Calvinism (Monergism) and the King James Bible
Here is a quote from King James showing that the man was a complete Calvinist:
"God hath two wills: a revealed will toward us, and that will here is understood; he hath also a secret will in his eternal counsel, whereby all things are governed, and in the end made to turn into his glory: oftentimes drawing good effects out of bad causes, and light out of darkness, to the fulfilling either of his mercy, his justice, etc. The first Article of the Apostles creed teacheth us, that God is Almighty, however Vorftius and the Arminians think to rob him of his eternal decree, and secret will, making things to be done in this world whether he will or not." - Rovs, F. Testis Veritatis. The Doctrine of King James our Late Sovereign of famous Memory of the Church of England (London: W. I. 1626), p. 1
King James affirms that faith is the gift of God which he gives to us; it does not come from ourselves.
“Now, as to Faith, which is the nourisher and quickner of Religion, as I have already said, It is a sure perswasion and apprehension of the promises of God, applying them to your soule: and therefore may it justly be called the golden chaine that linketh the faithfulle soule to Christ: AND BECAUSE IT GROWETH NOT IN OUR GARDEN, BUT IS THE FREE GIFT OF GOD, AS THE SAME APOSTLE SAITH, it must be nourished by prayer, Which is nothing else, but a friendly talking with God. “
The whole point of Calvinism is that it is the Truth and it gives ALL the glory to God and humbles man in the dust, where we belong.
"Free will" Fantasy exalts man, tries to take credit for something the flesh did not do, and robs God of his glory.
Free will theology is right out of the Roman Catholic Catechism.
If you want to follow the whore, go right ahead. But it will all come to an end on Judgment Day. Then everybody will know that salvation is totally of the Lord and He does the choosing, not man.
Calvinists as missionaries and evangelists.
One needs only examine Protestant history to see that Calvinists have been on the forefront of evangelism and missions. George Whitefield was outspoken in affirming all five points of Calvinism, yet he was one of the most zealous and effective evangelists of the Great Awakening. Wherever he traveled, both in England and America, people would turn out by the thousands to hear him preach in the open fields. The modern missionary movement began in 1792 when the Calvinistic Baptist, William Carey, left England to minister the gospel in India. With the help of William Ward and Joshua Marshman, he founded 26 churches and 126 schools, and translated the Bible into 44 languages including Sanskrit. In 1812, Adoniram Judson, another Calvinistic Baptist, sailed to Burma, becoming the first American to depart for the overseas mission field. . . . Other Calvinistic evangelists and missionaries of note include Jonathan Edwards, Asahel Nettleton and Charles H. Spurgeon. More than this, the Protestant Reformation was perhaps the greatest evangelistic movement of modern history. The Lord brought it about through the evangelistic zeal and unfailing courage of men who believed that God is fully sovereign in salvation—men such as Martin Luther, William Tyndale, John Calvin and John Knox, as well as lesser known men such as William Farel, George Wishart, Martin Bucer, Hugh Latimer, Nicholas Ridley and countless others.
Read the article. Compare the verses. Think about what the Book actually SAYS. Ask God to give you the faith to believe the words of God and not the carnal philosophy of men.
I do not at all believe that a person has to see or believe the truth of the sovereignty of God in electing His particular people from before the foundation of the world unto salvation through the blood of the Lamb of God, in order to be saved.
But as a King James Bible believer I find it highly ironic that so many of my KJB brethren (though not all, by any means) are so dead set against the doctrines of the free and sovereign, electing grace of God. Many of them hate these doctrines and label them as heresy. Yet most of them are totally unaware of the simple fact that the vast majority of the King James Bible translators themselves held tenaciously to these very same doctrines they hate so much.
KJB translators were Calvinists.
Taken from the article “The King James Version Of The Bible, by Rev. Steven Houck
Minister in the Protestant Reformed Churches
“Even the translators of the King James Version itself had rejected popery. They were influenced greatly by the Reformation both on the continent and in England. These men considered Theodore Beza to be the chief authority in religious matters. They relied upon his judgment in matters of exposition as well the Greek text.
Many of the translators were themselves very Calvinistic. Miles Smith, who was a member of the third translation company, one of the revisors of the whole, the final editor with Bishop Bilson, and the author of The Translators To The Readers, was a severe Calvinist. His influence upon the King James Version was great. Besides Smith, Lawrence Chaderton, John Reynolds, Thomas Holland, Daniel Fairclough, George Abbot, John Harmar, and Samuel Ward were all Calvinists. No doubt there were more Calvinist among them, but we know little about many of these translators.”
And this from the article “The Majority of the KJV Translators were Calvinists”
“Another historical fact that would show that Calvinism was still accepted in the Church of England at the time of the making of the KJV is the fact that a Calvinist was named as the Archbishop of Canterbury in 1611. After the death of Archbishop Richard Bancroft in late 1610, King James I made George Abbot, who had been one of the translators of the KJV, the Archbishop of Canterbury. Otto Scott noted that George Abbott, Archbishop of Canterbury, was "a Calvinist" (Great Christian Revolution, p. 143).
In 1618, King James I and Archbishop Abbot sent English delegates, including two men who had been KJV translators, to the Dort Synod. Representing the Church of England, those English delegates voted for the Calvinist position. Otto Scott noted that these English delegates "voted to uphold Calvinist principles in their entirety" (Great Christian Revolution, pp. 143, 146). Thus, as late as 1618 at the Dort Synod, the Church of England still publicly supported Calvinism.”
See page 5 of this PDF article by G.P. Hallihan titled Kings & Puritans, Bishops & Bibles - the Hampton Court Conference, January 1604. Page 5 discusses the Calvinistic theology of virtually every member of the King James Bible translation committee and of king James himself.
As far as I know from reading about it, there was only one "free will" Arminian on the translation committee. His name was John Richardson.
From The Learned Men
The Cambridge Hebrew group had a goodly knack with English words and sounds.
One fact that stands out about John Richardson of Cambridge is that he was fat. Those of another persuasion called him a "fat bellied Arminian."
See also a well done article called The King James Version of the Bible - A Bible of the Reformation. This shows the strong Calvinistic tradition behind the King James Bible.
Beyond all doubt, the majority of the men whom God used to give us His perfect words in our beloved King James Bible were themselves what people today would call Calvinists. They were either members of the church of England or Puritans. The Anglican church of 1611 was nothing like the apostate Anglican church of today.
If you want to know what they believed, all you have to do is take a look at what are called the 39 Articles of Faith of the Church of England, which were drawn up in 1562. It is also strongly anti-Roman Catholic. Pay particular notice to Article 17 where it speaks of Predestination and Election. You can see what they believed at this site here:
Though they are but men, here is a partial list of some very well known Christians who also believed and preached these same doctrines of sovereign grace. The majority of the King James Bible translators, as well as Stephanus 1550 and Theodore Beza 1599 whose Greek texts form the textual basis of the King James Bible's New Testament were both strong Calvinists, John Wycliffe 1320-1384, who first translated the Bible into English, William Tyndale***(see below), Myles Coverdale of the Coverdale Bible 1535, John Rogers who compiled Matthew's Bible 1549, the translators of the Bishop's Bible and the Geneva Bible, Pierre Olivetan 1506 - 1538, translated the Bible into the French Olivetan Bible using the Hebrew and Greek texts as his source; he was also John Calvin's cousin, João Ferreira Annes de Almeida (1628-1691) - he translated the Bible into Portuguese using the Traditional Hebrew and Greek texts; his Bible has been called the equivalent to the King James Bible in Portuguese.
William Carey - the father of the modern missionary movement (1761-1834), Robert Murray M'Cheyne (1813-1842), the famous religious artist Rembrandt 1606-1669, John Bunyan- who wrote Pilgrim's Progress (1628-1688) *** See links at end that prove Bunyan was a Calvinist), Cotton Mathers, pastor, author and political activist 1663-1728, ***Noah Webster, famous for his 1828 English Dictionary which bears his name, ***Isaac Watts (1674-1748) was a solid Calvinist who composed some 750 hymns, many which we sing today. They are loaded with sound theology and praise to our Redeeming God. Among his best known are Joy to the World, When I survey the Wondrous Cross, and Alas, and did my Saviour bleed? Great hymns, C. H. Spurgeon - the prince of preachers (1834-1892) *** (See notes below), George Whitfield - famous evangelist (1714-1770), John Jay 1745-1829, one of the founding Fathers of the United States and the first Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, ***John Newton - who wrote Amazing Grace (1722-1807), John Milton of Paradise Lost fame (1608-1674), William Cowper, who wrote There is a Fountain (1731-1800), ***Augustus Toplady, who wrote Rock of Ages, Cleft for me (1740-1778) * (See link below to his powerful study called "The Golden Idol of Freewill"), Albert Barnes 1798-1870 of Barnes' Notes on the New Testament fame, Horatious Bonar - author of many hymns (1808-1889), J.N. Darby 1800-1882 influential teacher among the Plymouth Brethren and the father of modern Dispensationalism * (See his comments on "Man's so-called free will" below), George Mueller 1805-1898 -Christian evangelist and orphanage director, Martin Luther (1483-1546), John Knox (1505-1572), both Robert Estienne, also known as Stephanus (1503 - 1559) and Theodore Beza (1519 - 1605) - compilers of the Greek New Testament that underlies the King James Bible.
Giovanni Diodati (1576 – 1649) was the first to translate the Bible into Italian from Hebrew and Greek sources. He was a strongly Calvinistic Italian Protestant theologian, and his Italian Bible is very much like the King James Holy Bible, Cipriano de Valera was a strong Calvinist who translated the Bible into Spanish in the 1602 Reina Valera Spanish Bible. His Spanish Bible followed the Traditional Greek texts and is very much like the King James Bible but in Spanish. Thomas Cranmer (1489-1556) of The Great Bible of 1540 fame, sometimes called the Cranmer Bible, Hugh Latimer (1485-1555), Nicholas Ridley (1500-1555), John Huss (1369-1415), John Foxe of Foxes Book of Martyrs (1517-1587), Blaise Pascal - the French mathematician, physicist, inventor and author (1623-1662), Stephen Charnock (1628-1680), John Owen (1616-1683), John Gill, Baptist pastor, teacher and world known Bible commentator (1697 - 1771), David Brainerd - missionary to the American Indians (1718 - 1747), Andrew Fuller (1754-1815) Matthew Henry who wrote the famous commentary that bears his name (1662-1714), Robert Haldane (1764-1842), Jonathon Edwards, theologian and preacher who was used mightily during the Great Awakening revivals in America and famous for his sermon "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" (1703-1758), Augustus H. Strong, former president of Rochester Theological Seminary (1836-1921), Adoniram Judson (1788-1850) Baptist missionary who labored for 40 years in Burma, Charles Hodge (1797-1878), A. A. Hodge (1823-1886), B. B. Warfield (1851-1921), B. H. Carroll, founder and first president of the Southwestern Baptist Seminary (1843-1914), ** Reformed theologian, Frederick Nolan 1784-1864, and author of The Integrity of the Received Text, Presbyterian Joseph Charles Philpot 1802-1869, scholar and Reformed theologian Robert Dabney 1820 - 1898, and Reformed pastor and teacher George Sayles Bishop 1836-1916, Edward F. Hills, author of The King James Version Defended 1912-1981 **(**all five of these men defended in their writings the Received Text that underlies the King James Bible against the Westcott-Hort critical text that is the basis of such modern versions as the NIV, RSV, NASB, ESV, NET, etc.)
