On this Rock I Stand

Paul certainly knew Jesus. Not because He appeared to Him as the Pillar of Fire on the Damascus Road and addressed him by name, but because He revealed Himself through His unchanging Word from Genesis to Malachi.

Before Jacob died he prophesied, "Benjamin is a wolf that prowls. He devours his enemies in the morning, and in the evening he divides the spoil" (Genesis 49:27). Paul's Hebrew name was that of Israel's Benjamite king, Saul, who stood head and shoulders over any of the people, and persecuted David, "a man after God's Own heart". Paul shared this Benjamin nature -- in the morning he surpassed all others in persecuting Jesus, David's greater Son (Acts 9:4-5). But when Christ shared His victory with him, his name was changed from Saul, meaning "desired", to Paul, meaning "small", or "unimportant". And in the evening He divided the spoils of his victory in revelation with whomsoever will -- Hebrew or Gentile -- at the cost of his social standing, his possessions and his life.

Whereas King Saul lost his natural crown, his kingdom and his life, Paul gained the crown of Life and will reign through all eternity in the New Jerusalem. Paul's epitaph for his former Saul-self was, "I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ lives in me".

When Paul wrote his Epistle to the Romans from Corinth in AD57/58 he had not yet visited Rome where there lived many converts who worshipped in several house churches and whose faith was known among the Churches around the world (Romans 1:8; 16). Paul wrote to a long-established congregation saying "for many years I have greatly desired to come to you", and he mentioned among the Christians in Rome other apostles who had been converted before him (Romans 1:13; 15:22-23).

Brother Branham said, "When the Christians (mainly Jews by birth) were scattered abroad from Jerusalem they went everywhere preaching the Gospel, particularly in the synagogues. Thus within three years, or about in AD36 the Gospel had been taken to Rome by Junius and Andronicus, who according to Romans 16:7 were apostles. The work flourished there for several years until the constant altercations of the Jews amongst themselves caused Emperor Claudius to expel them from Rome. With the Jews banished from that city the backbone of that little church was practically broken. Perhaps even the elders had been Jewish and so would be gone. The flock would be unattended, and since the Word had not been written as a guide it would be very easy for this little flock to drift or be inundated by the philosophers and pagans of that day. With grievous wolves on the prowl, and the spirit of antichrist released, we find from history that this little church in Rome became hopelessly backslidden, and began to introduce pagan ceremonies under Christian titles.

As the period of banishment lasted for 13 years, the founders, Junius and Andronicus, did not come back until AD54. Imagine their horror to find a church with a Christian title that was woefully pagan. There were altars in the church upon which they placed incense and celebrated pagan rites. The established leaders of that church could not be approached, so with the few who had tried to remain faithful they started a new church, or the Second Church of Rome. God graciously worked amongst them by signs and wonders so that a third church was started. And though the First Church was reproached for being pagan and NOT Christian in its worship it would not give up its title but remained and STILL REMAINS the First Church of Rome -- the Roman Catholic Church (William Branham, An Exposition of the Seven Church Ages, 189:3).

From a cursory reading of Acts 8:1 we might infer that the stoning of Stephen in about AD33 as recorded in the previous chapter would be immediately followed by an outbreak of fanaticism of which the Christians would be the victims. And it is possible that the mass of the Jews on returning to the city, at once began a general attack on the Christians, and as a consequence of this dispersion (indicated earlier by Jesus in Matthew 10:23), the Gospel was taken to Rome by Junius and Andronicus in about AD36.

Paul's own conversion took place circa AD39. In about AD50/52 the apostolic Council took place in Jerusalem after which Paul traveled to Antioch in Syria where he began his second missionary journey. Paul's last port before returning to Jerusalem was Ephesus. The Ephesian Church was born in AD53, the year in which Claudius expelled the Jews from Rome and which Brother Branham said the Church Ages commenced (Acts 18:18-19:41).

