2

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Russell and Colin Standish, twin sons and eldest in a family of four

children, were born in Newcastle, Australia, in 1933. They obtained their

teacher training diplomas from Avondale College before completing

Bachelor of Arts degrees with honors in psychology at the University of

Sidney.

Russell then completed medicine, choosing to specialize in internal

medicine, and achieved membership in the Royal College of Physicians,

United Kingdom and later was elected a fellow of the Royal College of

Physicians. Colin completed his Master of Arts degree and Doctor of

Philosophy, both in psychology, and then a second Masters in education.

Russell has subsequently served in a number of hospitals in Australia, the

Far East, and Great Britain, being medical director of a number of these

hospitals. Colin has worked in the field of education, being president of a

number of colleges, including West Indies College, Jamaica, and Columbia

Union College in the United States.

Russell is presently the president of Remnant Ministries located in

Melbourne, Australia. Colin is president of Hartland Institute, an

educational and health institution in Rapidan, Virginia.

3

CHAPTER 1

A BRIEF HISTORY OF BIBLE MANUSCRIPTS AND

TRANSLATIONS

The twenty-seven books of the New Testament were written in the

second half of the first century after Christ. Not one of the original

writings is preserved. However, early Christians carefully preserved

copies of these sacred writings, taking the greatest care to eliminate

copyist errors. Syria became the center of such copying endeavors.

Nevertheless, within a century of the writing of the New Testament

canon, serious alterations were made, especially by scribes in the city of

Alexandria in Egypt. These men were motivated by a desire to support

their Gnostic errors, which included the view that Christ was not a

member of the Godhead. Once scribes tampered with Scripture they

became increasingly careless in their copying techniques, introducing

numerous mistakes. However, the scribes of Syria did not deviate from

their meticulous copying methods.

From these two copyist perspectives, two quite different streams of

Greek manuscripts emerged. The Eastern stream, which became centered

on Syria and Constantinople, remained true to the original writings of the

apostles, while the Western stream, centered on Alexandria and Rome, was

markedly flawed by both deliberate and careless alterations.

Early in the fourth century, Emperor Constantine commissioned Eusebius,

bishop of Caesarea, to prepare fifty copies of the New Testament.

Eusebius chose to copy the flawed Western manuscripts. His decision was

influenced by his admiration of Origen, who himself was a corrupter of

Holy Writ.

It is thought that two of Eusebius’ copies survive in the Codex Sinaiticus

and the Codex Vaticanus. These copies contain many errors, and during

the sixth and the seventh centuries at least ten different scribes attempted

to make corrections to bring them somewhat closer to the valid Eastern

4

manuscripts. Despite this effort, deliberate and careless errors remained in

great numbers.

Knowledge of the errors did not prevent Jerome from using these faulty

manuscripts as a basis for his Latin version of the Bible. His translation

became the official Scripture of the Roman Catholic Church and is known

as the Latin Vulgate. Disregarding all evidence to the contrary, the Council

of Trent in the sixteenth century proclaimed the Latin Vulgate to be free

from error.

But despite the great influence of the Papacy, true Christians were not

deceived. Believers such as the Waldenses and the Gallic church of France

and the Celtic church of Britain refused such perversion of God’s Word

and used only those translations arising from the Eastern stream. This

practice was also true of God’s churches in Ethiopia, Persia, India, and

China.

When the Turks conquered Constantinople and destroyed the Byzantine

Empire in 1453, men escaped to the West bringing priceless biblical and

secular manuscripts with them. These manuscripts enlightened the dense

darkness of the Middle Ages, a darkness directly attributable to Roman

Catholic domination. The revelations of these manuscripts opened minds

to learning and also to the pure, precious Word of God. The Renaissance

spread throughout Europe like a wildfire, and shortly the Reformation

arose.

God’s servants perceived that it was the Word of God in the language of

the common people which opened minds to truth and dispelled the errors

of the Papacy. As nation after nation threw off the shackles of

Catholicism and embraced a pure faith based upon the inerrant Word of

God, great fear gripped the leadership in Rome. The Council of Trent was

called in 1545 to find a means to stem the advance of Protestantism.

Perceptively, the bishops gathered at the Council acknowledged that the

free distribution of the Bible to all men would prove the death knell of the

Roman Catholic Church. Wherever men and women read this precious

Book, the errors of Catholicism were forsaken.

Gladly would these wily bishops have cast every Bible into a sea of

flames as they had done in previous generations, but their coercive power

5

had disappeared from much of Europe. Thus more subtle means were

required to reverse the great advance of scriptural truth. Some less

farsighted bishops even suggested that the Roman Catholic Church, too,

endorse the Bible as the sole source of faith. They reasoned that they

might be able to wean men and women from Protestantism if they

proclaimed such a view. But the Jesuits saw that such a stand, rather than

serving to rescue the Catholic faith, would seal its doom. With the

Archbishop of Reggio as their spokesman, the Jesuits totally overthrew

this faulted tactic by pointing out that there was no scriptural basis for

Sundaykeeping, and unless the church was prepared to return to

Sabbathkeeping, they must uphold the authority of the tradition of the

church above that of the Scriptures.

The Archbishop of Reggio’s successful argument won a continued place

for church tradition as the major source of Catholic doctrine, but it did not

provide a solution to the advance of Protestantism and the supremacy of

Scripture in the hearts of Protestants. The Jesuits thus devised a new

strategy. While having little regard for the Bible, they nevertheless went to

Douay and Rheims in France and translated the Bible into the English

language using the Latin Vulgate as its basis, although resorting to the

original languages in some areas.

The Jesuits were not bothered by the faultiness of their new translation; it

furthered their aims. Their faith depended not upon God’s Word, but

rather upon church tradition. Accuracy was not vital to their undertaking,

and inaccuracies would assist them in their aim to weaken Protestant faith

in God’s Word. It is the corruption of God’s Word which tums men and

women to the authority of men and the church in place of the Bible.

For three centuries the design of the Jesuits met with scant success.

Protestants were acutely aware of the perversions of the Western

manuscripts and eschewed them. Men such as William Tyndale died at the

stake rather than submit to a perverted Scripture. The Reformers of

Europe united to bring before God’s flock the precious truths of the pure

Word of God. It was in this commitment of fidelity to God’s Word that

the King James Version of the Bible was undertaken by Godly men.

But in the nineteenth century the Jesuits penetrated the Anglican Church

in force. This infiltration led to the formation of what became known as

6

the Oxford movement early in that century. This movement among young

Anglican clerics upheld the re-introduction of Catholic practices such as

confession, the adoration of Mary, and the celebration of the Mass, into

the Anglican Church.

When, in the 1870s, the archbishopric of Canterbury undertook a revision

of the King James Version of the Bible, the revision committee’s two most

influential figures, Doctors Westcott and Hort, were greatly under the

influence of the Oxford movement. They encouraged the translators to

discard the pure Eastern manuscripts upon which the Protestant

Reformation and its Bible were based and to revert to the perverted

Western manuscripts, ever the ally of Catholicism.

Thus the Revised Version of 1881 transformed the nature of the Englishlanguage

Scripture. This version, and the American Revised Version which

followed twenty years later and which was equally faulted, did not

initially have a profound influence in Protestantism, for the King James

Version remained the standard Bible of these churches.

But the appearance of the Revised Standard Version of the Bible in the

second half of the twentieth century, followed by a plethora of new

translations, saw the scheme of the Jesuits finally implemented. Today

most Protestants have discarded the trusted King James Version and now

cheerfully use Bibles which are based upon Catholic manuscripts. All the

best-known modern translations with the exception of the New King

James Version (also known as the new Authorized Version) distort

Scripture. These translations include the New International Version, the

New English Bible, Today’s English Version, Phillips’ translation-cumparaphrase,

and a host of others.

Is it any wonder that the Catholics openly rejoiced at the appearance of

the Revised Version, proclaiming that its use would be the death knell of

Protestantism? The use of these translations has seriously weakened the

Protestant perception of the errors of Rome. Already the effects of the use

of these translations, initially sponsored by theologians, are plain to see.