Benjamin Keach – 17th cent. English Particular Baptist Minister. He introduced 'hymns' to the previous Psalter-only Baptist tradition and compiled first Baptist hymn books. Isaac Backus – American revolutionary, delegate to the First Continental Congress; James Petigru Boyce – 19th century Southern Baptist pastor, theologian, author, seminary professor and founder and first president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary; John Gano – Baptist Chaplin. He administered baptism by immersion to George Washington during the American Revolution; A. W. Pink - 20th century Baptist theologian; R. Albert Mohler, Jr. – ninth president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky; Roger Williams, Founding pastor of the First Baptist Church in America (1638) and founder of Rhode Island; John Gresham Machen (1881-1937), Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones (1899-1981), R. C. Sproul, J.I. Packer, Francis Schaeffer (1912-1984), Dr. Ken Matto (KJB believer), Ian Paisley, who also is a strong King James Bible believer, and Michael Maynard who wrote A History of The Debate Over 1 John 5:7-8 (a book recommended by Donald Waite and Gail Ripplinger).
Dr. Martin Lloyd-Jones, a strong Calvinist, comments on the King James Bible -
“Very well, my friends, let me say a word for the old book, the old Authorized Version. It was translated by fifty-four men, every one of them a great scholar,… These translators were all men who were orthodox in the faith. They believed that the Bible is the infallible Word of God and they submitted to it as the final authority,… Here, I say, were fifty-four men, scholars and saintly, who were utterly submitted to the Book. You have never had that in any other version. Here and here alone you have a body of men who were absolutely committed to it, who gave themselves to it, who did not want to correct or sit in judgment upon it, whose only concern and desire was to translate it and interpret it for the masses of the people.” D.M. Lloyd-Jones, Sermon: How Can We See a Return to the Bible?, 1961
William Tyndale on God’s Sovereign Election -
John Newton, who wrote that great hymn “Amazing Grace” himself wrote an essay called "More than a Calvinist" in 1762.
You can see it here.
Here is just part of what John Newton says: "The doctrine of God’s sovereignty likewise is no less fully assented to by those who are called Calvinists. We zealously contend for this point in our debates with the Armimians; and are ready to wonder that any should be hardy enough to dispute the Creator’s right to do what he will with his own. While we are only engaged in defense of the election of grace, and have a comfortable hope that we are ourselves of that number, we seem so convinced, by the arguments the Scripture affords us in support of the truth, that we can hardly forbear charging our adversaries with perverse obstinacy and pride, for opposing it. Undoubtedly the ground of this opposition lies in the pride of the human heart..."
John Newton on Calvinism
“I am an avowed Calvinist; the points which are usually comprised in that term seem to me so consonant to Scripture, reason (when enlightened), and experience, that I have not the shadow of a doubt about them. But I cannot dispute; I dare not speculate. What is by some called High Calvinism [or Hyper-Calvinism] I dread. I feel much more union of spirit with some Arminians than I could with some Calvinists; and if I thought a person feared sin, loved the Word of God, and was seeking after Jesus, I would not walk the length of my study to proselyte him to the Calvinist doctrines. Not because I think them mere opinions, or of little importance to a believer—I think the contrary; but because I believe these doctrines will do no one any good till he is taught them of God. I believe a too hasty assent to Calvinistic principles, before a person is duly acquainted with the plague of his own heart, is one principal cause of that lightness of profession which so lamentably abounds in this day, a chief reason why many professors are rash, heady, high-minded, contentious about words, and sadly remiss as to the means of divine appointment. For this reason, I suppose, though I never preached a sermon in which the tincture of Calvinism may not be easily discerned by a judicious hearer, yet I very seldom insist expressly upon those points, unless they fairly and necessarily lie in my way.”
Martin Luther -
Luther believed that divine election was the cause of our salvation. The doctrine was for the comfort of the believer. He wrote: "The human doctrine of free will and of our spiritual powers is futile. The matter (salvation) does not depend on our will but on God’s will and election."* Since salvation is totally of God’s doing, the doctrine of election comforts those who believe. We can say, "I belong to God! I have been chosen by God. I am one of his sheep!"
Synergism verse Monergism and Martin Luther's book "The Bondage of the Will"
7 minute video dealing with the difference between the Roman Catholic doctrine of “free will” versus that of Martin Luther and the Reformers of sovereign electing grace.
Isaac Watts - famous Hymn writer
***Noah Webster gives his personal testimony of his conversion in 1808 during the Second Great Awakening. He tells how he was brought up as a religious man but he was not yet regenerate. He previously was opposed to the doctrines of Calvinism, but once he was soundly converted, he knew that these doctrines were true. He writes:
“This my dear friend, is a short but faithful narration of facts. That these impressions were not the effect of any of my own passions, nor of enthusiasm is to me evident, for I was in complete possession of all my rational powers, and that the influence was supernatural, is evident from this circumstance; IT WAS NOT ONLY INDEPENDENT OF ALL VOLITION BUT OPPOSED TO IT. You will readily suppose that after such evidence of the direct operation of the divine spirit upon the human heart, I COULD NO LONGER QUESTION OR HAVE A DOUBT RESPECTING THE CALVINISTIC AND CHRISTIAN DOCTRINES OF REGENERATION, OF FREE GRACE AND OF THE SOVEREIGNTY OF GOD. I now began to understand and relish many parts of the scriptures, which before appeared mysterious and unintelligible, or repugnant to my natural pride…– in short my view of the scriptures, of religion, of the whole christian, scheme of salvation, and of God’s moral government, are very much changed, and my heart yields with delight and confidence to whatever appears to be the divine will.”
You can see his entire personal testimony here.
John Nelson Darby, 1880-1882, the founder of Dispensationalism, was a strong Calvinist and supporter of the doctrine of total depravity.
“This re-appearance of the doctrine of freewill serves to support that of the pretension of the natural man to be not irremediably fallen, for this is what such doctrine tends to. All who have never been deeply convicted of sin, all persons in whom this conviction is based on gross external sins, believe more or less in freewill.” – Man’s So-Called Freewill
C.H. Spurgeon. Unbelievably, I have run into the occasional rabid free willer who told me that I did not have my facts straight about Charles Spurgeon being a Calvinist!
Here is his own sermon that he preached on February 11, 1855 called “Christ Crucified” in which he clearly says: “And I have my own private opinion that there is no such thing as preaching Christ and him crucified, unless you preach what nowadays is called Calvinism. I have my own ideas, and those I always state boldly. It is a nickname to call it Calvinism; Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing else. I do not believe we can preach the gospel, if we do not preach justification by faith, without works; nor unless we preach the sovereignty of God in his dispensation of grace; nor unless we exalt the electing, unchangeable, eternal, immutable, conquering, love of Jehovah; nor do I think we can preach the gospel, unless we base it upon the peculiar redemption which Christ made for his elect and chosen people; nor can I comprehend a gospel which lets saints fall away after they are called, and suffers the children of God to be burned in the fires of damnation after having believed. Such a gospel I abhor. The gospel of the Bible is not such a gospel as that.”
See also Spurgeon's Quotes - Those particularly on Calvinism vs Arminianism and the Doctrines of Grace
See Spurgeon's sermon on John 5:40 "And ye WILL NOT come to me, that ye might have life." titled "Free Will A Slave."
Dr. Martin Lloyd-Jones sermon on Calvinism, Hyper-Calvinism and Arminianism
The Waldensians were “Calvinists” long before John Calvin.
What did the Waldensians believe about the church?
Read the quote below from a time far before Luther or Calvin.
Chapter V, Extracted out of divers Authentick Manuscripts written in their own Language several hundreds of Years (1100-1200AD) before either Calvin (1509 – 1564) or Luther (1483 – 1546)
Article IV: The Catechism of the ancient Waldenses for the Instructing of their Youth.
Minister: What is that which thou Believest concerning the Holy Church?
Answer: I say, that the Church is considered two manner of ways, the one Substantially , and the other Ministerially. As it is considered Substantially, by the Holy Catholick Church is meant all the Elect of God, from the beginning of the World to the end, by the grace of God through the merit of Christ, gathered together by the Holy Spirit, and fore-ordained to eternal life: the number and names of whom are known to him alone who has elected them: and in this Church remains none who is reprobate: but the Church, as it is conserved according to the truth of the Misitery, is the company of the Ministers of Christ, together with the People committed to their Charge, using he Ministry, by Faith, Hope and Charity.
** The Churches of the Valley of Piemont, Sir Samuel Moreland, p. 79 (1658 AD)
Question for those of you who consider themselves to be Calvinists -
Why are you using one of the new Vatican Versions like the ESV, NASB, NIV, NET, Holman versions etc. instead of the the only Reformation Bible believed by thousands of blood bought saints to be the infallible words of God?
King James, who himself was a strong Calvinist, made the following remarks concerning the Pope and Roman Catholicism:
"... Popery is in deed The mysterie of iniquitie ..." -- 1605 Speech to Parliament
"... blinde superstition of their errors in Religion ... led them to this device [The Gunpowder Plot] ..." -- 1605 Speech to Parliament
"The ground of all true ... religion, and ... service ... that brings salvation ... is to bee situate in Jesus Christ onely ... Act. 4:12 ..." -- Meditation Upon I Chron. 15:25-29
"The Pope is Antichrist ..." -- Meditation Upon Revelation 20:7-10
"Antichrist and his clergie ... not only infect the earth ... but rule also over the whole ..." -- Meditation Upon Revelation 20:7-10
"... Is it a small corrupting of the Scriptures to make all, or the most part of the Apocrypha of equall faith with the canonicall Scriptures ...?" -- A Premonition to All Most Mightie Monarches
"The Scripture forbiddeth to worship the Image of any thing that God created ..." -- A Premonition to All Most Mightie Monarches
"Christ did not promise ... to leave Peter with them to direct and instruct them in all things; but he promised to send the holy Ghost for that end." -- A Premonition to All Most Mightie Monarches
"Rome is the Seat of the Antichrist." -- A Premonition to All Most Mightie Monarches
Another reason to like king James!
