Catholics, .modern liberal Christians and Muslims can fellowship and worship together in complete unity.
Satan with his one world belief system Christian Bible has set the scene for modern so called Christianity to fit into his one world belief system - his one world religion.
He attacked its basis and by doing this aimed to change its belief system.
For Centuries Satan hindered Christianity by hiding The Bible from the common people and leaving doctrine in the hand of scholars who promoted their viewpoints on it as well allowing the established church to proclaim doctrine according to what it needed to proclaim even though it might not have been Biblically correct. Few non-clergy people knew the bible to be able to correct any errors and if they did the established church removed anyone daring to criticise its doctrinal errors or promote The Bible and the reading of it. At times these people were burnt at the stake along with their Bibles.
Then the printing press came along and The Bible was accessible to all. The church was no longer able to stop people reading it and the reformation occurred. Satan now was losing control of established religion.
Direct frontal attack did not work as it only strengthened the Christians so he needed to attack it from inside Christianity and not externally if he wanted to control the church and guide it again.
So he decided he would need to do the following:
From examining the approach of scholars and editors to modern bibles and seeing the alterations they have made the objectives of Satan appear to be as follows:
Make The Bible appear to be like any other holy book written by man so it can be altered without having to be worried about a God disapproving of the alterations.
Make out the Jesus was conceived normally and not miraculously so He is no different to the founder of any other religion.
Because they implied Jesus could not redeem us or save us, because he was not divine until after death, it appears salvation requires us to do something and not just accept what Jesus is suppose to have done.
Like Jesus, man can become divine through their personal effort just as Jesus became divine because of what He did and suffered.
Change the attitudes of people to demons and hell so that the conflict with God was hidden and he could represent demons in a positive way or mythologise them so people would not believe in them and hell.
Satan will then have all religions on the same basis so that they can become one in worship as their basic beliefs are all the same.
This is why true Jews, true Muslims, and true Christians will be exterminated in the tribulation when Antichrist rules so that they will not be there to show the errors of the one world religious system.
This is because of what they teach in most seminaries these days using bibles modified to express their beliefs so that Christianity is not taught but a pseudo Christianity is taught.
Modern Biblical scholarship assume man has made errors in the transmission of The Bible when they copied earlier manuscripts and that the older the manuscript the more accurate it is. This ignores God's overall control of things and shows they do not really believe in the God of the Bible, who said He had preserved His Bible, but in a lesser God who cannot preserve the writings He originally told us.
They begin by stating that it was 35+ years before the first Gospel was written and that all the information about the Life of Christ was passed down by word of mouth so that it was coloured by the belief of Christians that Jesus was divine.
They say that we have to correct the Gospels to remove the wrong statements in it and that we do not have other historical sources we can use to correct them. So we have to look at the practices and beliefs of the time of Jesus.
So they judge an infinite Christ by finite man's myths and beliefs.
They examine the culture and beliefs of the time of Jesus and use it as a basis. Unfortunately it was based on Greek humanism (reason and philosophy) which did not believe in a God like the God of the Bible, as well as mythology and the history of the day to determine what was actually done by Jesus during His lifetime.
They found men who had been born from sex with a God but no man born of a virgin birth so reasoned Christ had born through sex. So they removed the references to a virgin birth when they translated The Bible, deliberately mistranslating words to do so.
Because they believe The Bible was not correctly transmitted they do not believe the prophecies about Jesus and the purpose of His death. So they examine the death of Jesus historically and state that crucified people were left hang on the cross and rot as part of the punishment so that Jesus would not have been taken down from the cross and buried in a tomb. They also state that Pilot would not have granted the wish of Nicodemus to bury Jesus because Pilate's character was such that he would not have granted this request anyway,
Because of this and the lack of historical proof of the resurrection they believe it never happened and the events around it are not as declared in the Gospels.
The bodily resurrection of Jesus is what makes Christianity special. No other religious founder has been able to do this so scholars looking for an historical precedence for the resurrection do not find one. So there are three schools of thought in modern scholarship about the bodily resurrection of Jesus:
He rose bodily (which they believe did not happen)
People had only visions about Him rising in in a body
People hallucinated about Him rising in a body.
In other words it actually did not physically happen.
They believe Jesus was made a God after death but was not divine before birth so had no authority over Satan and that redemption could not have occurred. This means Jesus could not delegate authority to us over Satan and that the resurrection may not have occurred so was not a proof of His divinity so that Mark 16:9-21 were removed.
Anyone who was raised to heaven and seated with God was considered at the time of Jesus to have become a God and be divine and this is how they believe the early Christians declared Jesus divine.
This viewpoint is in line with their using history as a basis to judge faith so that they also do not believe in miracles except to say others at the time of Christ or earlier did similar things to what He did. These people were not considered divine until after their death so Jesus did not need to be divine at birth to do these things. This is different to Cessationism that says Jesus did miracles but they were only for the time of Jesus and not for today's church.
It also means that others can become divine and this belief was proven by The Catholic church who early in the 1800's issued 4 decrees making Mary equal to Jesus in many ways.
If He was not divine Jesus could not redeem us which is why new bibles imply Salvation requires us to work at getting to heaven.
These scholars needed Greek texts to back up these beliefs so they looked and found two in the 19th Century (Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus) and also another in the 20th Century (Codex 2742) that was used to heavily alter the Gospel of Mark.
They stated 3rd and 4th Century documents were reliable and were to be used as the basis o translation.
Unfortunately for them it was proved that Codex Sinaiticus and 2742 were forgeries and Codex Vaticanus was a 5th Century codex so that none of the three documents they relied on were eligible to be used as a basis for Bible translations.
Tischendorf was told by Simonedes and a witness who saw him write the Sinaiticus that Sinaiticus was a forgery but he ignored this.
Code 2742 was based on a Greek text published in 1860 and the ink used in it was not available to the late 1700’s so it is a forgery which means modern Bibles have a problem. It is probable that the concern over the methods used to prove Codex 2742 could show Sinaiticus was also a fake which is why they withdrew the testing of it they were going to do on it.
The translation of Modern text is based on Greek rational thinking and is not based on faith in God and what He said He had done with His Bible transmission.
Modern liberal theologians portray Jesus as a human, no different to Mohammed so that Catholic, Christian and Moslem can fellowship together (the aim of Ecumenicism).
They portray a god (different to the God of The Bible) who could not transmit His Bible correctly and had in it things they consider lies (Genesis are myths e.g.). In other words they are not Christian but are a man's idea of what Christianity should be based on using their reasoning about Jesus resulting from accepting historical records as being the criteria and not faith in God.
It is obvious that they use reason rather than faith to work out what they believe the Bible should say using the historical culture of the time of Jesus to work out whom Jesus was and what He did ignoring what the Gospels said because they believe these are not a correct record of the life of Jesus.
The Bible says that what is not of faith is sin which in these circumstances incorrectly expressing the truths God has said about Himself, Jesus and His life and purposes is sin. So modern bibles are a sin against God and His truths.
This means that modern Bibles translated by these liberal scholars and/or edited by them do not express what God said but what-they have reasoned God should have said-in The Bible.
They say they are expressing the mind of God even though we are told no one can know the mind of God. This shows how deceived they are and how dangerous their Bibles are as they remove 20% of the traditional Bible meaning only 80%. of their Bible can be accurate because old and new Bibles agree on this 80%. The 20% based on reasoning is backed up by three codices: Two are forgeries and one should not be used as it was written in the wrong century.
They use reason (historical practice of the time of Jesus) to make those changes basing them on three codices which are ineligible to use for Bible translation.
How can churches using modern Bibles have faith in the divinity of Jesus and His virgin birth when they purposely do not teach these things and remove any title of His that shows He is Divine? How can they do the work of Jesus if they do not really believe Him to be God. His advice just becomes the advice of a holy man and this attitude is reflected in the worldliness of the church as it uses bibles based on worldly historical ideas.
Modern theology is based on reason and this lack of faith is why churches, using modern Bibles, are declining and actually worship a Jesus that is different to the Jesus in the Traditional Bibles which was worshipped the first 1850 years of Christianity.
Traditional Bibles have The Holy Spirit to guide the translators. Modern Bibles only have the reasonings of man without any external spiritual check to show their reasonings are correct. If they heard The Spirit they would have translated the Bible correctly and made little if no changes.
You wonder how theologians who question everything and accept only what is historically proven or belief of the time that is rationally possible can translate a foreign language like Greek into a Bible that is supposedly based on faith and not things that are only rationally provable. This is why today’s modern Bibles do not promote faith but doubt about supernatural things to do with Jesus and God.
Their approach has resulted in a God of a bible that is different to the traditional one accepted for 1850 years. The modern church uses these ‘Bibles’ and now worship a different God to the one of the traditional Bible. Their God is based on rational processes while the God of the traditional Bible is based on faith. This is what is leading to the apostasy of the last days and people do not even realise this.
Christians think they are worshiping the true God but are not and so are in a form of apostasy because the reject God and what He originally said in His Bible. They only commit sin in doing this if they deliberately reject what God tells them about this in their spirit through The Holy Spirit.
Christ has been changed by modern theologians to be similar to the founders of other religions so that the Antichrist can combine all major religions (except Judaism) into a one world faith that all can believe in and fellowship in. To do this He must destroy the traditional faith in God and replace it with a faith other religions can relate to and fellowship with and have a Bible that enables it to be done.