7

CHAPTER 2

THE NOBLEST MONUMENT OF ENGLISH PROSE

It was not until the sixteenth century that the first English translation of

the Scriptures from their original Greek and Hebrew was completed. It is

true that John Wycliffe had, in the fourteenth century, translated the Bible

into English from the Latin Vulgate. For this and other assaults on the

excesses of Rome, Wycliffe’s bones were disinterred a decade after his

death in 1384, and publicly burnt. He had written,

Cristen men and wymmen, olde and yonge, shuden studie fast in

the Newe Testament, for it is of ful autorite, and opyn to

understanding of simple men, as to the poyntis that be moost

This astounding assertion had rocked the ecclesiastical foundations of

England. It was a frontal challenge to the papal teaching that the priests

alone could interpret and present scriptural truth. This erroneous view of

Catholicism is one reflected by the growing demands of modern

theologians to invest them with the right to determine truth when matters

of doctrine are in dispute. The domination of the church by theologians

has ever led to darkness, never light. Little wonder that Wycliffe was later

hailed by devout Protestants as the Morning Star of the Reformation.

In November 1983 we had the privilege of worshiping in the country

church of Lutterworth in Leicestershire, England. It was to this pastorate

that John Wycliffe was banished when his influence in Oxford was more

than the church hierarchy could tolerate. It was here that he died, and it

was here that his bones were ceremonially bumed. How fortunate we are

that our God’s actions are not subject to the whims and bigotry of man! In

the stone church is preserved a copy of Wycliffe’s great contribution to

truth, his translation of Holy Writ.

But bold as Wycliffe’s work was, and far-reaching as his efforts were — it

was through contact with him that Reformation stirrngs were witnessed as

8

far away as Bohemia, culminating in the mighty witness of Huss and

Jerome — Wycliffe was unable to introduce to his fellow citizens an

uncorrupted translation of the New Testament.

The Latin Vulgate, from which Wycliffe translated his English version, had

been translated originally from those corrupted Greek manuscripts.

William Tyndale in the sixteenth century had access to uncorrupted Greek

and Hebrew manuscripts and it was from these that he prepared his

English translation. The Roman Catholic prelates condemned Tyndale’s

work as a willful perversion of the New Testament. His Bible was

consigned to the flames and he himself was burnt at the stake in 1536 for

daring to utilize Greek manuscripts uncorrupted by deliberate alterations.

So dear was the purity of God’s Word to Tyndale that life itself was less

precious. We do well to consider at what price the standard of purity of

biblical manuscript was preserved.

Tyndale’s work was not extinguished by the flames which consumed his

body and his translations. It lives on today in its worthy successor, the

King James Version of Scripture. Unfortunately, the tradition of the

corrupted manuscripts was not stayed by the success of the English

Reformation. It still survives in most modern translations. Indeed in 1986,

sales of one of these versions, the New International Version, exceeded

that of the King James Version for the first time.

The great majority of Christians selecting a modern version of Scripture do

so, believing that they are simply obtaining an authentic Bible translated in

the English language of today rather than that of the seventeenth century.

They would be astounded to learn that the most popular modern versions

have been translated from a different Greek manuscript from that used in

Greek manuscripts have competed for the right to be accepted as the

original words written by the apostolic authors.

Many unsuspecting Christians accept the claim, that modern translations

have a marked advantage over those of the sixteenth and the seventeenth

centuries since more recent discoveries have revealed many more

manuscripts. In some cases these are more ancient copies of the Greek

manuscripts. It is claimed that these enable a more accurate basis for the

evaluation of both minor and major discrepancies among the various

9

manuscripts. But all the Greek manuscripts bear unmistakable testimony

of having arisen from one of two sourcesmone preserved by the Eastern

Christian Church in Constantinople and Syria and the other by the church

of the West, centered in Rome and Alexandria. Modern discoveries have

not altered this fact. The merits of these competing claims demand

evaluation, for it is never safe to tamper with Holy Writ. God did not

choose in a careless fashion the message He inspired His servants to

record. Every sentence was inspired by God. While it is true that these

privileged authors of the canonical writings used their own words and

distinctive styles in writing, nevertheless every concept expressed, every

fact related, was deemed by God as information vital to our salvation. So

holy were these words that the most terrible anathema was threatened

against those who dare to tamper with the Scripture’s content.

If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the

plagues that are written in this book: and if any man shall take away

from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away

his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from

the things which are written in this book. Revelation 22:18-19

No translator since early Reformation times has chosen these two forms of

the Greek Scripture in a vacuum. Each has made a deliberate decision to

choose one or the other. The translators who were chosen to undertake

this important task in the days of King James I. of England were well

extending back to

the apostolic churches and reappearing at intervals down through

the Christian era among enlightened believers. [It] was protected

by the wisdom and scholarship of the pure church in her different

phases; by such as the church in Pella in Palestine where Christians

Syrian Church of Antioch which produced eminent scholarship; by

the Italic Church in northern Italy; also at the same time by the

Gallic Church in southern France and the Celtic church in Great

Britain; by the pre-Waldensian, the Waldensian, and the churches

10

This pedigree is impressive indeed, for all these churches strove for purity

of faith in an age of rampant apostasy.

The competing stream is small by comparison, yet it seems that as in the

Vaticanus, secreted in the Vatican Library for centuries, and the Codex

Sinaiticus, discovered by a German theologian in the "waste-paper basket"

of an ancient monastery at Sinai in 1844. One could tightly wonder if this

discovery was not a satanic trump card reserved by the devil for the days

of the preaching of the everlasting gospel. This corrupt form of the Greek

manuscript has been represented in the Latin Vulgate, the 1582 Jesuit

translation of Scripture into English (known as the Douay) and, since

1881, in the vast majority of modern English translations.

Perhaps no man examined the evidence for the authenticity of the Greek

text more carefully than John William Burgon, fellow of Oriel College,

Oxford, vicar of St. Mary’s, the University of Oxford Church, professor

of Divinity at Oxford University, and later dean of Chichester. This great

nineteenth century Christian held a fervent love for Sctipture. He spared

no effort to examine the claims of the two versions. In Rome in 1860, he

visited the Vatican Library specifically to study the Codex Vaticanus. In

1862 he traveled to Sinai and inspected the treasures of St. Catherine’s

Convent where the Codex Sinaiticus had been discovered. He also visited a

large number of continental libraries, examining their ancient Greek

manusctipts of the New Testament.

At the conclusion of these investigations, Professor Burgon declared:

I am utterly disinclined to believe, so grossly improbable does it

seem — that at the end of 1800 years, 995 copies out of every

thousand, I suppose, will prove untrustworthy, and that one, two,

three, four, or five which remain, whose contents were till

yesterday as good as unknown, will be found to have the secret of

what the Holy Spirit originally inspired. I am utterly unable to

believe, in short, that God’s promise has so entirely failed, that at

11

the end of 1800 years, much of the text of the Gospel had in point

of fact to be picked by a German critic out of a waste paper basket

Grand Rapids International Publications, Grand Rapids, 13.

Some have upheld the antiquity of the Codex Sinaiticus and the Codex

Vaticanus as evidence of their superiority over the manuscripts used in the

translation during the reign of King James I. Burgon adopted an alternative

view. He saw many years of preservation as evidence of their unreliability

since any valuable document, he believed, would have long since been

destroyed by constant usage.

Burgon’s references to the recentness of the knowledge of this western

stream should not be interpreted as evidence that it is of recent origin. It is

simply a fact that these Greek manuscripts were unknown to the mass of

scholars until the nineteenth century. But these manuscripts were soon

found to be the basis for the perversions present in the long extant Latin

Vulgate, so highly prized and promoted by the Roman Catholic Church.

That the Reformers, both English and Continental, eschewed this false set

of biblical records, should not surprise us. The Eastern church had

meticulously preserved the Word of God through numerous copyings,

checking and rechecking each entry. Such care had not been demonstrated

in the West, where apostasy so rapidly overtook the purity of the faith

that some sought to "improve" on the words of Holy Writ through means

of alterations and deletions.

