You are here: Home / Apologetics

Why the King James is Not a Perfect Inspired Translation

08/15/2013 45 Comments

KJVThe King James Bible translation was great piece of work for its day but is it really the perfect infallible word of God for all time? I do not think so. Due to archeology and scholarship, we have gained a lot of knowledge about the ancient world since 1611 and modern Bibles reflect this much more accurate and informed scholarship. For example, the Masoretic text of the Old Testament dates to AD 1000 but today we have access to the Dead Sea Scrolls (with Old Testament fragments back to 200 BC) and thousands of Ugaritic and other texts that inform us about the context of the Old Testament. In 1611, this stuff was buried under ground. Translations like the ESV are far superior to the KJV because they reflect this new knowledge.

As far as the discussion concerning NT manuscripts, Dr. Dan Wallace has penned a fine essay here. What you will find is that the KJVonlyist arguments are very misleading and trade on fear. Studying church history reveals that scribes added things over time rather than taking them out. The verses KJVonly people claim have been removed are additions, usually by Catholic scribes.  We want to study the inspired word not a medieval Catholic’s additions (as in the case of 1 John 5:7 KJV).

If you like the King James Bible and prefer to use it then I have no problem with that. This post is directed toward those KJV-only people who argue that God inspired the KJV translators to preserve a perfect inerrant translation of his word in 1611. This idea is easily disproved but persists with a cultist tenacity.

I joined a Facebook group called “King James Bible Debate” but I quickly discovered the members did not really want to debate. After the numerous pleasantries concerning me being a Jesuit plant were offered, I presented an argument that went unanswered… silence…  and I mean crickets were chirping… a few red herrings and non sequiturs were proffered and, then I was hurriedly banned from the group ( I suppose for being Jesuit). It’s very revealing when a group must silence dissent in order to preserve the paradigm – it is how cults always operate. The argument that got me banned is as follows:

 

  1. The God of the Hebrews hates false gods (Judges 2:17; Jer. 14:22; 18:15).
  2. The Greek term pascha means ‘passover’ and the KJV translators rendered it as passover 28 times. “Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover.” (Lk 22:1, AV)
  3. However, they rendered the same exact same term as “Easter” in Acts 12. “And when he had apprehended him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four quaternions of soldiers to keep him; intending after Easter to bring him forth to the people.”(Ac 12:4, AV)
  4. The English word “Easter” is derived from the name of an Anglo-Saxon goddess, Ēostre, a form of the widely attested Indo-European dawn goddess. Saint Bede the Venerable, an Anglo-Saxon theologian, historian, and chronologist, best known today for his Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum recorded in the 8th century that it was it derived from Eostre, or Eostrae, the Anglo-Saxon goddess of Spring and fertility.
  5. The God of the Bible would never inspire a translator to name His holy feast day after a pagan goddess (Isaiah 42:8). This violates His character and holiness.

Therefore, the King James Bible is not a perfect inspired translation. This seems decisive enough to dismiss the central claim of the KJVonly cult but in light of a dispute over etymology I’ll offer one more argument that is similarly devastating to the “perfect translation” idea.

  1. When Luke wrote the book of Acts, he had an actual date and time in mind. There was no “Easter” celebration in Jerusalem in the AD 60s when Acts was composed. Luke meant the Jewish passover feast and it is well established that the early church celebrated Jesus resurrection during passover.

The paschal feast thus took place in the primitive Church at the same time as the Jewish Passover, that is, on the night of the 15th Nisan, and by the date rather than the day. The feast had, however, a very different character from the Jewish Passover, though without denying its derivation from this. [1]

  1. Due to replacement theology and anti-Semitism, the Council of Nicea defined Easter specifically so it was not on the date of the Jewish Passover. Constantine wrote:

    2. And in the first place, it seemed very unworthy for us to keep this most sacred feast following the custom of the Jews, a people who have soiled their hands in a most terrible outrage, and have thus polluted their souls, and are now deservedly blind. Since we have cast aside their way of calculating the date of the festival, we can ensure that future generations can celebrate this observance at the more accurate time which we have kept from the first day of the passion until the present time….  — Emperor Constantine, following the Council of Nicaea [2]

  2. Thus, by definition Easter does not denote the date that the inspired author Luke intended.

Therefore, the KJV is not a perfect inspired translation.

When your belief system is hinged on something as precarious as absolute perfection from a group of fallible men, one counterexample implodes the house of cards.