It is not one world denomination but a one world belief system.
We have this bible now which is why this fellowship of 'Christians, Roman Catholics and Muslims is occurring so that a joint place of worship has been set up in Jerusalem..
This shows the danger of not having faith but trying to reason out things and ignoring what God says about them. Satan can use reason for his own purposes as he has done with modern bible translations.
What is not of faith is sin (wrong) and modern theologians have proven this with their translations and the approach to the three manuscripts they have used for translation.
Where there is no faith there are no miracles. Where Jesus is not considered to be God before He was born there can be no delegation by Him to cast out Satan.
These are evidences of The Kingdom of God and these are missing from many churches which is why they do not represent The Kingdom of God but the denomination they belong too. These churches use modern bible translations which preach these things because they are based on the reasonings of men and not on faith.
Miracles and casting out Satan were signs of the early church which is so different to what is called Christianity today which lacks these marks of the early church so really does not represent early Christianity where these two things proved Jesus was greater than the religions around them.
The modern church usually does not have these as a part of it so do represent the church Christ set up but something man has organized for control purposes. Without these two things the church is just like any other religious organisation.
When it has miracles and the casting out Satan it prospered. Now when these are missing it dies or barely holds its own in society becoming more and more irrelevant to most people outside of it.
Without these two things the church is like any other faith founded by a man having good morals and someone to worship who is said to be god but does not apparently have the authority of a god to defeat evil and do miracles. It becomes a whitewashed sepulcher, having the appearance of Christianity but none of the spiritual power and authority of it in it.
People seek spiritual authority and power and cannot find it in the Christian church which is why they go elsewhere which is the reason the new age, witchcraft, Satanism and similar religions and cults are growing and the church is usually declining where it does not embrace spiritual power and authority.
Soon Jesus will change this with the last three great revivals before He return when the whole world will hear the Gospel. Be ready to b e a part of it!
Reading the Bible is an act of faith, worship and Love:
Faith in something you believe in which is why you read it
Worship because you believe is better than any other book and that it is from God
Love because you are reading about someone you love and love to read about Him.
Reading it as a chore or habit is the wrong way to approach it.
Do not believe what it says in parts
Consider it to be alterable like any other book
Do not love Jesus or they would not demean Him in it as they do.
And they are the ones supposedly to encourage you faith in God, the Bible and Jesus.
It can be seen they are not qualified to translate the Bible as they do not have the correct attitudes to do this.
In the Middle Ages The Bible ruled and science was subservient to what The Bible said about it. Science was not developed to the extent that its concepts were able to question what The Bible taught about the natural order of things.
Today science is king and The Bible is made to submit to it. The Bible has to submit to man’s theories and reasonings about it scientifically and this has carried over into modern theology where what can be proved or is more historically possible is more important than what may have happened.
First there was Cessationism in the church which cast doubt on there ever actually having been miracles
Secondly science seemed to show The Bible was wrong
Thirdly evolution seemed to show creation was a myth
Reason dictated The Bible had been incorrectly transmitted so needed correcting.
The first was Cessationism in the church dealt with later.
The second was the change in attitudes towards what The Bible said and because of the new discoveries of which science seemed to contradict The Bible resulting from the attitudes towards it in the 'age of enlightenment' period.
The trials of Galileo in 1610 and 1633 were really about attitudes that would be a part of the age of enlightenment and not actually the theories involved in the trial. If the attitudes Galileo had towards the old theories had been accepted then there would have been no trial. The attitudes were behind the fact the new theories were expressed and the rejection of these theories' meant these attitudes were also rejected. So, in a sense, the age of the enlightenment's embryo was possible in the early 1600s and its full expression was later in the 18th Century.
It could be said that before the 'enlightenment' matured, science was aimed at expressing the Glories of God, revealing His Glory in the discoveries that were made, while the age of enlightenment was aimed at knowledge of things by man, giving man the glory for the discoveries made. The object of focus was turned from God to man and along with this faith in the things of God diminished amongst those who examined the things of science.
So we need to examine what Cessationism is and how it affected the church and then to examine the attitudes in the age of enlightenment that changed or modified the attitudes in the church to The Bible.
I will not present arguments for or against these two things as the purpose of this document is not to justify any stance but to just show the effects they had on faith in The Bible and acceptance of The Bible as fact by theologians.
In Christianity, Cessationism is the doctrine that spiritual gifts such as speaking in tongues, prophecy and healing ceased with the original twelve apostles. This is generally opposed to continuationism, which teaches that the Holy Spirit may bestow the spiritual gifts on persons other than the original twelve apostles at any time.
Cessationists teach that the primary purpose of miracles was to authenticate the Apostles' message as being of a divine origin and, therefore, authoritative (Hebrews 2:3-4). However, since the completion of the Canon, the Church can test the truthfulness of any message claiming to represent God, against his written revelation which having been completed, makes any supernatural sign as unnecessary (2 Peter 1:19; see also 2 Timothy 3:16-17).
This misses the whole point that signs and wonders are to show the Kingdom of God is there and without them The Kingdom of God cannot be proven to actually exist but needs to be taken on faith, A faith Jesus did not expect His apostles to have because they saw The Kingdom’s authority being expressed on earth.
The expression of The Kingdom shows that Jesus had an actual place to rule from and it was not fictional.
Cessationists believe that, given that the authority of the early church has been established and the New Testament is complete, Christians do not require charismatic gifts to guide them. So they believe that the spiritual gifts cease to operate today after the death of the last of the twelve apostles and are no longer in effect today.
Because the supernatural expression of the gifts is the proof of Jesus resurrecting and the only expression of His Kingdom on earth then removing these things removes that which differentiates the Christian church from other religions making it no different to most of them. So when science comes along and needs proof of the supernatural the church can provide none. So science can proceeds with its assumptions and theories even though they may remove faith in things that people may have because the church cannot show that faith is real not having anything supernatural to show their faith is in a real God and not one just talked about. Cessationism is necessary so that the church will be little different to other world religions when the Antichrist makes his one world religious system..
The Enlightenment was a philosophical movement which dominated the world of ideas in Europe in the 18th century. The Enlightenment included a range of ideas centred on reason as the primary source of authority and legitimacy, along with increased questioning of religious orthodoxy.
European politics, philosophy, science and communications were radically reoriented as part of a movement referred to by its participants as the Age of Reason, or simply the Enlightenment. Enlightenment thinkers in Britain, in France and throughout Europe questioned traditional authority and embraced the notion that humanity could be improved through rational change. The Enlightenment produced numerous books, essays, inventions, scientific discoveries, laws, wars and revolutions. The American and French Revolutions were directly inspired by Enlightenment ideals and respectively marked the peak of its influence and the beginning of its decline. The Enlightenment ultimately gave way to 19th-century Romanticism.
Reason was very important and whatever reasoned that was reasonable was accepted even if it went against current norms and traditions such as Biblical belief and doctrine,.
It was also a time of religious (and anti-religious) innovation, as Christians sought to reposition their faith along rational lines and deists and materialists argued that the universe seemed to determine its own course without God’s intervention.
In the Middle ages God was behind everything so science had to obey The Bible. In the enlightenment, God was an impersonal player as there was no proof he existed because the supernatural was now absent from the established church as a result of Cessationism and so it became a battle of words between the church and science. If Pentecostalism and Charismatic churches had been around things may have been different.
The church had little evidence of a supernatural God while science had all the evidence it needed to prove it because all it theorised about, (at that stage), could be seen or proved by experiment. People embraced science and rejected Christian belief because it could not be proved and God did not appear to be real because He did not work through the church to prove His existence.
So a culture arose where it was allowable to doubt The Bible because what it said could not be proven at that time and was appeared not to be backed up by science and archaeology and God did not appear to be real or relevant because He was not personally working miracles to prove who He was.
So because of science and the church not able to show the supernatural reason became more important than faith so that it was easy for people to believe The Bible was inaccurate and needed correcting.
You are a theologian who believes The Bible is not correct because it does not align with what science is finding out about the world, especially evolution, which had been around 100 years or more before Darwin wrote his book. You believe the Bible is corrupted because of this and has not been copied (transmitted) correctly.
The church does not show there is a supernatural element to nature because of Cessationism so you become rational about things looking for natural explanations in all things.
As you are a scientist, history is very important so you look for historical Greek texts much older than the ones used for the King James Bible and when two texts are discovered 1400 years old you embrace them .
You do not worry about doctrinal differences as you believe the doctrine in the King James is incorrect, being the result of later texts where errors were copied into it so that it does not accurately reflect original doctrine according to you viewpoint.
So you promote the translation of this 'New, improved, earlier text' and ignore the arguments of those who follow the King James Bible.
Because you have no other Greek texts and the ones you had for the King James you consider erroneous in some degree you also look at other religions to see if they align with your version of Christianity.
Because you believe your two Greek texts are correct as far as you are you concerned you consider their doctrine is correct and no doctrine is altered by them. If any are incorrect in the King James it is because of the erroneous texts used by the translators of the King James.
Because you do not believe in a supernatural events as none are evident in the church you remove as many of these as you can, such as the virgin birth. Because of evolution you declare Genesis Ch 1-11 myths like those of other world religions that are about creation and the flood.