The banishment of the Jews from Rome under Claudius in Acts 18:2 was used of God to disperse the fugitives to neighboring Greece where many became Christians and disciples of Paul; and after their return to Rome, were heralds of Christianity who took part in organizing a congregation. This is historically proven by the example of Aquila and Priscilla, who, when Jews, emigrated to Corinth, lived there for over a year and a half in the company of Paul, and subsequently appeared as teachers in Rome and occupants of a house where a Roman congregation assembled (Romans 16:8). Apollos also, who traveled to Rome during Paul's imprisonment, and probably other individuals mentioned in Romans 16 were led by God in a similar way,

It seems the edict of Claudius was not rigorously executed, from apprehension of bad effects in view of the large Jewish colony, and that only the public assemblies were closed. Claudius issued several edicts concerning the Jews. First favorable ones in the year 42, mentioned by Josephus, then the edict of expulsion in AD53 which was either never fully executed, or else speedily recalled. However as Brother Branham states there was a disruption of the work for thirteen years owing to the "Jewish" problems in Rome.

The Christian community in Rome was mainly Hebrew (Romans 4:1) but the Gentile Christian element also was considerable (Romans 11:13-32), as may be expected in view of the large number of Jewish proselytes in Rome. We may safely assume that the Church was just as much influenced by Gentile Christians from Antioch, as by Jewish Christians who witnessed the first Pentecost at Jerusalem for we learn from chapter 16, that the most prominent members of the Church were adherents of Paul who previously sent out the faithful disciples, Aquila and his wife Priscilla, as his pioneers in Rome as they had been his pioneers in Ephesus.

One of Paul's purposes in writing this letter was as a courtesy to those apostles and ministers who had preceded him since his policy was to "preach the Gospel where Christ was not known, to prevent the confusion that might arise by building upon another man's foundation" (Romans 15:20). Since Paul makes no mention of Peter, "the apostle to the circumcision" and pastor of a Church at Jerusalem, we see that as late as AD57/58 "pope" Peter had never set foot in Rome.

When Paul arrived in Rome for the first time in AD61/62 as a prisoner there was still no "pope" Peter in Rome. He was released from this imprisonment in AD64, and after a missionary journey was rearrested, imprisoned, and in AD67 he was martyred in Rome.

In his letter to the Romans and elsewhere, Paul speaks of "mutual faith" (Romans 1:12; I Corinthians 1:10; Galatians 1:8-9). "Whether we are Jew or Greek, bond or free, male or female, Christians are all in agreement (or one) in the Word" (Galatians 3:28; Titus 1:4).

Following his new birth, and as he grew in the faith, Saul shunned the "master-race" psychology of his Pharisaic past, and as Paul, he declared his indebtedness to the whole Gentile world without distinction of race, color, education or social standing. "Henceforth he knew no man after the flesh" and could receive revelation through the most humble Gentile who was in the Spirit.

Romans 1:16-18, "For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believes; to the Jew first (because the revelation of the Old Testament was entrusted to Israel through the faith of Abraham, and finally Judah), and also to the Greek (or Gentiles of all nations who had made Greek language, customs and learning their own). For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, 'The just shall live by faith.' For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men (whether Jew or Gentile), who hold down the truth in unrighteousness".

Jesus said "salvation is of the Jews, for we know WHAT we worship" (John 4:22). But this was only because of their historic priority: faith is older than Israel or the Gentile Abraham, who is the 'father of faith'. Israel abrogated its sacred obligation to shine that Light to the Gentiles, suppressing the truth in unrighteousness. And since they willfully allowed themselves to be blinded by denominational traditions, the Jew has no real right to the Gospel after salvation is come. Faith is the reality and substance of which their religion was but a shadow and symbol.

The word "Jew" begs investigation and understanding. It is incontestable that it did not come into existence until the year 1775. Prior to 1775 the word "Jew" did not exist in any language. When the Rheims (Douai) English translation of the New Testament was first printed in 1582 and the King James Authorized English translation of the New Testament was first published in 1611, the Word "Jew" did not appear in either. The word "Jew" first appeared in both of these well-known editions when they were revised in the eighteenth century.

I purchased the manuscript of Eric John Phelp's book, Vatican Assassins throughout which he boasts that he is a "White American Freeman, and Dispensational Baptist-Calvinist" who adheres to "The Authorized King James Version of 1611" (emphasized with heraldic script). I would be amazed if he has ever read the King James Authorized translation of the Bible of 1611 which has been out of print for over 200 years. Calvin was a "Jewish", rascal whose real name was Cauvin, and God ceased "winking" at Baptist ignorance when the Laodicean (or Pentecostal) dispensation began in 1906. And even that ended as a Move of God in 1963 so he has nought whereof to boast and should read Paul's testimony in Philippians 3:4-8, our opening Scripture.