Eusebius, an early church father, admitted that in his day,

corrupted manuscripts were so prevalent that agreement between

the copies was hopeless. Wilkinson, op. cit., 15

Men such as Justin Martyr in the second century of the Christian

Era, together with Tatian, who espoused Gnosticism, had

deliberately "corrected" Scripture. In the following century,

Clement of Alexandria, a man who espoused many pagan concepts,

336

12

But men like Origen and his follower, Jerome, who was the editor of the

Latin Vulgate, contributed most to the debasing of Holy Writ. The

situation has been well summarized by Scrivener:

It is no less true to fact than paradoxical in sound, that the worst

corruptions to which the New Testament has ever been subjected,

originated within a hundred years after it was composed; that

Western, with a portion of the Syrian Church, used far inferior

manuscripts to those employed by Stunica, or Erasmus, or

Edition, 511, quoted in Wilkinson, 18.

The history of the recent change of thinking in Protestant circles is not

clouded in mystery. It was successfully engineered by two prominent

professors of Theology at Cambridge University: Brooke Foss Westcott

and Fenton John Anthony Hort. These men have been recognized as the

most brilliant and erudite Bible scholars of the second half of the

nineteenth century, but they were brilliantly wrong. They were in error,

for they were not lovers of truth, but rather leaned toward the rising

Anglo-Catholic tide in their church. We illustrate by citing a quotation

from one of Professor Hort’s letters.

I have been persuaded for many years, he wrote in a letter to Dr.

Westcott dated October 17, 1865, that Mary-worship and Jesusworship

have very much in common in their causes and their

results (quoted in Fuller, 17).

With such Catholic sentiments in his heart, we need not experience

surprise that this man, ignoring the hard-won gains of his spiritual

forefathers in the Anglican Church, turned once more to the manuscripts

so valued by Rome. Thus when, in the 1870s, both Westcott and Hort

were included among those entrusted with a revision of the King James

Version, they persuaded their fellow translators to exceed their

commission. This commission had confined the work of the committee to

alterations of expressions which the passage of time had rendered archaic.

Many readers of the modern translations imagine that here the translators

halted. But tragically, the Revised Version of 1881 was based upon, not

13

manuscripts. What the consequences of this departure from their

commission produced, we shall subsequently examine.

Some assume that in most instances there is such a small difference between

the Textus Receptus and the Codex Vaticanus as to make all protests trivial.

Such should study the evidence more closely. Philip Mauro, a diligent

Greek scholar, has recorded no fewer than 7,578 verbal divergences in the

gospels alone. These consist of the omission of 2,877 words, the addition of

536 words, the substitution of 935 words, the transposition of 2,098 words

and the modification of 1,132 words (Philip Mauro, Which Version?

Authorized or Revised?, quoted in Fuller, 78). Such wholesale destruction

of the original text, resultant upon both willful changes and carelessness in

copying, indicates the magnitude of the problem.

The beauty of the King James Version English has never been matched.

Even the translators of the Revised Standard Version were constrained to

admit this fact. They quoted from the assessment of those involved in the

1881 revision. These men had stated that the King James Version was

marked by

its simplicity, its dignity, its power, its happy turns of

expression., the music of its cadences, and the felicities of its

rhythm. The Preface of the Revised Standard Version of Scripture

It is sometimes asserted that the English language reached its peak around

the seventeenth century. This view is a matter of personal judgment, but it

must be said that the works of William Shakespeare and John Milton,

contemporaries of the 1611 translation, offer evidence to support this

opinion. One analysis of the superiority of seventeenth-century English to

that of the present day concluded:

Each word was broad, simple and generic. That is to say, words

were capable of containing in themselves different shades of

meaning which were attached to that central thought. B.G.

Wilkinson, op. cit., p. 74

Whatever the reason, few could rightly refute the claim that the language of

the King James Version has not been equalled by later translators. It is

indeed the noblest monument of English prose. How proper that the

sacred Word of God should be thus expressed!

14

CHAPTER 3

TESTIMONY OF A MODERN REVISION

In 1982 the Revised Authorized Version (also known as the New King

James Version) of the Bible was published. While significantly superior to

some of the other contemporary translations of the Bible, it also shares

unjustifiably rendered "Most Holy Place" rather than "Holy Place" or

unsolicited testimony to the unmatched quality of the original Authorized

Version (also known as the King James Version) from rather unlikely

sources, such as this quotation from the eminent Catholic scholar,

Alexander Geddes, who in 1786 stated of the Authorized Version:

If accuracy and strictest attention to the letter of the text be

supposed to constitute an excellent version, this is of all versions

The same preface quotes the English literary legend, George Bernard Shaw,

certainly not a Christian in belief, as saying of the King James Bible:

The translation was extraordinarily well done because to the

translators what they were translating was not merely a curious

collection of ancient books written by different authors in different

stages of culture, but the Word of God divinely revealed through

His chosen and expressly inspired scribes. In this conviction they

carried out their work with boundless reverence and care and

achieved a beautifully artistic result. Ibid. p. iii

The preface adds some other valuable insights as to why no other

subsequent English translation of the Bible has been able to match the

veracity of the Authorized Version of the Holy Scriptures. It affirms that

the period of the 1611 translation was far more aggressively devoted to

classical learning than our present day (ibid., ii).

15

Perceptively the preface of the Revised Authorized Version points out:

translation that paraphrased or gave only an approximate rendering.

languages of the Bible as they were with English.

which assured a translation in which only a principle of utmost

accuracy could be accepted.

who frequently use the less precise dynamic equivalence when

translating certain passages, used complete equivalence. The former

often leads to paraphrasing which lacks the more literal rendition of the

Authorized Version of Holy Scriptures (ibid.).

The preface to the Revised Authorized Version also offers confirmation

that the translators of the Authorized Version believed in the sacred

providences by which the manuscripts were preserved.

They firmly believed that they had been handed down a

trustworthy record of the Word of God (ibid.).

The profound influence of the Authorized Version upon a wide range of

life and culture in the English-speaking world is also noted in the Revised

Authorized Version preface:

The precision of translation for which it is historically renowned,

and its majesty of style have enabled that monumental version of

the Word of God to become the mainspring of the religion, language

and legal foundations of our civilization.

The preface also acknowledges the deficiencies of the Sinaitic and the

Vatican manuscripts, upon which most of the modern versions of the

Scriptures depend.

The manuscript preferences cited in many contemporary

translations of the New Testament are due to recent reliance on a

relatively few manuscripts discovered in the late nineteenth and

early twentieth centuries. Dependence on these manuscripts,

16

especially two, the Sinaitic and Vatican manuscripts, is due to the

greater age of these documents. However, in spite of their age,

many scholars have reason to doubt their faithfulness to the

autographs, since they often disagree with one another, and show

other signs of unreliability...

On the other hand, the great majority of existing manuscripts are in

substantial agreement. Even though some are late, and none are

earlier than the fifth century, most of their readings are verified by

ancient papyri, ancient versions, and quotations in the writings of

the early church fathers. This large body of manuscripts is the

source of the Greek text underlying the Authorized Version. It is

the Greek text used by Greek-speaking churches for many

Since the latter nineteenth century the theory has been held by

some scholars that this traditional text of the New Testament had

been officially edited by the fourth-century church. Recent studies

have caused significant changes in this view, and a growing number

previously thought (ibid., vii).

No translation is perfect. It may even be persuasively argued that no exact

copies of the original autographs still exist. That concept has become the

platform of debate for many who declare that therefore the precision of a

translation is less important than its relevance to today’s needs. This view

has led to the deplorable situation where some "translations" have only

scant resemblance to the sacred truth enshrined in the Scriptures. To those

who cherish the sacred oracles of God, objective research confirms that the

Authorized Version of the Bible is the most accurate and gives the most

precise translation of any English Version yet produced. That reason alone

is sufficient for it to be the primary Bible for all true Protestants.