Because all world religions do not have God born as a man you reason Jesus must be a man so cannot be sinless. So he appears to sin in Matt 5:22 and John 7:8. Especially because birth after sex with a God and deification after death this was common belief and practice around the time of Christ.
Because other founders of religions were deified you have no problem with Jesus being Lord in heaven but not on earth. So every reference to divinity in His lifetime is inappropriate so you remove these from The Bible where possible.
You are not concerned about the miracles of Jesus or the gifts of The Spirit occurring today because of Cessationism in the churches. Besides they are not present in most religions
This means you do not need supernatural events to verify the Jesus you write about is the real one.
So you have a Jesus who was born a man, did good but was not perfect and died and became like an ascended master or God. But he was not god before he died.
The Bible translations derived from the Greek you make out of these two codices reflects all of these suppositions and the churches that use them also accept them.
So the church becomes more like the pagan religions used to evaluate Christianity and it no longer demonstrates The Kingdom of God because it no longer demonstrates The Kingdom of God's authority over demons and nature.
This suits Satan who has to corrupt Christianity and its holy book so that Jesus is like the founder of other world religions and the supernatural is really not a part of their worship or lifestyle. This he has to do to prepare for Antichrist and so he can form the one world religion for Satan to be worshiped by.
Satan and his demons and their evil nature have to be hidden so Jesus is the one made to fall from heaven for rebellion in Is 14:12 and not Satan. Hell is changed to another name so people do not realize it is hell being spoken about and so do not associate the punishments of hell with the new name used for it. Satan needs this done for liberal Christians to accept him as beneficial when he first appears on the scene in the tribulation.
Antichrist will be a normal man, like the founder of any other religion, and will be honoured like the founders of other religions are honoured.
Meanwhile the defenders of both Greek texts will fight to the death defending their text, believing the other side is deceived.
So a generation has grown up not knowing the doctrine of the King James Version and only know Bibles based on the new Greek which is man’s reasoned attempt to ‘correct’ The Bible.. This means they will not see any doctrinal error in Bibles based on the new Greek and to them the King James will have the errors.
The stage is ready now for Antichrist to appear as he has a whole generation now trained in the bible he has created for the Christian church to use and has moulded it to be like other religions so it can be easily assimilated with them in his one world church.
The Lord He had me write it to show it was useless to argue doctrine or texts with modern theologians as they believed they were correct and the King James proponents were wrong and any reasoned arguments by the King James proponents would not make them change their minds because they had science and history on their side.
These liberal Christians have to be convicted by The Holy Spirit that they are wrong as man cannot do it.
So do not debate with modern theologians unless The Spirit says to, but to fight the demons behind them that are convicting them to fight for the apostate Greek text.
If they love Jesus they serve Him, even if their understanding of who He is, is not correct. God looks at the heart not the mind and if they love Jesus as Lord and try to obey Him that is all He requires.
You are judged on what you do with what you know and not what others say you should do.
As long as you wholeheartedly follow what you have understood as being the truth the God accepts your following Him and The Holy Spirit will show you the truth to free you from the heresy of modern liberal theologians.
These people follow error taught by those in authority over them and who would not follow these errors if they knew the truth. God judges their heart to see if it is correct in attitude towards Him and not just what they know.
God judges you on what you do with what you know and not on what others say you should know.
So do not judge their salvation. But it is possible to say that their lifestyle is such that it indicates they may not get to heaven and even then remember you may be in the same boat. So better usually not to say anything but to point them to what The Bibles says and to encourage them to follow the truths of The Bible.
Without the expression of the authority of Jesus and the work of The Holy Spirit, Liberal Christianity is just the like the words of any other religion. It shows no real evidence the resurrection has occurred and that Jesus has the authority over nature and the spirit world that resulted from it. It might as well be the words of Jehovah's Witnesses, Unitarians or Mormons. In fact there are members of these cults on editorial committees of Modern Bibles because there is nothing to show the words of the Bible are different to the words of other holy books.
It expresses the Authority of Jesus over nature and demons
It demonstrates effective spiritual warfare.
They are guided by The Holy Spirit so knows how to serve Jesus effectively as well as when to speak to those The Spirit is convicting about the errors of modern theology.
They demonstrate the Gifts of The Holy Spirit in their life.
Where science is concerned there is a need to show science is wrong and The Bible correct but as there is a lot of emotionality by scientist who defend evolution and faith is required to believe in evolution logical arguments will usually get you nowhere. Even factual scientific evidence is not accepted at times the religion of evolution is so strong.
Unless the church demonstrates the authority of Jesus over Satan and nature it will not effectively show modern Bibles are wrong through proving them wrong about what they have said about Jesus and The Holy Spirit. Arguments will only be words by two sides who are convinced they are correct and the other side is wrong.
Unfortunately, instead of learning about these things from Denominations that demonstrate them the established church prefers to criticise them to justify their own position and by this condemn many to a faith that is far less than what it should be, which is to be expected if reason and knowledge is more important than listening to The Holy Spirit and demonstrating The Kingdom of God to the world. And when the denominational approach to things over rides what The Bible says about them.
Modern theology is a result of the rationalism of the 17th Century in which man reasoned things based on the experience of nature around them which is why evolution became so popular. God was secondary to science so that science overrode what The Bible stated about something.
The believed God was either impersonal or not all powerful which is why they said we cannot know what The Bible really said as God did not care enough or was not powerful enough to preserve the original text of it so we would have it. This means we need to find out ourselves what it means and what is means must be deduced from the religions we know of that believe in a god or gods.
This is why Modern Bibles can change their texts as they obtain a 'better understanding' of what they believe The Bible should say and which is why it is no use debating them on doctrine as they believe their erroneous doctrine is correct so that no doctrine, according to them, is affected by their translation.
They go to the oldest manuscripts believing they are more accurate than more modern ones and use them as a starting point of translation. It does not matter to them that these manuscripts come from a part of Christianity rejected by the majority Christians in the early Christian period as being in error and so was not orthodox believe in the early church. They are the oldest record and historians go by what they have and not by what 'folklore' says happened. There is also the problem that, of the three manuscripts used by them as he main basis for their translations, two are fakes and one falls outside the period they say you can use for Bile translations so they really have no textual basis for the changes they make to the traditional Bible.
They say that there is no guarantee that the early documents of the church have been correctly preserved so that they cannot be used to contradict their 'improved' Greek.
So they look at the beliefs in other religions around them as being what people have perceived as being what God requires of people (once again using historical experience rather than what The Bible says) and make Christianity to be like them and because there are so many corrections in the two early documents they use they do not believe they are really as accurate as they could be. So using reason and the example of other religions they alter their bible to align it with what appears to be the orthodox practice of religions in the world that have texts that go back further than Christianity at times.
To do this they have too:
Make Jesus human, like the founder of other religions
Remove the authority of Christians over demons and sickness as other religions do not have this because Jesus could not have made to them the delegation given to us to do this.
Make Jesus an ascended master or similar or a holy one who is deified like many religions have allowing them to have other humans become deified (Mary is an example) or revered as superior to normal people (saints)
Remove the direct and personal interaction of God with people so you need to do things or work out what your god wants you to do making The Holy Spirit impersonal or a spiritual force, removing the personal role of guidance He has in The Bible. This requires ‘authorised people to be a go-between you ad God to know what God desires you to do.
Make it necessary to be saved through your personal efforts and not by faith so stopping the need to believe in a particular god for salvation by removing redemption because Jesus was supposedly not divine so could not pay the penalty for sin
Remove the hell of Christianity and replacing it with what world religions call hell, if they have a hell in their belief system. This is why Hell is missing from modern bibles. If there is no punishment for evil then there is no evil angels to corrupt people to go there so Satan can be classified as good and have the same status of Jesus and even be the brother of Jesus, as some believe.
This suits Satan as it allows him to make Christianity like any other religion so it can be united with them in a one world general religion that has the basic beliefs of all and which allows for some variance from the norm in their beliefs. This is why pagan events and beliefs are now rife throughout the Christian world.
Look at modern Bibles closely and all the six changes mentioned above will be found in them.
Note: If The Bible is not the final authority then any cult can be part of the one world church. It is because of The Bible we use classifies them as a cult we do not accept them and if The Bible is not the ultimate authority then what you believe correct, providing it fits in with what is generally acceptable as religion, can be part of your church or belief system.
People say the new bibles are Gnostic but they are not. They use a Gnostic text and build on it to make Christianity which is not Gnostic but new age so that all religions and new age beliefs can join as one. This is so Hinduism, Buddhism, Satanism, even witchcraft will be able to identify with the principles of this 'improved' Christian' belief system.
The bone-fide Muslims, Jews and true Christians will not be a part of this new 'Christianity' which is why they are destroyed by the new religion and its government.
The Antichrist must be going to be revealed soon as the bible he needs is ready and ecumenicism and interfaith dialogue are become more open so that heads of the different religions even worship together which they could or would not have done under the faith requirements of the King James Bible.
The Bible is the handbook of The Kingdom so Satan has used liberal theologians to attack it because:
It tells us type of faith required to enter The Kingdom
It tells us about Jesus, who He is and what He has done for us
It tells us how to obtain eternal life
It tells us what God requires of us as His Citizens
It tells us how to defeat Satan
Satan has to remove its message in important ways and he uses liberal theologians to attack The Bible. It is only as they are able to modify the Bible to reinforce their liberal stance on doctrine can they succeed with their heresy and replace The Kingdom of God with their ideas (really Satan’s) of God and His kingdom.