We should all take greater care whereupon we think we stand lest we build our foundation upon the sand of men's opinions rather than the unmovable rock of revelation which is the mind of Christ (Hebrews 12:25-28). Many go into error by standing on the letter of the King James Bible, or of William Branham's Messages, when the letter without the Spirit is death.

God is not known by the letter, but by the Spirit which discerns error and rightly divides the Word. Brother V. S. Herrell is a scholar who, observing many errors in the letter of the King James Version, wrote the Anointed Standard Translation of the Bible. He constructed "a list of very real reasons why the King James Version of the Bible, or the Authorized Version as it is called, does in no way, shape, or form represent the original writings of Jesus and His ambassadors:

1. The KJV was constructed between 1607 and 1611 and it is filled not only with archaic speech but with the poetic narrative of the Elizabethan age. In other words it was not only hard to understand to the man of its day, but all the more difficult nearly four hundred years later, on a different continent, by an entirely different culture, etc. Entire catalogues of archaic words have been constructed for the reader of the KJV and still none do justice to the passe reading of the KJV.

2. Even disregarding the obsolete language of the KJV and the corrupted nature of its manuscript basis, still it is widely held by mainstream scholars that the KJV contains over 20,000 mistakes [as explained in the introductory pages of the Emphatic Diaglott used by Brother Branham]. Add to these mistakes those errors that mainstream scholars do not recognize, plus the manuscript problems and the difficulty of its archaic language, and then we see the error count for the KJV climb much higher" (V. S. Herrell, The Anointed Standard Translation of the Bible, p. 5-6, Herrell Bros. Publishing House).

The common assumption is that all is well, that the Bible would not be in today's format if God did not approve of it. Hence, it would appear that we are not to see any error in it, or additions and deletions or human interjection. . . Well that is only partly true . . . because the Bible that we promote today, is NOT the Bible of Jesus' time. It has been changed and modified beginning in the early Centuries after Christ by, guess who?

Of course, the Talmudists, always seeking avenues to distort and discourage Christianity. . . And her9's how they did it!

In the century or so before the first arrival of Jesus, a book was compiled from ancient Hebrew Scrolls and texts into a Greek language Bible called the Septuagint. . . the Old Testament.

When Jesus came, he used the Septuagint as the basic Bible, and so did His disciples. . . Now, the text in Greek was international, as Greek, much like English today, was the international language. . . So, the Bible used and authenticated by Jesus and His disciples was the accepted and "approved" version of the Bible.

Let me quote from someone who has researched this singular issue, Lloyd Palmer, who publishes the bi-monthly Christian Paper, called Straws in the Wind (P.O. Box.513, Albert Lea, MN. 56007, USA). In his May/June, 2000 issue here is what he extracted from a 12 page Document prepared by Russell Harris of The Gospel Broadcasting Association, titled, "Rightful Succession and Imposture: The Case of the Septuagint vs. the Masoretic Text".

"In the Sept-Oct. 99 edition of Straws, I promised to expose the Masoretes who were Jews responsible for the Masoretic Manuscripts. These manuscripts were used by nearly all of the Translators of the Old Testament in compiling the English Bible. History, for the most part, portrayed the Masoretes as pious men of high integrity, having unfeigned and total devotion to accurate preservation of the Holy Writ, faithfully executing the duties of an office to which they were it's legitimate heir! In reality, nothing could be further from the truth.

As previously mentioned, from its inception, the modern English Bible has been based on the Masoretic Text. That is, the Scriptures of the Old Covenant found in the modern English Bible have been translated directly from the Masoretic Text, with little or no consideration being given to the reading of the Septuagint or other manuscripts of Old Covenant Scripture. Although Christians frequently debate the faithfulness of the available English translations of Scripture, most are oblivious to a matter of far greater import, namely, the faithfulness of the Masoretic Text itself. The situation is due to the fact that Christians generally are ignorant of the history of the Masoretic Text.

Historians report that the Ancient Hebrew language had largely fallen into disuse by the time of the Incarnation. The Israelites carried off captive by Assyria circa 721BC were subsequently dispersed throughout the region later dominated by Greece and Rome. Consequently, those of the dispersion -- the Lost Sheep to whom Jesus states that He was sent (Matthew 15:24) generally spoke "koine." (An amalgam of Greek dialects that replaced classical Greek in the Greek and Roman periods of empire)".

