Corruption and Presuppositions

A discussion that illustrates some of the presuppositions at play in the Bible translation debate:

https://puritanboard.com/threads/corruption-of-the-critical-text-vs-majority-text.92692/

Advertisements

Their Authentic Writings

Tertullian, c.180AD:

“Come now, you who would indulge a better curiosity, if you would apply it to the business of your salvation, run over the apostolic churches, in which the very thrones of the apostles are still pre-eminent in their places, in which their own authentic writings are read, uttering the voice and representing the face of each of them severally.”

Rev. Matthew Winzer on this quote: “There is a question as to whether “authentic writings” refers to the autographs or accurate copies of them.”

Source: https://puritanboard.com/threads/church-fathers-and-biblical-autographs.92693/, Comment 2

James White and the Received Text (Truelove)

Source and discussion: https://puritanboard.com/threads/james-white-the-received-text.92697/

See also: http://www.jeffriddle.net/2017/05/word-magazine-75-james-white-versus.html?m=1

“Lucifer” or “Day Star” in Isaiah 14:12?

Below is Will Kinney’s take on Isaiah 14:12, reprinted with permission.

I personally know someone who really struggled with calling Jesus and Satan by the same title in the NIV.

That said, most of the commentaries I consulted seemed to agree that the verse is talking about a literal star in the sky and not the fallen angel also known as Satan.

The Geneva Bible says

(h) You who thought yourself most glorious and as it were placed in the heaven for the morning star that goes before the sun, is called Lucifer, to whom Nebuchadnezzar is compared.

Albert Barnes says

Lucifer – Margin, ‘Day-star’ (הילל  hēylēl, from הלל  hâlal, “to shine”). The word in Hebrew occurs as a noun nowhere else. In two other places Eze_21:12; Zec_11:2, it is used as a verb in the imperative mood of Hiphil, and is translated ‘howl’ from the verb ילל  yālal, “to howl” or “cry.” Gesenius and Rosenmuller suppose that it should be so rendered here. So Noyes renders it, ‘Howl, son of the morning!’ But the common translation seems to be preferable. The Septuagint renders it, Ἑωσφόρος  Heōsphoros, and the Vulgate, ‘Lucifer, the morning star.’ The Chaldee, ‘How art thou fallen from high, who wert splendid among the sons of men.’ There can be no doubt that the object in the eve of the prophet was the bright morning star; and his design was to compare this magnificent oriental monarch with that. The comparison of a monarch with the sun, or the other heavenly bodies, is common in the Scriptures.

John Gill says

How art thou fallen from heaven,…. This is not to be understood of the fall of Satan, and the apostate angels, from their first estate, when they were cast down from heaven to hell, though there may be an allusion to it; see Luk_10:18 but the words are a continuation of the speech of the dead to the king of Babylon…

O Lucifer, son of the morning! alluding to the star Venus, which is the phosphorus or morning star, which ushers in the light of the morning, and shows that day is at hand; by which is meant, not Satan, who is never in Scripture called Lucifer, though he was once an angel of light, and sometimes transforms himself into one, and the good angels are called morning stars, Job_38:7 and such he and his angels once were; but the king of Babylon is intended, whose royal glory and majesty, as outshining all the rest of the kings of the earth, is expressed by those names; and which perhaps were such as he took himself, or were given him by his courtiers. The Targum is,

“how art thou fallen from on high, who was shining among the sons of men, as the star Venus among the stars.”

Jarchi, as the Talmud (c), applies it to Nebuchadnezzar; though, if any particular person is pointed at, Belshazzar is rather designed, the last of the kings of Babylon. The church of Rome, in the times of the apostles, was famous for its light and knowledge; its faith was spoken of throughout all the earth; and its bishops or pastors were bright stars, in the morning of the Gospel dispensation:

Adam Clarke says

O Lucifer, son of the morning – The Versions in general agree in this translation, and render הילל  heilel as signifying Lucifer, Φωσφωρος, the morning star, whether Jupiter or Venus; as these are both bringers of the morning light, or morning stars, annually in their turn. And although the context speaks explicitly concerning Nebuchadnezzar, yet this has been, I know not why, applied to the chief of the fallen angels, who is most incongruously denominated Lucifer, (the bringer of light!) an epithet as common to him as those of Satan and Devil. That the Holy Spirit by his prophets should call this arch-enemy of God and man the light-bringer, would be strange indeed. But the truth is, the text speaks nothing at all concerning Satan nor his fall, nor the occasion of that fall, which many divines have with great confidence deduced from this text. O how necessary it is to understand the literal meaning of Scripture, that preposterous comments may be prevented! Besides, I doubt much whether our translation be correct. הילל  heilel, which we translate Lucifer, comes from ילל  yalal, yell, howl, or shriek, and should be translated, “Howl, son of the morning;” and so the Syriac has understood it; and for this meaning Michaelis contends: see his reasons in Parkhurst, under הלל  halal.

Of the commentaries I consulted, only Matthew Henry (whose opinion is weighty indeed) saw a direct allusion to fallen angels in Isaiah 14:13, the verse following the one in question:

Thou has said in thy heart, like Lucifer, I will ascend into heaven. Here is the language of his vainglory, borrowed perhaps from that of the angels who fell, who not content with their first estate, the post assigned them, would vie with God, and become not only independent of him, but equal with him. Or perhaps it refers to the story of Nebuchadnezzar, who, when he would be more than a man, was justly turned into a brute, Dan_4:30. The king of Babylon here promises himself, [1.] That in pomp and power he shall surpass all his neighbours, and shall arrive at the very height of earthly glory and felicity, that he shall be as great and happy as this world can make him; that is the heaven of a carnal heart, and to that he hopes to ascend, and to be as far above those about him as the heaven is above the earth. Princes are the stars of God, which give some light to this dark world (Mat_24:29); but he will exalt his throne above them all. [2.] That he shall particularly insult over God’s Mount Zion, which Belshazzar, in his last drunken frolic, seems to have had a particular spite against when he called for the vessels of the temple at Jerusalem, to profane them; see Dan_5:2. In the same humour he here said, I will sit upon the mount of the congregation (it is the same word that is used for the holy convocations), in the sides of the north; so Mount Zion is said to be situated, Psa_48:2. Perhaps Belshazzar was projecting an expedition to Jerusalem, to triumph in the ruins of it, at the time when God cut him off. [3.] That he shall vie with the God of Israel, of whom he had indeed heard glorious things, that he had his residence above the heights of the clouds. “But thither,” says he, “will I ascend, and be as great as he; I will be like him whom they call the Most High.” It is a gracious ambition to covet to be like the Most Holy, for he has said, Be you holy, for I am holy; but it is a sinful ambition to aim to be like the Most High, for he has said, He that exalteth himself shall be abased, and the devil drew our first parents in to eat forbidden fruit by promising them that they should be as gods. [4.] That he shall himself be deified after his death, as some of the first founders of the Assyrian monarchy were, and stars had even their names from them. “But,” says he, “I will exalt my throne above them all.” Such as this was his pride, which was the undoubted omen of his destruction.

Methinks this is not a hill to die on, but in any case, here is Will Kinney’s article:


“Lucifer” or “Day Star” in Isaiah 14:12?

 “Lucifer” or “Morning Star” (Day Star) in Isaiah 14:12?

In Isaiah 14:12 the King James Holy Bible (and MANY others, as we shall soon see) reads: “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! For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High. Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.”

The reason this passage is attacked by the modern bible version proponents is because the NASB, RSV, Holman Standard, NIV, Catholic St. Joseph New American Bible, Jerusalem Bible, and many others have translated this section in a VERY different way. Instead of, “How art thou fallen from heaven, O LUCIFER. . .”, they say, “How you have fallen from heaven, O MORNING STAR. . .” or “DAY STAR”

The Jehovah Witness New World Translation has: “O how you have fallen from heaven, YOU SHINING ONE, son of the dawn!”

Doug Kutilek, who himself does not believe that any Bible in any language is the complete and 100% true words of God, and who tells us that regarding the N.T. he accepts neither the Textus Receptus, nor the Westcott-Hort influenced critical texts, but thinks that he needs to evaluate every reading for himself before he decides which readings are right and which are not, (in other words Kutilek is his own authority) thinks he has irrefutable proof that Isaiah 14:12 is talking about the planet Venus.

Mr. Kutilek points out in one of his articles criticizing Lucifer in the KJB that the marginal reading of the King James Bible says: “or, O day star”, and thus, he thinks, the KJB translators were on the side of the modern versions. It should be pointed out that we King James Bible believers do not believe the KJB translators were inspired nor do we believe their own thoughts, their Preface or their own theology was always right.

We believe and defend THE TEXT of the King James Bible as having been guided by God Almighty to give us His perfect words of 100% truth. God overruled the occasional marginal readings and guided them to put in THE TEXT what He wanted to be there. 

The Hebrew does not mean “day star”, and though there is a relationship between the planet Venus and what is called the morning star, the Isaiah passage is actually referring to the fall of Lucifer, who became Satan, and not some planet wanting to be like God.

The only thing the marginal notes show is that among the forty seven plus translators who worked on the King James Bible not all of them were agreed on how to translate numerous words or passages. The marginal notes refer to ideas other translators entertained but which were rejected in the final TEXT.  

You can see many of these marginal notes throughout the whole Bible.  For example, in Isaiah 6:9 we read “Here ye indeed, but understand not” – marginal note “Or, without ceasing“.  Isaiah 9:1 “in Galilee of the nations” – or, populous (Galilee)”; Isaiah 9:16 “the leaders of this people cause them to err” – or, “they that call them blessed“; Isaiah 14:4 “the golden city ceased” – or, “the exactress of gold“; Isaiah 14:9 “stirreth up…all the chief ones of the earth” – or, “the great goats“; and Isaiah 15:7 “to the brook of the willows” – or, “the valley of the Arabians“.  We do not defend the marginal notes, but the words God caused to be placed into the TEXT of the King James Bible as being inspired and 100% true. 

The Funk and Wagnalls Standard College Dictionary defines Lucifer as 1. The archangel who led the revolt of the angels and fell from heaven: identified with Satan. and 2. The planet Venus when it appears as the morning star.

 The Hebrew Lexicon by Benjamin Davidson, The Analytical Hebrew And Chaldee Lexicon, (Peabody: Hendrickson, 2011), p. 190, gives Lucifer as one of the definitions of the Hebrew word Helel.  הֵילֵל

“masculine. the morning star; Lucifer, Isaiah 14:12.  others take it as the imperfect of “to wail, lamen 

Likewise the Latin Dictionary at Latin-Dictionary.net defines the English word Lucifer as meaning “Lucifer, Satan”.

http://latin-dictionary.net/search/english/Lucifer

There are several problems with the translation “O morning star”, but first let me point out that there are as many opinions in Bible commentaries as to who or what is being referred to as there are bible versions. Some absolutely deny that it has anything to do with the fall of Satan.
Others believe this passage refers to the king of Babylon, whom many identify as king Nebuchadnezzar; others believe it refers to Belshazzar, some say it speaks of the Antichrist, and others as the kingdom of Babylon itself.
Amazingly, some even support the idea that it was the planet Venus that wanted to be like God and will be cast down to hell.

Many others see Isaiah 14:12 as referring to the Satanic spiritual power behind the king and kingdom of Babylon. There is little agreement among scholars as to who or what is being addressed in this passage or how to translate it.

The problem with the translation, “MORNING STAR” (#1966- haylale), is that the words “morning” and “star” are not found here in ANY Hebrew text. (Morning is #1242- boker and star is #3556- kokawb)

The word for star IS found in verse 13, where it says: “I will exalt my throne above the stars of God.” The two words, morning and star, are found together in Job 38:7, where God is asking Job in verse 4, “Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth?. . . When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?” This might be a reference to the angels who rejoiced at God’s creation, or the “morning stars” that sang may well be an anthropomorphism of the first created literal stars “singing”. God also describes mountains and hills as singing and trees of the field clapping their hands (See Isaiah 55:12).

Another serious problem with rendering this word (#1966 Haylale) as “morning star” is that Jesus Christ himself is called the morning star in Rev. 22:16 where he says: “I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.” The NIV and NASB make it possible to identify Satan with Jesus Christ. I believe this is Lucifer’s ultimate game plan and that the new versions have taken a giant step forward in advancing Satan’s deception.

In fact, if you take a look at the notes on Isaiah 14:12 in the Amplified bible (put out by the same people who gave us the NASB), you will find the following “explanation”. It says: “‘Light-bringer’ or ‘Shining one’ was originally translated Lucifer, but because of the association of that name with Satan it is not now used. Some students feel that the application of the name Lucifer to Satan, in spite of the long and confident teaching to that effect, is erroneous. Lucifer, the light-bringer is the Latin equivalent of the Greek word Phosphoros, which is used as a title of Christ in 2 Peter 1:19 and corresponds to the name ‘bright Morning Star’ in Revelation 22:16, which Jesus called Himself.”

The word translated as Lucifer in the KJB occurs only once in the Hebrew, just as the word Lucifer occurs only once in the Holy Bible. It is a noun and it comes from a very interesting verb #1984 hawlal. This verb is used many times and has many very different meanings including: “to shine, to be foolish, to boast, to glory, to praise, and to be mad (insane or crazy)”.

Isn’t it interesting that Satan boasts and glories in his wisdom and power, wants to receive praise as god, shines as an angel of light to deceive, and his madness in wanting to be like the most High is ultimately the height of foolishness?

Some Bible critics get a bee in their bonnets about the translation Lucifer and they claim this is merely a Latin word, and they ask why does the King James Bible have a Latin translation in it.  This is a really silly objection if you think about it.  In 382 A.D. Jerome translated from the Hebrew into Latin and he believed Lucifer (bearing light) was the best translation to depict who this entity was that wanted to be like God and fell from heaven.   

In 425 the Latin Vulgate did the same and later on the Latin Clementine version did likewise.  The 2005 electronic edition of the Latin Clementine reads this way: Quomodo cecidisti de cælo, Lucifer, qui mane oriebaris?”  You can see this Latin translation online here –

 http://vulsearch.sourceforge.net/html/index.html

Numerous other Bible translators agree. If you begin to criticize the Latin, you get yourself into all kinds of problems.  Numerous words found in the English language come directly from Latin.  In the Bible we get such words as justice = Latin iustitiam; justify and justification; sacrifice = sarificium; sanctify and sanctification; cross = crucem; saint= sancti; propitiation, and revelation = revelationis, to name but a very few.  

Yet not one of these English words looks anything remotely like the literal Hebrew and Greek words in the texts from which we get our English translations.  The Latin gave us many good words that eventually were carried over into English.

 The Greek Septuagint and Modern Greek Today

It is also highly significant that the so called Greek Septuagint (LXX) also agrees with the reading of Lucifer.  In the common copy of what is know as the Greek Septuagint, the Isaiah passage reads: πως επεσεν εκ του ουρανου, ο Εωσφορε” and the English translation is “How has Lucifer, that rose in the morning, fallen from heaven.” There are also at least three English translations of the Septuagint or Siniaticus copies, and all three of them translate it as Lucifer. The Septuagint Bible of 1954 by C.A. Muses and  the Old Testament According to the Septuagint of 2009 – “How is LUCIFER fallen from heaven, that rose up in the morning!” The Septuagint online English translation can be see here

– http://ecmarsh.com/lxx/Esaias/index.htm

 where it says:  “How has Lucifer, that rose in the morning, fallen from heaven!” In addition to this there are The Septuagint Bible of 1954 by A.C. Muses, and the 2009 Old Testament According to the Septuagint.  Then there is the modern Greek meaning of the word Εωσφορε.  

I have in my study a modern day Greek-English dictionary. It is called Divry’s Modern English-Greek and Greek-English Desk Dictionary, published by D. C. Divry, Inc. Publishers New York 1974.  If you look under the English Lucifer page 182 you get Εωσφορε, and if you look up the word Εωσφορε on page 523 (the same Greek word found in all copies of the Greek Septuagint) you get the English word Lucifer.

There is also an online English to Greek Dictionary. Simply go to the site – http://www.kypros.org/cgi-bin/lexicon  Then type in the word Lucifer and what you come up with in Greek is this same word  Εωσφορε that is found in the Septuagint translations and the Modern Greek Old Testament too.

The reasons I believe the King James Bible reading of Lucifer is correct are many. First, if this passage is not referring to the fall of Satan, also known as the dragon, the old serpent, the devil, leviathan, Beelzebub, etc., then we have no account in Scripture as to how he, who was originally created by God as good, became what he is today.

In I Timothy 3:6 we are told that a bishop should not be a novice “lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil.” We are also told that Satan wishes to be worshiped. We see in the temptation in the wilderness that he came to Jesus Christ and said: “All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me.” Where are this desire to be like the most High God and the pride that resulted in his condemnation recorded in the Scriptures except here in Isaiah 14:12-15? The fall of Satan is not found anywhere else in the whole Bible except here.

Secondly, I disagree with those that argue that only the king of Babylon is being referred to in Isaiah 14:12 and not the fall of Satan. Many say it refers to king Nebuchadnezzar. A big problem with this view is that Nebuchadnezzar became a worshiper of the true God and his miraculous conversion is recorded in Daniel chapter 4. Nebuchadnezzar will not “be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit”, but rather will be with the Lord Jesus Christ and his redeemed for all eternity.  Another problem is that if the passage refers to an earthly king, then how did he get into heaven from whence he fell?

Thirdly, I and many others believe that Lucifer or Satan’s fall is recorded here, and that he, the devil, was the real spiritual power behind the kingdom of Babylon. Babylon also appears prominently again in the book of Revelation as the kingdom of the beast and both are spiritually empowered by Satan and his devils.

David Guzik’s commentary notes (Caps are mine): “How you are fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! Here, the prophet identifies the king of Babylon as Lucifer, son of the morning. Some debate if Lucifer is a name or a title… The prophetic habit of speaking to both a near and a distant fulfillment, the prophet will sometimes speak more to the near or more to the distant. HERE IS A GOOD EXAMPLE OF ISAIAH SPEAKING MORE TO THE DISTANT, ULTIMATE FULFILLMENT. It is true that the king of literal Babylon shined brightly among the men of his day, and fell as hard and as completely as if a man were to fall from heaven. BUT THERE WAS A FAR MORE BRIGHTLY SHINING BEING WHO INHABITED HEAVEN, AND FELL EVEN MORE DRAMATICALLY – THE KING OF SPIRITUAL BABYLON, SATAN.”