Noah Webster, in his 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language gives a definition of heresy (which I have paraphrased as follows):
The original meaning was to take hold of something. The word, in his days meant a fundamental error in the Christian faith or untenable or unsound opinion or doctrine.
Heresy is perhaps too general a word as the person you are calling a heretic also calls you one. The same is with apostasy so that is also not a good word to use. An absolute reference is needed and I propose the King James Version and the traditional received Greek text is used to define that which is in error as this translation sits on over 1850 years of continuous Bible. So heresy, as discussed in this book is from a traditional King James point of view and not from the viewpoint of liberal theologians who may find nothing heretical about any of their belief system.
Have a reference to show the error or heresy against. The Greek and Hebrew texts of the King James Bible are proven as being the yardstick for measuring scripture translations and will be used for the purposes of establishing a standard by which to reveal error or heresy in modern bibles translations.
You needf to know The Bible truths so that the error or heresy is clearly understood.
You need to hear The Holy Spirit to be guided by Him in understanding the error or heresy and showing the heresy for what it is
You need to observe the fruit of the heretical belief to see if it is Godly or not.
Heretics attack the truths of the Bible in a way that backs up their teaching and beliefs so that their heresy is supported by their version of the bible either by what they make it say or the way they comment on it. Unfortunately they cannot see the error of their beliefs and only the Holy Spirit can show this to them but The Spirit uses people to tell the heretics what they need to believe for Him to be able to show them the truths they need to know.
They interpret it according their theology (belief system) and not actually what it says. They do this by:
Changing the meaning of the translation of the Greek Text:
They make words mean what they want them to mean so that the word is translated differently in different places even though there is no rationale for doing that.
The leave out verses or change them to mean something different to what they originally meant
They add, alter or remove words or phrases to give verses the sense they want
They add footnotes that question the validity or accuracy of verses or promote their interpretation of their doctrine behind a verse
Mythologize Genesis or other parts of The Bible to say these things never really happened
Make up theories such as the Gap theory to make their beliefs more palatable in regard to sin and creation
Rationalising parts of the Bible to remove the need for faith (miracles are an example of this)
They denounce the King James Version as being incorrect and needing to be corrected through the so called better critical Greek Text and use this to justify their corruption of doctrine
By doing these they remove The God of The Bible who is All Powerful and Almighty and create a new god that is not like the God of The Bible. This shows they worship a different God to that of The Bible.
It is obvious they do not know or fear The God of The Bible or they would not have altered The Bible the way they do.
If you add to the Bible (like the Gap theory), Mythologist Gen Ch. 1 to 11 or declare miracles are not real, you cannot really trust The Bible and it becomes useless as a Guide to redemption, salvation, trusting God and learning about Him. Not believing Gen 3 literally removes the need for Jesus and makes The New Testament and Jesus irrelevant.
Rationalising Miracles also removes the need for faith in God’s power to do Miracles and calls God, Jesus and the Bible liars and again you cannot trust anything that particular Bible says. You have no place to go to find out about God, redemption and salvation and must rely on what can be seen in His creation and listening to your conscience to get to heaven.
The Bible becomes like any other book, nothing special or God-given and can be accepted by many belief systems without compromising their own beliefs.
It is sad that one of the leading modern theologians is an agnostic because he uses reason rather than faith to examine The Bible.
There are two approaches to translating biblical Greek: formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence. Formal equivalence is when the text is translated and says what the text actually means. This is the approach behind the King James Translation. Dynamic equivalence means that you translate passages in such a way so it says what you believe should be there. This means you alter the text as you think you should so what the text says is in a way secondary to what the Greek text actually says. As each translators and editors of each version sees things differently you have the same words translated differently in the various versions which is why there is such a difference between modern translations.
This mistranslation of dynamic equivalence is compounded in modern versions as they use the liberal Greek text based on what Hort and Wescott gave to the Revised Version translators so they are already going to translate the bible wrongly even before the place their own doctrinal bias on it. The Revised Version was so bad a translation it had to be immediately revised which shows how accurate the Greek text they used was.
Another problem is that in terms of copyright law, new Bible versions can only be copyrighted as ‘derivative works.’ Words must be changed whether or not they need to be changed. Editors and translators may update one archaic word in eight thousand in the King James Version, but modern bible editors must change many other words, so the new translations are materially different to the King James Version and at times to each other.
This problem of difference in texts because of copyright occurs amongst modern bibles so that they can never completely agree as they must use many different words to say the same thing and words and phrases that are substituted for another do not always say the same thing or have the same meaning. This is another reason modern bibles are different to each other.
God is not the author of confusion so cannot be behind the confusion of interpretation in modern bibles. This only leaves Satan as the cause of this confusion as confused, incorrectly translated bibles would suit his purposes well.
The problem with dynamic translation is that each translator imprints their own doctrinal belief on the translation and if they are liberal Christians then their translation will be liberal. Unfortunately many of the editors and translators of the modern versions are liberal (heretical) in some way in their beliefs or have compromised them in some way so they are not following Jesus as Lord and translate accordingly so that their beliefs are not threatened.
Sadly, many Christians do not know the errors in the beliefs of many translators and editors and of modern day bibles and many leading theologians believe modern bibles are trustworthy, not realising the errors in the faith of the editors behind these Bibles.
Remember that Satan will do anything to stop you reading and understanding The Bible in your own language so that you will not read the truths that will set you free and help you to fight him. If he cannot stop you reading it he will corrupt the translation so the truths are hidden or missing.
To change the Bible one needs to remove the fact that God has said He would preserve its words (truths). The King James Version quotes this preservation statement by God as follows:
Psa 12:5 (King James Version) For the oppression of the poor, for the sighing of the needy, now will I arise, saith the LORD; I will set him in safety from him that puffeth at him.
Psa 12:6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
Psa 12:7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.
If you examine a modern version you will note it is no longer the Bible that is preserved but the people in the preceding verse.
ESV Psa 12:5 “Because the poor are plundered, because the needy groan, I will now arise,” says the LORD; “I will place him in the safety for which he longs.”
Psa 12:6 The words of the LORD are pure words, like silver refined in a furnace on the ground, purified seven times.
Psa 12:7 You, O LORD, will keep them; you will guard us from this generation forever.
This allows translators and editors to take liberties to make their translation say what they want it to say so that they can modify, leave out and/or change words, phrases or verses to suit their doctrine (belief system) and as many of the translators and editors were liberal in some of their beliefs they passed these erroneous doctrine and beliefs onto the version they were on the translating or editing panel of, corrupting the text with their incorrect doctrine.
The problem with translating verse 7 as referring to the people is that it states then that Israel would be preserved. As we know Israel was restored a few times so this passages has to be an erroneous translation as history shows it is wrong. If Israel was preserved the nation would not have disappeared.
The King James Version does not have this error.
There are over 5300 surviving Greek manuscripts that contain all or part of the New Testament. These manuscripts agree together 99% of the time. The other 1% account for the differences between the King James and the modern versions. The translators and editors need to explain why they preferred these corrupted readings (considered so for 1450+ years) in these five manuscripts, edited apparently by heretics, and ignore the 5300+ others manuscripts which in the majority endorsed the content of the King James Version.
We need The Bible so we can know what God requires of us. It also needs to be preserved (as to content) so that people of all periods have the same standard and one period is not required to obey a different standard to another age.
God has to preserve His Bible for this to happen so the people of 100 AD have the same Bible as the people of 2000 AD. This means you do not have to rediscover what God has said to us in His Bible, removing a major foundation of modern theology.
We do not need the original or oldest documents of the Old or New Testament as God has preserved what He wants us to know in the copies of the Scripture we have had passed down from our ancestors to use and which we can trust because of unbroken history of constant transmission of the received text. The evidence for this is the constancy of translations over the last 1800 years while the modern versions over the last 120 years are not even consistent with each other.
We do not need theology that says men have to find out what God really meant (which is coloured by their belief system) and then who edit the Bible according to what they believe it means or believe it should say (as modern translators of the Bible do).
If these translators had truly trusted God, they would have accepted what was revealed in the scriptures handed down to them without having to edit the Bible to suit their belief system, bringing in any errors they had and which are now in these modern bibles.
They would have trusted the control of all circumstances that would have allowed God to maintain the accuracy of the Bible text from 100 AD until today. By their attitude they show they really do not believe in the God of The Bible or they would not be altering it to suit their belief system. By this they show they are not really qualified to edit a Bible of Faith because they use the reason of men to say what they want The Bible to say and not say what God says it says.
I have mentioned Ps 12:7 and how the modern versions change this so they can edit their translation as they need to back up their theology with a bible translation that states what they believe. But God states this preservation also elsewhere (Mat 5:18).
It can be seen that Ps 12:5-7 and Math 5:18 contradict each other in the modern Bibles. This means they are in error in some way and cannot be trusted as you do not know what else is in error.
If God did not preserve His word how would we know what He requires of us. So it is necessary for Him to preserve His word so people throughout all time will clearly know His requirements of them and so that His requirements are standardised for each generation because they have not changed in any way. This means people have the same requirements for redemption and salvation in every generation and that these does not change because of copyist errors, despite what liberal theologians imply by their attitude to The Bible.