17

CHAPTER 4

TWO GREEK NEW TESTAMENTS

Many theologians, seeking to calm the fears of church members, assert

that there is only three percent of difference between the Greek

manuscripts upon which the modern versions are based and those upon

which the King James Version depends. Even if this estimate is correct, it

means that the equivalent of 240 verses in the New Testament come under

question. Very significant doctrinal changes could be accomplished by the

perversion of such a large number of verses. Furthermore, should God’s

many theologians, as we have noted, emphasize that only three percent of

Scripture is in question, nevertheless, they are most tenacious in their

defense of the modern versions. Indeed, their defense of these versions

appears to extend beyond the matter of ease of understanding. After all,

theologians in many instances have studied Greek and/or Hebrew. They

themselves should have no trouble with a few archaic English words. Yet it

is evident that the majority discard the King James Version, preferring one

of the modern versions based upon the Greek manuscripts which contain

numerous omissions and other errors. We could be forgiven for suspecting

a hidden agenda.

There have been, from the earliest period of the Christian era, two

competing Greek manuscripts. Before a sincere Bible student selects a

Bible translation for daily use, it is imperative tha he first examine which

one of these two incompatible Greek manuscripts he finds to be the one

which represents the original writings of the New Testament apostles, and

then discover which translations are based upon this accurate Greek

manuscript. Clearly, a translation from a faulty Greek manuscript can in

no wise bring pure truth to God’s people.

The Greek manuscripts from which the King James Version of Scripture

was translated, largely emanated from the Eastern Christian Church. When

Constantinople, the headquarters of the Eastern Church, was overrun by

18

the Ottoman Empire in 1453, many Greek scholars fled to the West,

bringing with them priceless Greek manuscripts of Scripture. The Eastern

Christian Church, particularly that located in Syria, had faithfully copied

the manuscripts utilizing a technique similar to that used by the Jews in

copying the Old Testament. In this technique, words and letters were

counted and manuscripts checked to minimize the possibility of copyist

errors.

So dedicated were the translators of the King James Version that they

desired only the very best manuscripts, and eschewed those which had

been tampered with in the West. The sound manuscripts represent over

ninety-five percent of all Greek manuscripts of the New Testament.

The second category of the Greek manuscripts, from which the vast

majority of modern translations have been made, comprises those from the

Western Christian Church which had its centers of learning in Alexandria

and Rome. The two most famous of these manuscripts are the Codex

Vaticanus and the Codex Sinaiticus. Two significant Bibles have been

translated from these Western manuscripts. The first was the Latin

Vulgate translated in the fourth century, and the second was the Jesuit

translation of Scripture in 1582 known as the Douay Version.

It is significant that churches which remain close to the truth of God

always preferred Bibles based upon the Eastern manuscripts; while those

who did not regard biblical authority as final preferred the Western

manuscripts. Thus the church at Pella in Palestine, where Christians fled

after the fall of Jerusalem, the Syrian church of Antioch, the Italic church

of Northern Italy, the Gallic of Southern France, the Celtic church of Great

Britain, and the Waldensians, all had the Eastern manuscripts as the basis

for their Bibles. On the other hand, the Roman Catholic Church has

always upheld the Western group of manuscripts. Such a situation should

alert every loyal Christian to the need for a thorough examination of the

Bible from which he is studying. Dr. Fuller has demonstrated the presence

of the two contrasting categories of Greek manuscripts of the New

Testament. Speaking of the production of the Douay translation, he states:

At the same time another group of scholars, bitterly hostile to the

first group, were gathered at Rheims, France. There the Jesuits,

assisted by Rome and backed by all the power of Spain, brought

19

forth an English translation of the Vulgate. In its preface, they

expressly declared that the Vulgate had been translated in 1300 into

Italian and in 1400 into French, "the sooner to shake out of the

deceived people’s hands, the false heretical translations of a sect

called Waldenses." This proves that Waldensian Versions existed in

1300 and 1400. So the Vulgate was Rome’s corrupt Scriptures

against the Received Text; but the Received Text the New

Testament of the apostles, of the Waldenses, and of the Reformers.

That the Western Christian church corrupted Scriptures cannot be

doubted. Speaking of the pure Italic faith, Allix testified:

They receive only, saith he, what is written in the Old and New

Testaments. They say, that the popes of Rome, and other priests,

have depraved the Scriptures by their doctrines and glosses. Allix,

There is sound historical evidence to support the fact that the New

Testament was early corrupted in the Western Christian church.

Eusebius reported that in his day there were many corrupted

manuscripts. He asserted that those who were destroying the

Very soon the Gnostic heresy entered the Christian church. The

proponents of this heresy taught that Christ was a created being.

In the second century, Tatian wrote what he described to be a

harmony of the gospels, termed the Diatessaron. This book

claimed to have placed the four gospels into one book. However, it

was so corrupted that eventually most churches destroyed the

In Alexandria in the third century, Clement refused to hand down

Christian materials unmixed with the precepts of pagan

philosophy. He freely quoted from corrupted manuscripts

20

Origen also "corrected" Scripture. He stated:

The Scriptures are of little use to those who understand them as

they are written. M’Clintock and Strong, quoted in Wilkinson, 17.

It was Origen who taught Jerome, the editor of the Latin Vulgate

translation of Scripture.

Because the Gnostics did not accept the divinity of Jesus Christ, we can

see evidences of their doctrine in their corrupted New Testament

manuscripts. Let us examine just one. One of the great affirmations of the

divinity of Jesus Christ was stated in Paul’s first epistle to Timothy:

And without controversy great is the mystery of Godliness: God

was manifest in the flesh. 1 Timothy 3:16

Virtually every modern translation, following the Western manuscripts

Let us examine three modern translations of this text as evidence.

Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of our religion: He was

manifested in the flesh, RSV

And great beyond all question is the mystery of our religion: He

who was manifested in the body, NEB

Beyond all question, the mystery of Godliness is great: He

appeared in a body. 1 Timothy 3:16, NIV

That the English translators of the King James Version were not alone in

adhering to the legitimate Eastern manuscripts may be seen from an

examination of the translation of this text in a number of European

languages:

Dieu a ete manifeste en chair (Osterwald’s French Version).

Gott ist offenbaret im fleisch (Luther’s German translation).

Iddio e stato-manifestato in carne (Diodati’s Italian translation).

Deus se manifestou em carne (Almeide’s Portuguese translation).

Dios ha sido manifestado en carne (Valera’s Spanish translation

21

William Tyndale, in 1534, had translated this passage as

God was shewed in the fleisch (1 Timothy 3:16, Tyndale translation).

Clearly, the decision as to the stream of Greek manuscript in which to

place one’s faith is a vital one.

22

CHAPTER 5

CORRUPTED MANUSCRIPT

One may inquire upon what evidence we base the assertion that the Codex

Vaticanus and the Codex Sinaiticus are corrupted manuscripts. Since much

has made of the fact that each is a fourth-century document, whereas the

the two Codices, are unaware that both are full of

alterations of an obvious correctional character — "brought in by

at least ten different revisers, some of them systematically spread

over every page, others occasional, all limited to separate portions

of the MS, many of these being contemporaneous with the first

writer, but for the greater part belonging to the sixth or seventh

required so many corrections is proof beyond dispute that it was regarded

as impure. Indeed, the Codex Sinaiticus would have been even more

corrupted, had it not been for the thoroughgoing revision which Dr.

Scrivener believed took place in the

6th or 7th century [in order] to conform to manuscripts in vogue at

Ibid.

Unlike scribes in the East, there is clear evidence that those scribes who

undertook the copying resulting in the Codex Sinaiticus were utterly

incompetent.

There is no attempt to end the word at the end of the line, for even

23

last letter being carried over to the beginning of the next line,

though there was ample room for it on the line preceding. Ibid., 76

Rank scribal carelessness can be seen in that the Codex Sinaiticus

must have been derived from one in which the lines were similarly

divided, since the writer occasionally omits just the number of

letters which would suffice to fill a line, and that to the utter ruin

of the sense; as if his eye had heedlessly wandered to the line

immediately below. Doctor Scrivener cited instances "where

complete lines are omitted" and others "where the copiers pass in

the middle of the line to the corresponding portion of the line

below." Ibid., 76-77

It is clear that the scribes failed to reread the page, for they could not have

failed to notice such omissions, and the destroyed sense of sentences.