Brother Branham said, "The Bible is written in the regular street language. That's the reason the translators get mixed up on it so much. One says the Greek Word says this and the Hebrew Word says this. And they disagree on it, because they are trying to apply a different meaning. It was taught right in regular language like you and I use here, just a regular language" (Life Story, #54-0314).

"The remnant of Judah left in Jerusalem after most of Judah, like Israel, was also taken by the Assyrians (II Kings 18:13) and who were later carried off captive to Babylon circa 586BC, also underwent a change in language. During the seventy years of captivity, the Babylonian empire was conquered by the Persian empire, and Aramaic became the common language of this remnant of Judah. Following the return of this remnant to Jerusalem and the re-building of the temple, the land once populated by the thirteen tribes of Israel repeatedly passed from one dominion to another until, nearly five centuries later, Judea became a Province of Rome. Although Latin was the official language of Rome, those of the remnant came to speak "koine," in addition to Aramaic.

With the destruction of Jerusalem, again, in AD70, Ancient Hebrew became a dead language. The Levitical priesthood -- which, prior to the Crucifixion, had custodianship of the canon of Scripture -- had been invalidated more than forty years previously, upon the death of Christ Jesus. For the most part, the scribes and pharisees who might have kept the language alive, perished in the fall of Jerusalem. The early church had the Septuagint, recognizing it as the authoritative canon of Old Covenant Scripture. Consequently, those of the remnant of Judah, Benjamin and Levi who embraced Christianity no longer had a need for Hebrew.

More then 500 years after the Crucifixion, unregenerate Jews, claiming to be successors of the scribes, began working to revive the defunct Ancient Hebrew language, and to breathe new life into the abandoned Ancient Hebrew manuscripts of Scripture. These Jews were known by the name, Masorete, also spelled Massorete. The name is derived from the Masoretic Hebrew verb "masar". which means to "transmit, to deliver something into the hand of another in the sense of committing the object into the other's trust".

The activity of the Masoretes was originally centered at Babylonia and Tiberias. The activity continued until the 9th or 10th century A.D. and perhaps beyond. The eventual product of this activity was a manuscript of Old Covenant Scripture known today as the Masoretic Text.

As is the case with any spoken language, Ancient Hebrew had both vowels and consonants. However, Ancient Hebrew vowels apparently had no written representation. It appears that the Ancient Hebrew alphabet consisted of 22 letters, all of which generally are regarded as consonants. Although not recorded in documents, vowels were well understood on the basis of context and tradition, being mentally inserted by the reader. This situation persisted throughout the active life of the Ancient Hebrew language -- a period of well over a thousand years.

It is commonly supposed that the work of the Masoretes was limited to development of a system of annotation -- called "pointing" -- for indicating vowels, and annotation of the Ancient Hebrew manuscripts. The purpose of annotation, ostensibly, was to establish for posterity the correct pronunciation of each Ancient Hebrew word. Thus, it is generally believed that the Masoretic text is nothing more than the Ancient Hebrew text which has been "pointed", i.e., an Ancient Hebrew manuscript to which vowels have been added.

However, it turns out that the undertaking involved alterations of a much more fundamental nature. Indeed, upon the rubble of Ancient Hebrew, the Masorete erected a significantly different language of much greater complexity -- a language which appears to have been created for the express purpose of facilitating wholesale alteration of the manuscripts of Old Covenant Scripture. The Masorete then translated the Ancient Hebrew manuscripts of Scripture into the new language, in the process, taking great liberties!

Adam Clarke, an 18th Century Anglican Scholar, makes it clear that the work of the Masoretes is, in reality, a commentary which has been integrated into the body of Scripture. However, Clarke points out that the Hebrew of the Masoretic Text (Masoretic Hebrew) is quite different from the Hebrew of the Patriarchs, (Ancient Hebrew) in which Old Covenant Scripture was originally written.

In the General Preface of his commentary on the Scripture, published in 1810, Clarke writes;

"The Masorets were the most extensive Jewish commentators which that nation could ever boast. The system of punctuation, probably invented by them, is a continual gloss on the Law and the Prophets; their vowel points, and prosaic and metrical accents, &c., give every word to which they are affixed a peculiar kind of meaning, which in their simple state, multitudes of them can by no means bear. The vowel points alone add whole conjugations to the language. This system is one of the most artificial, particular, and extensive comments ever written on the Word of God; for there is not one word in the Bible that is not the subject of a particular gloss through its influence. This school is supposed to have commenced about 450 years before our Lord, and to have extended down to AD1030. Some think it did not commence before the 5th century A.D."