It cannot be said that modern bible translations continue this clear line of telling us what God requires of us and by this show they are not of the lineage of the original bible writings.
To say God did not preserve His Word is to call Him a liar and hypocrite asking us to obey His Word but not preserving it so we would not know all or part of the guidelines we needed to obey Him.
This divine preservation by God means that there is an unbroken line of the transmission of His Words and doctrine (theology) from Creation to now. This we find in the King James Version, but not in modern bibles which are partly based on a texts (the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus) which was laid aside and ignored by the church for 1450+ years. God did not put it aside for 1400 years as if He wanted used for Bible translation.
If God had not preserved His principles and Words no one would have really known for 1450 years what God said what it was until ‘rediscovered’ by modern theologians so 1450 years people would have had no idea what God wanted of them.
The critical text fails the test of divine preservation which is why the modern theologians have to devise a reason to promote this text.
I will show some doctrinal differences in the translations made from these two different texts using the New International Version and King James Version, the best known representative of each of the critical and received Greek texts. The King James Version is based on the received text and the New International Version on the critical text. I have already mentioned the change made in Ps 12:7 which were made so modern translators could justify what they wrote and could do what they wanted with their translation.
In Job 32:8 we are told The Holy Spirit gives us understanding of the things of God. The modern versions debase Jesus and so are not Spirit inspired as The Spirit always exalts Jesus. This means modern translations are the efforts of men and do not say what God wants to say to us as it should be said.
Some worrying differences between these two Greek texts are discussed in the paragraphs that follow.
I deal with mark 16:9-20 first
The New International Version has a note to imply the passage is not the Word of God. The note goes something like this:
“The earliest manuscripts and some other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 6:9-20)”
This is a blatant lie! There are over 1640 manuscripts and similar extant with this part of this chapter of Mark. Only five do not have this passage and even then one of them still has space for it. These five are among the ones chosen to be the basis of the Greek used in modern New Testament Translations.
They have ignored 1635+ texts to imply this passage should not belong to The Bible. This passage is the only place we have been delegated authority to do the Miracles Jesus did as well as to attack and defeat Satan.
This alone shows how selective the editors of new bibles are in that they ignore solid evidence to translate the Bible in the way they believe it should be translated.
If God is behind this note in the New International Version He is a hypocrite saying we will do greater works than Jesus then casting doubt on our authority to do these. Jesus is also said to be a liar for saying something He did not mean or for requesting us to do something we are not able to do.
In the Gospels Jesus said we would do greater works (in quantity) that He did. Removing this passage makes Jesus out to be a liar and a hypocrite and unable to be our redeemer. Why would theologians support this note that implies these things? God would not. If Jesus did not say this how can we believe anything placed in these Bibles as being what Jesus said or accept their veracity and truthfulness and faithfulness to the originals.
If modern Bibles leave such an important passage as this out how or imply it is not original how can we believe anything they say, especially when it helps Satan by leaving out our delegated authority over him and his works. Why would theologians want to help Satan?
If Jesus is human He could not say these things anyway so that the real reason it is omitted is because the translators did not believe Jesus was God and able to say or delegate these things.
The King James Version does not have this error.
1 John 5:7 of the received text is left out of the critical text and v6-8 are combined to form a new v7 in the New International Version. This rearrangement of verses implies the omitted v7 is not The Word of God. The omitted verse is as follows:
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
Why would the translators and editors purposely leave out a verse that proves The Trinity and the Divinity of Jesus? God would not do that. This omission shows the influence of the Unitarians in the choice of the text for the Greek promoted by The Bible Society in England and later overseas. It also shows the belief Jesus was not divine so that there is no Trinity and Jesus could not be a part of it if there was one.
The King James Version does not have this error.
Blasphemy occurs in Is 14:12 of such a horrendous nature that it calls into question the faith of the translators of the New International Version.
The translators of the modern New Testaments know the Names of Jesus and have used them in the following verses: 2 Pet 1:19, Rev 2:-28 and Rev 22:16. The Title of Jesus I am referring too is where Jesus is called “the morning star”
Why then do they alter the text of Is 14:12 to replace the name of Satan with that of Jesus. Is 14:12 in the King James Version reads as follows:
How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!
The New International Version reads as follows:
How have you fallen from heaven, O morning star (=Jesus), son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations.
Notice how Jesus has replaced Lucifer (Satan) and that the fall was after the nations were established.
God would not replace a name of Satan with that of Jesus. The translators of the modern Bible do not know Satan from Jesus it appears or there is a hidden Agenda in their translation. Remember 99% of manuscripts have Lucifer and not Jesus so why have the translators and editors ignored this?
The translators do not believe Jesus is God and the latest thing is to believe Jesus pre-existed as an angel like Lucifer. Also, Satan hides who He is and what He did by having Jesus sin and fall and not him.
According to modern translators Jesus:
Was cast out and did not voluntarily come to earth
Was proud and sinned
Wanted to be like God
Imply He cannot be redeemer so that Calvary was a wasted effort by God and achieved nothing and that it cannot be about redemption.
Their defence is that this title is for the King of Babylon but if that is the case why not say his name like The Bible does elsewhere in respect of other people it writes about. This defence is very weak. The only conclusion being they have purposely put the Name of Jesus there to remove Him as God and redeemer.
The King James Version does not have this error.
Another passage that shows they do not know doctrine or are deliberately ignoring it is James 5:16 The New International Version has ‘sins’ while the King James Version has ‘faults’. Which is correct?
According to the Bible our sins were dealt with at Calvary and were forgiven there. They are forgiven before we sin so we do not need to confess them to anyone. All God requires of us now is repentance from the sinful act. We are told admit our weaknesses (faults) so we can be helped to overcome them but we do not need to confess any sins resulting from them. Is it possible the translators and editors do not believe in the forgiveness of sin we were given at Calvary? Why do they think we need to confess our sins to someone other than Jesus?
This would also mean they believe that Jesus was not divine when He died so could not deal with the spiritual penalty for our sins.
The King James Version) does not have this error.
In 1 Tim 3:16 the word ‘God ‘is replaced by ‘He’ and by this the divine nature of Jesus is attacked. ‘He’ refers to a human nature. ‘God ‘refers to a divine nature. Why would the translators remove the divinity of Jesus unless they did not believe He was God? God would not do that!
The New International Version is so strong in humanising Jesus and removing His Divinity that its attitude to Jesus has been questioned at times!
The King James Version does not have this error.
According to the modern versions Jesus sinned
Mat 5:22 But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment;
The New International Version says if you are angry you sin. This implies anger is a sin as it is against God’s Law of Love. Jesus was angry at the moneylenders in the Temple. According to modern Bibles Jesus sinned and cannot be our redeemer. In the text used for this verse in the King James Version the problem does not arise. The New International Version left out the phrase ‘without a cause’ and the only cause can only really be to defend the things of God (Which Jesus was doing). Why do they not want you to defend the things of God as Jesus was doing?
Also by implying Jesus sinned they imply He was not God but human and sinned like and other founder of a religion does.
This verse in the modern versions removes the righteous anger we can have to fight for the things of God. According to this verse you cannot be angry at people who mock The Father, Jesus, The Holy Spirit or the things of God as you will sin if you are angry. It leads to a toothless, inoffensive faith that cannot criticise anything that opposes it.
This would stop people criticising the errors of belief in other faiths that the true Bible does not accept.
Why did the editors remove from the Bible the allowance of righteous anger at people abusing the things of God? This would hinder attacks on the modern bible translators as you would be in sin if you were angry at their heresy according to their bibles. Even if it was in standing up for the things of God or against the error and heresy of other faiths and religions you would be in sin according to the modern Bible. This attitude would make ecumenicism and inter faith worship easier as you could not (according to modern bible versions) stand for the things of God in a angry or forceful manner.
The King James Version does not have this error.
In Col 1:14 the words ‘through his Blood’. have been let out. Why leave out the important point that Redemption is only through the Blood of Jesus shed at Calvary. God would not as it underpins the purpose of Jesus dying. So why do the translators and editors of modern versions believe redemption is not important?
Only in the Christian faith is there the concept of redemption through the Grace of God - His gift to those that follow Jesus. It is not found in other religions so needs to be removed if ‘Christians are to have the same belief system as other religions.
The King James Version does not have this error.
In Phil 4:13 Christ is removed as our strength and a mysterious person strengthens us called ‘him’, who could be anyone. This removes the divine help God gives us in Jesus and replaces it with man or another spiritual being. ‘Him’ could be Satan, your brother a friend and not necessarily Jesus.
A non-Christian reading this verse would not know who you were talking about and could assume it was their own god. Why do the editors want to remove this witness of The Word to Jesus and to non-Christians?
People do not understand how much New Age type thinking is allowed by changes like this so that the Bible becomes more palatable to New age and other religions as they can substitute, Satan, Buddha, Gaia or whoever they want for the word ‘him’. This problem does not arise with the King James Version as it specifically mentions Jesus is our strength.
The King James Version does not have this error.
In the New International Version Lord is omitted 39 times, Jesus is omitted 87 times and Christ is omitted 39 times and more worldly and new age friendly titles are sometimes substituted.
The Jews used the word ‘Lord’ in place of JHWH, their name for God so that when they call Jesus ‘Lord’ they are saying Jesus is God. . So when they addressed him as Lord Jesus they were implying He was God. Why was this removed from modern bibles? There is no rational reason for doing this unless they did not believe Jesus is God. By removing this word they are denying His divinity.