The 1609 Douay-Rheims Bible has a note on “O Lucifer” in Isaiah 14:12 that says, “O Lucifer. . .O day star. All this, according to the letter, is spoken of the king of Babylon. It may also be applied, in a spiritual sense, to Lucifer the prince of devils, who was created a bright angel, but fell by pride and rebellion against God.” 

Likewise, E.W. Bullinger notes in his well known Companion Bible In Isaiah 14:12, ‘Lucifer = Morning star. Is worshipped by the Assyrians as male at sunrise, female at sunset. And is a name of Satan’, this is according to the work of E.W. Bullinger. See also verse 13, in that context, “the north”, ‘this helps us to localize the dwelling place of God. No “Semitic conception”, but Divine revelation of Him Who knows what Satan “said in his heart.” ‘ Cp. Ps. 75.6 , Job 26.7. (E.W. B.)

Bible teacher and Commentary writer Harry A. Ironside writes in his Expository Notes on the Prophet Isaiah – “These words cannot apply to any mere mortal man. Lucifer (the light-bearer) is a created angel of the very highest order, identical with the covering cherub of Ezekiel 28. He was, apparently, the greatest of all the angel host and was perfect before God until he fell through pride. It was his ambition to take the throne of Deity for himself and become the supreme ruler of the universe.

Note his five “I wills.” It was the assertion of the creature’s will in opposition to the will of the Creator that brought about his downfall, and so an archangel became the devil! Cast down from the place of power and favor which he had enjoyed, he became the untiring enemy of God and man, and down through the millennia since has exerted every conceivable device to ruin mankind and rob God of the glory due to His name.

It is of him our Lord speaks in John 8:44. The Lord there shows that Satan is an apostate, having fallen from a position once enjoyed, and we know from other Scriptures how he ever goes about as a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour. The Cross was the precursor of Satan’s doom, but he is determined to wreak his vengeance upon mankind so far as he can before his own final judgment takes place, because his heart is filled with hatred against God and against those whom God loves.

We know from other passages that Lucifer was not alone in his rebellion (II Peter 2:4), and our Lord speaks of “the devil and his angels” (Matthew 25:41), and this is confirmed in Revelation 12:7, where we read of the coming war in heaven between Michael and his angels, and the dragon and his.” (End on notes from Harry Ironside)

Commentator Dr. Henry M. Morris states: “Although the prophecy in Isaiah 14 is directed toward the earthly king of Babylon, here it goes far beyond him (he could never fall from heaven) to the wicked spirit possessing his body and inspiring his actions. Just as Satan possessed and used the serpent’s body in Eden, so he does here with Babylon’s king…”

Gregory of Nyssa, A.D. 382, Against Eunomius, Book I, chapter 22: “as the Scripture says in the description of the fall of the morning star, the mysteries on which subject are revealed by our Lord to His disciples: “I saw Satan falling like lightning from heaven.”

A.D. 400 – The Apology of Rufinus, Book I, chapter 34 (“Principalities and Powers”): “the Apostle means by these expressions the rebellious angels, and the prince of this world, and Lucifer who once was the morning star, over whom in the end of the age the saints must sit with Christ…the rebellious angels and the prince of this world, and Lucifer who once was the morning star”

Jonathan Edwards, (circa 1750) Volume II, Miscellaneous Discourses, XI. Miscellaneous Observations, II. Fall of the Angels: “This angel, before his fall, was the chief of all the angels, of greatest natural capacity, strength, and wisdom, and highest in honour and dignity, the brightest of all those stars of heaven, as is signified by what is said of him, under that type of him, the king of Babylon, Isa. xiv. 12. “How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!”

Charles H. Spurgeon, in a sermon delivered on January 10th, 1864, said “We can scarcely think that all devils are Satans. There seems to be one chief arch-spirit, one great Diabolus, who is an accuser of the brethren-one mighty Lucifer, who fell down from heaven and has become the prince of the powers of darkness. In all his hosts it is probable that there is not his like. He stands first and chief of those fallen morning stars; the rest of the spirits may stand in different grades of wickedness, a hierarchy of hell.”

Even some non KJB only preachers see this passage as referring to Lucifer and Satan.  These are the 1999 notes from Fullerton Calvary Chapel, Rich Cathers, Commentary Sermon Notes on Isaiah –

Satan’s Boast  12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!

Lucifer – the name is Latin for “morning star” (or, “light bearer”). The Hebrew word used here is heylel – shining one, morning star, Lucifer. This is the only place this specific Hebrew word is found, and it comes from another Hebrew word, halal, meaning to shine; to praise, boast, be boastful. The term “morning star” is used to describe angels (Job 38:7), and Jesus (Rev. 22:16).

The morning star is actually the planet Venus. It shines brightly for a short time in the early morning, but soon fades with the rising of the sun.

Why I believe this also refers to Satan, the power behind the king of Babylon:

1. There are angelic beings (both good and bad) which seem to be connected with earthly, political persons.
a. In Daniel 10, Daniel meets the angel Gabriel, who describes having been in a war with the “prince of the kingdom of Persia”, apparently a title of a demonic spirit which was in charge of the kingdom of Persia, perhaps even in charge of the king of Persia.
b. We have another passage similar to the one here in Isaiah, in Eze. 28:12-20, where a word is given to the “king of Tyre”. At first he seems to be talking to a human, but there comes a point where suddenly things sound different. This “king” is described as having been in the garden of Eden (Eze. 28:13), and being the “anointed cherub that covers” which is a term describing an angel (Eze. 28:14). Again, the idea is that at a particular point, the prophecy turns and addresses the angel behind the person.

2. There are just too many telltale signs that this is Satan:

a. vs.12 – “Fallen from heaven” supposes that the person was in heaven. Satan is in heaven accusing us. (Job 1:6; Rev. 12:10)
b. vs.12 – Satan can be an “angel of light”:
(2 Cor 11:13-15 KJV) For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. {14} And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. {15} Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.
c. vs.12 – Satan loves to imitate Jesus and deceive people. Jesus is the “morning star” (Rev. 22:16; Mat. 24:5; Rev. 13:2).
d. vs.12 – Jesus referred to seeing Satan falling from heaven (Luke 10:18), and one day Satan will be cast out of heaven (Rev. 12:10).
e. vs.14 – Satan wants to take God’s place in having everyone worship him. He even tried getting Jesus to worship him (Mat. 4:8-10).
f. vs.15 – Satan will one day be thrown into a bottomless pit (Rev. 20:2) and then later thrown forever into the Lake of Fire (Rev. 20:10).

:13 I will exalt my throne above the stars of God:
stars of God – a term used to describe angels (Job 38:7)
:13 upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north
mount of the congregation – refers to Mount Zion, the place where God had His temple built, the place where He would meet with His people.
the sides of the north – the side of the mountain that the temple was on.
The Antichrist, who will be empowered by Satan (Rev. 13:2), will one day set up his throne in the temple and demand to be worshipped as God (2Th. 2:4).
:14 I will be like the most High  (end of notes from Rich Cathers)

David Guzik’s commentary on the Bible – a. How you are fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! Here, the prophet identifies the king of Babylon as Lucifer, son of the morning. Some debate if Lucifer is a name or a title; the word means morning star or day star, referring to a brightly shining object in the heavens. Whether it is a title or a name makes little difference; this once brightly shining king of Babylon is now fallen from heaven.

i. The prophetic habit of speaking to both a near and a distant fulfillment, the prophet will sometimes speak more to the near or more to the distant. Here is a good example of Isaiah speaking more to the distant, ultimate fulfillment. It is true that the king of literal Babylon shined brightly among the men of his day, and fell as hard and as completely as if a man were to fall from heaven. But there was a far more brightly shining being who inhabited heaven, and fell even more dramatically – the king of spiritual Babylon, Satan.

b. Fallen from heaven: In fact there are four falls of Satan, and this refers to his final, fourth fall.

i. Satan fell from glorified to profane (Ezekiel 28:14-16). This is what Jesus spoke of in Luke 10:18 when He says He saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven. This is the only fall of Satan that has already happened.

ii. Satan will fall from having access to heaven (Job 1:121 Kings 22:21,Zechariah 3:1) to restriction on the earth (Revelation 12:9).

iii. Satan will fall from his place on the earth to bondage in the bottomless pit for 1,000 years (Revelation 20:1-3).

iv. Finally, as mentioned here in Isaiah 14:12, Satan will fall from the bottomless pit to the lake of fire, which we commonly know as hell (Revelation 20:10). 

Smith’s Bible Dictionary of 1901 says regarding the name Lucifer: “Its application, from St. Jerome downward, to Satan in his fall from heaven arises probably from the fact that the Babylonian empire is in Scripture represented as the type of tyrannical and self idolizing power, and especially connected with the empire of the Evil One in the Apocalypse.”

Revelation 18:2 says: “Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit…”, and very significantly we read in Revelation 13: 1-2, “And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having SEVEN HEADS and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy. And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a LION, and THE DRAGON GAVE HIM HIS POWER, and his seat, and great authority.”

I understand this beast which has 7 heads and 10 horns to be a combination of the four world powers depicted in the book of Daniel, of which the king of Babylon was the lion and one of the 7 heads mentioned. In the book of Revelation we see that the dragon gave him his power. Satan himself is the spiritual power behind the kingdom of the beast and he finally gets the worship he has always wanted – “And they worshiped the dragon which gave power unto the beast…” Revelation 13:4.

Fourthly, many Bible critics say Lucifer is a mistranslation of the Hebrew and that the KJB has been responsible for this misconception and confusion. It should be pointed out that the KJB is not the first or the only Bible version to so understand and translate this passage in Isaiah 14:12.

All English Bibles before the KJB of 1611 also have the word LUCIFER in them. This includes Wycliffe 1395, Coverdale’s 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible (John Rogers) 1549,  Bishop’s Bible 1568, and the Geneva Bible 1599 – “How art thou fallen from heauen, O LUCIFER, sonne of the morning?”.

Lucifer is also found in the Latin Vulgate 425 A.D., the Douay-Rheims of 1582 – “How art thou fallen from heaven, O LUCIFER”, the Douay 1950 Catholic bible.

BUT the more modern Catholic versions like the Jerusalem Bible and the St. Joseph New American Bible now agree with the NIV, NASB, RSV versions and have “morning star”.  However the latest 2009 Catholic Public Domain Version has now gone back to reading “Lucifer”.  You can see this 2009 Bible translation here

– http://www.sacredbible.org/catholic/index.htm 

Lucifer is also the reading found in The Bill Bible 1671, The Thomson Bible 1808, Daniel Webster’s 1833 translation, The Longman Version 1841, The Brenton Translation 1851, The Boothroyd Bible 1853, Noyes Translation 1869, Darby’s 1890 version, The American Translation 1927, The Word of Yah 1993, God’s First Truth 1999, The Revised Geneva Bible 2005, the 2012 Natural Israelite Version -“How you are fallen from heaven, O LUCIFER, son of the morning!”, the Jubilee Bible 2010, Conservative Bible 2011, the Biblos Interlinear Bible 2011 – “how are you fallen from heaven, O LUCIFER.”, the BRG Bible 2012 and the Modern English Bible 2014 – “How are you fallen from heaven, O LUCIFER, son of the morning!”

The 2008 Ancient Roots Translinear Bible – “How you fell from the heavens, LUCIFER, son of the daylight!  You smashed to the ground, feeble over the nations.”

This Hebrew Interlinear Old Testament – “How art thou fallen from heaven, O LUCIFER, son of the morning!”

http://studybible.info/IHOT/Isaiah%2014:12 

Hebrew Roots Bible 2012 – “Oh LUCIFER, son of the morning, how you have fallen from the heavens2!”  Footnote – “Showing the downfall of Satan.”

The Asser Septuagint version 2009 – “How is LUCIFER fallen from heaven, that rose up in the morning! ” 

http://orthodoxengland.org.uk/zot.htm

The Romanian Cornilescu Bible and the 2009 Romanian Fidela Bbile both say Lucifer – “Cum ai căzut din cer, LUCIFER, fiu al dimineţii”  as well as the 1569 Spanish Sagradas Escrituras read Lucifer – “¡Cómo caíste del cielo, oh LUCIFER, hijo de la mañana!” Lucifer is also the reading of the 2004 Spanish Reina Valera Gomez bible, that can be seen here

http://www.reinavaleragomez.com/RVGhtml/index.html  

 It says: ¡Cómo caíste del cielo, oh LUCIFER, hijo de la mañana! Cortado fuiste por tierra, tú que debilitabas las naciones.” Czech Kralika (1613) lucifere; the Albanian Bible – “Vallë, si ke rënë nga qielli, o LUCIFER.  The New Italian Diodati of 1991, as well as the Conferenza Episcopale Italiana version read: “Come mai sei caduto dal cielo, o LUCIFERO“. The Portuguese O Livro of 2000 also reads the same with – “Como caíste do céu, ó LUCIFER – estrela matinal!”. The Russian Synodal Version also reads Lucifer – “Как упал ты с неба, денница, сын зари!” = “How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!”, the Lithuanian Bible – “Kaip tu iškritai iš dangaus, LIUCIFERI, ryto aušros sūnau?”,   The French Sainte Bible of 1759 by Louis Lemaistre de Sacy also reads Lucifer – “Comment es-tu tombé du ciel. LUCIFER, toi qui paroissois si brillant au point du jour?” 

Lucifer is also the reading in the 1982 NKJV, the 21st Century KJV 1994, The Brenton Translation 1851, the Calvin Bible 1855,  the 2001 Urim-Thummin Version, the Knox Bible ‘You’ Version 2009, The Septuagint Bible of 1954 by C.A. Muses, the Old Testament According to the Septuagint of 2009 – “How is LUCIFER fallen from heaven, that rose up in the morning!“-  

http://orthodoxengland.org.uk/pdf/ot/isaiah.pdf  and the Third Millenium Bible 1998.

Ryrie’s Scofield bible and Dakes annotated bible make reference to the fact that many early church fathers (among these Tertullian 160-220 A.D., Origen 185-254 A. D., and Gregory the Great), saw the passage in Isaiah 14 as referring to the fall of Satan. The idea that the passage refers to the fall of Satan did NOT originate with Jerome (384 A.D), though he also believed this. Tertullian lived almost 200 years before Jerome, and he held this view.

Bible versions that contain the Scofield notes, including the NIV Scofield edition, say regarding the Lucifer of Isaiah 14:12: “Verses 12-14 evidently refer to Satan, who, as prince of this world-system (See Scofield “Revelation 13:8) is the real unseen ruler of the successive world- powers. Tyre, Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, Rome, etc. (see Ezekiel 28:12-14) Lucifer, “day-star,” can be none other that Satan. This tremendous passage marks the beginning of sin in the universe. When Lucifer said, “I will,” sin began.

The Encyclopedia Britannica says: “The Church Fathers interpreted the words of Jesus in Luke 10:18, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven,” as a reference to this passage in Isaiah, so that “Lucifer” came to be regarded as the name of Satan before his fall.”

The Random House 1999 Webster’s dictionary gives the following definitions of Lucifer. The first one listed is “a proud rebellious archangel, identified with Satan, who fell from heaven.” The second one is: “the planet Venus when appearing as the morning star.” Of these two, I don’t think it was the planet Venus that wanted to be like God and exalt its throne above the stars of God, do you?  

Notes from the Internet

On one of the internet Bible clubs I belong to, I was discussing this passage with another Christian who said Lucifer was a bad translation of the Hebrew text. Here is part of our dialogue.

“My aim has not been to argue that the Isaiah text is irrelevant to our understanding of Satan’s downfall: we’re probably not so far apart as it sometimes seems. Whilst “Lucifer” is a bad translation of heylel in Is 14:12 it is actually a good exposition of the text from a biblical-theological perspective. Since our discussions here usually focus on the questions of translation we often miss the fact that we’re largely in agreement doctrinally.” (end of statement)

(My response) “Well, I’m glad we tend to see this passage in a similar way doctrinally, but I would disagree with you that Lucifer is a bad translation. We know that one of the primary meanings of the verb from which Hehlel is derived is “to shine”. Lucifer literally means “light bearing or light bearer”. The other passage that traditionally speaks of Satan is Ezekiel 28:12-19.

First the prince of Tyrus is addressed, then beginning with verse 12 the king of Tyrus is spoken to. The king seems to be the spiritual power behind the earthly prince. This “king” is also called the anointed cherub that covereth who was in the mountain of God. He was also in the garden of Eden. Part of his description is being covered with many precious stones and gold. He walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire, and verse 17 says: “Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness”. Apparently this covering cherub was resplendent and reflected bright lights and colors – thus “light bearer” or Lucifer.

Many Christians have thought that the reason God made two cherubs facing each other over the mercy seat, was to provide an object lesson about pride. Lucifer was the only one of his kind before his fall. He was lifted up because of his beauty. So as an object lesson, God creates two cherubs facing each other. They can “see” that there is another one just like them and they are not so special or unique.

Lucifer or Light bearer fits perfectly because Satan was a very bright, beautiful, light reflecting creature before his fall, and he now transforms himself into an angel of light to deceive.

Those that say, like the NKJV footnote, that the Hebrew reads literally “morning star” are simply making this up (that is a kind way of saying they are lying). As you know, the words “morning star” are used in other places in Scripture, but not here in Isaiah 14:12. So I would say that the name Lucifer in Isaiah is exactly what it should be; it is an excellent translation.” (end of response)

Lucifer seems to be the personal name of this powerful spiritual entity who wants to be like the most High God and he is also known as Satan and the devil. A host of modern dictionaries and encyclopedias, including Webster’s 1999 edition, Word Net. Dictionary, American Heritage Dictionary, Wordsmyth English Dictionary, and Encyclopedia Com. all define Lucifer as Satan and the devil. This is not a new doctrine, nor is it an old one that has passed out of favor.

Another objection I have heard raised against understanding Isaiah 14:12 as referring to the fall of Satan is this. Some have pointed to verse 16 where those who witness this fall say: “Is this THE MAN that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms…that opened not the house of his prisoners?” They then ask How is it possible to call Satan A MAN?

Initially this might seem like a good point, but if you read The Bible more carefully you will also see that God Himself is called a MAN, and the angels, and Satan too. In Exodus 15:3 Moses and the children of Israel sing a song of deliverance saying: “The LORD is A MAN of war; the LORD is his name.” The Hebrew word “man” is in the text and is so rendered by the RV, ASV, ESV, NKJV and many others, though the NASB, NIV have paraphrased this as “The Lord is a warrior”.

