The Bible Version Issue, Is It A NON-ISSUE?

FOREWARD

I have come to the realization that our present and future Preachers are not fully aware of all the history of the Bible Version debate. There is a winding trail of deception and untruth that needs to be exposed for a full understanding of why many are standing for the King James Bible and its Greek Received Text

 

There is a plea for us to make "which Bible is the Word of God?" a non-issue. The call is to end the division and strife over modem versions of the Bible so that there can be unity in Fundamentalism. Prior to 1960 there was no division over this issue, the King James Bible was the standard.

 

With the appearance in the 1950's of what Harold Ockenga called "NEW EVANGELCALS" a desire for "NEW BIBLES" arose. It is significant that with the compromise of New Evangelicalism in the co-operative crusades of Billy Graham a need arose for easier to read Bibles. Though there were multitudes of recorded decisions for Christ, few ended up in Fundamental Baptist Churches. Modern Versions of the Bible were promoted to help those who had made professions [but were not born-again] to understand the Bible. The watering down of the Word of God that has followed has been enormous. The problem has not been with the King James Bible, but with the natural man. I Cor. 2:14 "But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."

 

What follows in this work is a long trail of events that I have observed in the 48 years since I was saved. The events cover a period of time from early 1974 to the present time. Pertinent information concerning some of the things mentioned will be shown in the Appendix.

 

Dr. Paul Freeman. Evangelist and Bible Teacher
April, 2004

From 1970 to 1974 I was a member of the Calvary Baptist Church in Lansdale, PA. My Pastor was E. Robert Jordan. Pastor Jordan preached from the King James Bible. He later wrote a manual on the King James Bible and the Textus Receptus, which was excellent in the defense of both.

 

From 1974 to 1976 I was a member of Bethel Baptist Church in Sellersville, PA. My Pastor was Richard Harris. I taught in the Sunday School and Bible Institute there. In 1974 I heard a staff member at Bethel, by the name of Bruce Carter, speak about the two Greek Texts from which all translations come. He gave me a copy of a pamphlet by Jasper Ray titled God Wrote Only One Bible. From the publisher I ordered the Greek-English Interlinear New Testament by George Ricker Berry. It was an inter-linear translation from the Stevens Text of 1550 A.D., which later would be known as the Textus Receptus [or Received Text]. In the footnotes were all the critical changes proposed by Greisbach [1805] Lachmann [1842-1850] Tischendorf, Eighth Edition [1865-1872] Tregelles [1857-1872] Alford [1868-1870] and Wordsworth [1870]. These Textual Critics were the forerunners of the new Greek Text of 1881 A.D. by Professor Westcott and Dr. Hort. These two Greek Texts differed in over 5,000 places.

 

As I studied the new Modem Versions I found that they all followed the textual changes [with few exceptions] of the Westcott and Hort Greek Text of 1881. It was apparent that the Received Text was not the source of their translation. In the latter part of 1974 my son came home from Pillsbury Baptist Bible College in Owatonna, MN. He showed me a New American Standard Version of the Bible and told me it was the most accurate Bible. His Greek teacher had told him that there was no such thing as a Greek Textus Receptus. I showed him the changes that had been made and how they affected Bible Doctrine. I then took him to see President Tom Baker of the Bible Truth Institute in Sunbury, PA. After over two hours of discussion it became clear to my son that he had been given to believe that which was not truthful. My son went back to Bible College with a Greek Received Text obtained from the Bible Truth Institute and a firm belief in the trustworthiness of the King James Bible. He has been the Pastor of the Race Street Baptist Church in Catasauqua, PA. since 1976. The church is founded on the King James Bible and the Greek Received Text, opposing all modern versions of the Bible.

 

While my son was enrolled at Pillsbury he worked each summer in the Preacher Boy Program at Calvary Baptist Church in Lansdale, PA, under Pastor E. Robert Jordan. A few years later Pastor Jordan started the Calvary Baptist Theological Seminary. He brought on the faculty, professors from Central Seminary in Minneapolis, MN. They came with their Westcott and Hort Text of 1881. When Pastor Jordan was asked why he permitted men to teach from the other Greek Text he said that it was a matter of Baptist "soul liberty."