Dean Burgon pointed out:

In the Gospels alone, Codex B (Vatican) leaves out words or whole

clauses no fewer than 1,491 times. It bears traces of careless

transcription on every page. Codex Sinaiticus "abounds with errors

of the eye and pen to the extent not indeed unparalleled, but

happily rather unusual in documents of first-grade importance."

On many occasions 10, 20, 30, 40 words are dropped through very

carelessness. Letters and words, even whole sentences, are

frequently written twice over, or begun and immediately cancelled;

while that gross blunder, whereby a clause is omitted because it

happens to end in the same words as the clause preceding, occurs

no less than 115 times in the New Testament. Ibid., 77

It is little wonder that Dean Burgon exclaimed:

So manifest are the disfigurements jointly and exclusively exhibited

by the two Codices (Vatican and Sinaitic) that instead of accepting

them as two independent witnesses to the inspired original, we are

constrained to regard them as little more than a single reproduction

of one and the same scandalously corrupt and comparatively late

copy. Ibid., 74

Dean Burgon went on to point out:

24

In the Gospels alone, Codex Vaticanus differs from the Received

Text in the following particulars: It omits at least 2,877 words; it

adds 536 words; it substitutes 935 words; it transposes 2,098

It is little wonder than in considering these two fourth-century Codices

and a similar one from Beza dated in the sixth century, Dean Burgon

declared,

"... without a particle of hesitation, that they are three of the most

scandalously corrupt copies extant"; that they "exhibit the most

shamefully mutilated texts which are anyway to be met with"; that

they "have become (by whatever process, for their history is

wholly unknown) the depository of the largest amount of

fabricated readings, ancient blunders and intentional perversion of

truth, which are discernible in any known copies of the Word of

God." Ibid., 78

In view of the clear evidence that these manuscripts were copied by

scribes who disregarded the elementary techniques of their art, it should

not surprise us that the modern translations of Scripture based upon these

manuscripts are greatly faulted. Bibles utilizing such carelessly recorded

passages of Scripture should have no credibility in those areas where they

We must not overlook the fact, however, that such defective manuscripts

amply support Rome’s claim that the church is the sole source of doctrinal

truth. If our Bible is corrupted, then men will have to seek elsewhere to

find full truth.

25

CHAPTER 6

AN INSPIRED TRANSLATION?

As boys we traveled by train more than 1000 miles each Christmas

vacation (remember that is summertime in Australia), from our home city

of Newcastle to the beautiful Barossa Valley of the state of South

Australia. This valley was the ancestral home of our father, and was the

home of hundreds of Reformed Lutheran Germans who emigrated to

Australia between 1838 and 1850, fleeing persecution from the state

Lutheran Church in Germany.

Our great-great-grandfather, Thomas Standish, migrated to Australia from

Lancashire in England as a young man. On the boat, he met a young

German lass and they married upon arrival in the new state. These

Germans from the area of Germany known as Silesia (now part of Poland)

had adhered to their primitive Lutheran faith despite the fact that the

Prussian emperor adopted a course of persecution against them because

they refused to accept his enforced form of State Lutheranism, which they

judged to be apostate. Initially they sought refuge in the Ukraine, but their

leader, Pastor Kruger, on a visit to England met Sir William Angus, who had

devised a scheme to settle the state of South Australia and what became its

capital city, Adelaide. This, the only Australian State which did not

commence as a convict settlement, was first settled by Europeans in 1836.

In spite of the fact that our father was a fourth-generation Australian, and

despite the fact that he was of partial English ancestry, German was his

primary language. Following the failure of the German community of the

Barossa Valley to support the Australian war efforts in the First World

War, the German schools run by the Lutheran Church were closed and all

children of the Barossa Valley, including our father, were required to study

in English-medium schools. In a single generation the inhabitants of that

valley thus became Australians rather than Germans living in Australia.

We were always intrigued by this "little Germany." In our grandmother’s

home, we saw the primacy of the Martin Luther Bible. To fit our needs,

26

the English King James Bible was dusted off for worship time during our

visits. We still remember, however, the reverence with which our greatuncle

Oscar held the Luther Bible. Occasionally, he would point to a

passage, indicating his view that there was a deeper meaning in the Geman

Bible as compared with the English translation. Clearly, God spoke to him

in German.

In the English-speaking world, it is possible for us to forget that the Bible

has been translated into hundreds of languages. Every one of these

languages possesses words with slightly different shades of meaning —

often unique to the cultural heritage of that language. It is not possible for

one language to be translated into another language with perfect accuracy.

Though the Hebrew scholars were among the finest in the world,

nevertheless it is not difficult to detect the differences in expression in the

Greek Septuagint translation of the pre-Christian era when compared with

the original Hebrew. If anyone has doubts about translation difficulties, he

should examine a Diaglot, which attempts to provide a word-by-word

translation into English language from the Greek.

There are other considerations. Of all the 5,000 or so older

manuscripts of the Greek New Testament, many are fragmentary or

partial. Further, whenever there are significant portions of the New

It hardly needs emphasis that we have none of the original writings, and

that even manuscripts of the Byzantine (Eastern) text have in many cases

been altered from the original at least slightly, either by accidental error of

the scribe or by deliberate change. However, almost always these errors

can be identified by comparison with other copies, with early translations

into other languages, and with reference to scriptural quotations of the

early church fathers. It must be remembered that the leaders of

Christianity in the East followed very strict rules of copying. Most errors

are simple misspellings or omissions of words in one manuscript which are

practical purposes, represents the original writings.

We now examine the problem of whether any translation is divinely

inspired. Obviously, if no manuscript in the original language is a perfect

27

reproduction of the original writings, then it is impossible for any

translation from these imperfect manuscripts to be perfect. Yet, by

comparing manuscript with manuscript and examining other ancient

writings, it is possible to discern the original writings with great accuracy.

Many textual critics greatly overstate the presence of errors in the Greek

manuscripts. The lesson of the Hebrew manuscripts should not be lost.

Textual critics had pontificated major copyists’ errors in this text. But the

discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls put such guesswork to rest. God had

preserved His Word. That He has just as miraculously preserved the New

Testament cannot be doubted.

Some, however, have been so bold as to assert that the King James Version

of the Scripture is a divinely inspired translation. Such a claim must be

doubtful. Every evidence we have indicates that, though the King James

Version is an excellent translation, it is not a perfect translation, which

presumably is what an inspired translation would be. Yet we do not doubt

the guidance of the Holy Spirit in the work of these translators, a guidance

that could hardly be expected to guide men deliberately bent on falsifying

God’s Word.

Generally the exact-equivalence method of translation does not necessarily

completely remove all bias in translation. For example, the Authorized

Version, though giving many strong evidences of the doctrine of free will,

nevertheless reflects the Calvinistic leanings of some of its translators with

its heavy predestination emphasis in a number of New Testament

passages. It is likely that the writings of the Dutch scholar Armenius, who

died just about the time that the King James Version began to be

translated, were known to the translators. It is possible that they were

reacting against his free-will theology. Some have also felt that the King

James Version reflects the pagan error of immediate life after death, with

its emphasis on an everlasting burning hell. But, if these biases are present,

they do not misdirect the Spirit-directed soul who is endeavoring to find

the truth of the Bible by studying precept upon precept and comparing

Scripture with Scripture. Overwhelmingly, the King James Version

portrays a concept of free will through such texts as the following:

day whom ye will serve; whether the Gods which your fathers

28

served that were on the other side of the flood, or the Gods of the

Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we

And Elijah came unto all the people, and said, How long halt ye between

him. And the people answered him not a word. 1 Kings 18:21

O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest

them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered

thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under

her wings, and ye would not! Matthew 23:37

Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden,

and I will give you rest. Matthew 11:28

And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth

say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will,

let him take the water of life freely. Revelation 22:17

The Lord is not slack concerning his promises, as some men count

slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any

should perish, but that all should come to repentance. 2 Peter 3:9

Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come

unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for

them. Hebrews 7:25

The King James Version portrays the sleep of death awaiting the

resurrection through clearly translated texts:

For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any

thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of

them is forgotten. Ecclesiastes 9:5

Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there

is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave,

whither thou goest. Ecclesiastes 9:10

For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the

latter day upon the earth: and though after my skin worms destroy

this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God: whom I shall see for

29

myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and not another; though my

reins be consumed within me. Job 19:25-27

And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake,

some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting

contempt. Daniel 12:2

These things said he: and after that he saith unto them, Our friend

Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep.