Angels as well are referred to as “men” in the Scriptures. In Genesis 18-19 we see three MEN come to Abraham. Two of them are angels as seen from 19:1 and one of them is God. Yet they are called “men” several times in these two chapters. See Genesis 18:2,16,22; and 19:1,10,12 and 16.

Then in the New Testament, Mark 2:22-27 the Lord Jesus talks about casting out Satan and says: “No man can enter into a strong MAN’S house, and spoil his goods, except he will first bind the strong MAN; and then he will spoil his house.’

I have also recently heard another argument brought forth by a bible agnostic who openly admits that he does not believe that any Bible in any language is the infallible words of God. He tries to defend the modern version reading found in some translations like the ESV “O Day Star” or the NASB “O Star of the morning” or the NIV 1984 edition “O morning star” by pointing to Job 38:7 where it says: “When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?”. 

He then proceeds to build his argument that the name of “morning star” was not exclusive to Jesus Christ and that to call Satan, or the king of Babylon or whoever is being talked about in Isaiah 14 is not a bad thing or giving the title of our Lord to Satan. 

On the surface this argument may seem to have some weight, but we should consider the following.  The “morning stars” and “the sons of God” spoken of in Job 38 DO seem to be angelic beings.  However there is a difference between “the sons of God” and “the Son of God”. There are many “sons of God” both human and angelic, but only one Son of God.  Likewise there is only one Lucifer. 

The phrase in the new versions in Isaiah 14:12 like “O Day Star” or “O Star of the morning” seem to imply a uniqueness, that is, there is only one of these.  Yet Jesus Christ refers to Himself as “the morning star” in Revelation 22:16 when He says: “I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.”  He does not say “I am A morning star” but “THE morning star”. There is only one who is separate from all others and unique in His being, just as there are many “sons of God” but only one “the Son of God”. 

I have also heard the argument given by the bible agnostics that it is not a legitimate translation to take a literal word like Helel and translate it as a personal name like Lucifer in Isaiah 14:12.  What I then point out to bible agnostics like this is that their own bible versions do this very thing in Acts 14:12 where their own bible versions say “And they called Barnabas JUPITER”. There is NO Greek text that says anything even remotely like “Jupiter” but all Greek texts have the literal words: ἐκάλουν τε τὸν Βαρνάβαν Δία.  It is this last word Dia that they all translate as a personal name “Jupiter”.  So, once again, his argument falls to the ground.

Those who attack the King James Bible and say that we who believe and defend it are not using the facts, may not be aware that there are many differing scholarly opinions and Bible versions, and many of them agree with the King James Bible.

Those who criticize the KJB do not believe that any Bible or any text in any language is now the inerrant words of God. They have no final authority as to what are the true words of God and are left to their own changeable opinions and preferences.

The King James Bible is the perfect word of the living God. It alone, like the incarnate Word of God of Whom it testifies, is the faithful and true witness.

Will Kinney

Early Church writers’ testimony to the fall of Lucifer as recorded in Isaiah 14:12

(A special thanks to brother Mark Lamb for this information)

“LUCIFER” and “SON OF THE MORNING” Only appear in Isa 14:12.

Nowhere else can this name or title be found in the Bible.

Patristic Evidentiary Support for the Genuineness of the above Passage

The Early Church Fathers 38 Vol. Set WordSearch Add-On

182-254 A.D. Early Church Fathers – Ante-Nicene Fathers – Volume 4 – ORIGEN – Origen de Principiis. – Book 1. – Chapter 5. On Rational Natures.

5. Again, we are taught as follows BY THE PROPHET ISAIAH regarding another opposing power. THE PROPHET SAYS, “HOW IS LUCIFER, who used to arise in the morning, fallen from heaven! He who assailed all nations is broken and beaten to the ground. Thou indeed saidst in thy heart, I shall ascend into heaven; above the stars of heaven shall I place my throne; I shall sit upon a lofty mountain, above the lofty mountains which are towards the north; I shall ascend above the clouds; I shall be like the Most High. Now shalt thou be brought down to the lower world, and to the foundations of the earth. They who see thee shall be amazed at thee, and shall say, This is the man who harassed the whole earth, who moved kings, who made the whole world a desert, who destroyed cities, and did not unloose those who were in chains. All the kings of the nations have slept in honour, every one in his own house; but thou shalt be cast forth on the mountains, accursed with the many dead who have been pierced through with swords, and have descended to the lower world. As a garment cloned with blood, and stained, will not be clean; neither shall thou be clean, because thou hast destroyed my land and slain my people: thou shall not remain for ever, most wicked seed. Prepare thy sons for death on account of the sins of thy father, lest they rise again and inherit the earth, and fill the earth with wars. And I shall rise against them, saith the Lord of hosts, and I shall cause their name to perish, and their remains, and their seed.”[11]

ISA 14:12-22. Most evidently BY THESE WORDS IS HE SHOWN TO HAVE FALLEN FROM HEAVEN, WHO FORMERLY WAS LUCIFER, AND WHO USED TO ARISE IN THE MORNING. For if, as some think, he was a nature of darkness, how is LUCIFER said to have existed before? Or how could he arise in the morning, who had in himself nothing of the light? Nay, even the Saviour Himself teaches us, saying of the devil, “Behold, I see Satan fallen from heaven like lightning.”[12] Luke 10:18. For at one time he was light.

 170-236 A.D. Early Church Fathers – Ante-Nicene Fathers – Volume 5 – HIPPOLYTUS – The Extant Works and Fragments of Hippolytus. – Part II. Dogmatical and Historical. – Treatise on Christ and Antichrist.

How art thou fallen from heaven, O LUCIFER, SON OF THE MORNING![48] He is cast down to the ground who sends off to all the nations. possess my land.”[50] … ISA 14:4-21.

182-254 A.D. Early Church Fathers – Ante-Nicene Fathers – Volume 9 – ORIGEN – Epistle to Gregory and Origen’s Commentary on the Gospel of John. – Origen’s Commentary on the Gospel of John. – Book 1. – The Angels Also are Evangelists. But the angels also wonder at the peace which is to be brought about on account of Jesus on the earth, that seat of war, on which LUCIFER, STAR OF THE MORNING, fell from heaven, to be warred against and destroyed by Jesus.

354-430 A.D. Early Church Fathers – Nicene & Post-Nicene Fathers – First Series – Volume 2 – ST. AUGUSTIN: City of God – City of God – Book XI – Chapter 15 – The Devil Sinneth from the Beginning.

“HOW ART THOU FALLEN, O LUCIFER, SON OF THE MORNING!”[3] ISA 14:12.

354-430 A.D. Early Church Fathers – Nicene & Post-Nicene Fathers – First Series – Volume 2 – St. AUGUSTIN: – On Christian Doctrine – Book III – Chapter 37 – The Seventh Rule of Tichonius.

For example, what is said in ISAIAH, “HOW HE IS FALLEN FROM HEAVEN, LUCIFER, SON OF THE MORNING!”[1]

ISA 14:12 (LXX.). “HOW ART THOU FALLEN FROM HEAVEN, O LUCIFER, SON OF THE MORNING!” (A.V.).

354-430 A.D. Early Church Fathers – Nicene & Post-Nicene Fathers – First Series – Volume 7 – St. AUGUSTIN: – Lectures or Tractates on the Gospel According to St. John. – Tractate III – Chapter I. 15-18.

Listen to the voice of the Father to the Son: “Before LUCIFER I have begotten Thee.”[12] Ps 110:3.—Vulgate. He who was begotten before LUCIFER Himself illuminates all. A certain one was named LUCIFER, WHO FELL; for he was an angel and became a devil; and concerning him the Scripture said, “LUCIFER, WHO DID ARISE IN THE MORNING, FELL.”[13] ISA 14:27. And why was he LUCIFER? Because, being enlightened, he gave forth light. But for what reason did he become dark! Because he abode not in the truth.[14] John 8:44. Therefore He was before LUCIFER, before every one that is enlightened; since before every one that is enlightened, of necessity He must be by whom all are enlightened who can be enlightened.

296-373 A.D. Early Church Fathers – Nicene & Post-Nicene Fathers – Second Series – Volume 4 – ATHANASIUS: Select Works and Letters – Against the Arians. (Orationes contra Arianos IV.) – Against the Arians. (Orationes contra Arianos IV.) – Discourse III

For they would not have remained in their own glory, unless, what the Father willed, that they had willed also. He, for instance, who did not remain, but went astray, heard the words, ‘HOW ART THOU FALLEN FROM HEAVEN, O LUCIFER, SON OF THE MORNING [6] IS 14:12.?’ But if this be so, how is only He Only-begotten Son and Word and Wisdom?

335-394 A.D. Early Church Fathers – Nicene & Post-Nicene Fathers – Second Series – Volume 5 – GREGORY OF NYSSA: Dogmatic Treatises, Etc. – Prolegomena. – His General Character as a Theologian. An Epitome of all Philosophers.

He was ‘AS THE ANGELS’ AND IF HE FELL, LUCIFER FELL TOO.

347-420 A.D. Early Church Fathers – Nicene & Post-Nicene Fathers – Second Series – Volume 6 – St. JEROME: Letters and Select Works – The Letters of St. Jerome. – Letter XV – To Pope Damasus.

In the West the Sun of righteousness[9] Mal 4:2. is even now rising; in the East, LUCIFER, WHO FELL FROM HEAVEN,[10] Luke 10:18. has once more set his throne above the stars.[11] ISA 14:12.

347-420 A.D. Early Church Fathers – Nicene & Post-Nicene Fathers – Second Series – Volume 6 – St. JEROME: Letters and Select Works – The Letters of St. Jerome. – Letter XXII – To Eustochium.

LUCIFER FELL, LUCIFER WHO USED TO RISE AT DAWN;[35] ISA 14:12. and he who was bred up in a paradise of delight had the well-earned sentence passed upon him, “Though thou exalt thyself as the eagle, and though thou set thy nest among the stars, thence will I bring thee down, saith the Lord.”[36] Obad 4. For he had said in his heart, “I will exalt my throne above the stars of God,” and “I will be like the Most High.”[37] Isa 14:13-14.

347-420 A.D. Early Church Fathers – Nicene & Post-Nicene Fathers – Second Series – Volume 6 – St. JEROME: Letters and Select Works – Treatises. – Against Jovinianus. – Book II

LUCIFER FELL who was sending to all nations, and he who was nurtured in a paradise of delight as one of the twelve precious stones, was wounded and went down to hell from the mount of God. Hence the Saviour says in the Gospel: “I beheld SATAN FALLING as lightning from heaven.” If HE FELL who stood on so sublime a height, who may not fall? If there are falls in heaven, how much more on earth! And yet though LUCIFER BE FALLEN (the old serpent after his fall), “his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the muscles of his belly.

330-390 A.D.Early Church Fathers – Nicene & Post-Nicene Fathers – Second Series – Volume 7 – GREGORY NAZIANZEN – Select Orations of Saint Gregory Nazianzen. – Oration XXVIII – The Second Theological Oration.

Or perhaps it is in order that we may not share the fate of LUCIFER, WHO FELL, and in consequence of receiving the full light make our necks stiff against the Lord Almighty, and suffer a fall, of all things most pitiable, from the height we had attained.

330-390 A.D. Early Church Fathers – Nicene & Post-Nicene Fathers – Second Series – Volume 7 – GREGORY NAZIANZEN – Select Orations of Saint Gregory Nazianzen. – Oration XXXVIII – On the Theophany, or Birthday of Christ.

I am obliged to stop short of saying that, and to conceive and speak of them only as difficult to move because of him, who for his splendour WAS CALLED LUCIFER, BUT BECAME AND IS CALLED DARKNESS THROUGH HIS PRIDE;

330-390 A.D. Early Church Fathers – Nicene & Post-Nicene Fathers – Second Series – Volume 7 – GREGORY NAZIANZEN – Select Orations of Saint Gregory Nazianzen. – Oration XLV – The Second Oration on Easter. 

“because of him who for His Splendour WAS CALLED LUCIFER, BUT BECAME AND IS CALLED DARKNESS THROUGH HIS PRIDE; and the Apostate Hosts who are subject to him, creators of evil by their revolt against good, and our inciters.”

329-379 A.D. Early Church Fathers – Nicene & Post-Nicene Fathers – Second Series – Volume 8 – BASIL: Letters and Select Works – The Letters. – To a lapsed Monk.

you were demonstrating and explaining the chastisement of God, and you yourself brought chastisement on your own head. How am I to lament you, how grieve for you? HOW IS LUCIFER THAT WAS

RISING IN THE MORNING FALLEN AND DASHED ON THE GROUND? Both the ears of every hearer will tingle. How is the Nazarite, brighter than gold, become dark above pitch?

360-435 A.D. Early Church Fathers – Nicene & Post-Nicene Fathers – Second Series – Volume 11 – JOHN CASSIAN – The Works of John Cassian. – The Twelve Books on the Institutes of the Coenobia, and the Remedies for the Eight Principal Faults. – Book XII. Of the Spirit of Pride. – Chapter IV. How by reason OF PRIDE LUCIFER WAS TURNED FROM AN ARCHANGEL INTO A DEVIL.

And that we may understand the power of its awful tyranny we see that that angel who, for the greatness of his splendour and beauty WAS TERMED LUCIFER, WAS CAST OUT OF HEAVEN for no other sin but this, and, pierced with the dart of pride, was hurled down from his grand and exalted position as an angel into hell. If then pride of heart alone was enough to CAST DOWN FROM HEAVEN to earth a power that was so great and adorned with the attributes of such might, THE VERY GREATNESS OF HIS FALL shows us with what care we who are surrounded by the weakness of the flesh ought to be on our guard. But we can learn how to avoid the most deadly poison of this evil if we trace out the origin and causes of HIS FALL. For weakness can never be cured, nor the remedies for bad states of health be disclosed unless first their origin and causes are investigated by a wise scrutiny. For as he (viz., LUCIFER) was endowed with divine splendour, and shone forth among the other higher powers by the bounty of his Maker’

360-435 A.D. Early Church Fathers – Nicene & Post-Nicene Fathers – Second Series – Volume 11 – JOHN CASSIAN – The Works of John Cassian. – The Conferences of John Cassian. Part I. Containing Conferences I-X. – Conference V. Conference of Abbot Serapion. On the Eight Principal Faults. – Chapter VII. How vainglory and pride can be consummated without any assistance from the body.

Or what act on the part of the body was there in that pride of old in the case of the above mentioned LUCIFER; as he only conceived it in his heart and mind, as the prophet tells us: “WHO SAIDST IN THINE HEART: I WILL ASCEND INTO HEAVEN, I WILL SET MY THRONE ABOVE THE STARS OF GOD. I WILL ASCEND ABOVE THE HEIGHTS OF THE CLOUDS, I WILL BE LIKE THE MOST HIGH.”[1] IS 14:13-14. And just as he had no one to stir him up to this pride, so his thoughts alone were the authors of the sin when complete and of his eternal fall; especially as no exercise of the dominion at which he aimed followed.

360-435 A.D. Early Church Fathers – Nicene & Post-Nicene Fathers – Second Series – Volume 11 – JOHN CASSIAN – The Works of John Cassian. – The Conferences of John Cassian. Part I. Containing Conferences I-X. – Conference VIII. The Second Conference of Abbot Serenus. On Principalities. – Chapter VIII. OF THE FALL OF THE DEVIL and the angels.

“And so we are clearly shown that out of that number of them some of THE LEADERS FELL, by the lamentations of Ezekiel and ISAIAH, in which we know that the prince of Tyre or that LUCIFER WHO ROSE IN THE MORNING is lamented with a doleful plaint: …

And thy heart was lifted up with thy beauty: thou hast lost thy wisdom in thy beauty, I HAVE CAST THEE TO THE GROUND: I have set thee before the face of kings, that they might behold thee. Thou hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thy iniquities and by the iniquity of thy traffic.”[1] Ezek 28:11-18. ISAIAH ALSO SAYS OF ANOTHER: “HOW ART THOU FALLEN FROM HEAVEN, O LUCIFER, WHO DIDST RISE IN THE MORNING? HOW ART THOU FALLEN TO THE GROUND, that didst wound the nations? and thou saidst in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God, I will sit in the mountain of the covenant, in the sides of the north. I will ascend above the heights of the clouds. I will be like the Most High.”[2] IS 14:12-14.

Return to Articles – http://brandplucked.webs.com/articles.htm 

See also John Hinton’s article on Lucifer vs.  morning star, which does a good job of explaining the meaning of Lucifer and the implications of mistranslating this as “morning star”

http://www.kjv-asia.com/authorized_version_defence_morning_star.htm 

See a very good article on this subject at KJV Today

“Lucifer” or “Day Star” in Isaiah 14:12

http://www.kjvtoday.com/home/lucifer-or-day-star-in-isaiah-1412

Notes from the Internet

Objection:

– A Bible agnostic posts:

“Morning star is ONLY for Jesus? Then the KJV blasphemes in Job 38:7. It implies multiple Jesuses.
Why doesn’t the KJV want only one Jesus?”

Job 38:7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?” (end of objection)

Then a fellow Bible believer responds: You folks really think you threw a “GOTCHA!!!!!” monkey wrench for the KJ Bible believers eh?

Revelation 22:16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.

Numbers 24:17 I shall see him, but not now: I shall behold him, but not nigh: there shall come a Star out of Jacob, and a Sceptre shall rise out of Israel, and shall smite the corners of Moab, and destroy all the children of Sheth.

Notice the passage where the Lord Jesus Christ calls himself “the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.” This is a fulfillment of Numbers 24:17

Let’s read your passage again:

Job 38:7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

Morning stars/stars = angels

Revelation 1:20 The mystery of the seven stars which thou sawest in my right hand, and the seven golden candlesticks. The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches: and the seven candlesticks which thou sawest are the seven churches.

Look again:

Revelation 12:4 And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.

Matthew 25:41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:

Revelation 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

Morning stars of Job 38:7 = angels!!

the bright and morning star = the Lord Jesus Christ!!

Nothing like a King James Bible to straighten things out, eh?” (end of comments by the fellow King James Bible believer)

Additional Notes:

There are many “morning stars” (Job 38:9) that are angles, but there is only ONE THE morning star – Revelation 22:16 I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.”

There were many “angels” but there is only ONE THE angel of the LORD, who is the Son of God.

There are many “sons of God” but there is only ONE THE Son of God.

There were many “high priests” but there is only ONE The High Priest – Hebrews 3:1

There were many “apostles” but there is only ONE The Apostle – Hebrews 3:1

Hebrews 3:1 “Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus.”