 

At this point it is worth noting that while I was a member of Calvary Baptist Church [1970- 1974] Pastor Jordan spoke against Bob Jones University, calling it an "inter-denominational school." Members who sent their children to Bob Jones were told that it was wrong for them to do so. Presently the Calvary Baptist Seminary is closely allied with Bob Jones University. Pastor Jordan changed his position and reconciled with a school that from its beginning has used the Westcott and Hort Greek Text of 1881.

 

Since Bob Jones University has now entered into our trail of events, it is necessary to explore their position on the Version Issue. This school has, from its beginning, used the Westcott and Hort Greek Text in their Greek classes. Their public position is that they use the King James Bible in Chapel and in Classes. However, the Received Text underlying the King James Bible is not used in Greek classes. Instead, the 1881 Greek Text of Westcott and Hort [now updated and called the Critical Text] is used to change the King James Bible to agree with their preferred text. It does not take long for the student to gravitate to what they now perceive as the "more accurate Bible" which is the New American Standard Version. You do not have to be in the Greek class at Bob Jones to learn the superiority of the New American Standard Version. It is uplifted in other classes as well. Parents who send their children to Bob Jones can expect them to come home with a New American Standard Bible.

 

Now that we have opened the subject of the New American Standard Version we need to explore where it came from. The original American Standard Version was translated in 1901 from the new Greek Text of Westcott and Hort 1881 A.D. The changes in it were damaging to the Person and the Work of the Lord Jesus Christ. The Jehovah's Witnesses printed and distributed it. [See Appendix #1] To my knowledge, the Jehovah's Witnesses have never printed and distributed a King James Bible. In John 9:38 the American Standard Version by a footnote makes Jesus a "creature." This version did not have a good success story among fundamental Bible believing Christians. Fifty years later the copyright was available. The publisher did not want it and no one else did either. At this point the Lockman Foundation bought the copyright.

 

Dr. Franklin Logsdon was chosen by Dewey Lockman to do a feasability study on a new translation. Dr. Logsdon proceeded to gather the translators and work was started. The New Testament was completed in 1960. Dr. Logsdon wrote the Preface with all good intentions. The Greek Text used was the Westcott and Hort text. It was named the NEW American Standard Version. Upon the publication of this new Bible, the names of the translators were withheld. It remained that way for many years. However, in 1999 I received a reply from the Lockman Foundation, giving the names of the translators and the schools who provided them. Bob Jones University was among the schools listed. [See Appendix #2]

 

Not long after the publication, friends of Dr. Logsdon found out that he had a part in it. They began to press him about the changes that had been made regarding the Person and Work of Christ. After much soul-searching, Dr. Logsdon wrote to Dewey Lockman and renounced all connection to the New American Standard Version. He said that he had made a "terrible mistake." Before he could sit down and explain it to his friend Dewey Lockman, Mr. Lockman died of a heart attack. I listened to Dr. Logsdon on audio tape tell of his connection and renunciation. I have a transcript of that message. That ought to cause any thinking person to think twice before embracing this version.

 

One of the men who convinced Dr. Logsdon about his "terrible mistake" regarding the New American Standard Version was David Otis Fuller. In 1970 Dr. Fuller edited Which Bible? which included articles for the Textus Receptus by various authors. In 1973 he edited True or False? with the same purpose with articles by various authors. Later he edited Counterfeit or Genuine? for the same reason. These books have been greatly used of the Lord to establish many on the Textus Receptus and the King James Bible.

 

In 1974 the Dean of Bible Truth Institute in Sunbury, PA., communicated with Dr. Stewart Custer, Chairman of the Bible Dept. at Bob Jones University. In Dr. Custer's reply he mentions Dr. Fuller and shows that neither he nor his books were welcome at Bob Jones University. [See Appendix #3] The Feb. 1979 issue of Faith for the Family, put out by Bob Jones University, had an article titled "What is the Inspired Word of God?" The article was written by Edward M. Panosian, Chairman of the Division of Church History at Bob Jones. In it he stated that "Neither the Received Text nor the Westcott and Hort Text is either right or wrong, liberal or conservative. The latter is older and nearer to the original, but both are the Word of the living God." This is quite a statement coming from such a learned professor at a Bible College. According to Dr. Donald A. Waite, Th.D., Ph.D. of the Bible for Today, there are 5,604 words that are different between these two Greek Texts. If both are to be regarded as the Word of God, then God has given us two Bibles, which are not the same.