Even without adding to, deleting from, or changing a single letter of the Ancient Hebrew manuscripts of Scripture, pointing gave the Masorete power to dramatically change the meaning of almost any given passage of Scripture, for the prerogative of selecting vowels, is, to a large extent, the prerogative of selecting words! As a crude example, consider how the meaning of an English sentence might be changed by substitution of the word "poor" for the word "pure" -- a substitution which may be effected by a simple change of vowels.

Clarke appears to be one of the few commentators who have seen fully the significance of the Masoretic Text -- namely, that it is a new "version" of the Scripture, written in a new language. Obviously, Hebrew Scholars have been aware of this fact. They should have called attention to the difference between Ancient Hebrew and the language of the Masoretes, and should have differentiated the two, by use of names such as Ancient Hebrew and Masoretic Hebrew. However, the majority of Hebrew scholars are "Jewish", and thus cannot be expected to be objective and candid regarding such a matter.

Textual critics long ago, established that there are numerous and significant differences between the Septuagint and the Masoretic Text, one of them being that the text of the Septuagint is significantly longer than that of the Masoretic Text. Inasmuch as the Septuagint was translated directly from the Ancient Hebrew and subsequently was authenticated by Jesus and the apostles, and in view of the nature of the discrepancies, it appears that the Masoretes made substantial alterations in the Ancient Hebrew text, as well as omitting material which legitimately is part of the canon of Scripture.

One of the first scholars to investigate the matter was Louis Cappel, a French Huguenot divine and scholar who lived from 1585 to 1658. Consider the following excerpt from the article, "CAPPEL, LOUIS," found in the 1948 edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica.

"As a Hebrew scholar, he concluded that the vowel points and accents were not an original part of Hebrew, but were inserted by the Masorete Jews of Tiberias, not earlier then the 5th Century A.D., and that the primitive Hebrew characters are Aramaic and were substituted for the more ancient at the time of the captivity. . . The various readings in the Old Testament Text and the differences between the ancient versions and the Massoretic Text convinced him that the integrity of the Hebrew text as held by Protestants, was untenable. This amounted to an attack upon the verbal inspiration of Scripture. Bitter, however, as was the opposition, it was not long before his results were accepted by scholars."

The Masoretic Text appears not merely to have been corrupted, but to have been purposely corrupted, as an attack upon the Christian Faith! Regarding this matter, consider the testimony of Adam Clarke. Clarke is commenting upon Hebrews 1:6: "And again, when He bringeth in the first-begotten into the world, He saith, And let all the angels of God worship Him."

There has been some difficulty in ascertaining the place from which the apostle quotes these words; some suppose Psalm 97:7: "Worship him, all ye gods:" which the Septuagint translates thus: "proskunesate auto, pantes aggeloi auton," or in English, "Worship him, all ye His angels:" but it is not clear that the Messiah is intended in this Psalm, nor are the words precisely those used here by the apostle. Our marginal references send us with great propriety to the Septuagint version of Deuteronomy 32:43, where the passage is found verbatim et literatim; but there is nothing answering to the words in the present Hebrew text.

The apostle undoubtedly quoted the Septuagint, which had then been for more than 300 years a version of the highest repute among the Jews; and it is very probable that the copy from which the Seventy translated had the corresponding words. However, this may be, they are now sanctioned by Divine authority: and as the verse contains some singular additions, I will set it down in a parallel column with that of our own version, which was taken immediately from the Hebrew text, premising simply this: that it is the last verse of the famous prophetic song of Moses, which seems to point out the advent of the Messiah to discomfit his enemies, purify the land and redeem Israel from all his iniquities.

Deuteronomy 32:43 -- from the Hebrew: ". . . Rejoice, O ye nations, with His people; . . . for He will avenge the blood of His servants: . . . and . . . will be merciful to His land and to His people."

Deuteronomy 32:43 -- from the Septuagint: "Rejoice, ye heaven, together with Him; and let all the angels of God worship him. Rejoice, ye Gentiles, with His people; and let the children of God be strengthened in Him; for He will avenge the blood of His children; He will avenge, and will repay judgment to His adversaries; and those who hate Him will he recompense: and the Lord will purge the land of His people."

This is a very important verse, and to it, as it stands in the Septuagint, St. Paul has referred once before: (Romans 15:10).