The doctrine of biblical inerrancy applies to the original autographs written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Koine Greek. Although we do not have those originals, the science of textual criticism, as employed by Holy Spirit led scholars, gives a Greek New Testament text that we can confidently assess to be around 99% true to the originals in modern editions like the NA28. Translations are another matter. Some concepts in Hebrew and Greek do not translate to English directly, so no English translation is infallibly perfect, it is not even possible,  because they all must compromise at points. But thanks to hard working scholars and archeologists, we have a very accurate rendering of the ancient text that we can trust for all maters of faith and doctrine.

 


[1] Gerhard Kittel, Geoffrey W. Bromiley, and Gerhard Friedrich, eds., Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1964–), 902.

[2] “Emperor Constantine to all churches concerning the date of Easter” http://www.fourthcentury.com/index.php/urkunde-26

Filed Under Apologetics Tagged With Cults, KJVonlyism

Pseudoprophetai Pope Frank Asks “Who Am I to Judge” Homosexual Priests?

07/30/2013 29 Comments

Pope_Francis_in_March_2013

The Pope says “Who am I to judge?” Rather astonishing coming from the alleged the vicar of Christ… Perhaps he is not equipped to judge. But “The spiritual person judges all things, but is himself to be judged by no one.”(1 Co 2:15) and consider this passage, “Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world is to be judged by you, are you incompetent to try trivial cases? Do you not know that we are to judge angels? How much more, then, matters pertaining to this life!”(1 Co 6:2–3) Given the scripture is clear this behavior leads to hell (1 Cor 6:9), it is a dereliction of moral duty not to make a judgement. The idea is that we do not judge hypocritically, but we must make judgments.

But we know that the law is good, provided one uses it legitimately. We know that the law is not meant for a righteous person, but for the lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinful, for the unholy and irreverent, for those who kill their fathers and mothers, for murderers, for the sexually immoral and homosexuals, for kidnappers, liars, perjurers, and for whatever else is contrary to the sound teaching based on the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was entrusted to me.” (1 Ti 1:8–11)

Filed Under Apologetics Tagged With Pope Frank

One hell of deal all right… Pope Frank’s Social Media Indulgences

07/17/2013 39 Comments

One hell of a deal: Pope Francis offers reduced time in Purgatory for Catholics that follow him on Twitter

Court in charge of forgiveness of sins says those that follow upcoming event via social media will be granted indulgences

Salvation – or at least a shorter stay in Purgatory – might now be only a tweet away with news that Pope Francis is to offer “indulgences” – remissions for temporary punishment – to the faithful who follow him on the social media site.

Source

Catholics claim purgatory is for working off the temporal effects of sin but a temporal effect is a consequence that flows naturally from the sin itself, like liver disease from drinking too much or catching a STD from sexual sin. In this case, purgatory is not a natural consequence at all but rather a supernatural one imposed on the believer by God post mortem. It is not temporal but the Catholics need to argue that way because scripture clearly teaches that Christ took our punishment for us (Isa 53:6; 2 Cor 5:21). So Rome wants to prop up the doctrine of purgatory as part of the sanctification process. This is controverted by scripture that says Jesus sanctified us positionally with the Father: “For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified.” (Heb 10:14)

What’s next “like” the pope on facebook and get a pass on three weeks of mass attendance?

Filed Under Apologetics

The Watchtower Meets the Pleiadeans

07/14/2013 32 Comments


early_watch_tower_coverA few people have asked why I included the Jehovah’s Witnesses in my list of groups with strange extraterrestrial doctrines in Exo-Vaticana.  First, it is essential to recognize that the Jehovah’s Witnesses believe themselves to be the only true religion and have consistently taught that all others are of the devil. That includes evangelicals of all stripes. A lesser known but pertinent fact is that the founders of Watchtower Bible and Tract Society held beliefs similar to modern UFO cults. We submit two examples from their officially sanctioned literature. The JW cult began as a splinter group when founder Charles Taze Russell (1852–1916) broke ties with the Adventists in the wake of several date setting failures. His following grew as his publishing arm “Zion’s Watch Tower Tract Society” spread his strange doctrines far and wide. In Thy Kingdom Come(1891), the third of a seven volume series, he argues that Jehovah resides on a star called Alcyone in the Pleiades star cluster located in the constellation Taurus. Arguing more like an Ancient Astronaut Theorist than a theologian, he wrote concerning the center of the cosmos:

Astronomers are not yet fully agreed as to what or where that center is. Some, however, believe that they have found the direction of it to be the Pleiades, and particularly Alcyone, the central one of the renowned Pleiadic stars. To the distinguished German astronomer, Prof. J. H. Maedler, belongs the honor of having made this discovery. Alcyone, then, as far as science has been able to perceive, would seem to be ‘the midnight throne’ in which the whole system of gravitation has its central seat, and from which the Almighty governs his universe.[1]

Taken at face value, this drastically diminishes divine omnipresence to a specific location within the material universe, an idea far removed from biblical Christianity which holds that God transcends His material creation being present everywhere at the same time (Ps. 139:7-9). Russell also denied the doctrine of the trinity. Interestingly, the Pleiades cluster is the claimed home of the so-called Nordic aliens popularized by contactees like “Billy” Eduard Albert Meier who started the FIGU cult. Meier, infamous for his hoaxed flying saucer photographs, issues antichristian rants coupled with new age teachings dictated by Semjase, an alleged Pleiadean.[2] The correlation between the Pleiades and diverse cult groups suggests a common spiritual source albeit not space aliens. Russell was also particularly fond of Egyptian symbolism such as the winged sun disk, an emblem tracing deep into the Old Kingdom (26 BC) as the mark of Horus, a deity believed to incarnate as Pharaoh.

JW sun disc

Winged Sun Disk in J.W. Literature

 Nimrud_stele_winged_sun

Nimrud Stele (Egypt 9th century BC)

Certainly, the biblical narrative paints Pharaoh as an idolatrous oppressor of God’s people who hard heartedly opposed Moses. In fact, God specifically associates him with Satan, the great dragon (Eze 29:3). From Egypt, the Pharaohic symbol spread to Mesopotamia and even as far as Persia and became more generally associated with divinity, royalty and power in the Ancient Near East. Mysteriously, it has also been discovered in the records of ancient cultures as far away as South America and Australia. Thus, it meets Carl Jung’s definition of a culturally transcendent archetype. In the middle ages, it appears in alchemical works and grimoires. Accordingly, its popularity with nineteenth century occultists suggests Russell was no stranger to their works. In fact, just prior to his publication, the winged-sun-disk was featured in magical works by the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, Helena Blavatsky’s Theosophical Society, the Rosicrucian Order, and Freemasonry. This makes for strange bedfellows indeed.

Given all the above, the winged sun disk was an extremely odd pretense to Bible study. Employing a syncretic hermeneutic, he justified it with a metaphor from Malachi, “the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings” (4:2) a prophecy to be fulfilled by Christ as “the light of the world” (John 8:12). Nevertheless, its occult connotations suggest this application was reckless at best and, at worst, indicative of a syncretistic occultism. Considering his bizarre Great Pyramid teachings, the weight of the evidence supports the latter.

Russell_Pyramid

Russell’s Pyramid Memorial Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Most cult-apologetics texts discuss Russell’s failed predictions that Christ would return in 1874 then revised to 1914. However, it is lesser known they were based on the Great Pyramid, a monument he believed to hold the key to prophecy. Based on various internal measurements and convoluted mathematics he originally arrived at 1874 as the dawn of the tribulation:

 Thus the Pyramid witnesses that the close of 1874 was the chronological beginning of the time of trouble such as was not since there was a nation — no, nor ever shall be afterward. And thus it will be noted that this “Witness” fully corroborates the Bible testimony on this subject…” [3]

As time passed uneventfully, he manipulated a few of the numbers and moved the date forward:

Thus the Pyramid witnesses that the close of 1914 will be the beginning of the time of trouble such as was not since there was a nation — no, nor ever shall be afterward. And thus it will be noted that this “Witness” fully corroborates the’ Bible testimony on this subject…” [4]

Given his prayers were directed toward Alcyone, a Pleiadic star, alongside his obsession with all things Egyptian, one might conclude Russell was subject to same deceiving spirits who inspire UFO cults and alien contactees. In fact, one might argue that Charles Taze Russell is a spiritual ancestor to the modern Pleiadean contactee. A few years after the 1914 date passed, Russell died. A new excuse we needed as 1914 came and went.