There are many “lords” and many “gods” but there is only ONE Lord Jesus Christ, and ONE God the Father.

1 Corinthians 8:5-6 – “For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth (as there be gods many and lords many) But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, ans we by him.”

The Angel of his presence = the Son of God

The angel of the LORD = the Son of God (See Genesis 16:7-13; Exodus 3:2-6)

Isaiah 63:9 King James Bible 1611 – “In all their affliction he was afflicted, and the Angel of his presence saued them: in his loue and in his pitie hee redeemed them, and he bare them, and caried them all the dayes of olde.

John Gill on Isaiah 63:9 -“and the Angel of his presence saved them – the Messiah is here meant; the Angel of the covenant, the Angel which went before the Israelites in the wilderness, (Exodus 23:20-23) not a created angel, or an angel by nature, but by office; being sent of God, as the word signifies, on the errand and business of salvation; called “the Angel of God’s presence”, or “face”, because his face was seen in him; his name, and nature, and perfections were in him; he is the brightness of his Father’s glory, and the express image of his person besides, the presence of God was always with him; he is the “Ithiel”, the Word that was with God, and with whom God always was; who lay in the bosom of his Father, and was ever with him; and who also, as Mediator, introduces his people into the presence of God, and always appears in it for them as their advocate and intercessor”

Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament – The angel of his presence saved them…(Isaiah 63:9). Inasmuch as Christ accompanied Israel in the wilderness (1 Corinthians 10:4), and is the `image of God’ (2 Cor. 4:4,6; Col. 1:15) and `the effulgence of his glory’ (Hebrews 1:3), the angel of God’s presence here is probably the Word of God that became flesh (John 1:1).

David Guzik’s Commentaries on the Bible – And the Angel of His Presence saved them: This refers to the presence and work of Jesus among ancient Israel, especially among those delivered from Egypt.

i. “The angel of His presence is the Messiah. Of this Angel it is said that He by His love and pity saved Israel; this can hardly be said of a created angel. It is the Christ who is meant here.” (Bultema)
ii. “Angel of his presence: literally ‘of his face’. We recognize people by face; ‘face’ is the Lord’s very one presence (Psalm 139:7), among them in the person of his angel – that unique ‘Angel of the Lord’ (as in Genesis 16:7ff; 21:17; 22:11, 15; Exodus 3:2; 14:19; 23:20-23; Malachi 3:1) who speaks as the Lord and is yet distinct from him.”

Jamieson, Fausset and Brown Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible – angel of his presence–literally, “of His face,” that is, who stands before Him continually; Messiah (Ex 14:19; 23:20, 21; Pr 8:30), language applicable to no creature (Ex 32:34; 33:2, 14; Nu 20:16; Mal 3:1).

Matthew Henry Commentary on the Bible – “this is rather to be understood of Jesus Christ, the eternal Word, that angel of whom God spoke to Moses (Exodus 23:20,21), whose voice Israel was to obey. He is called Jehovah, Exodus 13:21,14:21,24. He is the angel of the covenant, God’s messenger to the world, Malachi 3:1. He is the angel of God’s face, for he is the express image of his person; and the glory of God shines in the face of Christ. “

John Wesley – “The angel – The same that conducted them through the wilderness; the Lord Jesus Christ, who appeared to Moses in the bush.”

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

 A reader asks a question about Lucifer and the Greek and Latin translations.

 Yosef H. writes: I’ve been inwardly adamant the past few years about the KJV being the best or inspired english translation.  I have trouble accepting any other translation considering the incompleteness of the texts and if it’s not the KJV which one (or which ones if there are completely agreeing multiples) is the preserved word of God? 

Well every time I come to the lucifer issue I’m left off with frustration.

I read your page concerning Lucifer and I still have questions. Perhaps I missed something. 

You talk about how ἑωσφόρος is signifigant as lucifer is signifigant in the KJV and Latin Vulgate. 

My question is, if I am to accept the translation of “Lucifer” in the KJV, why would “Lucifer” be wrong in the following?

Job 11:17 (Latin Vulgate) “et quasi meridianus fulgor consurget tibi ad vesperam et cum te consumptum putaveris orieris ut lucifer”

Job 38:32 (Latin Vulgate) “numquid producis luciferum in tempore suo et vesperum super filios terrae consurgere facis”

Psalms 109(110):3 (Latin Vulgate) “tecum principium in die virtutis tuae in splendoribus sanctorum ex utero ante luciferum genui te”

2 Peter 1:19 (Latin Vulgate) “et habemus firmiorem propheticum sermonem cui bene facitis adtendentes quasi lucernae lucenti in caliginoso loco donec dies inlucescat et lucifer oriatur in cordibus vestris”

Secondly why is ἑωσφόρος in the septuigent signficant as compared to Job 3:9 for example in the septuigent?

σκοτόω ὁ ἄστρον ὁ νύξ ἐκεῖνος ὑπομένω καί εἰς φωτισμός μή ἔρχομαι καί μή ὁράω ἑωσφόρος ἀνατέλλω

Yet on the flip side claims such as these (as the follwing from wikipedia) leaves me scratching my head:

To speak of the morning star, lucifer is not the only expression that the Vulgate uses: three times it uses stella matutina: Sirach 50:6 (referring to the actual morning star), and Revelation 2:28 (of uncertain reference) and 22:16 (referring to Jesus).

So, conclusively, could you answer me as to why the KJV didn’t translate the other instances from the Latin Vulgate of “lucifer” to “lucifer” in the KJV? Why are the alternate uses of “Lucifer” in the Latin Vulgate not referring to Satan (and likewise the greek “Esophorus”)?

Perhaps I missed something in your article on this.

I’m constantly praying to God concerning these KJV issues, and that furthermore he does not give me in to grand delusions (which I have faith he won’t considering Christ is an anchor for my soul), leading me to truth and protecting me from lies. I ask him if the traditional view of lucifer turns out wrong, what does that mean for my faith, and what does that mean for my acceptance of the KJV as the inspired english translation of God. I think, as of far, this is the only issue I have ran in with the KJV that I’ve been frustrated with. 

Thanks in advance.

Yosef. 

Shalom and God bless. 

Hi Yosef. Thanks for writing. This is a very good question you bring up.  I think I may be able to help explain why the King James Bible is right, as I believe it always is.

As you pointed out, the Latin translation is a mixed bag that is not consistent on how it uses the word Lucifer nor on how it translates “morning star”.

Nor is the Greek Septuagint.

The Latin Vulgate uses the word lucifer (notice the small L) in Job 11:17 where the word is simply “morning”.

Job 11:17 (Latin Vulgate) “et quasi meridianus fulgor consurget tibi ad vesperam et cum te consumptum putaveris orieris ut lucifer”

KJB  – “And thine age shall be clearer than the noonday; thou shalt shine forth, thou shalt be as THE MORNING.”   There is no word for “star” in the verse.

In Job 38:32 the Latin Vulgate has “numquid producis luciferum in tempore suo et vesperum super filios terrae consurgere facis”  

But this is a bad translation of the Hebrew text which does NOT say anything about “morning star”, but rather reads like the KJB has it – “Canst thou bring forth MAZZAROTH in his season? or canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons?”

Here the Greek Septuagint has – η διανοιξεις μαζουρωθ εν καιρω αυτου και εσπερον επι κομης αυτου αξεις αυτα = 

Or wilt thou reveal MAZUROTH in his season, and the evening star with his rays? Wilt thou guide them? 

And in 2 Peter 1:19 the Latin Vulgate has lucifer (again, a small L) for what the KJB called “the day star” –  et lucifer oriatur in cordibus vestris”

So the Latin uses ‘lucifer’ to translate several different Hebrew words – “morning”, Massaroth” and the Hebrew word Halel in Isaiah 14:12. 

The only time we can say the Latin Vulgate uses “lucifer” to translate the Greek text is in 2 Peter 1:19 where the KJB says “until the DAY STAR arise in your hearts.” –   και φωσφορος ανατειλη εν ταις καρδιαις υμων 

Most significantly we see both the Latin Vulgate and the Greek Septuagint differ from the Hebrew text and create more inconsistencies in Job 38:7.

 The Hebrew text actually has the words “MORNING STARS” in the text as we see in Job 38:7 where we read in the King James Bible – “When THE MORNING STARS sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?”  

But neither the Latin Vulgate nor the Greek Septuagint use the word for “lucifer” here. The Latin Vulgate has the literal “morning stars”- astra matutina and the LXX just has the word “stars” αστρα

Latin Vulgate in Job 38:7 –  7 cum me laudarent simul astra matutina,

et jubilarent omnes filii Dei ?

Here in Job 38:7 the LXX does not use the Greek word – φωσφορος  but rather the common word for “stars” (άστρα) – οτε εγενηθησαν αστρα ηνεσαν με φωνη μεγαλη παντες αγγελοι μου

Septuagint –  When the stars were made, all my angels praised me with a loud voice.

Then when we get into the New Testament, the Greek text does not use the word φωσφορος for “the morning star” in Revelation 2:28 “I will give him the morning star” or in Revelation 22:16 “I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.” but rather the normal word for “star”.

Revelation 2:28 – και δωσω αυτω τον αστερα τον πρωινον

Revelation 22:16 – ο αστηρ ο λαμπρος και ορθρινος

So what I believe happened with the King James Bible is that they saw Lucifer (with a capital L), which literally means “light bearer”, as being a perfectly good translation of the Hebrew word that is found only once in the entire Bible – Helel – and as depicting the fall of Satan.  And the King James Bible never uses the word “lucifer” as a translation for “morning star” as found in the book of Revelation.

I hope this is of some help to you.

God bless,

Will Kinney

The Grace of God Destroyed

Via Will Kinney, with permission:

THE GRACE OF GOD DESTROYED

Many Christians have been deluded into thinking that the new Bible versions flooding the market today teach the same things with updated words.

In this brief study, we shall examine just four verses found in the Old Testament. In the King James Bible they are precious verses which teach sound doctrine concerning the truly amazing grace of our loving Father towards His children. These precious truths have been distorted and even denied in the new versions- which include the NKJV, NASB, ESV, Holman Christian Standard, and the NIV.

Numbers 23:21

In the book of Numbers chapters 22 – 24, the false prophet Balaam had been called by Balak the king of Moab to curse Israel. God allowed Balaam to go with Balak, but rather than cursing the people of God, Balaam was compelled to bless them instead.

In Numbers 23:19-21 we read these beautiful truths: “God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good? Behold, I have received commandment to bless: and he hath blessed; and I cannot reverse it.”

The next verse, 21, expresses a great truth in the KJB, but this is where the error of the new versions occurs. Verse 21: “He hath NOT BEHELD INIQUITY in Jacob, NEITHER HATH HE SEEN PERVERSENESS in Israel: the LORD his God is with him, and the shout of a king is among them”.

God has always dealt with His people according to the everlasting covenant of grace revealed to Abraham and his spiritual seed, confirmed to them and fulfilled in Christ.

Galatians 3:12-29. “And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.”

God had redeemed His people out of Egypt (Exodus 6:6) and forgiven their sins, even though they were a stiffnecked people (Num. 14: 19, 20).

Just as God sees us as blameless, holy, and without spot (Eph. 1:4; I Cor. 1:8), not because of our own obedience or righteousness, but because we are covered with the righteousness of Christ, so too, were His people in the wilderness.

But see how this truth has been lost in the NASB, ESV, Holman Standard, Catholic, Jehovah Witness NWT and the NIV “bibles”.

The NASB, RSV, ESV say: “He has not observed MISFORTUNE in Jacob; Nor has He seen TROUBLE in Israel.”

The Jehovah Witness New World Translation has: “He has not looked upon ANY UNCANNY POWER AGAINST Jacob, And NO TROUBLE has he seen against Israel.”

There is no idol in Jacob, neither is there an image god to be seen in Israel.
 The NIV has: “No MISFORTUNE is seen in Jacob, NO MISERY observed in Israel.”

There had been misery and misfortune in Israel, as well as sin and rebellion.  And there certainly were many idols and “images of god” among them too.

The Holman Standard has: “He considers NO DISASTER for Jacob; He sees NO TROUBLE for Israel.” (Yet the footnote gives the correct meaning as found in the King James Bible).

The Catholic versions are their usual confused mess of contradictions.  The older Douay-Rheims 1610 and the Douay of 1950 read like no others with: “There is NO IDOL in Jacob, NEITHER IS THERE AN IMAGE GOD to be seen in Israel.” 

The 1970 St. Joseph New American Bible is closest to the other Vatican Versions like the ESV, NIV, NASB in that it says: “MISFORTUNE is not observed in Jacob, nor MISERY seen in Israel.” 

But the 1985 New Jerusalem bible is much closer to the truth as found in the King James Bible with: “I have perceived NO GUILT in Jacob, have seen NO PERVERSITY in Israel.”

But then again the latest Catholic version, the 2009 Public Domain Version has gone back to something along the lines of the previous Douay saying: “There is NO SOOTHSAYING in Jacob, NOR ANY DIVINATION in Israel.”

But in this section of Holy Scripture here in Numbers 23-24 God is speaking a blessing through Balaam upon His redeemed people and stating how He sees them because they are His own peculiar people. “Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God’s elect? It is God that justifieth.” Romans 8:33. This truth of great comfort is lost in the ESV, NASB and NIV .

I personally do not believe any other English bible contains all of God’s perfect, preserved, inspired words except the King James Bible. But frequently, the new version proponents like to gang up on the KJB, as though it were the only Bible to read a certain way.

Other versions which agree with the KJB here are the Hebrew into English versions of 1917 JPS (Jewish Publication Society) – “None hath beheld INIQUITY in Jacob, neither hath one seen PERVERSENESS in Israel; the LORD his God is with him”, 1936 Jewish Publication Society of America, the Revised Version 1881, the ASV of 1901, Geneva Bible 1587, Young’s translation, Darby 1890, Hebrew Names Bible, the NKJV 1982, and the Amplified Bible 1987.

The Jewish translation of 2004 called the Judaica Press Tanach reads like the KJB with “He does not look at evil in Jacob, and has seen no perversity in Israel”.  

Other English Bibles that read like the King James Bible in Numbers 23:21 are The Word of Yah 1993, the Revised Webster’s Bible 1995, Sacred Scriptures Family of Yah 2001, the Context Group Version 2007 – “not beheld INIQUITY neither seen PERVERSENESS in Israel”,  Bond Slave Version 2009, the Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010 – “He has not beheld INIQUITY in Yaakov, neither has he seen PERVERSENESS in Yisrael”,  Biblos Interlinear Bible 2011 – “He has not beheld INIQUITY in Jacob, neither has he seen PERVERSENESS in Israel”, Conservative Bible 2011, and The World English Bible 2012 and The Holy Bible, Modern English Version 2014 – “He has NOT SEEN INIQUITY in Jacob. NEITHER HAS HE SEEN PERVERSENESS IN ISRAEL.”

The Natural Israelite Bible 2012 – “He has not observed INIQUITY in Jacob, Nor has He seen WICKEDNESS in Israel.”

Foreign Language Bibles 

Among foreign language bibles that have the same meaning as the KJB are the Spanish Cipriano de Valera 1602, and Reina Valera 1909 – 2011 -“No ha notado INIQUIDAD en Jacob, Ni ha visto PERVERSIDAD en Israel.”, the French Martin 1744 and French Ostervald 1998 -“Il n’a point aperçu d’INIQUITE en Jacob, ni vu de PERVERSITE en Israël”, the Portuguese Almeida Corregida 2009 – “Näo viu INIQUIDADE  em Israel, nem contemplou MALDADE em Jacó” and the Italian Diodati 1649 and the Italian Nuova Riveduta 2006, and La Nuova Diodati 1991 – “Egli non ha scorto INIQUITA in Giacobbe e non ha visto PERVERSITA in Israele.”  

The King James Bible is right, as always, and it consistently reveals and magnifies the saving grace of God towards His people. The false versions pervert these doctrines to varying degrees.  

If you want a good example of this, see the study on Revelation 19:8 KJB – “The fine linen is the righteousness of saints” or ESV (NKJV, NIV, NASB) – “ “the fine linen is THE RIGHTEOUS ACTS of the saints”?

http://brandplucked.webs.com/rev198finelinen.htm

Deuteronomy 32:5 – God’s children or Not God’s children?

Tremendous error and contradiction have been introduced into this section of Scripture by the NKJV, NIV, RSV, Holman, ESV and NASB “bibles”. This is part of the song of Moses which says in verses 3-5: “I will publish the name of the LORD: ascribe ye greatness unto our God. He is the Rock, his work is perfect; for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he.”

The next verse is where the lies of the modern versions enter. The true Holy Bible says: “They have corrupted themselves, their spot is not the spot of his children: they are a perverse and crooked generation. Do ye thus requite the LORD, O foolish people and unwise? is not he thy father that hath bought thee? hath he not made thee, and established thee?”

If you look at the context, in the previous chapter God told Moses that the people would enter the promised land and would go a whoring after the gods of the strangers of the land and turn to other gods. God knew this before He brought them into the land, so their entering the land did not depend on their foreseen obedience to the law, but rather because of the covenant of grace made with Abraham.

They are still His children whom He bought (verse 6), His people and His inheritance (verse 9) and verse 19 still refers to them as “his sons and daughters”. They ARE His children even though disobedient, just as your child is still your child no matter what he does.

Many verses bring out this truth that God’s redeemed people, His own children, are capable of corrupting themselves with the spot of idolatry. Here are just a few found right here in the book of Deuteronomy.

In Deuteronomy 4:15-20 God tells His people: “Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves; for ye saw no manner of similitude on the day that the LORD spake unto you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire: Lest ye CORRUPT yourselves, and make you a graven image…But the LORD hath taken you…to be unto him a people of inheritance, as ye are this day.”

In Deuteronomy 9:12 Moses rehearses how he had been 40 days and 40 nights in Mount Horeb where God gave him the tables of the covenant. While Moses was in the mount, God spoke to him and said: “Arise, get thee down quickly from hence; for thy people which thou hast brought forth out of Egypt HAVE CORRUPTED themselves; they are quickly turned aside out of the way which I commanded them; they have made them a molten image.”

Yet in the rest of chapter nine, Moses asks God not to destroy “thy people and thine inheritance which thou hast redeemed…they are thy people and thine inheritance.” Though they had corrupted themselves with false gods, they were still His children and His redeemed people.