This very verse, as it stands now in the Septuagint, thus referred to by an inspired writer, shows the great importance of this ancient version; and proves the necessity of its being studied and well understood by every minister of Christ. In Romans 3, there is a large quotation form Psalm 14, where there are six whole verses in the apostle's quotation which are not found in the present Hebrew Text, but are preserved in the Septuagint! How strange it is that this venerable and important version, so often quoted by our Lord and all his apostles, should be so generally neglected, and so little known!" (This is the end of quoting from a 12 Page article by the Russell Harris, Gospel Broadcasting Association).

Adam Clarke rightly pointed out that six verses in Psalm 14, found in the Septuagint, were omitted by the Masoretes. Clarke chose not to speculate why, but I will . . . The following are the six omitted verses. See if you can figure out why Masorete Jews would want to omit them:

"Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips; whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness; their feet are swift to shed blood: destruction and misery are in their ways: there is no fear of God before their eyes" (Psalm 14, Septuagint Bible, Brenton edition. pp. 704-705).

These verses should jog your memory, but if not, read Jesus' stunning accusations of the Pharisee Jews in Matthew 23. You'll discover why fifth century Jews who claimed descent from the Pharisees, would omit these verses in their Masoretic Text. These blatant examples should move the serious Christian to ask how many additional instances of deceitful editing are to be found within the Masoretic Text. . . "

In his Introduction to the Anointed Standard Translation V. S. Herrell concurs:

3. Perhaps one of the most significant problems with the KJV lies in the manuscripts from which it was translated. The Old Testament (mentioned here for the sake of completeness) was translated from the Masoretic Text, a thoroughly corrupted and Talmudic Jewish produced and inspired text of the Hebrew Testament. The fact that the Masoretic Text was used for the Old Testament of the KJV also has a clear impact upon the New Testament, for the translators of both Testaments had direct and indirect contact with leading Hebraists of the day for purposes of textual and etymological consultation, and it must be understood that all of these leading Hebraists were Talmudic Jews. As for the New Testament source-text, the primary manuscript was Erasmus's Textus Receptus. The Textus Receptus was a very noble attempt at textual restoration for the Greek of the New Testament, but it cannot be trusted for two reasons. First, it was based literally upon only a handful of Greek witnesses, with most critical decisions being based upon the Latin. Secondly, under pressure, Erasmus several times succumbed to pressure from the Catholic Church regarding what he included and omitted from his text.

(For instance, scholars are unanimous that John 7:53-8:11 does not appear in the original text and must have been inserted in the late third or early fourth century and included by Jerome in his Vulgate. Jerome (347-420), whose corruptions go on seemingly forever, was also the first to insert I John 5:7-8 in reference to the "Trinity" into the New Testament).

Thus, it can be concluded that the KJV was based upon only eight Greek texts, all of which dated later than the 10th century. In contrast, the Anointed Standard Translation has as a basis some 5,400 witnesses, some dating back to AD125. Therefore, the KJV translators were at an enormous disadvantage, especially when we consider that it is an indisputable, scientific fact that most all of the best and oldest manuscripts of the New Testament were not discovered until the KJV had been published.

4. Yet another problem with the KJV are the guidelines under which it was translated. These guidelines were set forth by the appointees of King James (who was a notorious homosexual) and they specifically provided that the translation not depart from previous English translations of the Bible. The mistake here was that those previous translations were based upon even poorer source-texts than those of the KJV and they too preserved even more archaic language. Additionally, the translators of the KJV must have felt pressure not to offend the King in any way, a fact made clear in that they refused to translate the two occurrences of homosexual as homosexual, but rather veiled the word in euphemistic language.

There are many other reasons besides those given above why the KJV lacks credence as a responsible translation of the New Testament. As for translations made since the KJV, the overwhelming majority of those translations were also made using the Textus Receptus (and the Masoretic Text for the OT). Additionally, the theological terms ingrained into Protestantism by the KJV have been retained by modern translations (e.g. adultery, faith, grace, holy, etc.). Also, the translation teams of modern translations invariably are composed of trans-denominational translators, and this includes Jews, blacks, Catholics, Masons, and every other brand of Judaeo.