Another fanciful rationale for the downfield creep of the eschatological goal posts helped smooth the transition while Joseph Franklin Rutherford (1869-1942) picked up the pieces. A highly educated and charismatic leader, he played a primary role in their doctrinal development and growth. It was under Rutherford’s leadership that the smallish fringe group grew into the incorporated juggernaut called “The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society” known commonly as “Jehovah’s Witnesses.” However, his prodigious success as a religious huckster far outmatched any alleged competence in biblical exegesis. Retaining his mentor’s characteristically syncretic hermeneutic, from Job 38:31 and 2 Chronicles 6:21 he also derived a Pleiadean theology:

 The constellation of the Pleiades is a small one compared with others which scientific instruments disclose to the wondering eyes of man. But the greatness in size of other stars or planets is small when compared to the Pleiades in importance, because the Pleiades is the place of the eternal throne of God. [5]

It boggles the mind to assess the damage inflicted upon the divine attributes of Christian orthodoxy but suffice it to say biblical theology does not lead to the conclusion that the triune God can be spatially located within creation. Think of it this way, because God created all things (including the Pleiades), He is necessarily external to that creation, although he may enter into it as he so chooses.

[1] Charles Taze Russell, Thy Kingdom Come, vol. III of Millennial Dawn series, (Allegheny, PA: Tower Publishing, 1891), 327.

[2] “The Pleiadean Ishwish Semjase’s: Spiritual Teachings”  http://semjase.net/semjeng11.html (accessed 11/29/2012).

[3] Charles Taze Russell, Thy Kingdom Come, Studies In The Scriptures, vol. 3, 1904 edition.

[4] Charles Taze Russell, Thy Kingdom Come, Studies In The Scriptures, vol. 3, 1910 edition.

[5] J. F. Rutherford, Reconciliation, 1928, p. 14.

banner

 

Filed Under Apologetics Tagged With Cults, jehovahs witnesses, UFO Religions

Dispensationalism: the Key to Bible Prophecy (part 2)

07/04/2013 23 Comments

by Cris D. Putnam
Traditional Seven Dispensations

Traditional Seven Dispensations

I affirm Ryrie’s second point the basic dispensational philosophy of history as well. A philosophy of history is a systematic understanding in which past events and major sequences are unified and explained in light of a future ultimate meaning.[i] While all Christians believe the ultimate meaning is found in Christ, they disagree in the form and function. Paul wrote to the church in Ephesus, “To me, though I am the very least of all the saints, this grace was given, to preach to the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ, and to bring to light for everyone what is the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God who created all things,” (Eph 3:8–9, underline added). “The plan” is a rendering of the Greek οἰκονομία meaning “a plan which involves a set of arrangements (referring in the NT to God’s plan for bringing salvation to mankind within the course of history)—‘purpose, scheme, plan, arrangement.’”[ii]

In the second century, Irenaeus wrote, “He who, by Moses, instituted the legal dispensation, by which giving of the law we know that He spake to the fathers.”[iii] He then divides biblical history based on “four principal (καθολικαί) covenants given to the human race.”[iv] In the third century, church father Tertullian used the Latin word dispensatio to translate οἰκονομία and from that the English word dispensation derives. Hence, used in this way, a dispensation refers to a distinctive way in which God administers His relationship with mankind. As one can see, this line of thinking was present in primitive Christianity. In this way, nineteenth century dispensationalists were actually recovering theology that had been lost under centuries of Roman Catholic oppression.

As a system, dispensationalism has the most coherent philosophy of history because it accounts for the whole range of predictive prophecy. For example, the Old Testament predicts an earthly kingdom of universal peace (Is 2:2-4, 11:6-9, 65:17-25; Mic 4:1-5). Accordingly, futurist premillennialism accounts for the biblical data affirming that Christ will return to earth and rule over it for 1,000 years (Rev 20:4). Even so, I am willing to allow that “χίλια ἔτη” could be an idiom for a long period of time rather than insisting on precisely one thousand years. I agree with earlier divisions including the Adamic and Noahic dispensations found in revised dispensationalism. I somewhat appreciate the simplicity of the simple four-part structure associated with progressive dispensationalism: 1) Patriarchal (creation to Sinai); 2) Mosaic (Moses to Jesus ascension); 3) Ecclesial (ascension to second coming), and 4) Zionic (the millennial kingdom and eternal new creation).[v] However, Ryrie argues that progressive dispensationalists make the goal atemporal by conflating eternity and the millennium.[vi] While progressives place the millennial reign prior to the eternal state within the Zionic dispensation, it seems to confuse the matter. Thus, I agree with the older school that posits the eternal state as a distinct unit. Hence, my position entails: 1) Adamic; 2) Noahic; 3) Patriarchal; 4) Mosaic; 5) Church; 6) Millennial; 7) Eternal. These offer more explanatory scope than the abridged scheme presented by progressives. Ultimately, the exact number and name of the dispensations is not as important as one’s hermeneutic.