Then said his disciples, Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well. Howbeit

Jesus spake of his death: but they thought that he had spoken of

taking rest in sleep. Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead.

John 11:11-14

But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of

them that slept. For since by man came death, by man came also

the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in

Christ shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order:

Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his

coming. 1 Corinthians 15:20-23

Behold, I shew you a mystery; we shall not all sleep, but we shall

all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last

trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised

incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must

put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. So

when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this

mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass

the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory. 1

Corinthians 15:51-54

For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with

the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead

in Christ shall rise first: then we which are alive and remain shall be

caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the

air; and so shall we ever be with the Lord. 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17

wide range of ways by which errors crept into the manuscripts of the New

Testament. Most of these errors are readily detected. For example, if a

30

scribe accidentally left out a word, that word is attested to by many other

manuscripts. Overwhelmingly, the words of the New Testament are sure,

and where scholars are unsure, there is in most circumstances high

probability of the words of the original. Where there is vigorous debate, it

is over issues that do not touch the central truths of the Bible. There is no

reason to doubt the veracity of God’s Word.

Problems arise, however, when translators seek to interpret Scripture

according to their own biases. We can expect that as we come near the end

of earth’s history, this bias will increasingly be the object of Satan’s

efforts. The reason we uphold the King James Version of the Bible is not

that it is an inspired or perfect translation. We recommend the King James

Version, not just because it is easier to memorize or its language more

sacred, or its cadence superior to modern translations. We recommend the

King James Version as the primary Bible for both the individual and the

church, simply because it is still the most accurate and reliable translation

available in the English language. Whenever a more accurate, unbiased

translation comes out in good quality, contemporary English, the authors

will quickly join those who endorse its primary usage. We had hoped that

the New King James Version would provide just that, but it does not

measure up to the King James Version, and seriously erodes some

precious truths of Scripture.

31

CHAPTER 7

THE CASE OF THE MISSING GREEK

A layman in New Zealand, Evan Saddler, concerned about the formation of

modern Bible versions which he believed to have been prepared from

corrupted manuscripts, was challenged by a pastor concerning his

competence to make such a judgment. "How many languages do you

know?" asked the pastor. Mr. Saddler, a man of good humor, promptly

replied, "Two! — New Zealand and Australian."

Unfazed by this humorous rejoinder, the pastor pressed his point. "How

can you make yourself an expert on Bible translation if you do not know

Greek or Hebrew?" Mr. Saddler replied by asking a question himself. "Do

requested an analysis of the Greek wording upon which the New

International Version translation of Matthew 18:11 was based. The pastor

diligently set about his assigned task, but soon discovered that it was not

easily fulfilled. Looking up from his Bible in confusion and amazement,

the minister exploded, "But there is no Matthew 18:11" His observation

was correct. The tenth verse is present, and the twelfth, but the eleventh is

entirely omitted. Quietly, Mr. Saddler replied, ‘Now what use is your

knowledge of Greek when the text is missing?"

Indeed this episode does demonstrate that a knowledge of Greek is of no

value whatsoever if those Greek words have been expunged from the Word

of God. Furthermore, God inspired the writing of the Scriptures for the

common man. Clearly, the common man is not a Classics professor from

Oxford or Cambridge Universities. It is thus irrelevant in the discussion of

such a matter to introduce inconsequential issues.

The omission of the great truth,

For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost. Matthew 18:11

only arouses interest in a vast problem of the modern versions of

Scripture, for they depend upon corrupted Greek manuscripts.

32

Since the Bible is the sole standard of truth and doctrine, it serves Satan’s

purpose to destroy confidence in the Word of God. Furthermore, by

altering a little here and there, he brings confusion to God’s people until,

alas, many cease to regard the Word of God as a truly divine revelation.

But God has informed us,

To the law and to the testimony: If they speak not according to

this word, it is because there is no light in them. Isaiah 8:20

Unless we have a Bible uncorrupted by alterations, we have no set

standard of faith.

The omissions mentioned are not only in the New International Version

but also in the Revised Standard Version, the New English Version, the

Jerusalem Bible, the American Standard Version, Today’s English Version

and almost every other modern version, with the exception of the New

King James Version.

Appendix A sets forth the seventeen verses omitted from most modern

translations. In many cases, these verses are contained in a footnote

indicating that they have been omitted because they were not found in

"the most ancient and reliable manuscripts." Such a statement diminishes

the status of these verses as being truly part of Holy Writ. Appendix B

compares 178 texts containing major omissions in the New International

Version. Such widespread alteration of Scripture should not be met with a

shrug of the shoulder.

33

CHAPTER 8

WESTCOTT AND HORT

Bishop B.F. Westcott and Professor F.J.A. Hort were the most significant

translators of the Revised Version, and since their theories of textual

criticism continue to dominate the thinking of modern translators, we are

at liberty to examine their personal convictions, for manifestly these have

dictated their view of Scripture. That both men accepted gross apostasy is

testified by their own writings.

secret. He himself wrote:

Think of that vile Textus Receptus. Life of Hort, vol. 1, 214,

quoted in B.J. Wilkinson, Our Authorized Bible Vindicated, 168

With this attitude to the Greek text, in defense of which many true

Christians were prepared to yield their lives, we need not be perplexed as

to why Hort engineered the discarding of the Textus Receptus as the basis

for the Revised Version and replaced it essentially with the Codex

Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus.

He did not accept as truth the very Book he led out in translating.

I am inclined to think that no such state as "Eden" (I mean the

popular notion) ever existed, and that Adam’s fall in no degree

differed from the fall of each of his descendants, as Coleridge justly

How could the Holy Spirit enlighten a man who had such contempt for

God’s Word?

Once again we are not left to doubt why Hort possessed no faith in the

veracity of the early chapters of the Pentateuch; he was a convinced

evolutionist. In his letter to fellow translator and Anglican minister John

Ellerton, he wrote:

34

But the book which has most engaged me is Darwin. Whatever

may be thought of it, it is a book that one is proud to be

contemporary with ... My feeling is strong that the theory is

unanswerable. If so, it opens up a new period. Letter to John

Wilkinson, 152

While we possess no evidence to support the suggestion that Dr. Hort

was a Jesuit who had infiltrated the Anglican Church, one matter is certain:

he could not have done a "better" work had he been one. That he was a

Roman Catholic at heart is documented beyond dispute. The following

five quotations from his own pen should convince the most skeptical.

I have been persuaded for many years that Mary-worship and

"Jesus"-worship have very much in common in their causes and

their results. Ibid.

I am very far from pretending to understand completely the offrenewed

vitality of Mariolatry. Ibid.

But this last error can hardly be expelled till Protestants unlearn

the crazy horror of the idea of Priesthood. Ibid.

But you know I am a staunch sacerdotalist. Ibid.

I believe that Coleridge was quite right in saying that Christianity

without a substantial church is vanity and disillusion; and I

remember shocking you and Lightfoot not so long ago by

expressing a belief that "Protestantism" is only parenthetical and

temporary. Ibid., 155

It is proper to ask the rhetorical question, Could God use such a man,

steeped in the pagan superstition of Roman Catholicism, to bring new light

to the world concerning His Word?

Bishop Westcott, the Anglican Bishop of Durham, was no less of Catholic

persuasion, as his own pen testifies.

After leaving the monastery, we shaped our course to a little

oratory which we discovered on the summit of a neighboring hill ...

Fortunately we found the door open. It is very small, with one

35

kneeling-place; and behind a screen was a "Pieta" [a statue of the

Virgin and the dead Christ] the size of life ... Had I been alone I

could have knelt there for hours. Westcott wrote from France to

I wish I could see to what forgotten truth Mariolatry bears

witness. Westcott wrote to Archbishop Benson, November 17,

1865. Ibid.

He was just as condemnatory of the accuracy of the Word of God as was

his colleague.