"The king of England, James I (of the renowned King James Version) also pressed for a synod to deliberate on the five points of Arminianism. When the Arminians recommended Vorstius, a Socinian from Germany, to fill the chair at Leyden vacated by Arminius, King James I wrote letters to the States General of the Netherlands opposing his appointment:
"In short, since God has been pleased to dignify me with the title "Defender of the Faith", if Vorstius is kept any longer, we shall be obliged not only to separate from those heretical churches, but also to consult all the other Reformed churches, in order to know which is the best way of extirpating and sending back to Hell those cursed heresies which have recently sprung up; we shall be forced to forbid the young people of our kingdom to frequent such an infected University as that of Leyden." (Scott, 24-24)
The Trinity Foundation - Five Points
The King James Bible Translators were Calvinists.
15 minute video -
See Indisputable Proof that the ESV, NIV, NASB are the new Vatican Versions -
See part 2 for a verse by verse Bible comparison -
Fake Bible Versions DO teach and pervert several biblical doctrines, and the infallibility of the Bible (any bible in any language) is a huge doctrine that most Christians do not believe anymore.
IF the modern versionist actually BELIEVES what his fake bibles teach, then he does believe in false doctrines and has erred from the truth.
Here are about 40 concrete examples of the falsehoods taught by these fake bible versions. Examples - God can be deceived by men (NASB, NET), Man can speed up the coming of the day of God (NIV, ESV), Pride and Boasting are Christian virtues (ESV, NASB, NIV, NKJV), Satan controls the world (NIV), ghosts exist (NKJV, NIV, NASB, ESV) and There are different races of men and some races are inferior to others (NASB, NIV)
“For ye have perverted the words of the living God, of the LORD of hosts our God.” Jeremiah 23:36
The Ever Changing ESVs 2001, 2007, 2011 and 2016 editions = just another Vatican Version.
James White - The Protestant Pope of the new Vatican Versions.
Bridge to Babylon: Rome, Ecumenism & The Bible - A Lamp in the Dark Part lll.
Very well done documentary showing the influence of Westcott and Hort and the Roman Catholic church in rejecting the Reformation text of the Bible for the Vatican supervised Critical Greek text that is the basis of such versions as the ESV, NIV, NASB, NET, Jehovah Witness New World Translation and the modern Roman Catholic versions.
Question for those of you who are King James Bible believers - Many King James Bible believers refer to the errant and heretical views of men like Westcott and Hort who were behind the modern critical text "Bibles", and the inerrancy denying Bruce Metzer and the false Catholic church represented by Jesuit Cardinal Carlo Martini (both of whom were among the 5 chief editors of the United Bible Society's ever changing critical Greek text) and ask: "Would God use such men to put together His pure words?" I also believe this is a sound argument.
Then why do most King James Bible believers either ignore or totally dismiss the fact that God used those we would call Calvinists to give us the Greek texts of Stephanus and Beza (which the King James Bible translators primarily used) and the "line of good Bibles" like Tyndale, Coverdale, Matthew's Bible, the Bishops' Bible and the Geneva Bible, AND more significantly, the translators themselves of His masterpiece and the true Book of the Lord in the King James Bible?
It seems more than a little hypocritical to use the argument of heretics against the modern Vatican Versions like the ESV, NIV, NASB, NET, etc. and yet to entirely dismiss as irrelevant the fact that God used "Calvinists" to give us His perfect and pure words of absolute truth in our beloved King James Holy Bible. Think about it.
The Roman Catholic Catechism
Now, let's examine some of the places in the modern versions where they are muddying the waters or even perverting some of these precious truths.
I Timothy 2:3-5
"For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who WILL HAVE all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus."
Much of modern Christianity pictures God as a grandfatherly figure wishing so badly that his errant creatures would heed his pleadings and decide of their own free will to choose to believe and cast their vote for God. For those of us who have been granted by our gracious Lord to see the great truths of election and sovereign grace, we should be greatly concerned to see how many of these truths have been diluted in the new bible versions.
Comparing scripture with scripture we see that the phrase "all men" refers to both Jews and Gentiles. It means all categories of men, not all men without exception. The Arminian view always proves too much. There were multitudes of men who were already lost and in hell when Christ died. So does "all men" include those who had perished in their sins before Christ came to this earth?
In the Old Testament God chose only the nation of Israel to be his people. "For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God, and the LORD hath chosen thee to be a peculiar people unto himself, above all the nations that are upon the earth." Deut. 14:2. But now the Messiah has come to be the Saviour of His people which are taken out out every nation, tribe, kindred and tongue. "God did visit the Gentiles to take out of them a people for his name." Acts 15:14.
Even in the Old Testament times a Gentile could come to Israel and learn of the true God. Notice carefully the expression used in Solomon's prayer at the dedication of the temple in I Kings 8:41-43: "Moreover concerning A STRANGER, that is not of thy people Israel, but cometh out of a far country for thy name's sake; (For they shall hear of thy great name, and of thy strong hand, and of thy stretched out arm;) when HE shall come and pray toward this house; Hear thou in heaven thy dwelling place, and do according to all that THE STRANGER calleth to thee for; that ALL PEOPLE of the earth may know thy name, to fear thee, as do thy people of Israel."
Observe that this prayer refers to one Gentile who comes to pray to the true God. "All people of the earth" therefore does not mean every individual but all men without distinction of nationality, be they a Jew or a Gentile. Again in Isaiah 56: 6, 7 it says: "Also the sons of the stranger (Gentiles) that join themselves to the LORD, to serve him, and to love the name of the LORD...Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer...for mine house shall be called an house of prayer FOR ALL PEOPLE." Obviously this does not mean every individual without exception will join himself to the LORD, but all without distinction of nationality.
When the apostle Paul relates his conversion experience we can see how this same thought is expressed. In Acts 9:15 the Lord tells Ananias concerning Paul: "But the Lord said, Go thy way; for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel."
Yet in Acts 22:14, 15 Paul himself tells us that Ananias came to him: "And he said, The God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will, and see that Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth. For thou shalt be his witness unto ALL MEN of what thou hast seen and heard."
Do you see it? All men = the Gentiles, kings and the children of Israel. All men without distinction of nationality or social standing. Obviously Paul did not speak to Noah's sons, the Cherokee Indians, Genghis Khan or Bill Gates.
At the birth of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, the devout Simeon came by the Spirit into the temple, took up the babe in his arms and said: "Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, according to thy word: For mine eyes have seen thy salvation, which thou hast prepared before the face of ALL PEOPLE; A light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel."
Obviously not every individual Gentile or Jew would be lightened by this salvation, but the Messiah will save all people without distinction of nationality, not all people without exception.
This is why Paul continues in 1 Timothy with these significant words. In verses 6 and 7 he says: "Christ Jesus; Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time. Whereunto I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle, (I speak the truth in Christ, and lie not;) a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity."
Why does he say he is not lying but telling the truth that he was a preacher and teacher of the Gentiles? Because now in the New Testament dispensation Christ, the Jewish Messiah, is gathering from the heathen Gentiles a people for his name and together the elect Jews and the elect Gentiles are what make up the "all men".
This is a consistent, biblically defined use of the term "all men" or "all people". The "all men" is not the problem with the modern versions, but the NKJV, NIV, ESV and NASB have all translated the verb "to will" in such a way as to create a direct contradiction with several other verses and contribute to the pathetic god image so common today.
"who WILL HAVE all men to be saved"
Other Bibles that read like the King James Bible are Wycliffe 1395, Tyndale 1525 - "which WILL HAVE all men saved", Coverdale 1535, The Great Bible (Cranmer) 1540 - "which WYLL HAVE all men to be saued", Matthew's Bible 1549, Bishop's Bible 1568 - "Who WYLL HAVE all men to be saued", the Geneva Bible 1587 - "Who will that all men shalbe saued", The Beza N.T. 1599 - "who WILL that all men should be saved", the Bill Bible 1671, Mace's N.T. 1729, Whiston's Primitive N.T. 1745- "Who WILL HAVE all men to be saved", even Wesley's 1755 translation - "Who WILLETH all men to be saved", the Worsely Version 1770, Haweis N.T. 1795, The Thomson Bible 1808 - "who WILLETH all men to be saved", The Revised Translation 1815, The Thompson N.T. 1816, the Kneeland N.T. 1823, The Living Oracles 1835 (George Cambell), the Pickering N.T. 1840, the Etheridge Translation 1849, the Hewett N.T. 1850 - "who WILL HAVE all men to be saved", the Boothroyd Bible 1853, The Kenrick N.T. 1862 - "who WILL HAVE all men to be saved", the Anderson N.T. 1865, Noyes Translation 1869, Young's 1898 - "who doth will all men to be saved" Rotherham's 1902 Emphasized Bible, Webster's 1833 translation, The Alford N.T. 1870, the Revised Version 1881 - "who WILLETH that all men should be saved", the Davidson N.T. 1876, the Smith Bible 1876, The Revised English Bible 1877, the Sharpe Bible 1883, The Dillard N.T. 1885 - "who WILL HAVE all men to be saved."
The Clarke N.T. 1913 - "who WILL HAVE all men to be saved", The New Testament Translated from the Sinaitic Manuscript (Anderson) 1918, Weymouth Translation "who IS WILLING", The Centenary Translation 1924 - "whose WILL it is that all men should be saved", Noyes N.T. - "whose will is that all men should be saved", The New American Bible 1991, the Third Millennium Bible 1998, the 21st century KJV 1994, The Urim-Thummin Version 2001,The Tomson N.T. 2002, The Heritage Bible 2003, The Revised Geneva Bible 2005, The Concordant Version 2006, The Hebraic Transliteration Scripture - "who WILL HAVE all men", Online Interlinear Andre de Mol 2010, The Work of God's Children Illustrated Bible 2011 - "who WILL HAVE all men to be saved", and the Knox Bible 2012 all correctly translate the passage as God "WILL HAVE all men to be saved", or "wills" all men to be saved.
The verb is thelo (θελει) and, when used of God, it means to will to do something. And since He rules over all, what He wills He does.
When the King James Bible says that God WILL HAVE all men to be saved, this is the strongest possible was of saying that this WILL BE DONE by God Almighty.
However, the NKJV, ESV and NASB say God "DESIRES all men to be saved " while the NIV, ISV, NET, Holman Standard say he "WANTS all men to be saved".
It is interesting to see the parallel changes that have gone on in the Catholic versions. The 1582 Douay-Rheims read like the KJB with: "Who will have all men to be saved", but then the Douay of 1950 says "He WISHES all men to be saved", St. Joseph New American bible of 1970 has "he WANTS all men to be saved" and the New Jerusalem bible of 1985 and the 2009 Catholic Public Domain Version read: "he WANTS everyone to be saved".
To translate the verse in this way contradicts the passages where this same verb or noun form is used in reference to God.