 

The Oct.1979 issue of Faith for the Family had an article written by Dr. Thurman Wisdom, Dean of the School of Religion at Bob Jones University. The article was titled "Textus Receptus: Is it Fundamental to our Faith?" He asserts that there are three ways God uses to preserve His Word. The first is through over 5,000 manuscripts. The second is through the Word of God written in the hearts of believers. Here he says that if Satan could destroy every Bible it would still be here in the hearts of believers. They would not have marred any of God's infallible Word. The third way is by the ministry of the Holy Spirit. Where there is a textual variant reading, the Holy Spirit will show the believer which one is right. This is the most wishful thinking that one could possibly entertain. He then goes on to relate the King James Version defenders to a "wicked and adulterous generation" and says that we are in danger of turning our Bibles into hallowed relics.

 

This school has an untenable position regarding the Bible Version Issue. They have a faculty that is antagonistic to the King James Bible but use it for Public Relations. They promote the New American Standard Version which comes from the Westcott and Hort Greek Text taught in their Greek Class. Though there are many doctrinal differences in these two Bibles and two Greek Texts, they want everyone to put aside their differences and unite, choosing whichever one you prefer.

 

To promote this position and to minimize dissent the Bob Jones University put together a committee of men to write articles and combine them in a book titled From the Mind of God to the Mind of Man, which was published in 1999. That the source is Bob Jones is clearly documented in a book by Dr. Donald Waite of the Bible for Today. Dr. Waite's book is titled Fundamentalist Mis-Information on Bible Versions and is available from The Bible For Today Press, 900 Park Ave., Collingswood, NJ 08108. On the front cover of the Mind of God book is a picture of Matthew's Gospel out of the Revised Standard Version done by the National Council of Churches in 1946. This translation was rejected by all fundamental Christians because it changed "VIRGIN" in Isaiah 7:14 to "YOUNG WOMAN." Does this not suggest doctrinal problems with the Mind of God book?

 

One of the authors of the Mind of God book states that the Textus Receptus is the Model T Ford of the New Testament text. The author was John Ashbrook and in 1989 he wrote to me regarding his position. [See Appendix #4] The Mind of God book was a pitiful attempt to denigrate the King James Bible and to uplift the New American Standard Version. Other versions are spoken of more or less favorably.

 

It is worth noting that Bob Jones graduates have often migrated to other Bible Colleges as teachers. They have carried the Westcott and Hort Greek Text with them along with an affinity for the New American Standard Version or in some cases the New International Version. A network has been put in place that influences Bible Colleges all over the country. Many of these graduates hold membership in the Fundamental Baptist Fellowship, which is very sympathetic to the Bob Jones position. When the FBF held its 81st annual meeting they passed a resolution against fundamentalists who refuse to accept their double minded position. The call is for the King James Only people to repent or be rejected as schismatics. [See Appendix #5]

 

I have previously cited how my son in Pastoral study at Pillsbury Baptist Bible College was led toward the New American Standard Version and its Westcott and Hort Greek Text. Many other Baptist Colleges are moving toward the Bob Jones position. One Baptist College is trying to rewrite its own history regarding its stand on the Greek Text. The Maranatha Baptist College in Watertown, WI, was founded by Dr. B. Myron Cedarholm. The Greek Text used was the Textus Receptus. I have in my possession Dr. Cedarhohm's letter to a Maranatha graduate stating that to be a fact. I have also testimony from two Pastors that the Textus Receptus was the only one used at Maranatha. When Dr. Cedarholm retired, the new President at Maranatha was Arno Q. Weniger. When he took control, the school changed to the Westcott and Hort Greek Text in the Greek class. The current President, Dr. David Jaspers, told me that Dr. Cedarholm had hired teachers who used the Westcott and Hort Greek Text. However, the truth is that they were not allowed to use any other text in class except the Textus Receptus. When Dr. Cedarholm left the school, one teacher came out openly with the Westcott and Hort Text. I have the testimony of a former student. Dr. Jaspers told me that Maranatha professors have the option to use whatever Greek Text they choose. With 5,604 differences in the two Greek Texts, that is quite a permitted latitude to determine the preserved Word of God.