The problem with the New International Version is that at times it changes the Name of Jesus to generic one and does not capitalise these generic names. This is necessary if Jesus to be treated as an ordinary human and not as a divine person. Anyone who was not a Christian would not know these names referred to Jesus so would not have a reason to believe in Him. The New International Version would not lead them into faith in Jesus (Rom. 10:17). It would also allow people to substitute their own god for Jesus and by this generic use of names for Jesus set the basis for a one world bible where the generic names of Jesus could be applied to their own god.
Surely God would not change His Bible in such a way that reduces the chance for people to see Jesus and have faith in Him and which also allows his enemy to use it for his own purposes!
In his book “Serious omissions in the New International Version Bible”, Keith Piper lists 30 ways the New International Version attacks Jesus, 17 ways it downgrades Jesus and 10 ways it alters the requirements for Salvation. Why would a Bible attack Jesus? Why would the translators and editors use a critical text that attacks and down grade the divinity of Jesus as well as hiding salvation. Unless they did not believe Jesus was divine and that He was not different to any other founder of a religious system.
In the New Age and other cults or religions Jesus is not God, just another master and by removing or changing His divine titles to more human, generic ones the Bible is made more user friendly to other faiths and religions as the problem of Him being God’s Son is no longer there.
This problem does not arise with the King James Version.
Why are the translators making modern translations more user friendly with other religions and cults? So that they can fellowship with them!
I cannot imagine God doing that.
I have difficulty in trusting the New International Version Bible which implies God is a hypocrite, Jesus is a liar and sinner and which implies Jesus is just another man. As all modern Bibles are based on the critical text used by the New International Version so I also have difficulty in trusting them.
Anything that modifies doctrine or denigrates Jesus is heretical. The critical text does this so it is heretical and the modern Bible versions based on this text as a result must be heretical. It only requires one thing for it to be heretical like substituting Jesus for Satan in Is 14:12 so Jesus has now fallen from heaven and not Satan (and implies Jesus came to earth involuntarily) or changing Ps 12:7 implying the Bible is no longer preserved by God, or the changing of the Names of Jesus so He is less Divine. This is heresy at its worst and these changes can only have been deliberate by people who did not accept the divinity of Jesus and so could not be God sanctioned.
It only takes one doctrinal change to make a bible untrustworthy and useless for the purposes of the Christian faith but I have shown modern versions have numerous doctrinal errors (if only because they attack the divinity of Jesus) as a result of following the critical Greek text.
Given the liberal nature of the critical text it can only be assumed that the translators and editors do not know true doctrine or have modified these modern versions to suit and agenda or liberal doctrine they have. They are not judged by man but by the words they write and claim to be from God which words conflict with the Words God has preserved for over 1800 years.
In these last days when the Lukewarm Church is To be revealed for what it is and a one world religion (belief system) formed in preparation for the Antichrist, the critical text has appeared in time for it to be prepared to be the Text of those Christians that want to join this one world religion and in the process of becoming this create a lukewarm faith and resulting lukewarm Church.
The Dean Burgin Society: http://www.deanBurginsociety.org/
The Bible for Today: http://www.biblefortoday.org/
Way of Life Literature on Bible Corruptions: http://www.wayoflife.org/
AV Publications: http://www.avpublications.com/avnew/home.html
Trinitarian Bible Society was formed in 1830 when Unitarians took over the Bible Society in England and also have good material on Bible corruption: http://www.trinitarianbiblesociety.org/
Chick Publications also has some good thought provoking material on their web site: http://www.chick.com/information/bibleversions/
This has information on the King James Version amongst other things http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/#King James Version
This was used to translate the Gospel of Mark in he 7th UBS Greek edition.
This has been proved to be a fake being based on a Greek text available only between 1857 and 1859 because a better Greek version replaced it in 1867 so it fell into disuse after this. It was based on an edition of the Vaticanus used by a Phillip Buttman. No other Greek manuscript has the mistakes Buttmaan made in his Greek text.
There is also the problem that some of the ink used in the codex was not available before 1740.
In other words the latest Greek text used to translate the Gospel of Mark is rubbish and fraudulent.
This was supposed to be a Fourth century codex but the format it is in was not used until the fifth century between 440 and 4 64 AD. So it falls outside the period used to declare a document reliable for Bible translation. So theoretically it should not be used for modern Bible translation but only as an aid.
As modern Bibles use this as one the basis of translation then according to their method of choosing texts to translate they should not have used it.
When a stock take was made of the monastery it was found in the early eighteen hundreds the Sinaiticus was not listed in the list of complete Bibles. It miraculously appeared later without any history of where it has been until then.
It was found in a monastery that was run by the uncle of Simonedes one of the most brilliant forgers of the 19 Th century who stated he did it. No one wanted to believe him and when the person who had seen him forge the Sinaiticus told Tischendorf of this, Tischendorf refused to believe him.
So we have the forger and one who witnessed the forgery say it was a fake and no one wanted to believe them.
They were going to test the Sinaiticus but after 2427 was shown to be a forgery because of the ink used in it they withdrew the offer to test the Sinaiticus. If they were certain it was real and not a forgery they would have tested it.
Unfortunately it is the one codex most trust as the basis for modern bibles.
As it can be seen modern bibles are based on two forgeries and one unreliable manuscript so their changes cannot be trusted. Satan has succeeded in having his corrupted bible replace the true one and few realise this or why he did it.
It cannot be Jesus as he is declared by them to be human
It also cannot be the God that lied about preserving His Bible
Who is left?
The only the other god is Satan.
How has he accomplished this?
By having people cast doubt on the accuracy of The Bible including how God is represented in it.
Scholars have recreated what they believe The Bible originally said which includes how God is seen in it. To do this they reject the true God of The Bible. This allows Satan to guide these doubting scholars to write how he desires God to be represented. This means we look at what man thinks God is and not what God says He is in modern bibles.
This is how man-made religions function where there view of God is made from man’s reason guided by Satan. Because of this the God if modern Christianity does not offend the god of other religions. After all they are designed by Satan using what men say what God is and not what The Bible says God is so that all can accept each other’s god.
This is why in Daniel 3:23 it is a multiple of God’s mentioned and not one God.
The King James says :
Dan 3:25 He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.
Jesus is in the furnace and God is His Father. Satan could not have that so he had modern versions say:
RV) He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the aspect of the fourth is like a son of the gods.
This would be what a pagan would say who believes there are more than one person fathered by God and that there are multiple God’s. The influence of Greek mythology and thought can be seen in this.
This is also why they deliberately mistranslate virgin as young woman in Is 7:14 so that the birth of Jesus is not special but from sex like all other people in mythology who were born human and became gods.
Modern theology says that we do not have the original Greek writings of the Apostles so they have to work out what God is trying to say in His Bible. Their God was unable to maintain the accuracy of what He tried to teach us in The Scriptures. He was not in sufficient control of things to be able to do this or did not care whether or not we knew what He required from us.. This God is not all powerful and not in complete control of things and does not guide man to interpret The Scriptures so they have to reason out what He said. This means they are as intelligent as God to be able to do this or their God does not know everything as man is able to tell Him what He was trying to say in The Scriptures.
This also implies something terrible. That for nearly 2000 years the Christian church has not had the true scriptures which they say are only coming to light now having been lost and now being rediscovered implying the God of Christians is a lesser God who cannot control things to preserve His Scriptures.
The problem modern theologians have is that they have no standard to compare their work to see if it is correct. So, while they say they are working out what God was trying to say they cannot say they are correct because they have no standard to compare what they say too to show that it is correct. So you cannot trust any of the new modern versions as there reallyis no standard from God, according to them, to show they have correctly divined what God was trying to say. So in a sense they are back where they started not still not knowing what they believe God said is correct with the added disadvantage of being guided by what they have reasoned which may or not may not be correct.
Codex 2427 and Sinaiticus are forgeries so cannot be used by them to correct The Bible and Vaticanus is the wrong century to be considered for correcting The Bible. So even their texts are not reliable as a basis for comparing the traditional Greek text to what God is suppose to have said.
So they get closer to what God said or further away by relying on possible inaccurate reasoning about what He said. Even if they are getting this correct you still cannot trust modern versions because you have nothing to compare them too to show they are actually correct in what they have determined The Bible says.
They have not got an accurate version or they would be using it and not need to work out what is correct. This is why so many Greek text revisions have been made by Nestles and others as they keep finding out what they believe God said and have to keep changing The Greek. Their God cannot even make a consistent Greek text he is so uncaring or powerless to communicate with modern theologians.
They serve two Gods:
One of their own making.
So their God is:
Not all knowing
Not all powerful
Not a God of Love or he would have tried harder to have them have a correct set of Scriptures
So He is a bit of an uncaring wimp or a loveless God or both and they have it wrong in their bibles when they say 'God is Love'.
The alternate viewpoint is that God preserved His Scriptures and it is in found in the Textus Receptus and similar manuscripts. The Textus Receptus has the advantage also of not needing to find out what God wanted to say to us as it goes back to the apostles so that we have an unbroken teaching from Jesus to the present day.