Most of these new versions are in fact the new "Catholic" versions. It is highly ironic that the official Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches "the free will of man" in opposition to the faith of the Reformers who believed it was God who chose His elect in Christ before the foundation of the word and in time makes us willing to come to Christ. (See John 1:13; Romans 9:16, Phil. 2:13)
Their common UBS (United Bible Society) Nestle-Aland critical New Testament text is an artificially produced "interconfessional" text put out by a joint effort of the Vatican and modern day "Evangelicals". It's called the United Bible Society Critical Greek text and it underlies such versions as the ESV, NIV, NASB, RSV and the modern Catholic versions like the St. Joseph New American Bible of 1970 and the New Jerusalem bible of 1985. Don't believe me? Well, here is the Indisputable Proof that the ESV, NIV, NASBs are in fact the new Vatican Versions -
He "worketh all things after the counsel of HIS OWN WILL" Ephesians 1:11; "For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth WHOM HE WILL" John 5:21; and in Romans 9:16 - 18 we read: "So then it is NOT of him that WILLETH, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. Therefore hath he mercy on whom HE WILL have mercy, and whom HE WILL he hardeneth." Again with a different word but with the same thought is James 1:18 "OF HIS OWN WILL begat he us with the word of truth."
The new versions portray a schizophrenic god who, on the one hand desires or wants to save everybody, and yet a God Who in fact saves whom He wills.
Respecter of Persons
There is a subtle twisting of God's inspired words taking place in many modern versions in how they are rendering the phrase "respecteth not persons". This is so subtle, that I believe most Christians have not noticed it. The change in meaning produced by versions like the NKJV, NIV, ESV and NASB unfortunately fits in with so much of modern, popular theology, that many would actually consider it to be an improvement over the King James reading. It fits the philosophy of the natural mind of man.
The concept that "God has created all men equal" does not come from the Holy Bible. God obviously has not created all men equal, nor does He deal with every single individual or nation in what seems to us to be a fair and impartial manner. Many have become so influenced in their thinking by the reasoning of the world, that they cannot discern this obvious truth.
God has created, formed and made each of us. Yet He has not given to all equal intelligence, good looks, physical skills, nor spiritual gifts. "He divideth to every man severally as He will." Exodus 4:11 tells us "And the LORD said unto him, Who hath made man's mouth? or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not I the LORD?".
Not all are born in a country which even has the word of God in its culture, or where it would be openly taught and encouraged. Psalm 147:19,20 "He sheweth his word unto Jacob, his statutes and his judgments unto Israel. He hath not dealt so with any nation: and as for his judgments, they have not known them. Praise ye the LORD."
Some are born in abject poverty, disease and ignorance, while others are blessed with abundant crops, education and families that care for them. "The rich and poor meet together: the LORD is the maker of them all." Proverbs 22:2.
The phrase "to accept the persons of men" or "to respect persons" does not mean, as the modern versions have translated it, "to show partiality" or "to show favoritism". One of the chief arguments of the Arminian side against the doctrine of election is: "God does not show partiality or favoritism, so election cannot be true." The new bibles are reinforcing this fallacious argument.
"Not to show partiality" is to treat all men equally; and God does not treat every individual equally, as His word clearly testifies. Daniel Webster's 1828 dictionary defines "respecter of persons" as 'a person who regards the external circumstances of others in his judgment, and suffers his opinions to be biased by them'.
God's dealings with a man are not based on outward appearance, position, rank, wealth or nationality. Rather, His own sovereign purpose and the good pleasure of His will are the only deciding factors.
We are told in Deuteronomy 7:6-8 "For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth. The LORD did not set his love upon you, nor choose you, because ye were more in number than any people: for ye were the fewest of all people: But because the LORD loved you".
Deuteronomy 10:14-17 "Behold, the heaven and the heaven of heavens is the LORD'S thy God, the earth also, with all that therein is. Only the LORD had a delight in thy fathers to love them, and he chose their seed after them, even you above all people, as it is this day." Verse 17 "For the LORD thy God is God of gods, and Lord of lords, a great God, a mighty, and a terrible, which REGARDETH NOT PERSONS, nor taketh reward."
Here both election and "not regarding persons" are used in the same context.
God says He chose ONLY the fathers (Abraham, Isaac and Jacob) and their seed to be His people, and not the others. That He "REGARDETH NOT PERSONS" means that He does this, not on the basis of their nationality, nor their good moral character (for they were a stiffnecked and rebellious people), but because is was His good pleasure to do so.
Other Bibles that agree with the KJB here in Deuteronomy 10:17 are Wycliffe 1395, Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew's Bible 1549, the Bishops' Bible 1568, Geneva Bible 1587, the Bill Bible 1671, The Thompson Bible 1808, Webster's Bible 1833, the Longman Version 1841, the Boothroyd Bible 1853, the Lesser Old Testament 1853, The Revised English Bible 1877, Darby 1890, Young's 1898, the Revised Version 1881, the ASV of 1901, Rotherham's 1902, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907, the JPS 1917 Jewish Bible, the 1936 Hebrew-English, The Word of Yah 1993, Complete Apostle's Bible 2005 - "who is no respecter of persons", A Conservative Version 2005, the Bond Slave Version 2009, the Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, the New Heart English Bible 2010, the New European Version 2010 - "does not respect persons", The Orthodox Jewish Bible 2011 - "which regardeth not persons", the Biblos Interlinear Bible 2011 - "regards not persons", The World English Bible 2012 - "who doesn't respect persons", The Hebrew Names Version 2014 - "who doesn't regard persons".
Interlinear Hebrew Old Testament - "which regardeth not persons"
God's First Truth 1999 - "which regards no man's person"
Bible in Basic English 1961 - "who has no respect for any man's position"
However the NKJV, NIV and NASB have "shows no partiality". The Catholic St. Joseph NAB says: "has no favorites" while the New Jerusalem bible of 1985 has: "free of favouritism". If God chose Israel to be His people, and not the others, is not this showing partiality?
Deuteronomy 14:1-2 "Ye are the children of the LORD your God...and the LORD hath chosen thee to be a peculiar people unto himself, above all the nations that are upon the earth." Why did not God choose the other nations to be his children and to know his laws? Isn't this showing partiality or favoritism?
2 Samuel 14:14 - "NEITHER DOTH GOD RESPECT ANY PERSON"
One verse among the hundreds that have been messed up by the NKJV, NIV, ESV, Holman and NASB is 2 Samuel 14:14. Here Joab saw that king David's heart was toward his son Absalom. So Joab sends a wise woman to speak to the king. In verse 14 she says: "For we must needs die, and are as water spilt on the ground, which cannot be gathered up again: NEITHER DOTH GOD RESPECT ANY PERSON: yet doth he devise means, that his banished be not expelled from him."
In other words, we all must die, whether rich, poor, Jew, Gentile, man or woman, king or servant; God does not look at our social station and on this basis exclude some from death.
Other Bible versions that read as the King James Bible are the Geneva Bible of 1599, the Webster Bible 1833, the Longman Version 1841, The Jewish Family Bible 1864 - "NEITHER DOTH GOD RESPECT ANY PERSON", the Jewish Publication Society 1917 translation - "NEITHER DOTH GOD RESPECT ANY PERSON; but let him devise means, that he that is banished be not an outcast from him.", The Revised English Bible 1877, The Sharpe Bible 1883, Young's 1898, The Ancient Hebrew Bible 1907 - "NEITHER DOTH GOD RESPECT ANY PERSON", the KJV 21st Century version 1994, the Third Millennium Bible 1998 and the Jubilee Bible 2010 - "NEITHER DOES GOD RESPECT ANY PERSON; yet he does devise means that his outcasts not be expelled from him."
Other Bibles that read the same way and do not create this theological error are The Word of Yah 1993, The Revised Webster Bible 1995, The Concordant Literal Version 2009 - “and Elohim DOES NOT ACCEPT A PERSON", the Bond Slave Version 2009 - "neither does God RESPECT ANY PERSON", Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010 - "neither doth Elohim (אלהים) RESPECT ANY PERSON: yet doth he devise means, that his banished be not expelled from him.", Biblos Interlinear Bible 2011 - "neither does God RESPECT ANY PERSON"
Interlinear Hebrew Old Testament - "neither respect doth God person"
The Bishops' Bible of 1568, and the Geneva Bible of 1599 and The Revised Geneva Bible 2005 have the same basic meaning as that found in the King James Bible, saying: "For we must needes dye, and we are as water spilt on the ground, which cannot be gathered vp againe: NEITHER DOTH GOD SPARE ANY PERSON, yet doeth he appoynt meanes, not to cast out from him, him that is expelled."
The Boothroyd Bible 1853 says: "GOD ACCEPTETH NO PERSON"
and Young's 1898 is similar with: "AND GOD DOTH NOT ACCEPT A PERSON"
The Judaica Press Complete Tanach 2004 translation done by Rabbi Rosenburg says: "For die we must, and are as water that is spilt on the ground which cannot be gathered up again; AND GOD FAVORS NOT A SOUL, but He devises means that he that is banished be not cast from Him."
This rendering agrees with the sense found in the King James Bible.
The Complete Jewish Bible 1998 has the same meaning, with: "For we will all die someday; we’ll be like water spilled on the ground that can’t be gathered up again; and GOD MAKES NO EXCEPTION FOR ANYONE."
Foreign language Bible that agree with the meaning found in the King James Bible are the Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569 - "ni Dios hace acepción de personas, mas busca la manera para no echar de si al desechado.", the Spanish Biblia Jubilee 2010, and the Spanish Reina Valera Gómez Bible 2010 - "y Dios no hace acepción de personas, sino que provee los medios para que su desterrado no quede alejado de Él." = "and God is no respecter of persons, but also provides the means for his banished not stay away from him", the Italian Diodati 1649 - "e Iddio non ha riguardo ad lacuna persona" = "and God has no regard for any person", and the Romanian Fidela Bible 2009 - "nici Dumnezeu nu se uită la vreo persoană; totuşi plănuieşte mijloace, încât cel alungat al său să nu fie scos de la el."
But many bibles, including the NKJV, NIV, ESV, Holman and NASB have the ridiculous reading of "YET GOD DOES NOT TAKE AWAY LIFE", instead of "neither doth God respect any person". This is a lie and a contradiction. In this very book in chapter 12:15 "the LORD struck the child" of David and Bathsheeba and it died. In I Sam. 2:6 we are told "The LORD killeth, and maketh alive: he bringeth down to the grave, and bringeth up", and in Deuteronomy 32:39 God says "See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand."
It is not that the Hebrew will not allow the meaning found in the KJB, that the NKJV, NIV, ESV, Holman and NASB have so badly mistranslated 2 Samuel 14:14. They all likewise have translated these same words in other places as they stand in the KJB and others.
The phrase "no respecter of persons" is found six times in the New Testament, and every time the modern versions have distorted the true meaning. Romans 2:11, Ephesians 6:9, Colossians 3:25, James 2:1 and 9, and Acts 10:34. In each case it has to do with not receiving the face, outward position, nationality or social rank of another. But God does not treat all people the same, nor are we told to do so either. We are to withdraw from some, avoid, exclude, reject, separate from, and not cast our pearls before others.