In Deuteronomy 31:29 Moses tells the children of Israel even before they enter the promised land: “For I know that after my death, ye will utterly CORRUPT yourselves, and turn aside from the way which I have commanded you…ye will do evil in the sight of the LORD, to provoke him to anger through the work of your hands.”

John Gill comments on Deuteronomy 32:5: “their spot is not the spot of his children – Christ the rock has children given him by his Father, in whose adoption he has a concern, and by whose Spirit they are regenerated: these have their “spots”; by which are meant sins, and by those men are stained and polluted;… by nature they are as others, and while in an unregenerate estate, and indeed after conversion; though they are washed from their sins by the blood of Christ, and are justified by his righteousness, and so without spot, yet in themselves they are not without spots or sins, as their confessions and complaints, and all experience testify.”

God’s children DID corrupt themselves with strange gods, and the spot or blemish they had was the idolatrous practices of other people, but they are still His children, bought by God and belonging to Him as the rest of Deuteronomy chapter 32 shows.

Other versions that agree with the King James Bible in Deuteronomy 32:5 in teaching they are still His children are Webster’s 1833 translation, Darby 1890, Youngs 1898, the Hebrew-English JPS translation of 1917, the 2004 Judaica Press Tanach, the KJV 21st Century Version 1994, and  the Third Millennium Bible 1998.

Other English Bible that read like the KJB in Deuteronomy 32:5 and tell us that though they had spotted and stained themselves with the sin of idolatry, yet there were still His children, are The Word of Yah 1993, Bond Slave Version 2009, the Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, Conservative Bible 2011 – “They have corrupted themselves, their spot is not the spot of his children: they are a perverse and crooked generation.”,

Even Dan Wallace’s NET version 2006 (though a paraphrase) got it right, saying: “His people have been unfaithful to him; they have not acted like his children – this is their sin. They are a perverse and deceitful generation.”

The Judaica Press Tanach 2004 reads this portion as: “it is His children’s defect you crooked and twisted generation.” They are still His children.

The modern Complete Jewish Bible agrees that the children of Israel are still the children of God, saying: “He is not corrupt; the defect is in his children, a crooked and perverted generation.”

the Complete Apostle’s Bible 2005 is pretty good, with: “They have sinned, not pleasing Him; spotted children, a crooked and perverse generation.”

The Lesser Bible 1853 – “The corruption is not his, it is the defect of his children, of the perverse and crooked generation.”

The Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569, Cipriano de Valera 1602, and Reina Valera versions 1602, 1909, 1960, 1995 all clearly say that they are His children, even though they have the stain of sin. “La corrupción no es suya; de sus hijos es la mancha, generación torcida y perversa.” Translation- “Corruption is not His; of His children is the stain, a twisted and perverse generation.”

The 1917 Jewish Publication Society reads differently but retains the correct meaning saying: “Just and Right is He. Is corruption His? No; His children’s is the blemish.”

The Judaica Press Complete Tanach 2004 has: “Destruction is not His; IT IS HIS CHILDREN’S DEFECT you crooked and twisted generation.”

The 1989 NRSV is different from all other versions, including the RSV and the ESV. It says: “just and upright is he; yet his degenerate children have dealt falsely with him…Is not he your father?”  At least the NRSV still teaches that they are His children, though degenerate ones at that. 

The Hebraic Roots Bible 2012 has – He has not corrupted Himself; HIS SONS; IT IS THEIR BLEMISH; they are a crooked and perverse generation.”

Now look at the NKJV in Deut. 32:5. “They have corrupted themselves: THEY ARE NOT HIS CHILDREN, Because of their blemish.”

The NASB is similar with: “THEY ARE NOT HIS CHILDREN BECAUSE OF THEIR DEFECT.”

The Holman Standard says: “this is their defect – THEY ARE NOT HIS CHILDREN.”

And the Jehovah Witness New World Translation joins these bogus bible versions and says: “THEY ARE NOT HIS CHILDREN, the defect is their own.”

The Catholic Douay-Rheims of 1610 and Douay Version 1950 both say: “The have sinned against him, AND ARE NONE OF HIS CHILDREN in their filth: they are a wicked and perverse generation.”

These versions tell us they are NOT His children, and then in the very next verse tell us they ARE His children because He is their Father and He bought them!

Once again we can see the purification of God’s words in the English language until we get to its “purified seven times” perfection in the King James Bible.  Both the earlier Bishops’ Bible 1568 and the later Geneva Bible 1587 had it wrong.  The Bishops’ Bible read: “Frowardly haue they done agaynst hym by their vices, NOT BEYNG HIS OWNE CHILDREN, but a wicked and frowarde generation.”

The Geneva Bible also had it wrong by telling us that the children of Israel were NOT His children, and this again contradicts with the very next verse, even in the Geneva Bible. The Geneva Bible reads: “They haue corrupted them selues towarde him by their vice, NOT BEING HIS CHILDREN, but a frowarde and crooked generation.”

The NIV, RSV, and ESV are even worse with: “to their shame THEY ARE NO LONGER HIS CHILDREN”.

This teaches the doctrine that one can be a child of God and then lose it and no longer be His child, yet verses 6 and 19 still refer to them as His children.

The RSV, NIV, ESV and Holman Standard further confuse correct doctrine and hide the truth by mistranslating verse six where we read: “Is not he thy father that HATH BOUGHT thee?”

The correct reading that God had BOUGHT them is found in the Revised Version, the ASV, NKJV, NASB and MANY others. The Hebrew word means “to buy, to purchase, to redeem, and to possess.” It does not mean “Creator”.

It refers to such passages as Exodus 15 where Moses and the children of Israel sang the great song of deliverance from Egypt saying: “The LORD is my strength and song, and he is become my salvation…Thou in thy mercy hast led forth the people which thou hast REDEEMED…till the people pass over, O LORD, till the people pass over, which thou HAST PURCHASED.”

However instead of saying: “Is not he thy father that hath BOUGHT thee?”, the NIV, RSV, ESV, and Holman say: “Is he not your father, YOUR CREATOR, who made you?”

This rendering destroys the meaning of God buying or redeeming them, and merely teaches that He created them. 

Perverted bible versions pervert the truths of God.

“Ye have perverted the words of the living God” Jeremiah 23:36

2 Samuel 23:5  “Although my house BE NOT SO WITH GOD; YET he hath made with me an everlasting covenant”

The last words of David, the sweet psalmist of Israel, are recorded in 2 Samuel 23: 1-5.

The KJB says in verses 2,3,5 : “The Spirit of the LORD spake by me, and his word was in my tongue. The God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spake to me, He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God…Although my house be not so with God; yet he hath made with me an everlasting covenant, ordered in all things, and sure; for this is all my salvation, and all my desire, although he make it not to grow.” (“not to grow” probably refers to David’s house)

But the NKJV, NIV, NASB, RSV, ESV, Jehovah Witness NWT and Holman Standard have changed this into a question rather than a statement).

He that rules over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God. David, for the most part, did fairly well, yet he failed miserably in the matter of Bathsheba and Uriah, whom he murdered. Yet, even though David had not lived up to the divine standard, (only Christ as the true Son of David could do that) God had established the everlasting covenant of the “sure mercies of David” with him and He does the same thing with us. See Isaiah 55:3 KJB.

Yet notice the subtle but deadly changes made in this verse by the NAS, RSV, ESV, Jehovah Witness NWT and NIV. Instead of “Although my house be not so with God, yet he hath made with me an everlasting covenant…” the NIV has: “Is not my house right with God? Has he not made with me an everlasting covenant arranged and secure in every part?

The Holman Standard has: “Is it not true my house is with God? For He has established an everlasting covenant with me ordered and secure in every detail.”

The NAS, RSV, ESV read: “Truly is not my house so with God? For He has made an everlasting covenant with me, ordered in all things and secured.”

The Common English bible 2011 goes so far as to say: “Yes, my house is this way with God! He has made an eternal covenant with me, laid out and secure in every detail.”

And the Names of God Bible 2011 affirms: “Truly, El considers my house to be that way, because he has made a lasting promise to me, with every detail arranged and assured.”

Dan Wallace’s NET version 2006 affirms: “My dynasty is approved by God, for he has made a perpetual covenant with me, arranged in all its particulars and secured.”

These readings do not agree with each other, yet they all unite in implying that God made a covenant with David BECAUSE his house was so upright. This is a works salvation theology and denies the true facts regarding David’s life and the covenant of the sure mercies granted to David.

English Bibles that agree with the King James reading where king David admits that his house is NOT so faithful ruling in the fear of God, YET God had made an everlasting covenant with him, are Webster’s Translation 1833, Darby 1890 – “Although my house be NOT SO before God, YET he hath made with me an everlasting covenant”, Revised Version 1885, Darby 1890 – “Although my house be NOT SO before God, YET he hath made with me an everlasting covenant”, the ASV 1901 – “Verily my house is NOT SO with God; YET he hath made with me an everlasting covenant”, Rotherham’s Emphasized bible 1902, The Word of Yah 1993, KJB 21st Century Version 1994, Sacred Scriptures Family of Yah 2001 – “Verily my house IS NOT SO with El; YET he hath made with me an everlasting covenant, Ordered in all things, and sure”, the Judaica Press Complete Tanach 2004 – “For my house IS NOT SO with God”,  Context Group Version 2007, Hebraic Transliteration Scriptures 2010, The Holy Scriptures VW Edition 2010 – “Although my house IS NOT SO with the Mighty God, YET He has made with me a perpetual covenant, ordered in all things and secure.”, Biblos Interlinear Bible 2011, Conservative Bible 2011, the Natural Israelite Bible 2012.

The World English Bible reads: “MOST CERTAINLY MY HOUSE IS NOT SO WITH GOD, YET he has made with me an everlasting covenant, ordered in all things, and sure, for it is all my salvation, and all my desire, although he doesn’t make it grow.”  

The Bible Commentators

As usual, the commentators are all over the board with multiple translations and explanations about what 2 Samuel 23:5 means.  Here are some that agree with the King James Bible reading.

Matthew Poole’s Commentary – “Although my house be not so with God; although God knows that neither I nor my children have lived and ruled as we should have done, so justly, and in the fear of the Lord; and therefore have not enjoyed that uninterrupted prosperity which we might have enjoyed; but our morning light, or the beginning of that kingdom promised to me and mine for ever, hath been overcast with many black and dismal clouds, and my children have not hitherto been like the tender grass springing out of the earth, and thriving by the influences of the sun and rain; but rather like the grass that withereth away, or is cut off before its due time.

Yet he hath made with me an everlasting covenant: not-withstanding all our transgressions whereby we have broken covenant with God, and the confusions and civil wars. which have threatened our dissipation and utter destruction; yet I comfort myself with this, that God, to whom all my sins were foreknown before I committed them, was graciously pleased to make a sure covenant, to give and continue the kingdom to me and to my seed for ever, 2 Samuel 7:16,  until the coming of the Messias, who is to be my Son and successor, and whose kingdom shall have no end.”

John GillAlthough my house be not so with God,…. So bright, and flourishing, and prosperous as the government of the just ruler before described; or is not “right” with God, meaning his family, in which great sins were committed, and great disorders and confusions brought into it, as the cases of Amnon, Absalom, and Adonijah showed; or “not firm” or “stable”, through the rebellion of one, the insurrection of another, and the usurpation of a third; yet he believed it would be firm and stable in the Messiah that should spring from him, promised in the everlasting covenant”

John Trapp Commentary – “in case it be not, as the truth is, “In many things we offend all,” and keep not touch with God, – which is a hindrance to our complete happiness, – yet the foundation of God remaineth sure; neither shall our unbelief make the faith of God of none effect. Romans 3:3 We change often, but he changeth not, Malachi 3:6  and his covenant is firm and immutable, “ordered and established in everything,” by him who will “not suffer his faithfulness to fail, nor alter the thing that is gone out of his mouth.”

Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary – “Although my house be not so with God; yet he hath made with me an everlasting covenant, ordered in all things, and sure: for this is all my salvation, and all my desire, although he make it not to grow. How natural and proper was it for David, when speaking of JESUS, and his salvation, to make an immediate transition to his own personal interest in both; and to take comfort from this delightful assurance, amidst all the outward circumstances which had arisen through life to distress him. Reader! as this verse of David’s hath afforded comfort to thousands, and will continue to do so until time shall be no more, I would wish you not to pass it over hastily, but look into its several properties, praying over it, that the LORD may grant you to adopt (if it be his blessed will) the same precious assurance on the same precious grounds.

Do observe the confession David makes of his personal calamities. Although, (says he) my house be not so with GOD . Poor man! what a scene of sin and evil did the walls of his house furnish in his graceless children. To say nothing of the great miscarriages he had wrought himself; his day was a day of clouds, from morning even to the evening. How many of his children died in their sins! But what saith David under these trying circumstances? Although my house be not so with GOD yet hath he made with me an everlasting covenant. As if he had said, JESUS is mine, though he be not my childrens’. GOD hath given me JESUS, and that is enough; for in him I have all things. He is better to me than a thousand sons. Sweet consolation, and a glorious relief, under all afflictions.”

Coffman’s Commentary – “That everlasting covenant that God made with David concerning the bringing in of the Messiah to mankind through David’s posterity, was not conditional nor was it premised upon the righteous rule of David’s posterity; because, the following kings in David’s dynasty were as wicked (generally) as any rulers who ever lived. God brought in the Messiah via David’s descendants in spite of the wickedness of both the kings and the people. Certainly David had failed in the realization of the better purposes of his heart. “So it was God’s good pleasure that the covenant in spite of this personal failure remained firm and secure.”

The King James Bible is right, as always, and magnifies the amazing grace of God toward His people.

Isaiah 35:8 – “THE WAYFARING MEN, THOUGH FOOLS, SHALL NOT ERR THEREIN.”

“And an highway shall be there, an a way, and it shall be called The way of holiness; the unclean shall not pass over it; but it shall be for those: THE WAYFARING MEN, THOUGH FOOLS, SHALL NOT ERR THEREIN. No lion shall be there, nor any ravenous beast shall go up thereon, it shall not be found there; but the redeemed shall walk there.”

This verse teaches that there will be an highway for the redeemed to walk on and EVEN THOUGH THEY MAY BE FOOLS, THEY SHALL NOT ERR FROM THE HIGHWAY OF THE REDEEMED. If we are among the redeemed by the blood of Jesus Christ, He will keep us secure even though we, in and of ourselves, are at times foolish.

What a comfort and encouragement to our souls. We are all foolish at times. All of us make dumb mistakes and do not think clearly nor act with wisdom all too often.

But praise God He chose the foolish things of this world to confound the wise – I Cor. 1:27 and even though “the children of this world are in their generation wiser than the children of light”- Luke 16:8

John Gill comments: “they may not have that sharpness of wit, and quickness of natural parts, as some men have; and though they may not have that clear and distinct knowledge of Gospel truths as others, at least of some of them, yet shall not err as to the way of salvation; and though they may err or mistake in some things, yet not in the main, not fundamentally, nor finally; the way of salvation by Christ is so plain a way, that he that has any spiritual understanding of it shall not err in it.”

David Guzik states in his Bible commentary: “Whoever walks the road, although a fool, shall not go astray: When we stick on God’s Highway of Holiness, even though His work in us isn’t complete yet – we may still be in some ways a fool – yet we are safe because we are on His highway!”

Jamieson, Fausset and Brown comment: “though fools–rather, “And (even) fools,” that is, the simple shall not go astray, namely, because “He shall be with them” (Mt 11:25; 1Co 1:26-28). 

John Wesley comments: “Though fools – The way shall be so plain and strait, that even the most foolish travellers cannot easily mistake it. ” And finally…

Matthew Henry tells us: “though fools, of weak capacity in other things, shall have such plain directions from the word and Spirit of God in this way that they shall not err therein; not that they shall be infallible even in their own conduct, or that they shall in nothing mistake, but they shall not be guilty of any fatal misconduct, shall not so miss their way but that they shall recover it again, and get well to their journey’s end.”

Bibles that agree in Isaiah 35:8 with the KJB in sense or the exact reading are Wycliffe 1395, Coverdale 1535 – “the ignorant shall not err”, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549, the Bishops’ Bible 1568 “and the wayfayer nor ignorant shall not err”,  the Geneva Bible 1587 – “and walke in the way, and the fooles shall not erre.”, the Revised Version 1885, Darby 1890, Youngs 1898, the ASV 1901 -“the wayfaring men, yea fools, shall not err therein.” 1917 Jewish Publication Society Bible, 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company, Living Bible 1971 – “God will walk there with you; EVEN THE MOST STUPID CANNOT MISS THE WAY.”, the RSV, NRSV 1989 – “but it shall be for God’s people; NO TRAVELER, NOT EVEN FOOLS, SHALL GO ASTRAY.”, ESV 2001-2011 -“EVEN IF THEY ARE FOOLS, THEY SHALL NOT GO ASTRAY.” the Holman Standard 2009 -“The unclean will not travel on it, but it will be for him who walks the path. EVEN THE FOOL WILL NOT GO ASTRAY.“, the NKJV 1982, KJV 21st Century Version 1994,  the Third Millenium Bible 1998, Jubilee Bible 2010 – “and for those in it there shall be someone to go with them, IN SUCH A MANNER THAT THE FOOLISH SHALL NOT ERR THEREIN.”The Common English Bible 2011 – “ but it will be for those walking on that way. EVEN FOOLS WON’T GET LOST ON IT.”

Other English Bible that read like the KJB with “THE WAYFARING MEN, THOUGH FOOLS, SHALL NOT ERR THEREIN.” are the Amplified Bible 1987 – “the wayfaring men, YES, THE SIMPLE ONES AND FOOLS, SHALL NOT ERR IN IT AND LOSE THEIR WAY.”, The Word of Yah 1993, God’s First Truth 1999, The Judaica Press Complete Tanach 2004 – “and it shall be for them; the traveler, even fools shall not go astray therein.”, Green’s Literal 2005 – “even foolish ones shall not go astray.”, Context Group Version 2007, the Bond Slave Version 2009, Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, Online Interlinear 2010 (André de Mol), The Holy Scriptures VW Edition 2010 – “Whoever travels on it, though a fool, shall not go astray.”,  Biblos Interlinear Bible 2011, The Work of God’s Children Illustrated Bible 2011, Conservative Bible 2011, Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011,Interlinear Hebrew-Greek Scriptures 2012 (Mebust) – “and fools shall not go astray”, the Natural Israelite Bible 2012 – “Whoever walks the road, ALTHOUGH A FOOL, SHALL NOT GO ASTRAY.”, and the Hebraic Roots Bible 2012 – “And it is for them, the one going in the way; yea, fools shall not go astray.”, International Standard Version 2014 – “but it will be for whomever is traveling on that Way—NOT EVEN FOOLS WILL GET LOST.”