As a result of this, a conscious effort has been established to conform translations to the current brand of political, religious, and theological correctness. Thus, every translation made for mainstream Judeoism, with the intent of being sold in mainstream bookstores, has been stamped with the stamp of Jewish Approval. An excellent example of this conformity is found in the recently released New Revised Standard Version. The chairman of the translation team was Bruce Metzger, who was picked no doubt because he was also very influential in the construction of the Fourth Revised Edition of the UBS's The Greek New Testament, the supposed text-source for the NRSV. The Fourth Revised Edition of The Greek New Testament is very close in form to the text decided upon for the AST, and is, like the source-text of the AST, an eclectic text, using all the latest textual evidence. However, when one consults the NRSV, he finds that many of the spurious interpolations, omitted from the AST and even omitted from the text of the UBS's The Greek New Testament, are still present in the NRSV.

Another tradition that has persisted is the order of the books. The traditional order is based upon their order in the manuscripts. However the order of the manuscripts was derived for cataloging purposes with types of books grouped together. (i.e. the Gospels, Acts, the Pauline epistles, the general epistles, and the Revelation rather than their chronological order.

Since the translation was made in light of the evidence that this source-text provides and since the director of the translation team was a participant in that source-text's construction, the only reason that can provided for the NRSV still containing those interpolations is a desire by the translators to receive the stamp of Jewish Approval. This is true not only of the NRSV, finished in 1989, but also of the New International Version, finished in 1978, of the Revised Standard Version, the American Revised Standard Version, and every other popular, mainstream translation of the Bible ever made. There is, of course, no honest excuse for these translation policies. What one should learn from this, however, is that if the translators will continue to be dishonest regarding what is to be included and omitted from the text of the New Testament (and the entire Bible), is it any wonder that they would also knowingly mistranslate certain words? Is this any harder to accept than the KJV translators who knowingly mistranslated the word homosexual so as not to offend the homosexual King who provided them their paycheck?

The points illustrated thus far but scratch the surface of the need for a new translation. The problems with existing translations are so numerous that even a cursory examination of those problems is a work unto itself" (V. S. Herrell, The Anointed Standard Translation of the Bible, p. 7-9, Herrell Bros. Publishing House).

In the words of Brother Branham, ". . . right now. The people are all coming together. They are writing a Bible that will suit everyone whether it be a Jew, Catholic or Protestant. They have their own Nicene Council but they call it the Ecumenical Council" (William Branham, An Exposition of the Seven Church Ages, 228:3).

Returning to our commentary on the word "Jew". The original word came from the Latin "Iudaeus" and the Greek "Ioudaios" which in early English was "Iewe", or "Iewes" in the plural. The meaning of the original word was a "Judean" or resident of the geographic area of Judea; and although this area was at one time the southern kingdom of Judah, the original word had nothing whatsoever to do with the religion or race of that people. Indeed Nebuchadnezzar's captives were a mixed multitude, and by the time Judea had become a Roman province the majority of its population were unrelated to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, let alone the tribe of Judah.

It should be clear to anyone with the Holy Spirit that those who introduced this new word into our Bibles did so with sinister intent. Clearly the word "Jew" has changed in meaning, and nobody today would regard a "Jew" as a "Judean" in the literal sense of the word, yet that was the correct and only meaning in the eighteenth century when the word was coined. No Christian believes that the race, religion, nationality and culture of Jesus, and the race, religion, nationality and culture of so-called or self-styled "Jews" today (or even their ancestors) have a common origin or character with Jesus.

Meanings of words change. The present meaning of this word among those who regard themselves somehow as "Jews" has generally no racial connection with the Tribe of Judah or with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, since according to all of their encyclopedias, over 90% of "Jews" are non-Semitic peoples whose antecedents were never in Palestine and converted overnight in AD740. Neither has it any relationship to the faith of the Patriarchs, or of Moses, since religious "Jews" usually follow the Talmud which repudiates both the Law and the Prophets and offends the morality of even the most barbaric heathen whilst a "Jew" may be an atheist like the Judaeo-Communists, an agnostic, Buddhist, Hindu, Catholic or Protestant.

Brother Branham demonstrated how the meanings of words change by describing himself as "Irish Born" when neither he nor his parents on either side ever set foot in Ireland. Indeed his mother was part Cherokee Indian. Even so the generic word "Jew" was intended to become an all-encompassing term so as to establish a power base wherewith Rabbis and other self-styled leaders could exercise social, economic and political power over this mixed multitude for their own purposes. The Prophet said, "The Greek word for Pharisee means "an actor," somebody who acts, puts on. You know, America's so full of that anyhow, actors." (Unwelcomed Christ, #55-1002).