Most importantly, God Himself chose His elect people in Christ before the foundation of the world and "of the SAME LUMP" makes one vessel unto honour and another unto dishonour - Romans 9:21. This is definitely showing partiality, but it is not respecting persons.
Romans 2:11 says "For there is no respect of persons with God."
So also read Wycliffe 1395, Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540 (Cranmer), the Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, the Beza New Testament 1599, the Bill Bible 1671, Mace N.T. 1729, John Wesley's N.T. 1755, the Worsely Version 1770, Thomas Haweis N.T. 1795, the Thompson Bible 1808 "For with God there is no respect of persons.", Webster's bible 1833, Living Oracles 1835, the Pickering N.T. 1840, the Longman Version 1841, the Hewett N.T. 1850, The Commonly Received Version 1851, Murdock Translation 1851, the Boothroyd Bible 1853, American Bible Union N.T. 1865, Anderson's N.T. 1866, Noyes Translation 1869, The Alford N.T. 1870, The Revised English Bible 1877, the Revised Version 1885, the ASV of 1901, Rotherham's Emphasized Bible 1902, the Worrell N.T. 1904, the Clarke N.T. 1913, Lamsa's translation of the Syriac Peshitta 1933, Green's Interlinear 1985, The Word of Yah 1993, the KJV 21st Century Version 1994, the Third Millennium Bible 1998, The Lawrie Translation 1998 - "For there is NO RESPECT OF PERSONS with God.", The Sacred Scriptures Family of Yah 2001, The Tomson N.T. 2002, The Revised Geneva Bible 2005, the Bond Slave Version 2009, English Jubilee Bible 2010, the Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010 - "For there is no respect of persons with Elohim (אלהים).", The New European Version 2010, The Work of God's Children Illustrated Bible 2011, and The Revised Douay-Rheims Bible 2012.
The Julia Smith Translation 1855 reads: "there is no distinction of persons with God."
Darby 1890 has: "there is no acceptance of persons with God"
Youngs 1898 says "there is no acceptance of faces"
Foreign Language Bibles
Foreign language Bibles that read like the KJB here in Romans 2:11 are the Spanish Cipriano de Valera 1602, the Spanish Reina Valera 1960 and 1995 - "acepción de personas", Luther's German Bible 1545 - "Denn es ist kein Ansehen der Person vor Gott.", the Portuguese Almeida Corrigenda 2009 - "com Deus não há acepção de pessoas.", the Italian Diodati 1649 - "Dio non v’è riguardo alla qualità delle persone.", the French Martin 1744 and the French Ostervald of 1996 - "Car Dieu n'a point égard à l'apparence des personnes."
But the NKJV, NASB, ESV, NET, ISV say "there is no partiality with God" and the NIV, Catholic St. Joseph NAB, and the New Jerusalem bible all say "God does not show favoritism".
The Worldwide English N.T. says: "God does not love some people more than others".
Yet this very book declares in Romans 9 "For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of him that calleth...Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated...I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy...So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy...Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth."
Please consider the true meaning of the phrase "no respecter of persons" and contrast it with the modern rendering. I hope you will see that it is not the same at all. Only the KJB contains the whole truth of the counsel of God.
Faith is a gift from God.
Faith or belief is a gift from God. Faith is not something we can produce on our own. God has to give it to us. Those who are not His sheep do not believe because they are not His sheep. John 10:26. Jesus said to the Pharisees "But ye believe not, BECAUSE ye are not my sheep, as I said unto you. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me."
The reason you and I believe the gospel is because God Himself gives us faith. Romans 12:3 "For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think soberly, according as GOD HATH DEALT TO EVERY MAN THE MEASURE OF FAITH."
The "every man" in the context is the "every man among you" or those who are already Christians. Not everyone has faith. 2 Thessalonians 3:2 "for all men have not faith" and obviously there are unbelievers.
Phil. 1:29 "For unto you IT IS GIVEN in the behalf of Christ, not only TO BELIEVE ON HIM, but also to suffer for his sake."
Eph. 2:8 "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and THAT NOT OF YOURSELVES, IT IS THE GIFT OF GOD."
Eph. 1:19 "And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward that believe, according to the working of his mighty power" Tyndale and Geneva Bibles note that Faith is the work of God only, even as the raising up of Christ. The same power that raised up Christ, is the power of God that causes us to believe the gospel. This truth has been obscured in the NASB and NIV. They both add words not found in any Greek text and change the meaning of the passage.
The NASB says: "and what is the surpassing greatness of His power toward us who believe. THESE ARE in accordance with the working of the strength of His might..." The New Jerusalem has: "the power that he has exercised for us believers; THIS ACCORDS WITH the strength of his power..."
The NIV has: "and his incomparably great power for us who believe. THAT POWER is like the working of his mighty strength..." And the St. Joseph NAB reads: "his power in us who believe. IT IS LIKE he showed raising Christ from the dead..."
Ephesians 3:12 - KJB "In whom (Christ Jesus) we have boldness and access with confidence BY THE FAITH OF HIM."
The underlying Greek phrase here is very clear, yet many modern versions have totally mistranslated it. "By the faith of him" is δια της πιστεως αυτου. This is quite literally "through the faith of him". That is exactly what it says. And this is also the reading of Wycliffe 1395 - "bi the feith of hym.",the Great Bible 1540 -"which is by the fayth of hym.", even the Douay-Rheims! 1582 "by the faith of him", Whiston's N.T. 1745 "by the faith of him.", Webster's Translation 1833, Darby 1890 "by the faith of him", Rotherham's Emphasized bible 1902, the KJV 21st Century 1994 and the Jubilee Bible 2000 -"by the faith of him."
However there are many versions that do not give us the correct translation here. The Revised Version 1881, RSV and ESV say "through OUR faith IN him." There is NO text that reads this way. There is no word "our" and no word for "in". The whole meaning of the verse is changed.
The NKJV, NASB, NIV and Holman unite in saying "through faith IN him." Again, this is not an accurate translation at all.
And others go even further in changing the meaning. The brand new International Standard Version says: "through HIS FAITHFULNESS." and Dan Wallace's goofy NET version says: "In whom we have boldness and confident access TO GOD BECAUSE OF CHRIST'S FAITHFULNESS." Dan Wallace has added the words "TO GOD", "BECAUSE OF" and CHRIST'S" to the verse with ZERO textual support. He just made this up and it totally changes the meaning of the verse.
Scripture speaks of "the faith of God's elect" Titus 1:1
We are told that Jesus is the author and finisher of our faith - Hebrews 12:2 "Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith."
Acts 3:16 "yea, the faith which is by him (not just 'in' him, but BY Him) hath given him this perfect soundness "
Acts 18:27 "he helped them much which had believed THROUGH GRACE." It wasn't just that they believed "in" grace, by it was 'through grace' that they believed.
Acts 14:27 "they rehearsed all that God had done among them, and how He had opened the door of faith unto the Gentiles." If God doesn't open the door, there is no faith.
Acts 16:14 "Lydia...whose heart the Lord opened, that she attended unto the things which were spoken of by Paul"
Acts 15:9 "and put no difference between us (believing Jews) and them (believing Gentiles) purifying their hearts by faith." God purified their hearts by faith, not 'because of' faith. God did it and He did it by faith which He himself gave them. It was not "their part".
Acts 13:48 "and AS MANY AS WERE ORDAINED TO ETERNAL LIFE BELIEVED." Their having been ordained to eternal life preceded their believing. The reason they believed is because God had ordained them to faith in the gospel.
1 Peter 1:21 "Who by Him believe in God that raised him up from the dead" Again, it is BY HIM that we believe in God.
2 Peter 1:1 "to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ".
They obtained this faith, they did not have it to begin with and then did their part to exercise it.
1 Cor. 12:9 "For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom... to another faith by the same Spirit."
Gal. 5:22 one of the parts of the fruit of the Spirit is faith. The Spirit produces FAITH, and this is the reading found in such Bibles as Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva bible 1587, Whiston's Primitive N.T. 1745, Young's, Lamsa, Wycliffe 1395 Bible in Basic English, Green's 'literal', and even the Holman Standard 2003, but versions like the NKJV, NIV, RSV, ESV, and NASB have changed this to 'faithfulness'. The New Jerusalem bible has "trustfulness".
1 Cor. 3:5-6 "Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man? I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase."
You can preach and teach gospel truths, but unless God Himself gives the increase and causes the seed to sprout and grow, there is no belief and no life.
The NASB & NIV have both changed the meaning of this section, added words not in any text, and don't even agree with each other.The NASB says: "through whom you believed, even as the Lord GAVE OPPORTUNITY to each one." This fallacious reading pictures God as giving the opportunity to believe, but apparently it is up to us to choose to take advantage of it or not. This fits in perfectly with today's Arminian theology.
The NIV, on the other hand, differs from them all and says: "only servants, through whom you believed ---as the Lord HAS ASSIGNED TO EACH HIS TASK." The NIV's focus is not on the act of faith as coming from God, but rather on the task God gave to Paul and Apollos. The Catholic St. Joseph is very similar, reading: "ministers through whom you became believers, each of them doing only what the Lord assigned him."
The Faith OF Jesus Christ
One of the many serious changes being made in the modern bible versions is how they are altering the phrase "the faith OF Christ". Many times the phrase "by the faith OF Jesus Christ" has been changed to "by faith IN Jesus Christ". See for example Romans 3:22; Galatians 2:16, 20; 3:22; Ephesians 3:12; Philippians 3:9; James 2:1; Revelation 2:13; and 14:12.
Romans 3:22 "Even the righteousness of God which is by faith OF Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference."
John Gill comments on this verse saying: "Here it is said to be "by faith of Jesus Christ"; not by that faith which Christ himself had as man, but by that faith, OF WHICH HE IS THE AUTHOR and object."
Galatians 2:16, 20 - "Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith OF Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith OF Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified." ..."and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith OF the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me."
Here the NKJV, NIV, ESV and NASB, as well as the modern Catholic versions like St. Joseph NAB and the New Jerusalem bible, have all changed this to "faith IN Jesus Christ", thus changing the truth that this faith comes from Jesus Christ and instead implying that it comes from ourselves.
Dan Wallace's NET version goes even further into heresy and says: "that no one is justified by the works of the law but by THE FAITHFULNESS of Jesus Christ.” (Gal.2:17) and "I live because of the FAITHFULNESS of the Son of God" (Galatians 2:20)
This is not a question of Greek texts differing, because they all say the same thing, dia pisteos iesou xristou, the genitive of possession or source. We speak of the birth of Christ, the death of Christ, the resurrection of Jesus, the body of Jesus, the cross of Christ, the riches of Christ, the kingdom of Christ, the glory of Christ, and many other things using the same grammatical construction, but suddenly the NKJV, NAS, NIV, and most modern bibles now have "through faith IN Jesus Christ."