However in the NASB we read: “And a highway will be there, a roadway, and it will be called the highway of holiness, but it will be for him (the Hebrew is them- not him) who walks that way, AND FOOLS WILL NOT WANDER ON IT.”

The NASB “fools will not wander on it” seems to be saying fools will not get on it occasionally but the NIV is even clearer in its false teaching.

The NIV has: “And a highway will be there, it will be called the Way of Holiness, The unclean will not journey on it; it will be for those who walk in that Way, WICKED FOOLS WILL NOT GO ABOUT ON IT.”

There is no word for “wicked” in Hebrew, and the NIV is teaching that there will be no fools on the highway – the exact opposite meaning of that found the KJB and many others.

Dan Wallace and company’s NET version is very much like the NIV, NASB with: “it is reserved for those authorized to use it – FOOLS WILL NOT STRAY INTO IT.” 

Wallace’s NET version teaches that fools will not walk on this path. Proving that this is the view of Dan Wallace and company, the NET footnotes – “those authorized to use the Way of Holiness would be morally upright people who are the recipients of God’s deliverance, in contrast to the morally impure and FOOLISH WHO ARE EXCLUDED FROM THE NEW TESTAMENT COMMUNITY.” 

(Well, Dan Wallace better hope that’s not true, for his own sake.)

The Names of God Bible 2011 (Critical text version) says: “A highway will be there, a roadway. It will be called the Holy Road. SINNERS WON’T TRAVEL ON IT. It will be for those who walk on it. GODLESS FOOLS WON’T WANDER ONTO IT.”

If you are a Christian, and can honestly admit that you are sometimes foolish, then there is no comfort or assurance that you are a child of God and among the redeemed if you believe the NIV, NASB, Names of God Bible or Dan Wallace’s NET perversion. Corrupt bible versions DO pervert sound doctrine.

According to the NIV, RSV, ESV in Deuteronomy 32:5 you may once have been a child of God, and then no longer be His child – gone is the eternal security of the believer who has been redeemed by the precious blood of Christ. You had better watch your step!

This is just some of the confusion wrought by the versions that are so popular among present day Christiandom.  Most do not read their bibles anyway, so few would probably notice.

There is a famine in the land today, as prophesied in Amos 8:11 “Behold the days come, saith the Lord GOD, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the LORD.”

I ask you to consider these four examples of how the grace of God is being lost in the new “bibles.” There are hundreds of other things seriously wrong with these versions, and they are well documented at many sites on the internet and in many books that have come out recently defending the King James Bible as God’s preserved, inspired words.

Some will have ears to hear and will turn back to the old ways where you will find rest for your souls, but others will go on trusting in the scholarship of modern Bible critics. May God give us grace to grow in the true knowledge of His Son and our blessed kinsman redeemer who purchased us to be eternally and securely His own.

God bless you, a brother in Christ,

Will Kinney

Return to Articles – http://brandplucked.webs.com/kjbarticles.htm

The Deity of Christ

Via Will Kinney, with permission:

The Deity of Christ
3 Verses

There are three verses which are frequently brought up by those who believe the King James Bible has mistranslated references to the deity of Jesus Christ. They are Romans 9:5, Titus 2:13, and 2 Peter 1:1. We will examine each of the three, and show that the first two verses are not only correct but more accurate, and the third is just as valid as other versions.

#1 – Romans 9:5 says regarding the Jews: “Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed forever.”

Those who criticize the KJB say the rendering here does not declare the deity of Christ, but only says He is over all, and that God is blessed forever. I and many others believe they are correct in their understanding of the verse as it stands in the KJB. However, if you understand this particular verse as teaching the deity of Christ, even as it stands in the King James Bible, I would have no problem with that view. I fully believe that Jesus Christ is God manifest in the flesh; He is JEHOVAH God of the Old Testament.

But, as I understand this particular verse, it is not expounding that truth here. The phrase “who is over all, God blessed for ever” in the Greek reads: “ καὶ ἐξ ὧν ὁ χριστὸς τὸ κατὰ σάρκα, ὁ ὢν ἐπὶ πάντων, θεὸς εὐλογητὸς εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας. Ἀμήν.” This is the text as it appeared even by Westcott and Hort.

See laparola.net http://www.laparola.net/greco/

This is what the KJB correctly says. Christ is over all, and it is God the Father Who placed Him there, after He finished His work of redemption.

Ephesians 1:20 -22 tells us of the mighty power of God “which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in heavenly places, far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in the world to come: And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church.” This is what God the Father has done in Christ, and God is to be blessed and praised for ever for having done this.

Other versions that read exactly as does the KJB are Daniel Mace’s N.T. 1729 – “and of whom as to the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.”, Whiston’s Primitive N.T. 1745, Webster’s Bible 1833,  the Living Oracles 1835 – “and from whom the Messiah [descended], according to the flesh; who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen.”, Noyes Translation 1869 – “and from whom, as to the flesh, was the Christ. He who is over all, God, be blessed for ever! Amen.”,  the Revised Version of 1881, the ASV of 1901 – “and of whom is Christ as concerning the flesh, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.”, the New American Standard Bible 1963 – 1995 – “whose are the fathers, and from whom is the Christ according to the flesh, who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen.”, Young’s  literal 1898 – “and of whom is the Christ, according to the flesh, who is over all, God blessed to the ages. Amen.” Darby 1890 – “and of whom, as according to flesh, is the Christ, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.”, the Jerusalem Bible 1969, The New Berkeley Version in Modern English 1969, the 21st Century KJB 1994, the RSV 1952 and the NRSV 1989 – “and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ. God who is over all be blessed for ever. Amen.”, Douay-Rheims1582, the Douay 1950, the Third Millenium Bible 1998, The American Bible Union N.T.,  Worrell N.T.1904, The N.T. Translated from the Sinaitic  Manuscript 1918 – “and from whom is Christ according to the flesh: who is over all, God blessed for ever, Amen.”

Other Bible that read like the KJB are World English Bible, Hebrew Names Bible, the 1998 Complete Jewish Bible, the Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011, Weymouth’s N.T. 1912 – “To them the Patriarchs belong, and from them in respect of His human lineage came the Christ, who is exalted above all, God blessed throughout the Ages. Amen.” Goodspeed’s N.T. 1943- “and from them physically Christ came—God who is over all be blessed forever! Amen.”, Montgomery N.T., the 1969 Berkeley Version, the New American Bible St. Joseph 1970, the 1989 Revised English Bible, The Word of Yah 1993, Tomson N.T. 2002, The Evidence Bible 2003, The Resurrection Life N.T. 2005, Bond Slave Version 2009, Context Group Version 2007, Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, Far Above All Translation 2011, The Work of God’s Children Illustrated Bible 2011, Interlinear Hebrew-Greek Scriptures 2012 (Mebust) – “whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh the Mashiyach came, who is over all, Elohim blessed forever. Amen.”, World English Bible 2012 – “of whom are the fathers, and from whom is Christ as concerning the flesh, who is over all, God, blessed forever. Amen.

Other versions that read in a similar way, as saying that Christ is over all, and that God is to be blessed or praised for ever for this victory are the New English Bible 1970, New Life Version, Contemporary English Version, the Twentieth Century new testament 1904 – “as far as his human nature was concerned, from them came the Christ—he who is supreme over all things, God for ever blessed. Amen.”, Wesley’s N.T. 1755, Williams translation and J.B. Phillips, James Moffatt N.T. – “and theirs too (so far as natural descent goes) is the Christ. (Blessed for evermore be the God who is over all! Amen.)”, Williams New Testament,  Riverside N.T. – “whom by physical descent the Christ came. God who is over all be blessed through the ages! Amen.”, The Voice of 2012 – “and from their bloodline comes the Anointed One, who reigns supreme over all things, God blessed forever. Amen.” So the King James Bible is hardly alone in its rendering of this verse.

French Louis Segond of 1902 and of 2007, and the 1999 La Bible du Semeur both equal the King James Bible meaning with:  – “et les promesses, et les patriarches, et de qui est issu, selon la chair, le Christ, qui est au-dessus de toutes choses, Dieu béni éternellement. Amen!”

Spanish La Biblia de las Américas 1997 – de quienes son los patriarcas, y de quienes, según la carne, procede el Cristo, el cual está sobre todas las cosas, Dios bendito por los siglos. Amén.

The Portuguese Ferreira de Almeida Actualizada equals the KJB – “de quem são os patriarcas; e de quem descende o Cristo segundo a carne, o qual é sobre todas as coisas, Deus bendito eternamente. Amém.”

The Italian Conferenza Episcopale Italiana– “da essi proviene Cristo secondo la carne, egli che è sopra ogni cosa, Dio benedetto nei secoli. Amen.”

The Romanian Fidela Bible of 2009 also equals the KJB – “conform carnii este Cristos, care este peste toate, Dumnezeu binecuvantat pentru totdeauna. Amin.” 

The German Schlachter Bible of 2000 is translated like the KJB – “und von ihnen stammt dem Fleisch nach der Christus, der über alle ist, hochgelobter Gott in Ewigkeit. Amen!”

To accuse the KJB of not showing the deity of Christ in a verse which does not teach this truth is hardly a fair argument. The  versions which are usually cited in this attack on the KJB are the New KJV , the ESV and the NIV. None of these versions follow the Greek word order, but have altered it to teach the deity of Christ, and then blame the KJB for not doing the same. The NKJV says: “of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, [the] eternally blessed God.”

The NKJV has added the word “the” to the text. It changes the meaning and there is no justification for adding the word “the”. The phrase “for ever” has wrongly been altered in the NKJV to read “eternally”. It is rather the NKJV which has added to God’s word and changed the meaning of this verse.

Likewise the NIV has an almost complete paraphrase of the whole verse and has altered its meaning. The NIV says: “Theirs are the partriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all, forever praised! Amen.”

The NIV has changed the order of the Greek words to come up with a different meaning than what I believe the Holy Ghost who inspired this text intended. In fact, the NIV has a footnote here that recognizes the KJB and NASB rendering. It says: ‘or, “Christ, who is over all. God be forever praised.” 

The ESV does a similar thing by re-arranging the Greek word order. It says: “To them belong the partiarchs, and from their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen.”  There are zero words here in the Greek for “their race” and the literal word order in all Greek texts is “of whom the Christ according to the flesh who is over all God blessed for ever. Amen.”

This is how the King James Bible and many others have correctly translated the verse.  The King James Bible translators were being honest about what the verse actually says. They certainly believed in the full deity of the Lord Jesus Christ and did not have an agenda to either deny or promote His deity when it was not warranted by what was actually written in the Holy Scriptures.

Christ is not “ God over all” because this would exalt Christ above the Father. Christ was, is, and shall always be the second Person of the triune God, in submission to the Father. John 5:30 “I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.”

1 Corinthians 11:3 “the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.”

1Cor. 15:28 “And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.”

#2 James White and his criticism of Titus 2:13 in the King James Bible

Titus 2:13 – ” Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ” 

James White has a lot to say in his book, The King James Version Controversy, about how badly he thinks the King James Bible mangles the meaning of this verse and obscures the Deity of Christ.  On page 81 he says: “the KJV is shown to be wanting in Titus 2:13.” On page 201 he says, regarding Titus 2:13 in the KJB: “The simple fact is that the KJV provides an inferior translation, one that unintentionally detracts from the presentation of the full deity of Jesus Christ. The unwillingness of KJV defenders to overlook this fact is most disturbing.”

James White is entitled to his personal opinions, but there are a couple of things you should know about this man. He SAYS he believes the Bible IS the infallible words of God, but if you ask him to show you a copy of this infallible Bible he professes to believe in, he will never tell you. He will immediately try to change the subject.

Secondly, I believe he and many like him have been deceived when it comes to the Bible version issue. The modern version he promotes like the ESV, NIV, NASB are all in fact the new Vatican Versions. The Vatican has made a formal agreement with the United Bible Society to create an “inter confessional” text to unite “the separated brethren” and one of the main editors of this text was the Jesuit Cardinal Carlo Martini.  Nobody seriously believes any of these modern versions are the inerrant words of God; certainly not the people who put them together.  Don’t believe it? Then please see my article and the links found in it called James White – the Protestant Pope of the new Vatican Versions 

http://brandplucked.webs.com/jameswhiteppopevv.htm 

And thirdly, James White is completely wrong in his understanding and analysis of Titus 2:13 as it stands not only in the King James Bible but in many others as well.  The King James Bible is actually the most literal translation of the Greek text here and it brings out a special truth that apparently is hidden from Bible correctors like James White.

Titus 2:13 “Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of THE GREAT GOD AND OUR SAVIOUR Jesus Christ”

Here the critics like James White and others say the KJB rendering does not fully bring out the deity of Jesus Christ. I don’t really understand what they are talking about, because when I read this passage, it clearly declares that Jesus Christ is both the great God as well as our Saviour.  

Even a basic Greek grammar book like Dana and Mantey in their book A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament, on page 147 when discussing the definite article with nouns connected by kai, give Titus 2:13 as one of the examples – του μεγαλου θεου και σωτηρος ιησου χριστου – and then states in no uncertain terms – “After the same manner, του μεγαλου θεου και σωτηρος  ιησου χριστου, ASSERTS THAT JESUS IS THE GREAT GOD AND SAVIOUR.”

Dr. Larry Bednar, who also addresses this passage at his KJV Textual Technology site correctly asks: “One wonders if White thinks saints and faithful brethren (Col.1:2) separates saints and faithful brethren, as if they were two different types. Or does he think God and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ (Col.1:3) separates God from the Father, as if the Father were not God?”

http://www.kjvtextualtechnology.com/kjv-classical-language-of-emphasis.php 

The NKJV, NIV, ESV and NASB translate this verse in different ways.  They don’t even agree with each other.  The NKJV is not quite as bad as the NIV, NASB, ESV in that it says: “looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of OUR great God and Savior Jesus Christ”. The NKJV does not follow the literal Greek word order as does the King James Bible and it obscures the full and wonderful truths we see in the King James Bible.

But the NIV, NASB, ESV don’t have us looking for THE APPEARING OF GOD AND OUR SAVIOURJesus Christ” but instead looking for THE APPEARING OF THE GLORY of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ.”  God’s glory and His actually appearance can be two different things.  The heaven declare the glory of God, but it is not God Himself.

However, it is necessary to point out two very important things in this verse. Number one is that the Greek reads exactly as it stands in the KJB, and not as it is in the NKJV, NIV, ESV and NASB.

The Greek in all texts reads “the great God and OUR Saviour.”  This is one of the few verses in the N.T. that has no textual variants; they all read the same and the King James Bible is the most literal by far. All Greek text read -προσδεχομενοι την μακαριαν ελπιδα και επιφανειαν της δοξης του μεγαλου θεου και σωτηρος ημων ιησου χριστου

This is the important part here – της δοξης του μεγαλου θεου και σωτηρος ημων ιησου χριστου = the glory of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.

The crucial difference in meaning is this. When Christ appears again in glory, He is the God of everybody – every man, woman and child, believer or unbeliever – but He is OUR Saviour. He is the Saviour of only those who are true Christians, but He is the God and creator of all, and He will be the judge of those who have not believed on Him.  Jesus Christ is BOTH the Great God AND OUR Saviour.  We are looking for Him to appear as such, and this truth is fully brought out in the King James Bible and many others that have likewise translated it this way by following the literal Greek text. 

Another big difference in meaning between the KJB and such modern versions as the NASB, NIV and ESV is this which was pointed out to us recently on a Facebook King James Bible club. The Bible believing brother wrote the following: “The glorious appearing of our great God in the person of the Lord Jesus Christ is taught by Paul in one single text in Titus 2:13. Modern bibles twisted and denied it!

Titus 2:13 (King James Version) “Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;” Comment: You see the words glorious appearing of the great God?

Titus 2:13 (New International Version) “while we wait for the blessed hope—the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ,“ Comment: Where are the words glorious appearing of the great God? We are not waiting for the glory of God but His glorious appearing!

Titus 2:13 (New American Standard Bible) “looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus” Comment: Where are the words glorious appearing of the great God? We are not waiting for the glory of God but His glorious appearing!

Titus 2:13 (English Standard Version) waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ,” Comment: Where are the words glorious appearing of the great God? We are not waiting for the glory of God but His glorious appearing!

Comment: Where are the words “the glorious appearing of the great God? We are not waiting for the glory of God but His glorious appearing!” At first glance you may think modern bibles say the same as KJV says, but they are not!”  (end of comments by this Bible believer. And he is right!)

Titus 2:13 (New International Version) “while we wait for the blessed hope—the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ,“ Comment: Where are the words glorious appearing of the great God? We are not waiting for the glory of God but His glorious appearing!
Titus 2:13 (New American Standard Bible) “looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus” Comment: Where are the words glorious appearing of the great God? We are not waiting for the glory of God but His glorious appearing!
Titus 2:13 (English Standard Version) waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ,” Comment: Where are the words glorious appearing of the great God? We are not waiting for the glory of God but His glorious appearing!
Comment: Where are the words “the glorious appearing of the great God? We are not waiting for the glory of God but His glorious appearing!” At first glance you may think modern bibles say the same as KJV says, but they are not!”  (end of comments by this Bible believer. And he is right!)

So the KJB is actually more accurate here than the NIV, ESV, NKJV or the NASB.

Other Bible translations that read as does the KJB are Wycliffe’s 1380, Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535 – ” appearynge of the glory of ye greate God and of oure Sauioure Iesu Christ”, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549, the Bishop’s Bible 1568, the Douay-Rheims 1582 – ” the glory of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.”, the Geneva Bible 1599 – “that mightie God, and of our Sauiour Iesus Christ”, Mace’s N.T. 1729, Whiston’s Primitive N.T. 1745, John Wesley’s translation 1755, Worsley Translation 1770, Etheridge Translation 1849, Murdoch’s translation 1851 and Lamsa’s translation of the Syriac Peshitta 1933 – “the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ”, the Aramaic Bible in Plain English – “the revelation of the glory of The Great God and Our Lifesaver, Yeshua The Messiah”, the Emphatic Dioglott 1865, the Living Oracles 1835, Julia Smith translation 1855, Noyles Translation 1869, the ASV of 1901 – “the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ”, Webster’s Bible 1833, J.B. Phillips 1962, Rotherham’s Emphasized Bible 1902 “the glory of the great God and our Saviour Christ Jesus”,  Worrell N.T., Alford N.T. for English Readers, James Moffatt N.T. – “the Glory of the great God and of our Saviour Christ Jesus”, Riverside N.T., the World English Bible – ” appearing of the glory of the great God and our Savior, Jesus Christ”, Hebrew Names Version,  the New American Bible 1991, the KJV 21st Century 1994 and the Third Millenium Bible 1998 – “the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.”