Pharisaic elements and political Zionists controlled by the world Money Power have infiltrated the churches and this Message and hold sway over the minds of most so-called Christians through Bible colleges, publications and pulpit show-biz, classing their dupes as Judaeo-Christian, an oxymoron. (Most who call upon the lovely Name of our Lord Jesus Christ actually believe "Jews" are the Chosen People of God when they are His enemy and the enemy of the Hebrew people descended from Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, being impostors unrelated by blood and who follow pantheistic Judaism, not the Old Covenant faith. God's Chosen people is His elect. From the day of Pentecost His Chosen People is the true Church or Bride of Christ made up of both Hebrews and Gentiles.

Learn to distinguish "Jew" from Hebrew and Israelite descended from Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; and "Christian" from those, even within Message circles who hold the "letter" without the Spirit. One can only receive the Spirit or new birth through a clear revelation of the PRESENT Truth -- what Jesus is doing NOW.

Myself, the Church I pastor and our Website, are sometimes evil spoken of by unlearned people who have not "studied to show themselves approved of God by rightly dividing His Word". Visit other so-called Message websites and see if you can find any that link to Bible Believers' Church Website. If you find one you will find more that post a disclaimer denouncing us as anti-Semitic, which is a lie. Along with every Christian we are pro-Semitic while these not understanding the Bible, history and the Message of God's prophet ignorantly oppose Israel and know it not. The only people in this world who are anti-Semitic are self-styled "Jews", who are the hybrid descendants of Esau, sworn to destroy Israel, and who lord dominion over Israel and his Land today (Genesis 27:39-42; Obadiah; Malachi 1:1-5; Romans 9:11-14).

Perhaps more than any other Message Church, our teachings lend comfort to any true Israelite of the flesh who may encounter them. Because we distinguish them from their enemies, the self-styled Jew, and Roman Catholic and Protestant pseudo-Christianity, and identify the glorious destiny that awaits their elect.

When Paul wrote, "He is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not external and from men, but internal and from God" (Romans 2:29), he was not using the Word "Jew" in a racial or religious context but in the sense of an election from among all the nations, tribes and tongues of Adam's race. For the election followed Abraham's natural seed through Judah to David's Greater Son, Jesus Messiah, thence by faith to we Gentiles since Judah accounted themselves unworthy of eternal Life when they rejected the Anointed One (Galatians 3:26-29).

For two thousand years men have been debating the meaning of the letter of the original tongues. Praise God for sending us a Prophet in these last days who restored the apostolic faith, and finished the mystery of God. Like the wording and sense of the Bible as it was initially written, Brother Branham spoke in colloquial language. But the Message he delivered is not the Bible; it is the spoken Word Key that unlocks the MEANING hidden within the letter of the written Word.

Brother Branham said, "Treat me like the Dutchman. Take me for what I mean, not for what I say" (Isaiah 8:20; Acts 17:11; Romans 3:4; Galatians 1:8-9; I Thessalonians 5:21). Whereas his speech was common, the teacher must be precise in defining and rightly dividing the open Word for this day using the Key of the Message.

Those who stand upon the letter of the King James or any other translation of the Bible, like those who stand upon the letter of the Message, are fundamentally as correct as over one billion Roman Catholics who stand upon the letter of Matthew 16:18-19 and 28:19. And fundamentally they are just as LOST. nl186.

Pass it on . . . Send this article to someone you know
Brother Anthony Grigor-Scott is a non-denominational minister. He has ministered full-time since 1981, primarily to other ministers and their congregations in various countries. He pastors Bible Believers' tiny congregation, and is available to minister in your church.

For Further Information Contact: Bible Believers' Church Currabubula, NSW 2342, Australia	e-mail: [email protected] Order: Bible Believers' web site on CD. URL: http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/
Subscribe: [email protected] With the message: subscribe bible_believers_newsletter Unsubscribe: [email protected] With the message: unsubscribe bible_believers_newsletter

Bible Believers' Newsletter #186

Carnivore to Snoop Cell Phone Calls

Telephones Free Game for Easedroppers

Will Anti-Hate Laws Put You in Jail?

Deadly Giant Waves may Endanger Atlantic Coasts

Nice, Self-Chosen People

Jews Demonstrate Against Zionism