"by faith OF Jesus Christ"
Reading "by faith OF Jesus Christ" are Wycliffe 1395, Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew's Bible 1549, the Bishops' Bible 1568, the Douay-Rheims bible 1582, the Geneva Bible 1587, the Beza New Testament 1599, the Bill Bible 1671, Wesley's N.T. 1755, Webster's bible 1833, Morgan N.T. 1848, Julia Smith Translation 1855, the Emphatic Diaglott N.T. 1864, the Alford N.T. 1870, Davidson N.T. 1876, the Dillard N.T. 1885, Darby 1890, Young's 1898, Godbey N.T. 1902, the Douay Version 1950, The Word of Yah 1993 - "by faith OF Yahshua the Christ", Interlinear Greek N.T. 1997 (Larry Pierce), the Lawrie Translation 1998, the Third Millennium Bible 1998, God's First Truth 1999, the Tomson N.T. 2002, A Conservative Version Interlinear 2005, The Revised Geneva Bible 2005, the Concordant Version 2006, the Bond Slave Version 2009, the Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, the English Jubilee Bible 2010, the Biblos Interlinear Bible 2011, The Aramaic N.T. 2011, The Work of God's Children Illustrated Bible 2011, the Revised Douay-Rheims Bible 2012 = "by faith OF Jesus Christ", The Hebraic Roots Bible 2012 - “even the righteousness of Elohim through the faith OF Yahshua Messiah”, and The Modern Literal New Testament 2014 - "through the faith OF Jesus Christ".
However beginning with the Revised Version of 1881 and then by the ASV of 1901, they changed about half of these references to "the faith OF Jesus Christ" to faith IN Jesus Christ. For example, the first place we find mention of "the faith OF Jesus Christ" is Romans 3:22. The ASV changes this to read: "even the righteousness of God through faith IN Jesus Christ", but then it footnotes "or, OF". The ASV continues to change most of the verses that correctly read "the faith OF Jesus Christ", except in James 2:1 where it still has "the faith OF our Lord Jesus Christ", and in Revelation 2:13 "hast not denied MY faith", and 14:12 "keep the commandments of God, and the faith OF Jesus".
From then on all the references have progressively been changed in the RSV, NRSV, NKJV, NASB, NIV, St. Joseph New American bible 1970, the New Jerusalem bible 1985 and the Jehovah Witness New World Translation to now read "the faith IN Christ" or even "OUR faith IN Christ".
Revelation 2:13 - "I know thy works, and where thou dwellest, even where Satan's seat is: and thou holdest fast my name, and HAST NOT DENIED MY FAITH, even in those days wherein Antipas was my faithful martyr, who was slain among you, where Satan dwelleth.
All Greek texts read this way - "hast not denied MY FAITH" - καὶ οὐκ ἠρνήσω τὴν πίστιν μου. The simple meaning is that the faith of Jesus is the objective truth of Who He is and what He did for His people on the cross to redeem us from sin and hell. It has nothing to do with our own personal faith.
John Gill comments: "these held fast the name of Christ, or the Gospel, and denied not, but confessed the doctrine of faith in the worst of times. They had the truths of the Gospel in their possession, which were dear and valuable to them; and whereas there was danger of losing them, they held them fast, with great courage, magnanimity, and strength, though the greater number was against them, and they were attended with reproach and persecution."
Barnes' Notes on the N.T. briefly says: "And hast not denied my faith. That is, hast not denied my religion."
Agreeing with the King James reading of "not denied MY Faith" are Wycliffe, Tyndale, Coverdale, Bishops', the Geneva Bible 1587, the Beza N.T. 1599, the Bill Bible 1671, the RV, ASV, NASB, NKJV, Wesley, Youngs, Darby, Hebrew Names Version, Rotherham's Emphasized Bible, Lamsa'a 1933 translation of the Syriac, Douay, the RSV, ESV 2011, the Interlinear Greek N.T. 1997 (Larry Pierce), the Tomson N.T. 2002, Conservative Bible 2011, the Biblos Interlinear Bible 2011, The Work of God's Children Illustrated Bible 2011, The World English Bible 2012, The Modern Literal New Testament 2014 and The Modern English Version 2014 "did not deny MY faith".
However the NIV reads like no Greek text on this earth saying: "You did not renounce YOUR FAITH IN ME." Likewise the Catholic St. Joseph has "have not denied the faith you have in me" while the New Jerusalem reads: "AND DID NOT DISOWN YOUR FAITH IN ME."
Dan Wallace's NET version also reads "you have not denied YOUR faith IN me".
This would mean their own personal faith rather than the essential, objective truths of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Now going along with the NIV is the previous NRSV of 1989, the Holman Standard and the NET versions.
Notice that the RSV read like the KJB, then the NRSV was the first to change the Greek text to "YOUR faith in me", but then the newer ESV has once again gone back to the KJB reading of "not denied MY faith".
Revelation 14:12 - "Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and THE FAITH OF JESUS."
The whole idea here is that those who keep, guard and preserve the words of God and the truth contained in "the faith" of Jesus (the objective truth of Who He is, and what He did), shall overcome at the last against the false religion of antichrist and those who worship his image.
Again, all Greek texts read "the faith OF Jesus" (τὴν πίστιν Ἰησοῦ), and so too do the following Bible translations: Wycliffe 1395, Tyndale 1525, Coverdale 1535, Bishops' Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1599 (here are they that keepe the commaundements of God, and the fayth of Iesus.), the Beza N.T. 1599, the Bill Bible 1671, Wesley's N.T. 1755, Weymouth 1912, the Revised Version 1881, ASV 1901, RSV 1952, NRSV 1989, NKJV, Darby, Young's, Rotherham's Emphasized bible 1902, Lamsa's 1933 translation of the Syriac, the Interlinear Greek N.T. 1997 (Larry Pierce), the Tomson N.T. 2002, the Biblos Interlinear Bible 2011, Conservative Bible 2011, The Work of God's Children Illustrated Bible 2011, The World English Bible 2012, The Modern Literal New Testament 2014 and The Modern English Version 2014 - "the faith OF Jesus".
However the NIV reads: "who obey God's commandments and REMAIN FAITHFUL TO Jesus." - i.e. You better obey him faithfully or you will be lost.
The NASB and the ESV miss the mark too, and read exactly like the St. Joseph New American bible, with: "who keep the commandments of God and THEIR faith IN Jesus." - i.e. Keep on believing with your personal faith. Notice this time that the previous RSV, NRSV agree with the KJB, but now the ESV has changed the meaning of the verse by making up their own interpretation.
Dan Wallace does the same thing in his NET version, saying: "those who obey God's commandments and hold to THEIR faith IN Jesus"
Holman Standard has: "who keep the commandments of God and the faith in Jesus."
The ISV 2014 has put a whole new twist on the meaning of the verse with: "who keep the commandments of God and hold on to the FAITHFULNESS OF Jesus."
Repentance itself is also a gift from God.
Repentance as well as saving faith are both gifts from God, not the fruit of dead, unregenerate, fallen human nature. "Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins", "then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life", "if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth", "turn thou me and I shall be turned; for thou art the LORD my God. Surely after that I was turned, I repented." "Turn thou us unto thee, O LORD, and we shall be turned" (Acts 5:31; 11:18; 2 Timothy 2:25; Jeremiah 31:18-19; Lamentations 5:21)
"Except ye BE CONVERTED" or "Unless YOU CHANGE"? Matthew 18:3 and other Scriptures
Matthew 18:3 KJB - “And said, Verily I say unto you, Except YE BE CONVERTED, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.”
ESV - “and said, “Truly, I say to you, unless YOU TURN and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.”
NIV - “And he said: “Truly I tell you, unless YOU CHANGE and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.”
There are several verses in Scripture that speak of being converted and all of them in the King James Bible are in the passive voice. This means that Somebody else (God) is the one who brought about this change. He is the active agent in the conversion of the sinner. But all the major versions (ESV, NIV, NASB, NKJV) have at times perverted this truth and make it seem as though it is the sinner himself who turns to God or who changes himself.
See the complete study here -
Tremendous error and contradiction have been introduced into this section of Scripture by the NKJV, NIV, ESV and NAS “bibles”. This is part of the song of Moses which says in verses 3-5: “I will publish the name of the LORD: ascribe ye greatness unto our God. He is the Rock, his work is perfect; for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he.”
The next verse is where the lies of the modern versions enter. The true Holy Bible says: “They have corrupted themselves, their spot is not the spot of his children: they are a perverse and crooked generation. Do ye thus requite the LORD, O foolish people and unwise? is not he thy father that hath bought thee? hath he not made thee, and established thee?”
If you look at the context, in the previous chapter God told Moses that the people would enter the promised land and would go a whoring after the gods of the strangers of the land and turn to other gods. God knew this before He brought them into the land, so their entering the land did not depend on their foreseen obedience to the law, but rather because of the covenant of grace made with Abraham.
They are still His children whom He bought (verse 6) , His people and inheritance (verse 9) and verse 19 still refers to them as “his sons and daughters”. They are His children even though disobedient, just as your child is still your child no matter what he does.
God’s children did corrupt themselves with strange gods, and the spot or blemish they received belonged to the idolatrous practices of other people, but they are still His children, bought by God and belonging to Him as the rest of the chapter shows.
Now look at the NKJV in verse 5. “They have corrupted themselves: They are NOT His children, Because of their blemish.” The NAS is similar with its: “They are NOT His children because of their defect”. Both these versions tell us they are not His children, and then in the very next verse tell us they are His children because He is their Father and He bought them!
The NIV and ESV are even worse with: “to their shame they are NO LONGER his children”. This teaches that one can be a child of God and then lose it and no longer be His child, yet verse 6 and 19 still refer to them as His children!
These are obvious false doctrines and contradictions. Other versions that agree with the KJB in verse 5 as teaching they are still His children are Darby, Youngs, Spanish, Italian Diodati, Hebrew-English of 1917, Daniel Webster’s 1833 translation, the Third Millenium Bible and even the NRSV of 1989.
"Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power."
This verse is often used to support the truth that it is God who worketh in us both to will and to do of His good pleasure. Philippians 2:13. This is also the reading of the Bishops' Bible 1868, the RV 1885 -"Thy people offer themselves willingly in the day of thy power", ASV 1901, Darby, Rotherham's Emphasized Bible 1902, Jewish Publication Society Bible 1917, the Amplified Bible, Hebrew Names Version, Webster's, Spanish Sagradas Escrituras 1569 - "Tu pueblo será voluntario en el día de tu poder", the Spanish Reina Valera 1960 - "Tu pueblo se te ofrecerá voluntariamente en el día de tu poder", the Spanish Versión Moderna - "Tu pueblo se presentará como ofrendas voluntarias en el día de tu poder", the Italian New Diodati 1991 - "Il tuo popolo si offrirà volenteroso nel giorno del tuo potere", the Portuguese Almeida 1681 and the Modern Almeida - "O teu povo será mui voluntário no dia do teu poder", the Modern Greek translation - "Ο λαος σου θελει εισθαι προθυμος εν τη ημερα της δυναμεως σου", Third Millenium Bible 1998, the KJV 21st Century Version 1994, The English Jubilee Bible 2000, The Conservative Version 2001, the Heritage Bible 2003, the Urim-Thummin Version 2001, A Voice in the Wilderness version 2006 and the Torah Transliteration Scripture 2008 .