 

While I was teaching at the Bible Truth Institute in Sunbury, PA between 1978-1980, I made a study of the doctrinal errors in modern versions. I then published a 28-page booklet Bible Doctrines Affected by Modern Versions. I listed 176 New Testament passages that affect doctrine. It refutes the statements often made that the 5,604 differences in the two Greek Texts do not affect any Bible doctrines. One notable change involves the little word "YET" in John 7:8. The Critical Westcott and Hort Text removes it and in so doing makes Jesus Christ a liar to His brothers. How they can say that none of the changes affect any important doctrine is a mystery. Surely the sinlessness of Christ is an important doctrine.

 

We need to stop here and explain something about these two Greek Texts. The Westcott and Hort Text now known as the Critical Text rests on two Greek manuscripts from the fourth century. One is the Vaticanus (Codex B] manuscript resting in the Pope's Library in the Vatican. In the Gospels alone this manuscript leaves out words or whole clauses 1491 times. It differs from the Received Text by an omission of 2,877 words. It adds 536 words to the Received Text, and substitutes 935 words. Other changes are also evident. The other manuscript is the Sinaiticus [Codex Aleph], which was discovered in 1859. It was found in a monastery on Mt. Sinai where it was on the verge of being used to light the fires of the monks. It had little value to them, since it had been altered by ten different editors over ten different time periods. These two manuscripts differ with each other in over 3,000 places in the Gospels alone. Why would anyone want to base a new Greek Text of the New Testament upon such a faulty foundation?

 

By contrast, the Received Text upon which our King James Bible rests has over 5,000 manuscript witnesses. The statement is often made by the King James Bible detractors that no two of these manuscripts are exactly alike. That is an excuse that does not hold water or pass muster. If 100 people were asked to copy my book of 28 pages in longhand there would be no two copies exactly alike. However, there would be no trouble to ascertain the original, since all the copiers would not make the same error in the same place. The majority would quickly disprove the one with an error. It is beyond reason that 2 manuscripts are correct while 5,000 are in error.

 

Today the New Evangelicals and Roman Catholics are working together under the United Bible Societies to produce inter-confessional translations of the New Testament. The complete Bibles will include the Apocrypha and will be accompanied by Catholic explanations. One modem version based on the Westcott and Hort Text is Today's English Version (Good News for Modem Man] and it was well received by Roman Catholics. It is a doctrinal disaster. Billy Graham said that everyone should buy one. In Luke 1:27 the First Edition said that Mary was a "VIRGIN." The Second Edition said that she was a "GIRL." Col.l :14 omits "through his blood" and we could go on at great length with doctrinal errors. The only Bible that Roman Catholics do not want is the King James Bible. They prefer to muddy the waters of revelation to make room for their doctrine that Tradition and Scripture together equals the Word of God. Rome has never been for Scripture alone because it militates against their pagan religion. They will promote the two Catholic Manuscripts in order to homogenize Evangelicals and Catholics.

 

All of this is being aided and abetted by Bob Jones University and Baptist Colleges and Seminaries in their promotion of the Critical Catholic text of Westcott and Hort. Fundamental Christians have their foundation on the King James Bible and the 5,000 plus manuscripts that agree with the Textus Receptus. When this foundation is given up we are left at sea without a rudder. God has preserved His words in the multiplied copies and He has seen to it that those two corrupted manuscripts were hidden away for almost 1800 years. The Apostle Paul said, "For we are not as many which corrupt the word of God." [II Cor.2:17]

 

Dr. Arlin Horton, President of Pensacola Christian College, took a courageous step a few years ago to expose the deception carried on by Bob Jones University for years. The video Leaven in Fundamentalism put the blame right where it belonged. A line in the sand was drawn for two sides at odds with each other over which Bible is the Word of God. It took courage from the Lord to fly in the face of the Bob Jones network. There was an unknown cost to be paid by Pensacola Christian College regarding future student enrollments. He chose to leave the results with the Lord.