Many foreign language Bible translate the passage exactly as the King James Bible has it. Among these are the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569, the Spanish Reina Valera of 1909, Spanish Jubilee Bible 2000, and Spanish La Palabra 2010 – “la manifestación gloriosa del gran Dios y Salvador nuestro Jesucristo.”, the French Martin 1744, Louis Segond 1910 – “l’apparition de la gloire du grand Dieu, et notre Sauveur, Jésus-Christ”, the Italian Diodati 1649, and La Nuova Diodati 1991 – “della gloria del grande Dio e Salvatore nostro, Gesú Cristo.”, the Portuguese de Almeida 1681 and A Biblia Sagrada em Portugués –  o aparecimento da glória do grande Deus e nosso Salvador Jesus Cristo”, the Russian Zhuromsky New Testament, the Norwegian Det Norsk Bibelselskap 1930 – “og åpenbarelsen av den store Guds og vår frelser Jesu Kristi herlighet,” the Dutch Staten Vertaling Bible – “van den groten God en onzen Zaligmaker Jezus Christus;” = “of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ” 

Martin Luther’s German translation of 1545 also reads just like the King James Bible as does the German Schlachter Bible of 2000 with: “großen Gottes und unsers Heilandes Jesu Christi”.  = “the glory of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.”

Matthew Henry comments – “Jesus Christ, that great God and our Saviour, who saves not only as God, much less as Man alone; but as God-man, two natures in one person. He loved us, and gave himself for us.” 

John Gill comments – “and the glorious appearing of the great God, and our Saviour Jesus Christ; not two divine persons, only one, are here intended.”

Jamieson, Fausset and Brown comment – “the great God and our Saviour Jesus—There is but one Greek article to “God” and “Saviour,” which shows that both are predicated of one and the same Being.

Barnes’ Notes on the Whole Bible – “Of the great God –  There can be little doubt, if any, that by “the great God” here, the apostle referred to the Lord Jesus…No one, accustomed to Paul‘s views, can well doubt that when he used this language he had his eye throughout on the Son of God”  

Matthew Henry comments – “The great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ for they are not two subjects, but one only, as appears by the single article”  

Matthew Poole comments – “And the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ; and in order thereunto, looking for the coming of the great God, and our Saviour Jesus Christ, to the last judgment. The same person is here meant by the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.”

James White, who is now promoting the modern Vatican Versions and who SAYS the Bible is the infallible words of God but will NEVER tell you where to get one, is dead wrong in his criticisms of this verse, and the King James Bible is absolutely correct and infallible, as always.  

All of grace, believing the Book – the King James Holy Bible.

See also Dr. Larry Bednar’s explanation of Titus 2:13 in the KJB and why it is absolutely correct and better than the ESV, NIV, NASB and NKJV at his KJV Textual Technology site here –

http://www.kjvtextualtechnology.com/kjv-classical-language-of-emphasis.php

The King James Bible is right, as always.

#3 – The third verse that critics cite against the KJB is 2 Peter 1:1. Here we read

2 Peter 1:1 – “To them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.”

Again they say the verse, as it stands in the KJB, does not clearly show the deity of Jesus Christ. The NKJV, NIV and NASB read: “through the righteousness of OUR God and Savior, Jesus Christ.”

First, it needs to be pointed out that there are several textual differences in the Greek of verses one and two. One of the “oldest and best” manuscripts called Sinaiticus reads “righteousness of the Lord” or kurios instead of righteousness of God. But the NASB and NIV didn’t follow this, but rather the majority reading of “God”.

In the next verse we read: “Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge OF GOD AND OF JESUS OUR LORD.”

Here several texts omit “of God and of Jesus” – The Expositor’s Greek Testament does this. Other texts omit just “of God”, and Sinaiticus adds the word CHRIST and so says: “of God and of Jesus CHRIST our Lord”.

Other Greek manuscripts read “Jesus our Saviour” instead of “Jesus our Lord”, and others still reverse the word order and add Christ and end up with “of our Lord Jesus Christ” instead of “of Jesus our Lord”, while a few others say “of OUR God” instead of “of God”.

You can verify all this information by looking carefully at the Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament 4th edition.  There is thus a wide variety of different readings found in these first two verses of 2 Peter. 

Secondly, the text followed by the King James Bible seems to be that of Scrivener, Beza and Elziever.

2 Πετερ 1:1 εν δικαιοσυνη του θεου ημων και σωτηρος ημων ιησου χριστου = This text has the literal “righteousness of the OUR God and OUR Saviour Jesus Christ.

Several Bible translations actually read this way.  Among these are the Worsley Version of 1770 “the righteousness of OUR God and of OUR Saviour Jesus Christ”, the New Simplified Bible – ” the righteousness of our God, and of our Savior Jesus Christ”,  Green’s KJV lll of 1993, the French Sainte Bible of 1759 and La Bible du Semeur of 1999 – “notre Dieu et notre Sauveur”. 

Likewise the Weymouth translation of 1912 has “righteousness of OUR God and of OUR Savior Jesus Christ.”  Etheridge’s 1849 translation of the Syriac has “righteousness of OUR Lord and OUR Redeemer Jeshu Meshiha. Lawrie Translation 1998 – “through the righteousness of OUR God and OUR Savior Jesus Christ”

The ASV of 1901 DOES seem to distinguish between God and the Lord Jesus saying: “in the righteousness of our God and the saviour Jesus Christ”

See also the article on 2 Peter 1:1 at KJV Today where he discusses both the textual variations found in this verse and the use of the Granville Sharp Rule.

http://www.kjvtoday.com/home/god-and-our-saviour-or-our-god-and-saviour-in-titus-213–2-peter-11

As I understand it, the King James Bible translators saw both words “our” as referring to the same Person of the Lord Jesus Christ, who is both God and our Saviour.

It is a distinct possibility that they wanted to maintain this single identity of the full Deity of Christ, and so they chose to not translate one of the words “our” so as to avoid a translation that would suggest the passage is speaking about two different persons.  

Had they translated the passage in a strict literal sense (rather than the meaning) the rendering of “the righteousness of our God and our Saviour Jesus Christ” far more easily lends itself to the interpretation that it is speaking of two persons rather than one.  I don’t know this for sure. I wasn’t there when they talked about it. But this seems like a very good possibility.

Bible Translations that agree with the King James Bible reading –

The Cambridge Paragraph Bible by Frederick Scrivener 1873 – through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.”   http://thebiblecorner.com/englishbibles/thecambridgeparagraphbible/2peter/1.html

The  Italian Diodati of 1649 reads like the KJB with “righteousness of God and OUR Saviour, Jesus Christ.” – “giustizia dell’Iddio e Salvator NOSTRO, Gesù Cristo.” The 2009 Romanian Fidela Bible reads this way too – “de preţioasă prin dreptatea Dumnezeului şi Salvatorului nostru Isus Cristos”. 

So too do The Bill Bible 1671, Whiston’s Primitive N.T. 1745 – “through the righteousness of God, and OUR Saviour Jesus Christ.”, the Clarke N.T. 1795, Webster’s 1833 translation, the Pickering N.T. 1840 – “the righteousness of God and OUR Saviour Jesus Christ”, the Hammond N.T. 1845, The Morgan N.T. 1848 –  “to those obtaining like faith, in the righteousness of God, and OUR savior Jesus Christ, with us.”, The Commonly Received Version 1851, the Dillard N.T. 1885 – “of God and OUR Saviour Anointed Jesus.”, The Word of Yah 1993 – “through the righteousness of God and OUR Saviour Yahshua the Christ”, the KJV 21st Century version 1994, The Revised Webster Bible 1995,  the Third Millennium Bible of 1998, the Bond Slave Version 2012, the Revised English Version of 2010, The Conservative Bible 2011 – “through the righteousness of God and OUR Savior Jesus Christ”. 

The Resurrection Life New Testament 2005, the Holy Scriptures Jubilee Bible 2000, the Evidence Bible 2003, the Heritage Bible 2003, and the Urim-Thummin Version of 2001 by Dallas James all read the same with “through the righteousness of God and OUR Saviour Jesus Christ.”

The reading as it stands in the KJB “the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ” can easily be seen as stating that He is both God and our Saviour; but the difference is this – Jesus Christ is God but He is not every body’s Saviour.  He is OUR Saviour and 2 Peter is written to born again, blood bought Christians. 

Compare other verses with similar wording. In Isaiah 44:6, 24 we are told “Thus saith the LORD the King of Israel, AND his redeemer the LORD of hosts: I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God…Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, AND he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things…” Even though there is the word “and” in between the two nouns, we know there is only one person who is being referred to – God.

The same thing is found in 1 Thessalonians 3:11 “Now God himself AND our Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ direct our way unto you.”; Galatians 1:4 “according to the will of God AND our Father.” The “and” is not implying another person, but is bringing out another aspect of the same one. He is both God and our Father.

So too, in 2 Peter the “God and our Saviour Jesus Christ” can be seen as showing another aspect of the same divine Person, just as 2 Peter 1:11 “kingdom of our Lord AND Saviour Jesus Christ.”

Even the reading of the NKJV, NIV and NASB could be looked upon as describing two distinct persons; it all depends on how one reads it.

“Righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ”, can be compared to statements like “our Mom and Dad won’t let us go to the party” or “our boss and manager will be at the meeting”.

In Scripture we have “ye are our glory and joy” 1 Thessalonians 2:20, and Acts 15:25 “our beloved Barnabas and Paul”. Both Barnabas and Paul were beloved but they obviously were two different people. You see, if you wish to see a declaration of Christ’s deity in this verse, it is there. Likewise, it can be explained away by those who do not wish to see it in either rendering.

The Jehovah Witness New World Translation reads much the same way as the NKJV, NIV, NASB – “by the righteousness of OUR God and [the] Savior Jesus Christ” (NWT) and yet they manage to explain away the full deity of our Saviour Jesus Christ.

Dr. Thomas Holland has written a very good article refuting James White’s groundless criticism of the King James Bible, and these three verses. He addresses Titus 2:13 and the others about two-thirds down in his article here: http://www.purewords.org/kjb1611/html/lesson12.htm

I hope this has been of some help to those who believe that we have all of God’s inspired, pure words today, and that they are found in the King James Holy Bible.

Will Kinney

Return to Articles –  http://brandplucked.webs.com/kjbarticles.htm

Seven Easy Ways to Tell the True Bible from the False bibles

Via Will Kinney, with permission:

Seven Easy Ways to Tell the True Bible from the False bibles

True Bible or False bible?  You don’t need to be a scholar to tell which Bible is the true one. God never intended His words of truth to be known or understood only by the scholars. They don’t agree among themselves as to which text to follow or how to render it in English once they agree as to the text – as it witnessed by the conflicting NAS, NIV, ESV and NKJV.Jesus tells us “Beware of the scribes…” and in 1 Corinthians 1:19-20 “It is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this world? Hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?”

There is an easy way for every Christian to test the multitude of conflicting Bible versions flooding the market today. Are they a true or a false witness? Mark 14:56 tells us: “For many bare false witness against him, but their witness agreed not together.”

In a court of law a false witness will sometimes or even usually tell the truth, but he betrays himself as a false witness by saying something either false, contradictory or absurd. 

So it is with the NKJV, NASB, ESV, NIV and all the other modern Bible versions competing for your money and your mind. So Christian friend, I ask you to sit for a little while in the jury box, listen to the testimonies, and determine which one is telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Example #1

What is your righteousness before a holy and just God? Is it your own works or the imputed righteousness of our precious Lord Jesus Christ?

The imputed righteousness of Christ is illustrated and clearly taught in the King James Bible of 1611. In the beginning, after Adam and Eve had sinned and hid themselves from God because they were naked, we are told in Genesis 3:21: “Unto Adam also and to is wife did the LORD God make coats of skin, and clothed them.” An innocent animal was slain, and its coat was made a covering for the naked, guilty pair. God has to cover us; we cannot cover ourselves acceptably before Him.

Isaiah 61:10 beautifully expresses this truth: “I will greatly rejoice in the Lord, my soul shall be joyful in my God; for he hath clothed me with the garments of salvation, he hath covered me with the robe of righteousness…as a bride adorneth herself with her jewels.”

Zechariah 3:1-4 illustrates the same truth. Satan stood at the right hand of Joshua the high priest to resist him. The Lord rebuked Satan. The Bible tells us that: “Joshua was clothed with filthy garments.” But God said: “Take away the filthy garments from him. And unto him he said, Behold, I have caused thine iniquity to pass from thee, and I will clothe thee with change of raiment.”

In Matthew 22 our Saviour gives us a parable about a wedding where the guests were bidden to the feast. But the king saw there a man which had not on a wedding garment. “And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless.” Then the man was bound hand and foot and cast into outer darkness.

You and I have no righteousness of our own doing. “All our righteousnesses are as filthy rags” – Isaiah 64:6. But praise our God for his wonderful Son, Jesus Christ. “For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.” 2 Corinthians 5:21. “and be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith.” Philippians 3:9.

All the preceding information was given to show the true doctrine so that the false teaching of the new versions will be seen more clearly.

Revelation 19:7-9 tells us again of the wedding feast. V.7 “the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready. And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white; FOR THE FINE LINEN IS THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF SAINTS.”

This last phrase is consistent with the rest of Scripture that it is not our righteousness that makes us acceptable unto God, but the robe of the imputed righteousness of Christ. Versions that read just like the King James Bible are Tyndale’s New Testament of 1534, Miles Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549, the Bishop’s Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible of 1587, the Beza N.T. 1599, Green’s interlinear, Whiston’s Primitive New Testament 1745, John Wesley’s 1755 translation, Worsley Version 1770, Daniel Webster’s of 1833, Etheridge Translation 1849, Murdock Translation 1851, Noyes Translation 1869, New Testament translated from the Sinaitic mss. 1918, the Spanish Reina Valera of 1909 (el lino fino son las justificaciones de los santos), the 1744 French Martin – (“ce fin lin désigne la justice des Saints.”), Luther’s 1545 German Bible, Darby’s translation 1890, the Bible in Basic English 1970, Lamsa’s translation of the Syriac Peshitta, the Third Millennium Bible 1998, the 21st Century KJB version 1994, and even the 2002 paraphrase called The Message which reads: “She was given a bridal gown of bright and shining linen. The linen is the righteousness of the saints.”

However, the Catholic Douay, New American (St. Joseph of 1970), and the Jehovah Witness Bibles read in a similar way to many modern versions. St. Joseph: “the linen dress is THE VIRTUOUS DEEDS of God’s saints.” The Catholic New Jerusalem bible of 1985 reads: “because her linen is made of THE GOOD DEEDS of the saints.”

The NKJV, NASB, ISV (2003 International Standard Version), the 2001 ESV (English Standard Version), the Holman Christian Standard Bible, the NIV, and the Jehovah Witness NWT have, “the fine linen is the RIGHTEOUS ACTS of the saints.” (NIV 1984 edition) or “the fine linen is THE RIGHTEOUS DEEDS of God’s people”.

The Holman Standard and Jehovah Witness NWT read: “For the fine linen represents THE RIGHTEOUS ACTS of the saints.” That is the Catholic doctrine of works salvation and it is now taught in the NKJV, NIV, and NASB too. If our righteous acts or righteous deeds are going to make up our wedding dress, it will be pretty soiled and tattered, don’t you think? At the very least, you have to admit that not all these versions teach the same truth in this verse. So which one is right?

For a further development of the theology of this verse as it stands in the King James Bible please see my article here:  

 http://brandplucked.webs.com/rev198finelinen.htm

Example #2

God is sovereign and in control of his universe. Daniel 2:21 “he changeth the times and the seasons”. Acts 1:7 “It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power,”; Acts 17:31 “he hath appointed a day (already done) in the which he will judge the world in righteousness”; Revelation 9:15 “And the four angels were loosed, which were prepared for an hour, and a day, and a month, and a year, for to slay the third part of men.” God alone is in control of time, even to the very hour. John 7:30: “Then they sought to take him; but no man laid hands on him, because his hour was not yet come.”

2 Peter 3:12 KJB – “Looking for and HASTING UNTO the coming of the day of God”

The King James Bible along with Tyndale, the Great Bible 1540 – “lokyng for, and hastinge vnto the commynge of the daye of God”, Matthew’s Bible 1549 -“lokynge for and hasting vnto the comminge of the daye of God”, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva 1587 – “Looking for, and hasting vnto the comming of that day of God”, Douay, Webster’s 1833 translation, the KJV 21st Century 1994, Third Millennium Bible 1998, Young’s 1898, and the Spanish Reina Valera correctly translate 2 Peter 3:11,12 “Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, looking for and HASTING UNTO the coming of the day of God…”,  Douay – hasten towards; Young – hasting to; Spanish – apresurándoos para la venida.

While the RV, 1885 and ASV of 1901 have -“earnestly desiring the coming of the day of God”.  The Holman Standard of 2003 is similar to these last two, in that it reads: “as you wait for AND EARNESTLY DESIRE the coming of the day of God.”

But something has definitely changed in many new “bibles”. The NKJV,  NASB and ESV have “hastening the coming” and the NIV has “speed its coming”.

The Catholic bible versions teach the same false doctrine as do the NKJV, NASB, NIV and ESV.  The 1970 St. Joseph New American bible says: “looking for the coming of the day of God AND TRYING TO HASTEN IT.” while the Catholic New Jerusalem bible of 1985 has: “while you wait for the Day of God to come, and TRY TO HASTEN its coming.” We cannot  hasten or hurry up Gods timetable or affect it in any way. The new versions teach the opposite and contradict the rest of Scripture. For a further development and explanation of the theology of this verse as it stands in the King James Bible please see my article here:

http://brandplucked.webs.com/2peter312hastingunto.htm

Example #3

In 2 Samuel 14, Joab enlists the help of a wise woman to change David’s attitude toward his son Absalom. David apparently received the woman’s message as from the Lord, because he allowed Absalom to return to Jerusalem. Part of the message is v.14; “For we must needs die, and are as water spilt on the ground, which cannot be gathered again; NEITHER DOTH GOD RESPECT ANY PERSON.” In other words, we all die, regardless of wealth or social position.