No one now, I suppose, holds that the first three chapters of

Genesis, for example, give a literal history. I could never

understand how any one reading them with open eyes could think

they did. Westcott wrote to the Archbishop of Canterbury on Old

Testament criticism, March 4, 1890. Ibid., 157

Thus the two translators, whose work in textual criticism has dominated

almost all translations made in the last century, are seen to be "cupboard"

Roman Catholics, men who deny the inerrancy of Scripture and subscribe

to the theory of evolution. It is a record of belief that should utterly

destroy confidence in their work.

That they introduced not only the Western text dear to the Roman

Catholic Church, but that they concurred in the introduction of subtle

Further, their lack of belief in the Holy Book they chose to translate, and

their acceptance of the theory of evolution, disqualify them as serious

textual critics. Yet countless millions of Christians today are totally

oblivious of these facts, and unwittingly study from Bibles whose

translations have been influenced by the theories of these faithless men.

36

CHAPTER 9

THE MANUSCRIPTS

Today there are available over 5,000 Greek manuscripts of all or portions

of the New Testament. When the Ottoman Empire captured

Constantinople in 1453, scholars of the Byzantine culture centered there

fled to western Europe, bringing with them ancient manuscripts of every

kind. It was the reading of these manuscripts that stimulated the

Renaissance which spread throughout Europe, opening the continent once

more to scholarly endeavors and dispelling the gross ignorance of the Dark

Ages, which testified to the consequences of Rome’s apostate influence.

Centuries of suppression of God’s Word had reduced Europeans to a race

of ignorant, illiterate, backward people. Vast areas of knowledge were

totally lost. Such is the result of apostasy.

Most precious among the Byzantine manuscripts rescued from the

attacking Turks and brought to the West were the manuscripts of the

Greek New Testament. The Byzantine era lasted longer than a millennium,

Empire were a fierce people from the steppes of Asia, north of China in

the region still known as Turkestan. Under their fierce and ruthless leader,

Tamberlane, they had ravished many lands including China; others were

destroyed along their triumphal march toward Europe. Tamberlane the

Great, as he was known, adopted a scorched-earth policy. Every human,

every animal was murdered, every dwelling, every building destroyed,

every aspect of vegetation removed. Eventually the Greeks were

overthrown in Asia Minor, only the Cypriot Greeks remaining as a

remnant of the once vast Greek civilization in that region, the civilization

which had dominated during apostolic times. In fact, nomadic Turks had

been infiltrating Asia Minor since about the seventh century.

Subsequently the Turks conquered as far as central Europe, and on three

occasions stood at the gates of Vienna, threatening the very existence of

the Holy Roman Empire. Remnants of those conquests are seen in the

37

communities of Moslems still found in significant numbers in Albania,

Bulgaria, and Yugoslavia.

Tamberlane, who was born fifty miles north of Samarkand of Turko-

Mongol stock in 1336, conquered Persia by 1385 and Azerbaijan,

Armenia, Georgia and Mesopotamia by 1394. In 1398 he invaded India on

the pretext that the Moslem rulers were too lenient to Hindus, and he

razed Delhi to the ground. By 1401 he had overrun Baghdad and taken

Syria, and the following year he defeated the Egyptian army. Tamberlane,

sometimes known as Timur, died in 1405 while invading China. Some have

ascribed the arid Gobi desert to the scorched-earth policy adopted by his

soldiers, and certainly he was responsible for the almost total obliteration

of the strong Christian church in western China.

God in His infinite wisdom permitted the Turks to overrun

Constantinople to the frontiers of Greek knowledge. Scholars fled

Constantinople with all the Scriptures they could save. And thus Western

Europe, bathed in Catholic darkness, received the pure light of His Word.

His hand prevented the total overthrow of Europe, and thus preserved the

Christian flame. In those Greek New Testament manuscripts from

Constantinople lay the pure writings of the New Testament uncorrupted

by scribes and theologians in the West.

The known manuscripts consist of ninety papyrus fragments dated

between the second and eighth centuries, 270 uncial copies dated between

the third and the tenth centuries, 2,800 minuscules copied between the

The vast majority of these manuscripts, well over ninety-five percent, are

in such close agreement as to be to all intents and purposes identical. The

remainder, representing the Western stream of manuscripts, are clearly

defective. Yet it is these defective copies upon which almost all modern

translators place their trust. But the Reformers of the sixteenth and

seventeenth centuries made no such error.

Enormous support for the majority text is found in Armenian, Ethiopic,

Gothic, Latin, and Syriac translations, some predating the earliest Greek

manuscripts. For example, in the nineteenth century, following the texts of

the Codex Vaticanus and the Codex Sinaiticus, many passages of the New

38

Testament have been altered. But more recently discovered papyrus

fragments have confirmed the majority text. Nineteenth-century biblical

scholars claimed that much of the first fourteen chapters of the Gospel of

John was corrupted by scribes in the later Byzantine Era. This claim was

shown to be utterly false by the discovery of Papyrus Bodmer II. Dated

Papyrus verified many of the disputed passages attributed to late

Byzantine copyists and demonstrated that these passages were present in

very early manuscripts.

Other sources of verification of the Byzantine Greek Text are the writings

of the early church fathers. These men frequently quoted from Scripture

and their writings, going back to the second century, overwhelmingly

support the majority text.

Even the chairman of the committee which produced the Revised Version

was honest enough to write:

The manuscripts which Erasmus used differ for the most part only

in small and insignificant details from the great bulk of the cursive

MSS. The general character of the text is the same. By this

observation the pedigree of the Received Text is carried up beyond

the individual manuscripts used by Erasmus. ·. that pedigree

stretches back to remote antiquity. The first ancestor of the

To denigrate the majority text, Westcott and Hort introduced the Syrian

Recension theory. They postulated that some time in the third or fourth

centuries the Syrian copyists had mutilated the original New Testament,

One problem which Westcott and Hort faced was that the ancient Peshitta

Syriac translation, which undeniably predated the third century, agreed

Westcott and Hort overcame this apparently insurmountable objection to

their postulate by declaring the Peshitta Syriac translation to be of later

39

But it is significant to record that earlier Westcott had written that he had

discovered

no reason to desert the opinion which has obtained the sanction of

the most competent scholars, that the formation of the Peshitta

Syriac was to be fixed within the first half of the second century.

The very obscurity which hangs over its origin is proof of its

venerable age, because it shows that it grew up spontaneously

among Christian congregations ... Had it been the work of a later

date, of the third or fourth century, it is scarcely possible that its

Apparently when it was found necessary to support his false hypothesis

concerning the accuracy of the Peshitta Syriac, Westcott altered his view,

placed the Peshitta Syriac in the latter part of the third century or even in

the fourth. Of a certainty the vast bulk of Greek manuscripts confirm the

manuscripts.

40

CHAPTER 10

THE ROMAN CATHOLIC ATTITUDE

TOWARD SCRIPTURE

At the outset it must be made clear that Catholics are not "Bible

Christians."

We do not profess faith in the Bible, but in Jesus Christ and His

Thus the lines of distinction are drawn between Protestants and Roman

Catholics. For Protestants, the Holy Scriptures are the only authoritative

teachings of Jesus; the teachings of the church are valid only as they

conform with the written Word.

Jesus Himself set us an example of the all-sufficiency of the Word. Upon

the day of the resurrection, He joined Cleopas, one of His faithful

followers, and another devout Christian on their journey to Emmaus. Both

friends were utterly dejected as they discussed Jesus’ execution two days

earlier.

And he said unto them, What things? And they said unto him,

Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in

deed and word before God and all the people: and how the chief

priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and

have crucified him. But we trusted that it had been he which should

have redeemed Israel. Luke 24:19-21

Jesus’ response to their dismay is instructive to all Christians.