Young's is a bit odd, but pretty close to the meaning found in the KJB saying: "Thy people `are' free-will gifts in the day of Thy strength"
However the NIV says: "Your TROOPS will be willing on your day of BATTLE." The NKJV, ESV, NASB are not as bad as the NIV but still not as strong as the KJB. The NKJV has: "Your people will be volunteers in the day of your power" while the NASB reads: "Your people will volunteer freely in the day of your power." and the ESV says: "Your people will offer themselves freely on the day of your power."
2 Chronicles 29:36 - "God had prepared the people" -2 Chronicles 29:36 records the events surrounding a great spiritual revival and rededication of the house of the LORD under the new king Hezekiah. How did this revival take place? Well, the KJB and many other Bible translations make it clear that it happened because God Himself had prepared the people to do so. Remember, it is God who worketh in us both to will and to do of His good pleasure. KJB - “And Hezekiah rejoiced, and all the people, that God had prepared the people: for the thing was done suddenly.”
This is also the reading or meaning found in the Bishops’ Bible 1568 - “And Hezekia reioyced, and all the people, that God had made the folke so readie”, the Geneva Bible 1587 - “God had made the people so ready”, the NKJV, Youngs, Darby, Rotherham’s 1902 Emphasized Bible, and the Spanish Reina Valera - “que Dios hubiese preparado el pueblo” to name but a few.
John Gill and other Bible commentators took note of God’s working in His people to bring about this revival. He comments: “And Hezekiah rejoiced, and all the people…To see things go on so well, which foreboded good unto them: and particularly that God had prepared the people; - disposed and directed their hearts in such a manner as to yield such a cheerful obedience to the will of God, and show such a hearty regard to his worship and service, and the restoration of it: for the thing was done suddenly; - whereby it the more appeared that they were under a divine influence, which so quickly and powerfully wrought upon them to engage in this work, and needed not arguments and persuasions to bring them to it.”
Likewise Matthew Henry notes: “the hand of God was plainly in it: God had prepared the people by the secret influences of his grace, so that many of those who had in the last reign doted on the idolatrous altars were now as much in love with God's altar. This change, which God wrought on their minds, did very much expedite and facilitate the work... This is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous.”
However, beginning with the ASV of 1901, and now in versions like the NASB, NIV, RSV, ESV, Catholic St. Joseph, New Jerusalem and Holman we read something subtly different that removes the idea that it was God Himself who prepared the people. The NIV and these others read: “Hezekiah and all the people rejoiced at what God had brought about for his people”. Now the idea is that God merely did something FOR His people, rather than IN them. Big difference.
Compare the verse as it stands in the KJB with this one found just a few verses further along when talking about the same revival under king Hezekiah in 2 Chron. 30:12. When some humbled themselves before the Lord we read that "Also in Judah the hand of God was to give them one heart to do the commandment of the king and of the princes, by the word of the LORD." If God does not work in us both to will and to do of His good pleasure, then "without Me ye can do nothing" but sin.
1 Peter 1:22
"Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth THROUGH THE SPIRIT unto unfeigned love of the brethren..." This is a textual issue, but the phrase that shows we obey the truth through the Spirit of God is found in the vast majority of all Greek manuscripts. Bibles that contain the words "through the Spirit" are Tyndale, Coverdale, Bishops', Geneva, Wesley, Youngs, Spanish Reina Valera, Hebrew Names Version, and the NKJV to name a few. However versions like the NASB, RSV, ESV, Holman, NIV , St. Joseph NAB and New Jerusalem bible are based on very different Greek manuscripts and they all omit these inspired words from Scripture.
1 Peter 2:25
Who saves, God or man?
KJB - 1 Peter 2:25 - "For ye were as sheep going astray; but ARE NOW RETURNED unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls."
ητε γαρ ως προβατα πλανωμενα αλλ επεστραφητε νυν επι τον ποιμενα και επισκοπον των ψυχων υμων
Once again, the verb “are now returned” is a PASSIVE verb - epistrepho - επεστραφητε.
This means we did not do this on our own, but Another did it to us. It is God Himself who brings His wandering sheep back into the fold.
“And other sheep I HAVE (the elect among the Gentiles), which are not of this fold: (the Jews) them also I MUST BRING, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.” John 10:14
1 Peter 2:25 - "For ye were as sheep going astray; but ARE NOW RETURNED unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls."
Following the passive voice and correct theology that we ARE NOW RETURNED unto the Shepherd of our souls are Wycliffe 1395, Tyndale 1534, Coverdale 1535, the Great Bible 1540, Matthew’s Bible 1549, the Bishops’ Bible 1568, the Geneva Bible 1587, The Beza N.T. 1599, Whiston’s N.T. 1745, Wesley’s N.T. 1755, Worsley Version 1770, Haweis N.T. 1795, Webster’s translation 1833, Living Oracles 1835, Pickering N.T. 1840, The Longman Version 1841, Sawyer N.T. 1858, The Revised N.T. 1862, The Alford N.T. 1870, the Revised Version 1881, ASV 1901, The Clarke N.T. 1913, The Word of Yah 1993, KJV 21st Century 1994, Third Millennium Bible 1998, God’s First Truth 1999, The Evidence Bible 2003, Faithful N.T. 2009, The New European Version 2010, The Hebraic Transliteration Scripture 2010, the Conservative Bible 2011 =“YOU HAVE NOW BEEN RETURNED”, The Work of God's Children Bible 2011, Hebrew Names Version 2014
Daniel Mace’s N.T. 1729 says: “but now YOU ARE BROUGHT BACK to the pastor and overseer of your souls.
The Douay-Rheims of 1582 actually says: “but YOU ARE NOW CONVERTED to the shepherd and bishop of your souls.” and so does the 2010 Jubilee Bible.
The Modern English Version 2014 says: "YOU HAVE NOW BEEN RETURNED TO the Shepherd"
But after this the Catholic versions began to go downhill in this verse. The 1950 Douay as well as the 1970 St. Joseph NAB and the 1985 New Jerusalem bible all have “but now YOU HAVE RETURNED to the Shepherd”
AND so too do versions like Darby, Youngs, the RSV, NRSV, ESV, NET, NIV, NASB, NKJV, the Jehovah Witness NWT and the 2011 Common English bible.
NKJV 1982 - “For you were like sheep going astray, but HAVE NOW RETURNED to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls.” = wrong translation and WRONG theology.
The King James Bible is always right.
ALL of grace, believing the Book,
See more examples like this where the modern versions change "BE CONVERTED" (God does the converting) into "UNLESS YOU TURN BACK" (You do this yourself)
A similar example is found in the Old Testament. In Jeremiah 31:18-19 we read: "turn thou me, and I shall be turned; for thou art the LORD my God. Surely AFTER I WAS TURNED, I REPENTED..." Here we see that it is God who turns us from our sin and back to Himself. "after I was turned" clearly shows that I did not do this myself but, as the context shows, it was God who turned me.
"After I was turned, I repented" is the reading found in the Revised Version 1885, the ASV 1901, Webster's translation 1833, Darby, the Jewish translations of JPS 1917, the 1936 Hebrew Publishing Company, the Bible in Basic English 1961 and the KJV 21st Century 1994. Translations like Coverdale, the Great Bible, Matthew's bible and the Bishops' bible are similar with: "As soon as Thou turnest me, I shall reform myself."
However the NKJV says: "After my returning, I repented"; NASB - "After I turned back, I repented"; NIV "After I strayed, I repented"; NET "For after we turned away from you we repented"; Holman "After I returned I repented" and the ESV "For after I had turned away, I relented", St. Joseph NAB - "I turn in repentance; I have come to myself"; the New Jerusalem bible "For, since I turned away, I have repented." These don't even agree with each other in meaning and they all make it sound as though I had turned one way or another by myself.
1 Corinthians 4:7
"For who MAKETH THEE TO DIFFER FROM ANOTHER? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive? now if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory, as if thou hadst not received it?"
This precious verse teaches the distinguishing grace of God. We are no better than the non-elect. God makes of the same lump one vessel unto honour and another unto dishonour. All is of grace and we can boast in nothing found in ourselves.
The reading or meaning is the same in the RV, ASV, Wesley's translation 1755, Rotherham's Emphasized Bible 1902, the NKJV, Young's, Darby, Green's 2000, the Third Millenium Bible 1998 and even the NIV as well as others. The Spanish Reina Valera 1902, 1960 and 1995 reads the same with: "Porque ¿quién te distingue? ¿ó qué tienes que no hayas recibido? Y si lo recibiste, ¿de qué te glorías como si no hubieras recibido?"
Previous English Bibles like the Bishops' Bible and the Geneva Bible said: "Who separateth thee? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive?
However instead of "Who maketh thee to differ from another" the NASB says: "For who REGARDS YOU AS SUPERIOR?" How would you even answer this question in the NASB? Does God regard you as superior? Is there something special in you that is not found in another? It doesn't even make sense.
The Holman Standard and ISV both say: "Who makes you superior?", while the Catholic New Jerusalem asks: "Who made you so important?"
The ESV completely misses the mark with its: "For who sees anything different in you?"
Yet all these versions translate the same Greek word like the KJB has it in Acts 15:9 when God caused the gospel to be preached to the Gentiles - "And God...PUT NO DIFFERENCE between us (the believing Jews) and them (the believing Gentiles) purifying their hearts by faith."
At one of the Bible clubs a man was trying to defend the NASB reading of "Who regards you as superior?" and had to admit that the answer would have to be "No one". However the answer to the question in the true Bible - "For who maketh thee to differ from another?" would have to be "GOD"!
John Gill comments on this verse: - "For who maketh thee to differ from another… the apostle would have them consider, and whatever difference was made between them and others, was made, not by man, but God...whatever difference is made among men, is of God; it is he that makes them to differ from the rest of the creation; from angels, to whom they are inferior; and from beasts, to whom they are superior; and from one another in their person, size, shape, and countenance, which is a physical, or natural difference. It is God that makes them to differ from one another in things of a civil nature; as kings and subjects, masters and servants, high and low, rich and poor, bond and free...and there is an ecclesiastical difference which God makes in his own people, who have gifts differing one from another; there are diversities of gifts, administrations, and operations among them, and all from the same spirit: but the grand distinction God has made among men, lies in his special, distinguishing, and everlasting love to some, and not others; in his choice of them in Christ unto everlasting salvation; in the gift of them to Christ in the eternal covenant; in the redemption of them by his blood; in his powerful and prevalent intercession for them; in God's effectual calling of them by his grace; in his resurrection of them from the dead to everlasting life, placing them at Christ's right hand, and their entrance into everlasting glory throughout the endless ages of eternity; all which is owing, not to anything of man's, but to the free grace, sovereign will, and good pleasure of God.”