So the modern theologians have a wimp of a God, who cannot protect even what He wants to tell us and/or who is indifferent to us and lets man reason out what He said so without having us able to determine if it is accurate, so that you really cannot know if what is in modern bibles is what God said because it is only what man has reasoned is correct. So to trust these Bibles is to take your salvation in your hands because you cannot even trust what they said about it or redemption. After all they have reasoned it is what God said and may not be what He said (shown by the need to constantly revise the official Greek text). There will be truth in their Bibles but also error and as they do not have a scripture that is correct to compare it too you cannot really trust any of it as being what God said but only what they believed their God said.
The writings of the Textus Receptus (the Greek of the King James Text) comes from a direct line to the Apostles and has been preserved by God for nearly 1900 years so can be trusted. The God of The King James Version loves us enough to maintain His teachings for us to follow and has controlled their preservation so we have them today as they originally were.
God always gives us His things freely at no cost and the King James is not copyrighted so is freely available to all and cannot be controlled like the copyrighted modern bibles can be. This alone shows that man is in control of modern bibles and not God and so they are not of Him or they would be free to all, except for printing and distribution costs where applicable.
The God of the modern Bible is a capitalist unlike the God of The King James who gives what He has freely to all.
The wimpish Capitalistic God of the modern versions who allows man to reason out what He said and control their distribution so that 100000 NIV bibles were destroyed because they were not printed by the copyright owner who had them destroyed because they did not get a copyright fee? or
A God, who is able to preserve His wisdom for us to know and who gives us freely all things we need for us to enjoy.
I know whom I would choose.
Appendix A Not Believing in Genesis
Many Christians belief the stories in Genesis are a myth. They do not realise the consequences of this attitude. Once you realise what you are actually saying by this attitude you will be horrified.
This appendix aims to show you what happens when you do not believe in any part of Genesis or other parts of The Bible.
These three events are a major test of your faith in God and who you believe He is
If you believe in God you will believe in all these three things because you believe He is able to do these things
If you do not believe in God then you will not believe in these things because you do not believe He is God and able to do these things so any god you believe in will not be the true God of The Bible but a lesser spirit being.
Do you believe God created everything in 6 days?
You have the faith God requires to do His Will
You will not have the problems evolution causes people
You do not believe you are wiser than God to declare what He has or has not done (making you a god to be able to judge God)
You do not need to correct The Bible to say what you believe it says
You will not need to find alternative ways for things occurred which require more faith than believing these events happened
You are accepting beliefs and theories that have not been scientifically proved but only assumed and are really only hypotheses as they have not been proven only assumed
You do not believe God could create everything in six days or you would accept a six day creation
You must find an alternative system for the formation of the universe and the earth which Satan gladly provides.
You must find an alternative to the God of The Bible and a holy book you can believe in
Evolution is the only alternative you can believe in for the formation of the earth and universe, which states
There was nothing before the universe and you would break all the laws of physics having energy being created out of nothing
God has no real part in the creation of all things we know exist
All is an accident
Life spontaneously came into existence from things that did not have life (you believe life was created from nothing rather than an all powerful God created it)
God's order and discipline is not in the universe or it would be firstly seen in creation
Chance is the guide in everything and there is no divine plan behind all that happens
God has no right to make plans for or to influence creation as He did not make it
You can have no moral absolutes unless you can find a god who morals you can believe in
You can have no eternal purpose for life as God has no authority to give you one as He did not create you
You are your own god as you reject the God of The Bible and can do what you want as there is no God to judge you (so you believe)
Life after death may exist but God has no right to have a part in it as he did not create you so does not own you to be able to make plans for you or to control what happens to you
You do not believe God can create in six days so have the problems those above of those who answered ‘No’ above.
If you said ‘No’ because you believe in six day creation then you do not have the problems of those who do not believe in it.
If you said ‘No’ because you want to believe He Bible but want to accept what science says then you really do not believe God would create in six days or you would reject this way of these events happening and you would have many of the problems of those who do not believe in six day creation.
Do you believe there was a fall of mankind into sin?
You believe Jesus is necessary to complete God’s plan for you
You believe in Salvation and Redemption
You will obey God to preserve these
You will tell others of these things because they are good for other people and God's Love in you causes you to do this
You cannot believe in Jesus and all He did for you as He is not necessary because there is no fall of man for Him to die and remove the effects, of which was His main purpose for coming to earth.
You are saying God lied in His Bible which means you cannot trust any of it as you do not know where else He lied.
You will not love others as God does and will have a self-motivated expression of love. You may try to love as God Loves but you are really following a god that works within the limitations you have given him and as He is not the God of true Love you will not be able to express this in you to its fullest extent
You need to find a way of salvation you can believe in and you know is correct as you cannot trust anything The Bible says about it or anything else it states about anything to do with these things. You cannot pick and choose what parts of The Bible you want to believe in. It is all or none because once you start to pick and choose what you want to believe in you are no longer following the God who wrote it and have made your own bible.
Do you think there was a Worldwide Noahic flood?
You will understand Geology correctly
You will know God's judgment and Grace to Noah and all who follow God
You will not fruitlessly need to search for explanation of things in geology regardless of how improbable they may seem or scientifically incorrect they are
You will also understand world history correctly
You will have to believe in evolution as an alternative to the flood to explain earth geology and formation
You will not understand geology correctly
You will always be looking for explanations to refute the things that show the worldwide flood occurred regardless of how improbable or impossible these explanations are
You cannot believe what The Bible says in Genesis about the flood so you cannot use The Bible as you believe it has error
Overall consequence of saying "Yes" to belief in the above three events occurring:
You believe the God of the Bible and all He said
You believe all The Bible says
You know what Salvation and Redemption is
You know how to live to obtain and preserve these
You will express God’s Love and Control over all things
You will learn how to explain and defend these events against their critics
Jesus is irrelevant to you as all these point to Him in some way
You Believe God lied in the first verse of The Bible and in subsequent chapters of Genesis so you cannot believe anything in The Bible as you do not know where else He lied. If you believe God did not lie but that the translation of these chapters is wrong you cannot believe anything else in it as they may have been wrongly translated.
You do not believe what Jesus did as He believed in all these events
You cannot be a follower of Jesus as you do not believe what He believed
You worship a different God to that of The Bible and Jesus and need a different holy book you can trust in place of The Bible
You cannot believe anything The Bible says or use it as you believe it has error in it so by using any of it you may be promoting error
You do not know what else is in error
You cannot accept what it says about salvation and redemption as it may be incorrect
You need to find a god you can believe in and trust
You need to find a 'Bible' you can believe in and trust
You have to create your own morality without any absolute being (a god) to compare your values with you can trust completely and believe in
You will have to promote evolution or modify the Bible creation in some way (which is the same as rejecting what it says) and will have to promote whatever you believe in and not what God says
You will have trouble relating to a God you reject in part or whole as salvation is a relationship and you will compromise your salvation and even lose it.
You believe God did not create everything
He does not own all things as He did not make them
His Will is not important as He has no right to enforce it on a creation He did not created
You can do anything with what you have as He did not make it so you have the right to determine what to do with it
You do not believe He has moral authority over man as He did not create mankind
He has no right to punish anyone as He did not make them and cannot make moral laws for them because He is not their creator or maker
He has no right to judge anyone or anything in creation or to even interfere with it in any way as according to you He did not create these things so has no right of ownership or control over them
Jesus overcame Satan and obtained the right to control Him but as Jesus has no moral or other authority over you, you cannot use this authority to defeat Satan
Jesus is not necessary as there was no sin against an infinite God needing infinite sacrifice to appease
God has no right to destroy the earth through a flood as sin was not against Him as He had not created us to have the right to make our moral laws
You do not believe God has any authority to formulate or evaluate morals
God cannot make you obey His laws unless He makes you His prisoner and forces His Will on you because He did not create you
If He made you His prisoner He would not be god of Love
The Love of God and The Father are not relevant as we have not sinned against God to need them because they did not create us to give us laws to follow
If God shows us His love it is not because of Jesus as Jesus cannot redeem us because we have not sinned against God (there was no fall to do this and He has no right to judge us for our failings anyway)
You are in charge of your life and purposes unless you find another god to follow and even then you will be the one determining what you believe and how you want to obey this god.
You cannot reject any part of The Bible in part or whole as it means you cannot trust any of it or The God who wrote it.
To do this you must believe the reasonings of men who do not believe God could create things in six days or that the other events happened.
The only person who promotes this belief system is Satan so that those believing these things have been deluded by Satan to believe these things as God would not persuade them to believe these things.
There are no fence sitters as there can be no grey area in belief for or against these things.
You do not believe the scientific truth to show the possibility that God created in six days or that the other Biblical events happened
To not believe in an infinite God, whose marks are all over creation, requires greater faith to believe in men who are finite and cannot prove what they believe is correct about creation and the deluge but only reason it from what they see and do not accept any other rational explanation because they do not really believe in God or they would accept all these events as being under the control of God.
To say Genesis Ch 1-3 are myths or allegory is to remove the need for Jesus and His coming as one of the major proposes for this coming to earth is for our redemption, which only is relevant if there was a fall!
Another result of not believing in Genesis chapters 1 to 3 is that you cannot believe anything a prophet said in the Old Testament.
God said he spoke through the prophets which means a prophet wrote Genesis.
If you are saying the Creation, The fall of mankind and the flood are not correctly told by Genesis, You are saying the prophet did not write what God said or that God did not speak through the prophet. This means you cannot really trust anything prophets said in the Testament. If one prophet got it wrong how do you know others did not get it wrong?