The Geneva Bible, Youngs translation, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the 1917 Jewish Publication Society of America Version all agree with the KJV – “NEITHER DOTH GOD RESPECT ANY PERSON.”

However, the NKJV, NASB, NIV, and ESV say “God does not take away life.” This is a false statement. It contradicts 2 Samuel 12:15 just two chapters before where the Lord struck the child and he died. 1 Samuel 2:6 says: “The Lord killeth, and maketh alive; he bringeth down to the grave, and bringeth up…” and God himself testifies in Deut. 32:39; “I kill, and I make alive.”

This is not a case of the NKJV, ESV or NASB honestly examining the Hebrew, because all three have rendered the same words in other places just as the KJB has them here. Why change what this wise woman said from the truth into a lie?

For a further explanation of this verse please see my article here: Does God Take Away Life?  

http://brandplucked.webs.com/2sam14luke24.htm

Example #4

A false witness can say something so utterly ridiculous that you know he is lying. Let’s look at the NAS – the rapidly fading star of the scholarly types. Is it possible to deceive God? He knows our every thought and the words before they come out of our mouths. Of course, you say, no one can deceive God.

Stupid statement #1 . Psalms 78 tells us of Israel’s rebellion and sin against their God and of his continued compassion towards them. One of the people’s many recorded sins is found in v.36: “they did FLATTER him with their mouth, and lied unto him with their tongue.” We can flatter God – say all kinds of nice things about him yet not really mean them. God is not fooled by mans false words of adoration. The ASV, NIV, NKJV, ESV, Darby, Geneva, RSV and NRSV all agree with the KJV that they flattered God. But the NASB says they DECEIVED him. That, my Christian friend, is an impossibility. I hope you aren’t deceived into thinking the NASB is the true Bible.  

To see more on this verse – Can God be Deceived?

http://brandplucked.webs.com/eze149ps7836deceive.htm

Stupid statement #2. Psalm 10:4 describes a wicked man: “The wicked, through the pride of his countenance, will not seek after God; GOD IS NOT IN ALL HIS THOUGHTS.” In other words, in everything this man thinks, God never enters the picture.

The NKJV, NIV agree with the KJV. The NIV is good here saying: “in all his thoughts there is no room for God.” Older English Bible are good here like the Great Bible of 1540 – “nether is God in all his thoughtes.” or Matthew’s Bible of 1549 – “neither is God before his eyes.”

But the NASB and ESV have “All his thoughts are ‘There is no God.'” Not even the staunchest atheist walks around all day long thinking; “there is no god, there is no god, there is no god.”  The NASB, ESV are very similar to the Catholic New Jerusalem bible of 1985 which says: “”There is no God”, is his only thought.”

Stupid statement #3 Ephesians 5:13 says along with the NKJV, NIV 1984 edition, ASV, Darby, Geneva and Spanish: “But all things that are reproved are made manifest by the light; for WHATSOEVER DOTH MAKE MANIFEST IS LIGHT.” In other words, the light of God’s truth shows things for what they really are. It tells us what sin and unrighteousness are by exposing them.  

The ESV is pretty good here. It says: “But when anything is exposed by the light, it becomes visible.”

But the NASB would have us believe “EVERYTHING THAT BECOMES VISIBLE IS LIGHT.”  Oh, really? But now the “new” NIV of 2011 has come out and it has changed the meaning of this verse to now mean something utterly ridiculous. 

The “old” NIV of 1984 read: “But EVERYTHING EXPOSED BY THE LIGHT BECOMES VISIBLE.”  

However the NIV 2011 now says: “and everything THAT IS ILLUMINATED BECOMES A LIGHT.”!!!  The ‘new’ NIV is now much closer to it’s Catholic counterpart, the New Jerusalem bible of 1985 which also says: “and anything illuminated is itself a light.”

Example #5

As a false witness will contradict himself; so too will a false bible. Hebrews 3 tells of the children of Israel who didn’t believe God and hardened their hearts so as not to enter the promised land. Verse 16 says; “For some, when they had heard, did provoke; howbeit not all that came out of Egypt by Moses.”

Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549 – “For some, when they hearde, rebelled, how be it not al that came out of Egypte vnder Moyses.” the Bishops’ Bible of 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, Young’s and Reina Valera of 1602 agree with the King James Bible.

However the NKJV, NIV, NASB, ESV say: “For who, having heard, rebelled? Indeed, was it not all who came out of Egypt by Moses?”

You would naturally answer “Yes, it was all” to the new versions. But that is a lie, a contradiction and contrary to the whole sense of the passage. Joshua and Caleb believed God and eventually did enter the promised land along with thousands of the children of the parents who refused to believe God. The whole point of the passage is to believe God and enter into his rest. Be like Caleb and Joshua. 

The earlier Catholic bibles like the Douay-Rheims and the 1950 Douay were right and also agreed with the King James Bible.  The 1950 Douay says in Hebrews 3:16 – “for some who heard gave provocation, BUT NOT ALL those who came out of Egypt under Moses.” 

However the newer Catholic versions like the St. Joseph of 1970 reads exactly the same wrong meaning like the NKJV, NIV, NASB, ESV with “who were those that revolted when they heard that voice?  Was it not all whom Moses had led out of Egypt?”, while the New Jerusalem of 1985 has “who was it who listened and then rebelled? Surely all those whom Moses led out of Egypt.”  

To see more on this verse 

http://brandplucked.webs.com/heb316someprovokenot.htm

Example #6

Who is in control of the world? Is it God or Satan? Jesus Christ said: “All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.” Matthew 28:18. The Lord’s prayer in Matthew 6:13 ends with :”For thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory for ever, Amen.”

This phrase is in brackets in the NASB and removed in the NIV, RSV, NRSV, ESV, Jehovah Witness NWT and Dan Wallace’s  NET version.  Jesus either said it or he didn’t; they can’t all be right.

See my article on this verse here – Matthew 6:13 & Luke 11:2-4  – Is your bible a “Catholic” bible?

http://brandplucked.webs.com/matthew613.htm

In Ephesians 1:20-22 it is said of Christ that God “raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come; and hath put all things under his feet.”

Daniel 4:17,25,26 tell us that “the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will.” II Cron. 20:6: “O LORD God of our fathers, art not thou God in heaven? and rulest not thou over all kingdoms of the heathen? and in thine hand is there not power and might, so that none is able to withstand thee?”

Satan is a liar from the beginning. When he told Jesus, during the temptation, that all the kingdoms of the world were his and that he gave them to whomsoever he would, he was lying. His statement directly contradicts Daniel 4:17 and the other Scriptures.

But the NIV, NASB, ESV and NKJ have bought Satan’s lie and are passing it off on to God’s children.

In 1 John 5:19 the KJV along with the Geneva, Tyndale, Young’s and the Spanish of 1602 say: “And we know that we are of God, and THE WHOLE WORLD LIETH IN WICKEDNESS.” We live in a fallen world; it lies in sin; but God is still in control and ruling even though it may not appear that way. But the eye of faith sees his sovereignty and rejoices in this confidence.

However the NIV says: “The whole world is under the control of the evil one.” (Before you rush to your school boy Greek, check out your own version on the presence or lack of the definite article.) The NASB and ESV have “the whole world lies in the power of the evil one.”

Likewise the Catholic versions are in agreement with the NIV, NASB, ESV reading: “and the whole world is in the power of the Evil One.” (New Jerusalem bible 1985). The NKJV tries to strike a medium with its: “lies under the sway of the wicked one” but it is also wrong when it calls Satan the “ruler of this world” in John 16:11.

For further discussion of who rules the world, please see –   

http://brandplucked.webs.com/satanorgodcontrols.htm

Example #7

WORDS and NUMBERS

I believe God is very serious about his words and those who would tamper with them. Deuteronomy 4:2: “Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it.” Proverbs 30:5,6 “Every word of God is pure…Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.” Also Rev. 22:18,19.

The NASB, ESV and the NIV are guilty of adding to, diminishing from and changing the words of God. This is not just my opinion, but documented facts from their own “bibles” and concordances.

I will give just a few of the many examples I have found. In Judges 16:13-14 the NASB, ESV & NIV add 33 EXTRA WORDS to the text, which are not found in any Hebrew manuscripts, but according to the NIV footnote are found in some Greek copies.

In 2 Samuel 13:34 the NIV adds another 21 WORDS from the Greek. They are not found in the NASB or even the ESV. And again the NIV and the ESV both add another 15 WORDS to Psalm 145:13 from the Syriac – which are not in the NASB.

In Genesis 4:8 the NIV adds from the Greek: “let us go out into the field.”, but they are not found in the NASB or the ESV.

I have found well over 40 examples in the NASB and more than 80 in the NIV and ESV where they do not follow the Hebrew text but go with the Greek, Syriac, Targum etc. Here are documented facts about some of the many places where versions like the NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV, Holman Standard and other modern Bible versions reject the inspired Hebrew texts. See –  

 http://brandplucked.webs.com/nivnasbrejecthebrew.htm

 http://brandplucked.webs.com/nivnasbrejecthebrew2.htm

  2 Chronicles 22:2 tells us that Ahaziah was 42 years old when he began to reign. All Hebrew texts, plus the Revised Version, the ASV, Geneva, Darby, Young, Spanish, NKJV, and even the RSV & NRSV say 42.

Yet the NASB, ESV & NIV change this number to 22 on the basis of the Syriac and some LXX copies. This information is in a footnote in the Scofield NIV of 1984. It is recorded in 2 Kings 8:26 that he was 22 years old.

There is a rather easy solution to this apparent contradiction. Jehu was appointed by God to cut off the house of Ahab – 2 Chronicles 22:7. Ahaziah was son in law to Ahab – 2 Kings 8:27. So if you count how long each king related to Ahab reigned, you come up with exactly the 42nd year as a son of Ahab (related by marriage) when Ahaziah began to reign, though physically he was only 22.

Ahab 1 Kings 16:29 – 22 years reigned, Jehoram of Israel 12 years 2 Kings 3:1 and Jehoram of Judah 8 years 2 Chronicles 21:5. Thus 22 + 12 + 8 =42. The new versions are based on unbelief. They say “This is a scribal error.” They don’t believe God has preserved his word without error. They do not have an inspired, inerrant Bible in their hands. Ask them and you will see.

For a more in depth discussion of the 22 versus 42 “problem” please see – How old was Ahaziah?

http://brandplucked.webs.com/howoldwasahaziah.htm

A riddle is found within a riddle in Judges 14:12-18. Verse 15 says “it came to pass on the SEVENTH day”. This is in all Hebrew texts, Revised Version 1885, the ASV 1901, Geneva, Young, Darby, Douay, NKJ (but with misleading footnote) and Spanish.

The NIV and ESV change this to the FOURTH day with a footnote that says some LXX, Syriac 4th; Hebrew 7th.

The NASB also has FOURTH but no footnote. NASB, ESV and  NIV still have a contradiction because of v.17, 18. Can you solve the riddle? Hints: Could any days have intervened between v.12 and v.15? And what would the first 7th day of v. 15 have meant to the Jewish Samson? There is no need to doubt God’s Holy word. Get the King James Holy Bible and stick with it.

I have also developed a fuller explanation of the riddle within a riddle found here:

 http://brandplucked.webs.com/jud1415samsonsriddle.htm

 One last example dealing with numbers – though I have many more. In 1 Samuel 13:1 the KJV, NKJV, Geneva and Spanish say: “Saul reigned ONE year; and when he had reigned TWO years over Israel…”

The NASB editions 1972 to 1977 said: “Saul was FORTY years old when he began to reign and he reigned THIRTY-TWO years over Israel.”  

But then the NASB 1995 changed this to match the NIV and now says: “Saul was THIRTY years old when he began to reign, and he reigned FORTY TWO years over Israel.”  

The ESV 2001 and 2007 editions both read: “Saul was….years old when he began to reign, and he reigned…..and TWO years over Israel.”  

But now the ESV 2011 edition says: “Saul LIVED FOR ONE YEAR AND THEN BECAME KING, and when he had reigned for TWO years over Israel”

The NIV has: “Saul was THIRTY years old when he became king, and he reigned over Israel FORTY TWO years.”

Gleason Archer, one of the translators of the NIV, says in his book Bible Difficulties on page 171 that the Hebrew text here has been lost. How is that for God preserving his word?! The NASB & NIV and ESV not only disagree with each other (The ESV disagrees with other ESVs!) but contradict Acts 13:21 where we are told that Saul reigned for 40 years. The Hebrew text is not lost.

For further development of the truth of this verse as it stands in the King James Bible, please see my article here: Some Words Lost?

http://brandplucked.webs.com/1samuel131wordslost.htm

 “Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it.”

The NIV complete concordance tells us that they have not translated THOUSANDS of Hebrew and Greek words. Here are just a few examples.

Zechariah 1:7 NIV omits “saying”. The NIV number for this word is #606. Their own concordance tells us they have “not translated” this word 878 times.

Zechariah 1:11 “Behold” is gone. NIV #2180 not translated 550 times.

Zechariah  1:18 omits “mine eyes” #6524 – 36 times not translated; “saw” and “behold” also are gone from this same verse.

“Children” #1201 not translated 237 times

Zechariah 8:17 omits “in your hearts”, Zechariah 8:19 omits the word “fast” 3 of the 4 times it occurs in this verse.

Zechariah 9:1 omits “burden”. All of these words are in the NASB, NKJ, and of course the KJV.

The NIV has over 64,000 fewer words in it than the KJV. It does not translate the words “it came to pass” (also, to be, happen, occur) #2118 –  887 times.

The words “I pray thee” #5228 in NIV are not translated 297 times out of the 405 times it occurs in the Hebrew text.

See how the omission of this simple phrase changes a request into a demand. In Exodus 33:18 Moses speaks to God: “And he said, I BESEECH THEE, shew me thy glory.”

NIV: “Then Moses said, ‘Now show me your glory.'”

This type of “bible” may appeal to the blab it and grab it crowd, but it is not the pure word of God.

The NASB 1995 edition omits almost 8000 WORDS that were found in the previous NASB 1977 edition.

To see many examples of how the NASB continues to change both its Hebrew and Greek underlying texts, as well as their English translation over and over again from one edition to the next, see “The ever changing ‘literal’ NASB”

http://brandplucked.webs.com/everchangingnasbs.htm 

The King James Bible is the only English Bible believed by thousands of God’s redeemed people to be the complete and inerrant words of the living God. And that is exactly what it is.

No one seriously believes any other Bible in any language is or ever was the inerrant words of God.  Just ask them.  

All of grace, believing The Book – the Authorized King James Holy Bible,  

Will Kinney  

Return to Articles – http://brandplucked.webs.com/kjbarticles.htm

President Ronald Reagan speaking about the King James Bible

Here is a very interesting 3 minute video recording of President Ronald Reagan talking about the King James Bible and the modern versions on his radio program.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08_KByUwH6c&feature=share 

 Return to Articles – http://brandplucked.webs.com/kjbarticles.htm

Brother Joshua Alvarez has done a wonderful job in this 30 minute video of refuting the false claims and ignorance of a very confused young “pastor” regarding the Bible version issue.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ed7PGUt6VXE&feature=youtu.be&t=19m50s

 RECOMMENDED FURTHER READING 

Which Bible Version is God’s Word?

By: Edward Hendrie

http://www.antichristconspiracy.com/HTML%20Pages/Which_Bible_Version_is_God’s_Word.htm

Fact filled article showing the Jesuit Conspiracy to pervert and change the Bible to fit the “new” religion of the masses. 

 Part of what you will see in this article is the following:

  In apparent reference to Satan’s corruption of God’s word in the Garden of Eden, Jesus admonished Satan: “That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.” (Luke 4:4 AV) Just as Satan did in the Garden of Eden, he now tries to confuse people about what God has said: “Yea, hath God said . . . .” Pediatrician Dr. Lawrence Dunegan attended a lecture on March 20, 1969 at a gathering of pediatricians at a meeting of the Pittsburgh Pediatric Society. The lecturer at that meeting was a Dr. Richard Day (who died in 1989). At the time of the lecture Dr. Day was Professor of Pediatrics at Mount Sinai Medical School in New York. Previously, Dr. Day had served as Medical Director of Planned Parenthood Federation of America. Dr. Dunegan was well acquainted with Dr. Day and described him as an insider in the “order.” Dr. Dunegan did not explain what the “order” was, but from the lecture it was clear that it was a very powerful secret society made up of minions in service to Satan. During the lecture Dr. Day revealed many of the satanic plans that the members of the “order” had agreed upon that would change the United States from a Christian society to a pagan society. One of the strategies was to introduce new bible versions. By the time of the lecture in 1969, that strategy had long previously been implemented. Dr. Day was indicating that the final success of that strategy was in sight as henceforth it would be implemented with new vigor. Dr. Dunegan explains:

 Another area of discussion was Religion. This is an avowed atheist speaking. And he [Dr. Day] said, “Religion is not necessarily bad. A lot of people seem to need religion, with it’s mysteries and rituals – so they will have religion. But the major religions of today have to be changed because they are not compatible with the changes to come. The old religions will have to go. Especially Christianity. Once the Roman Catholic Church is brought down, the rest of Christianity will follow easily. Then a new religion can be accepted for use all over the world. It will incorporate something from all of the old ones to make it more easy for people to accept it, and feel at home in it. Most people won’t be too concerned with religion. They will realize that they don’t need it.

 In order to this, the Bible will be changed. It will be rewritten to fit the new religion. Gradually, key words will be replaced with new words having various shades of meaning. Then the meaning attached to the new word can be close to the old word – and as time goes on, other shades of meaning of that word can be emphasized. and then gradually that word replaced with another word.” I don’t know if I’m making that clear. But the idea is that everything in Scripture need not be rewritten, just key words replaced by other words. And the variability in meaning attached to any word can be used as a tool to change the entire meaning of Scripture, and therefore make it acceptable to this new religion. Most people won’t know the difference; and this was another one of the times where he said, “the few who do notice the difference won’t be enough to matter.” 

            In accordance with the aforementioned conspiracy, Satan and his minions now offer people a whole assortment of different bible versions, which change and twist God’s word. God’s word is with us today in the Authorized (King James) Version (referred to as AV or KJV). All other bible versions are tainted by the hands of Satan and his minions, including the New King James Version (NKJV). “Ye have perverted the words of the living God, of the LORD of hosts our God.” Jeremiah 23:36. The corrupted bible versions are essentially Roman Catholic bible versions. Sadly, most of the so called church leaders of today have accepted Satan’s counterfeit bibles.