On the third point, a literal interpretation of scripture, I think the work of progressive dispensationalists is helpful. Literal interpretation needs to be informed by literary understanding (e.g. genre). While the historical grammatical hermeneutic is best, biblical scholarship is certainly more informed today than the days of Darby and Scofield. The radical bifurcation of the church and Israel advocated in classic dispensationalism goes too far. Classic dispensationalists posited the Church and Israel as eternally separate. The Rose Guide to End Time Prophecy is helpful:

      • Classic dispensationalists see the church as God’s heavenly people and Israel as God’s earthly people. These two groups will remain separate even in eternity. The church will be in heaven. Israel will be on the earth. (John Nelson Darby, Lewis Sperry Chafer, Cyrus I. Scofield)
      • Revised dispensationalists still see the church and Israel as distinct. At the same time, they expect the saved from both groups to coexist in eternity in glorified and resurrected bodies. Ethnic Israel is the physical seed of Abraham; prior to the end of time, the nation of Israel will still receive the land that God promised. God temporarily set aside the unbelieving nation of Israel so that he could bring together believing Gentiles with a remnant of believing Jews in the church. The church is the spiritual seed of Abraham and includes believing Jews and Gentiles. (John Walvoord, Charles Caldwell Ryrie, J. Dwight Pentecost)
      • Progressive dispensationalists are similar in many ways to new covenantalists. According to progressive dispensationalists, God has had one plan that he has unfolded from the beginning of time to the present. Each dispensation has simply emphasized a different aspect of this one plan. Jesus inaugurated a kingdom during his earthly ministry, and he will bring this kingdom to fruition in a future millennium. The nation of Israel will still receive the land that God promised to Abraham, and Jesus will govern Jews and Gentiles according to their separate nationalities during the millennium. The plan of God will, however, ultimately culminate with one people, joined together in the presence of God for all eternity.(Craig Blaising, Darrell Bock, Bruce Ware)[vii]

Even given classic’s extremes, they served as a needed corrective. Theology Professor at LBTS, Dan Mitchell cogently qualifies the final point, “It’s not so much the idea of a literal interpretation that marks the distinction, but it is the approach, do you approach the text inductively from Genesis forward or deductively from the fulfillment backward. If you have already decided that everything is fulfilled in Christ, then there really isn’t much to talk about in terms of future eschatology.”[viii] For these reasons, I believe the dispensationalism is superior to covenant theology and I find myself somewhere in the tension between the progressive and revised schools of thought.

This essay offered an analysis of dispensationalism. It sought to illustrate the value of the system by examining three defining points: the distinction between the church and Israel, the philosophy of history and a literal hermeneutic. The relationship between these points was shown. In the end, it seems that these points support the idea that dispensationalism is the key to biblical prophecy.


[i] Renald E. Showers, There Really Is a Difference! : A Comparison of Covenant and Dispensational Theology (Bellmawr, NJ: The Friends of Israel Gospel Ministry, 1990). 22.

[ii] Johannes P. Louw and Eugene Albert Nida, vol. 1, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains, electronic ed. of the 2nd edition. (New York: United Bible Societies, 1996), 357.
[iii] Irenaeus of Lyons, “Irenæus Against Heresies” In , in The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume I: The Apostolic Fathers With Justin Martyr and Irenaeus, ed. Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson and A. Cleveland Coxe (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Company, 1885), 424.
[iv] Irenaeus, “Against Heresies” 429.

[v] Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L. Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1993), 123.

[vi] Ryrie, Dispensationalism, 22.
[vii] Dr. Timothy Paul Jones, Rose Guide to End-Times Prophecy, Kindle Edition (2012-03-06). Kindle Locations 5406-5417.
[viii] Dan Mitchell, “Dispensationalism and the Interpretation of Prophecy,” LBTS: Theo 630 lecture video, 3:32-3:57.
Filed Under Apologetics, Theology Tagged With Dispensational, Eschatology, replacement theology
« Older Posts
Newer Posts »