The doctrine of the distinguishing grace of God is lost in this verse in many modern versions like the NASB, ESV, Holman and NET.
"Nevertheless they DID FLATTER him (God) with their mouth, and they lied unto him with their tongues."
Psalm 78 rehearses the repeated sins of God's people and His continued faithfullness and mercy to them. We can flatter God by saying nice things about Him, yet walk contrary to His ways. This is called hypocrisy. The reading is the same in the RV, ASV, NKJV, RSV, NRSV, Geneva Bible, NIV, ESV and many others - they did flatter God.
However the NASB actually says: "But they DECEIVED HIM with their mouth." Can the all knowing, sovereign God be deceived by mortal man? Does the NASB portray the true God of the Bible, one that can be deceived?
In the book of Numbers chapters 22 - 24, the false prophet Balaam had been called by Balak the king of Moab to curse Israel. God allowed Balaam to go with Balak, but rather than cursing the people of God, Balaam was compelled to bless them instead.
In Numbers 23:19-21 we read these beautiful truths: “God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good? Behold, I have received commandment to bless: and he hath blessed; and I cannot reverse it.”
The next verse, 21, expresses a great truth in the KJB, but this is where the error of the new versions occurs. Verse 21: “He hath NOT BEHELD INIQUITY in Jacob, NEITHER HATH HE SEEN PERVERSENESS in Israel: the LORD his God is with him, and the shout of a king is among them”.
God has always dealt with His people according to the everlasting covenant of grace revealed to Abraham and his spiritual seed, confirmed to them and fulfilled in Christ.
Galatians 3:12-29. “And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.” God had redeemed His people out of Egypt (Exodus 6:6) and forgiven their sins, even though they were a stiffnecked people ( Numbers 14: 19, 20).
Just as God sees us as blameless, holy, and without spot (Ephesians 1:4; I Corinthians 1:8), not because of our own obedience or righteousness, but because we are covered with the righteousness of Christ, so too, were His people in the wilderness. This is a very important aspect of the doctrines of grace.
But see how this truth has been lost in the NASB, RSV, ESV, Holman and the NIV. The NASB says: “He has not observed MISFORTUNE in Jacob; Nor has He seen TROUBLE in Israel.” The NIV has: “No misfortune is seen in Jacob, no misery observed in Israel.” Likewise the Catholic St. Joseph NAB reads: "MISFORTUNE is not observed in Jacob, NOR MISERY seen in Israel." There had been plenty of misery and misfortune in Israel, but God is speaking a blessing through Balaam upon His redeemed people and stating how He sees them because they are His own peculiar people. “Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God’s elect? It is God that justifieth.” Romans 8:33. This great comforting truth in Numbers 23:21 is lost in the NASB and NIV .
I do not believe any other English bible contains all of God’s perfect, preserved, inspired words except the King James Bible. Frequently, the new version proponents like to gang up on the KJB, as though it were the only Bible to read a certain way.
Other versions which agree with the KJB here are the Hebrew into English versions of 1917, 1936, put out by the Hebrew Publication Company and the Jewish Publication Society of America, the Revised Version 1881, the ASV of 1901, Geneva Bible, Young’s translation, Darby, the NKJV, Amplified, KJV 21st Century 1994, Third Millennium Bible 1998, World English Bible 2000, Hebrew Names Version 2014, the modern Complete Jewish Bible, the Updated Bible version 2003, Bible in Basic English 1960, Webster's translation, New Century Version and the Spanish Reina Valera of 1602 and 1960.
There are a few other specific verses that teach the particular redemption of God's people that have been altered just by removing a single word or two. 1 Corinthians 5:7 tells us "For even Christ our passover is sacrificed FOR US." Hebrews 1:3 "when He had by Himself purged OUR sins."; 1 Peter 4:1 "Forasmuch then as Christ hath suffered FOR US in the flesh", and 1 John 3:5 "And ye know that He was manifested to take away OUR sins". All these readings are found in the Majority of all Greek texts as well as Sinaiticus, the Syriac and in Tyndale's bible 1525, Coverdale 1535, Bishops' Bible 1568 and the Geneva Bible 1599, and the NKJV. But Catholic text versions like the St. Joseph New American Bible, the New Jerusalem bible, the RSV, NIV, NASB, ESV, NET have removed all these capitalized words that teach the particular redemption of God's people.
Check out these two verses and see how the Roman Catholic doctrine of "free will" theology has been given room in these modern versions, and the meaning of the passage has been changed.
2 Corinthians 3:16 KJB (Bishops' Bible, Darby, R.V., ASV) - "Nevertheless when IT shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away."
NASB, Holman Standard, ISV - "but whenever A PERSON turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away." There is no Greek word for "a person" in any text.
NIV - "But whenever ANYONE turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away." There is no word for "anyone" in the text.
NKJV 1982, NET, ESV - "Nevertheless when ONE turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away." Again, there is no word for "one".
Catholic St. Joseph NAB 1970 - "But whenever HE turns to the Lord, the veil is removed."
Catholic New Jerusalem bible 1985 - "and this veil will not be taken away, till THEY turn to the Lord."
John 1:9 KJB (Tyndale, Bishops’, Geneva, RV, ASV) - “That was the true Light, which LIGHTETH every man that cometh into the world.”
The Catholic Connection.
The Catholic Douay-Rheims 1582 and the Douay 1950 say: "the true light that ENLIGHTENS every man". So too do the NASB and the ISV.
The Catholic St. Joseph New American Bible and the Catholic New Jerusalem bible 1985 and the Jehovah Witness NWT say: "the real light which GIVES LIGHT TO everyone". So too do the Holman Standard, the ESV, NIV, NET and the NKJV.
There is a huge battle going on in these days of falling away from the faith. The authority and truth of God's inerrant, perfect words and the doctrines of grace are under direct attack. Only in the King James Bible are all of God's perfect words of truth found today.
*John Bunyan - Proof that he was a Calvinist
Was John Bunyan, who wrote “Pilgrim’s Progress” a Calvinist?
Yes, absolutely. See some of his writings at these sites-
John Bunyan’s sermon on John 6:37 “All that the Father giveth to me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.”
COME AND WELCOME TO JESUS CHRIST; OR, A PLAIN AND PROFITABLE DISCOURSE ON JOHN 6:37
written by John Bunyan, London 1681. And he clearly is quoting from the King James Bible, not the Geneva Bible.
He shows the doctrines of election, predestination and limited atonement.
* Augustus Toplady (1740-1778), who is known for his wonderful hymn “Rock of Ages, Cleft for me” also wrote a powerful, Scripture filled sermon called “The Golden Idol of Freewill”
Hi saints. This is about the best explanation of the doctrines of electing grace I have ever seen. He is very logical and it is FULL of Scripture to back up the points he makes and he soundly refutes the "I chose of my own free will to believe" arguments. Highly recommended reading.
“King James was NOT a Calvinist” ???
There is an article that allegedly is from a guy named David J. Stewart who claims that King James was his “great, great, great, great, great, grandfather…lol” and that he was not a Calvinist.
He then goes on the post a “quote” where King James supposedly the following occurred.
He writes: “In an interview with his majesty, at the Palace of St. Theobald's, the year after the conclusion of the synod of Dort, the King said, respecting the Calvinists, who made God the author of sin:
“This doctrine is so horrible, that I am persuaded, if there were a council of unclean spirits assembled in hell, and their prince the devil were to put the question either to all of them in general, or to each in particular, to learn their opinion about the most likely means of stirring up the hatred of men against God their Maker; nothing could he invented by them that would be more efficacious for this purpose, or that could put a greater affront upon God’s love for mankind, than that infamous decree of the late Synod [of Dort], and the decision of that detestable formulary, by which the for greater part of the human race are condemned to hell for no other reason, than the mere will of God, without any regard to sin; the necessity of sinning, as well as that of being damned, being fastened on them by that great nail of the decree before-mentioned.” SOURCE: King James Stewart; from the book, “the works of James Arminius D.D.,” page 3.”
HOWEVER if you actually look up this book - The works of James Arminius” there is no such quote by King James on either page iii or page 3.
And anybody reading the site where this thing is posted who knows the FACTS knows that we are not dealing with a rational man. He says "maybe a couple of the KJB translators were Calvinists"
This is not a reasonable man we are dealing with. The vast majority of the KJB translators were strong and open Calvinists. Anyone denying this is willingly blind to the historic facts.
Very informative article by Dr. Ken Matto - The Qualifications of the King James Translators
Learn about the men God used to give us His masterpiece. They were head and shoulders above any group of scholars that could possibly be gathered together today.
12 minute Video on Unconditional Election
Excellent teaching. Only problem is, he (like John MacArthur, R.C. Sproul, James White, John Piper, etc.) does not have nor believe in ANY Bible in ANY language - including "the" Greek and "the" Hebrew - IS or ever was the complete and inerrant words of God.
The irony is that so many present day Calvinists have rejected the Reformation text of the King James Bible and are now promoting the Vatican supervised versions like the ESV, NASB, NET, NIV, Holman, etc.
These Vatican supervised versions (I can prove it) diminish and corrupt the very doctrines of sovereign grace we say we believe in. He even quotes some of these fake bibles that undermine these truths, and seems oblivious to it. I deal with them in my article.
Are you willing to look at the evidence?
See Calvinism (Monergism) and the King James Bible.
"He that hath ears to hear, let him hear." Luke 8:8
"But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant." 1 Corinthians 14:38
If you wish to discuss these things, come join us on Facebook Calvinism and the King James Bible.
It is my settled conviction that those evangelicals who now oppose an inerrant and infallible Bible must also balk at biblical predestination, for the one cannot be held without the other. The God whom we know, love, honour and worship can do no other than speak infallibly. A much reduced and limited God, whose statements and works are susceptible to the vagaries of human fallibility, is one who has no real control either over the created universe or over himself. The denial of an inerrant Bible is also the denial of a sovereign God.” David W. Norris
Notes from the Internet
Debate: Covenantal Infant Baptism
Tyler Vela presents the case for infant baptism. It is not as unbiblical as a lot of people think.
If interested, I invite you to join us on our Facebook forum called King James Bible Calvinists. The main purpose of the club is to discuss the infallibility of the King James Bible and the doctrines of God's sovereign, electing grace. Here is the link -
"To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the Beloved." Ephesians 1:6
Return to Articles - http://brandplucked.webs.com/articles.htm
Unconditional Election of God by Pastor Lasserre Bradley - 37 minute video - Very good.