O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:

ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his

glory? And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto

them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself. Luke 24:25-27

41

In the minds of many, Jesus’ approach to the dilemma of the two friends

seems curious, for it was only later as He sat at supper with them and

blessed the food that

their eyes were opened, and they knew him. Luke 24:31

Surely the most convincing evidence that Jesus could have offered of His

resurrection was His appearance in person. But was it? In this episode,

Jesus taught implicitly that our eyes are not always reliable witnesses of

truth. The devil can deceive as he did when he brought "Samuel" before

King Saul. Was that sound evidence of Samuel’s immortality?

When we studied psychology at Avondale College under Dr. Gordon

McDowell, he told us of attending the American Amateur Magicians’

Championship. The winner’s act was deceptively simple, yet none of the

professional magicians, called upon to judge the event, could discern the

trickery employed. The young man simply strolled onto the stage

whistling. Then he suddenly shot up the thumb of his right hand, and a

live canary sat happily upon it. He continued his whistling until each of

his ten fingers, one by one, was found to have a canary perched upon it.

The magician then produced a cage and placed all ten canaries in the small

cage. They enthusiastically flew about in it like any such birds are bound

to do. The magician continued his whistling holding the cage with its birds

between his hands, in clear view of the audience. Suddenly he clapped his

hands together and the cage and all ten birds disappeared before their eyes.

On the visual evidence, the birds had come from nowhere and with the

cage had returned to the invisible realm. But was it so? Of course not. It

was indeed a very clever trick, but the audience’s eyes had deceived them.

Jesus well knew that our faith must be established on firmer evidence than

our visual images. It was only after He had proved the authenticity of the

crucifixion and the resurrection events from Scripture that Christ revealed

Himself to these followers. It is little wonder that they were to testify:

Did not our hearts burn within us, while he talked with us by the

way, and while he opened to us the scriptures? Luke 24:32

42

Peter correctly recognized that the testimony of the Word of God was far

more certain than even the evidence of what his eyes had seen and his ears

had heard.

For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made

known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ,

but were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For he received from God

the Father honor and glory, when there came such a voice to him

from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am

well pleased. And this voice which came from heaven we heard,

when we were with him in the holy mount. We have also a more

sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as

unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the

day star arise in your hearts. 2 Peter 1:16-19

Roman Catholics have not altered their attitude toward Scripture. In 1954,

the Supreme Council of the Knights of Columbus, a fiercely Roman

Catholic organization, made the bold claim that the Bible does not believe

itself to be inspired or to be the complete Word of God; and that there is

only one place in the world where you can be sure to prove the Bible is

true and that is through the Catholic Church, the Apostolic Church (stated

Columbus are so ignorant of the words of the Bible that they are unaware

that it does present powerful testimony of its own inspiration. It testifies:

All scripture is given by inspiration of God. 2 Timothy 3:16

Further, the Bible plainly indicates that it is the complete Word of God

and that nothing else is required, for it warns:

If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the

plagues that are written in this book. Revelation 22:18

Protestants, on the other hand, accept the biblical assurance that it is the

work of the Holy Spirit to guide the worshiper in his discovery of the true

meaning of God’s Holy Word.

Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you

into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he

43

shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to

come. John 16:13

Nowhere does Scripture delegate this right to the church. Any student of

history can trace the dismal results of following the papal philosophy of

biblical interpretation. In the days of Jesus, God’s church claimed to be

the sole interpreter of the Word. This view was implicit in the question

posed concerning Jesus —

How knoweth this man letters, having never learned? John 7:15

In answer to this question Jesus enunciated the principle of individual

Bible interpretation.

If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether

it be of God, or whether I speak of myself. John 7:17

When the leading light of the early Christian Church, the apostle Paul,

explained his interpretation of Scripture to the believers in Berea, they

refused to accept his words without confirming them by personal study.

Rather than heaping condemnation upon them for following this

procedure, it is recorded concerning the Bereans:

These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they

received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the

scriptures daily, whether those things were so. Acts 17:11

In both Old Testament and New Testament times, men were admonished

to study God’s Word for themselves.

For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our

learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures

might have hope. Romans 15:4

Never did God place the interpretation of Scriptures in the province of the

church. So sacred are the Scriptures that the Holy Spirit alone holds the

key to their understanding. When the church has usurped this divine

prerogative, it has inevitably provided a fertile ground for the proclamation

of damnable error. The Jewish Church perverted Sabbathkeeping by its

dictates. It taught the law from a legalistic viewpoint which favored the

church but removed from God’s people the joy of their salvation.

44

So too the Roman Catholic Church, usurping God’s authority, has

interpreted Scripture to teach the infallibility of the pope, the immortality

of the soul, the Immaculate Conception, the efficacy of the seven

sacraments, confession of sins to men, idol worship, the veneration of the

"saints," purgatory, limbo, infant baptism, penance, the Mass, and a

whole host of associated heresies. Truly, the track record of ecclesiastical

interpretation of Scripture is a poor one indeed.

In contrast, humble men of God, searching the Scriptures under the power

of the Holy Ghost, founded the Reformation, the Methodist Revival, and

the great Advent movement of the nineteenth century. None of these

mighty reformatory movements which shook the world could have been

based upon interpretations propounded by church authority, for such is

not the province of the church. The duty of church leaders is to encourage

private Bible study and prayer, to preach the Word, admonishing the flock

to personally verify that which is spoken, to condemn sin, and to uplift

Jesus as our Savior. It is the church’s duty to organize the proclamation of

the three angels’ messages to every corner of the earth.

This responsibility does not mean a loose organization consisting of men

and women of great variations of belief. The Holy Spirit does not guide

one into truth and others into various errors. The Holy Spirit is designated

as the Spirit of Truth. He alone can guide into truth. Contrary to

speculation, when each believer asserts his God-ordained right to discover

Bible truth for himself, unity will prevail and the church will be vibrant.

Deeper truths will be discovered and shared as each believer utilizes the

power of divine insight freely available from the Holy Spirit. No course

would more effectively eliminate the spiritual stagnation of credalism than

a church buoyant with members freely studying God’s Word to discover

more and more of God’s plan for their lives.

Typical of the acquisition of truth which comes from personal Bible study

under the guidance of the Holy Spirit is the faith of William Tracy, a

former High Sheriff of the County of Glouchestershire in England. Tracy,

a devout Roman Catholic, had nevertheless studied William Tyndale’s

translation of Scripture. Before his death in 1530, Tracy wrote in his will a

profound view of the Bible truths he had found in Scripture, which were

quite contrary to the multitudinous errors taught by his church. He had

45

discovered justification by faith, the fallacy of the doctrine of the

immortality of the soul, the mediatorial ministry of Christ, and many other

truths still condemned by Roman Catholics. In part his will read:

First and before all things, I commit myself to God and to His

mercy, believing, without any doubt or mistrust that by His grace,

and the merits of Jesus Christ, and by virtue of His passion and

His resurrection, I have and shall have remission of all my sins, and

resurrection of body and soul according as it is written, I believe

that my Redeemer liveth, and that in the last day I shall rise out of

the earth, and in my flesh shall see my Savior: this my hope is laid

up in my bosom. And touching the health of my soul, the faith that

I have taken and rehearsed is sufficient (as I suppose) without any

other man’s works or merits· My ground of belief is, that there is

but one God and one Mediator between God and man, which is

Jesus Christ; so that I accept none in heaven or in earth to be

mediator between me and God, but only Jesus Christ: and

therefore will I bestow no part of my goods for that intent that any

man should say or do to help my soul: for therein I trust only to

the promises of Christ: "He that believeth and is baptized shall be

saved, and he that believeth not shall be damned." As touching the

burying of my body, it availeth me not whatsoever be done

thereto; for ... the funeral pomps are rather the solace of them that

live, than the wealth and comfort of them that are dead. And

touching the distribution of my temporal goods, my purpose is, by

the grace of God, to bestow them to be accepted as the fruits of

faith; so that I do not suppose that my merit shall be by the good

bestowing of them, but my merit is the faith of Jesus Christ only,

by whom such works are good ... and ever we should consider that

true saying, that a good work maketh not a good man, but a good

man maketh a good work; for faith maketh a man both good and

righteous; for a righteous man liveth by faith, and whatsoever

springeth not of faith is sin. Witness mine own hand the te