Everything that was prophesied about Jesus cannot be believed:
All the requirements of Him to be born as The Messiah
The work The Messiah would do
The death of The Messiah and what would accomplish
What the Messiah would usher in (the kingdom of God)
All the Messiah taught and did
What the prophets said cannot be trusted because you do not believe what a prophet wrote about in Genesis which means you cannot trust that other prophets have written.
It also means that God of the Bible lied according to you about His ability to have His Bible correctly written down and passed onto to future generations.
Prophecy id one of the major proofs of The Bible so to remove this proof is to make The Bible just like any other book.
Hand with the rewriting of The Bible goes the promoting of evolution as real and valid and the mythologising of Genesis by modern theologians.
What follows is from The Evolution Cruncher
by Vance Ferrell, B.A., M.A
Evolution Facts, Inc.
Box 300, Altamont, TN 37301 USA
Printed in the United States of America
Cover and Text Copyright © 2001
It is a remarkable fact that the basis of evolutionary theory was destroyed by seven scientific research findings, before *Charles Darwin first published the theory. Actually it was not his theory. He just happened to gather all the ideas about it and put it in a book.
Carl Linn (Carolus Linnaeus, 1707-1778) was a scientist who classified immense numbers of living organisms. An earnest creationist, he clearly saw that there were no halfway species. All plant and animal species were definite categories, separate from one another. Variation was possible within a species, and there were many sub-species. But there were no cross-overs from one species to another (*R. Milner, Encyclopaedia of Evolution, 1990, p. 276).
First Law of Thermodynamics (1847). Heinrich von Helmholtz stated the law of conservation of energy: The sum total of all matter will always remain the same. This law refutes several aspects of evolutionary theory. *Isaac Asimov calls it “the most fundamental generalization about the universe that scientists have ever been able to make” (*Isaac Asimov, “In the Game of Energy and Thermodynamics You Can’t Even Break Even,” Journal of Smithsonian Institute, June 1970, p. 6).
Second Law of Thermodynamics (1850). R.J.E. Clausius stated the law of entropy: All systems will tend toward the most mathematically probable state, and eventually become totally random and disorganized (*Harold Blum, Time’s Arrow and Evolution, 1968, p. 201).In other words, everything runs down, wears out, and goes to pieces (*R.R. Kindsay, “Physics: to What Extent is it Deterministic,” American Scientist 56, 1968, p. 100). This law totally eliminates the basic evolutionary theory that simple evolves into complex.*Einstein said the two laws were the most enduring laws he knew of (*Jeremy Rifkin, Entropy: A New World View, 1980, p. 6).
Guadeloupe Woman Found (1812). This is a well authenticated discovery which has been in the British Museum for over a century. A fully modern human skeleton was found in the French Caribbean island of Guadeloupe inside an immense slab of limestone, dated by modern geologists at 28 million years old. (More examples could be cited.) Human beings just like those living today (but sometimes larger), have been found in very deep levels of strata. (More recently but not well publicized a dinosaur fossil was found devouring a human fossil).
Gregor Mendel (1822-1884) was a creationist who lived and worked near Brunn (now Brno), Czechoslovakia. He was a science and math teacher. Unlike the theorists, Mendel was a true scientist. He bred garden peas and studied the results of crossing various varieties. Beginning his work in 1856, he concluded it within eight years. In 1865, he reported his research in the Journal of the Brunn Society for the Study of Natural Science. The journal was distributed to 120 libraries in Europe, England, and America. Yet his research was totally ignored by the scientific community until it was rediscovered in 1900(*R.A. Fisher, “Has Mendel’s Work Been Rediscovered?” Annals of Science, Vol. 1, No. 2, 1936). His experiments clearly showed that one species could not transmute into another one. A genetic barrier existed that could not be bridged. Mendel’s work laid the basis for modern genetics, and his discoveries effectively destroyed Brief History of Evolutionary Theory.
Louis Pasteur (1822-1895) was another genuine scientist. In the process of studying fermentation, he performed his famous 1861 experiment, in which he disproved the theory of spontaneous generation. Life cannot arise from non-living materials. This experiment was very important; for, up to that time, a majority of scientists believed in spontaneous generation. (They thought that if a pile of old clothes were left in a corner, it would breed mice! The proof was that, upon later returning to the clothes, mice would frequently be found there.) Pasteur concluded from his experiment that only God could create living creatures. But modern evolutionary theory continues to be based on that out-dated theory disproved by Pasteur: spontaneous generation (life arises from non-life). Why? Because it is the only basis on which evolution could occur. As *Adams notes, “With spontaneous generation discredited [by Pasteur], biologists were left with no theory of the origin of life at all” (*J. Edison Adams, Plants: An Introduction to Modern Biology, 1967, p. 585).
August Friedrich Leopold Weismann (1834-1914) was a German biologist who disproved *Lamarck’s notion of “the inheritance of acquired characteristics.” He is primarily remembered as the scientist who cut off the tails of 901 young white mice in 19 successive generations, yet each new generation was born with a full-length tail. The final generation, he reported, had tails as long as those originally measured on the first. Weismann also carried out other experiments that buttressed his refutation of Lamarckism. His discoveries, along with the fact that circumcision of Jewish males for 4,000 years had not affected the foreskin, doomed the theory (*Jean Rostand, Orion Book of Evolution, 1960, p. 64).Yet Lamarckism continues today as the disguised basis of evolutionary biology. For example, evolutionists still teach that giraffes kept stretching their necks to reach higher branches, so their necks became longer! In a later book, *Darwin abandoned natural selection as unworkable, and returned to Lamarckism as the cause of the never-observed change from one species to another (*Randall Hedtke, The Secret of the Sixth Edition, 1984)
End of Quote
People believe that the solar system was formed from a cloud of dust circling the sun. Scientifically this is impossible as any clumps of matter over 3 ft (1 metre) in size would collide and destroy each other so that the biggest clump of matter would never be greater than 3 ft (1 metre) in size, let alone planetary size.
The other problem is the planets are the wrong size and in the wrong place for a solar disk of dust to have formed them. The only way they could be where they are is if God put them there as it is scientifically impossible for them to be there any other way.
There are too many problems for this to have been the source of the universe and it is impossible for the universe to have been formed the way the Big Bang says. The evidence for the above is more than this little document can deal with.
The biggest problem is that it beaks the law of conservation of energy in that the universe was made out of nothing. Energy had to come from an etgernal source and the only source able to provide this energy was God.
The earth has been solidly proved to be flat with a firmament over it. People have seen where the firmament touches the earth and planes have been seen to crash into it. Why then is it promoted as being round?
Evolution requires a round earth and if the earth is flat then it shows it was created and not evolved. In fact in the late 1800’s it was scientifically proven the earth did not move and that it had an ether. This is why relativity was accepted as it said the earth was round, moving and had no ether, flying in the face of proven science.
But evolutionists needed this so it was promoted even though it had incorrect assumptions by firstly declaring there was no ether and that the earth was round.
The United Nations has a flat earth map as its logo. The Whitehouse in its incident room has a flat earth map on the floor.
The United States Geological Society uses it in its official atlas and people who have flown a lot will tell you the earth is not round but flat. An example of this is the statement that the earth is flat by President Donald Trump and He knows this because he has flown a lot and has seen the horizon a great deal and it is not curved.
Because evolution has not been proved it is still a matter of faith, just like belief in six day creation is a matter of faith.
In evolution we are asked to believe life and order resulted from nothing and chaos. God is able to make things and life from nothing, but evolutionists believe a hap-hazard process created life from nothing.
Evolution is not a theory but only a hypothesis as a theory requires some proof that it is possible. Evolution cannot show that it is possible but only assumes it is possible. It has no evidence to base a theory on and must clutch at straws of chance and unbelievable ‘accidents’ to make its hypothesis even begin to work.
When you begin to examine evolutionary theories as to why they say things happened you will soon see their theories are improbable if not impossible and must have a greater degree of faith to defend than faith in God requires.
The following sites show the fallacy of evolution:
And many others
The true history of the world and not as evolutionists need to tell it can be found in articles at this site:
For a proof of the flat earth search on ‘200 reasons why the earth is flat’.
There are also many other sites proving the earth is flat.
The Bible was written by men inspired by The Holy Ghost; If you attack the Bible you attack the Holy Ghost. If you knowingly call into question the Bible in any way you are demeaning the Holy Spirit as He is the writer of it (Job 32:8, 1 Pet 2:21). To doubt parts of the Bible as being accurate also questions the Holy Spirit’s credibility.
It is a brave man who questions God and The Holy Spirit’s credibility.
You either accept The Bible as it is and what it says is there or has happened or you cannot accept any part of it and worship a God different to Jesus and must find a way of salvation elsewhere, as you cannot believe any part of The Bible as you do not know what parts are not correct.
Deliverance—How Jesus told me to do it
Calvary Sin and Redemption
Faith, Hope and Love
The Father and The Trinity
'Who is Jesus The Christ' and 'Jesus my Love'
The Humanising of Jesus
The Holy Spirit
Jesus, Satan and You
The Silent War
Judgment on the Nations
'The Body' and Fellowship'
The Church and The Kingdom of God
On Christian Doctrine and Practice
The Kingdom of God
The Last Supper and Afterwards