 

Now the cat was out of the bag. Now it was clear to Christians everywhere that Bob Jones University had a double standard regarding the Bible. They were using the King James Bible for Public Relations but under the table were advocating the New American Standard Version. Their Greek Text was the Critical Greek Text, which is Catholic and corrupted. Pensacola Christian College uses the King James Bible and the Received Text, which is behind it and in agreement with it. This is an honest position and a consistent one. Immediately Bob Jones gathered a coalition of Seminary and College professors to produce a video to counter the Leaven in Fundamentalism. Following this they produced the book From the Mind of God to the Mind of Man and launched it from a faculty member's church in South Carolina. The Pastor of this church has encouraged his congregation to use the New American Standard Version.

 

In the latter part of 1999 I mailed a three-page article titled "The Agenda of the Bob Jones University Bible Department" to about 100 key Pastors in the Fundamental Baptist Fellowship. [See Appendix #6] Again, in the early part of 2000 I mailed a four-page article titled "What's Wrong with the New American Standard Version?"[See Appendix #7] to 670 Pastors in the Fundamental Baptist Fellowship. This Fellowship is a Bob Jones controlled group that was headed by Dr. Rod Bell. Dr. Bell was on the Board of Bob Jones University and was a Pastor in Virginia Beach, VA. He was also President of the Tabernacle Baptist Seminary. His name appears on the back cover of the Mind of God book.

 

I received a reply from Pastor Mike Harding of the First Baptist Church of Troy, MI. This is what he said: "We do use the New American Standard in our pulpit, and we are fundamentalists, and we are not ashamed." [See Appendix #7, page 5] A year later the Fundamental Baptist Fellowship was to hold their annual National Conference at Pastor Harding's Church. When his letter to me was made known it caused no small stir among fundamentalists. The Fellowship had men who still stood for the King James Bible, at least publicly. There were others who stood for the New American Standard Version. There was a division on the horizon, what could they do? Dr. Rod Bell solved the problem by getting each speaker to agree to use the King James Bible. Once again Public Relations prevailed against the supposed more accurate Bible. How long will it be until the New American Standard achieves the Public Relations edge?

 

It has become quite clear that the battle for the Bible is not going to end until the Rapture of the Church to Heaven. The whining and crying for the end of division and strife will not end on the part of the Critical Text people. They have cast their lot for so long with the deceived scholars that they cannot or will not say WE WERE WRONG. It would put them outside of their peer group and for a while it might be a lonely place. That which keeps them in line with the network is pride and peer pressure.

 

Some of them do not realize that their preservation doctrine with variant readings leaves them with a Bible that is inspired only concerning its message, concepts, or principles. They will not accept the inspired and preserved words of the Received Text and its reliable King James Bible in English. They have chosen to accept a Critical Text Bible in English, which contains the message of God. The question for them is: Which one of those words is ORIGINAL? They are still studying to find the ORIGINALS. Will they let us know when they have found them?

 

Our Lord Jesus Christ said that the Spirit of God would abide with us forever. [John 14:16] The Spirit of God said that the Word of God would live and abide with us forever. [I Peter 1:23] Psalm 13 8:2 says, "For thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name". There is nothing higher than His Word and His Name. God does not cast a shadow on His name or word because there is no one above them both. [James 1:17] The new birth is brought about by two agents, the Spirit [John 3:1-7] and the Word. [I Peter 1:23-25] There are no variants in either of these two agents. The Spirit was given on the day of Pentecost and He has not diminished or varied. The Word of God was given from the Spirit of God and it has not diminished or varied. [II Timothy 3:16,17] We are not seeking to find the ORIGINAL Spirit, nor are we seeking to find the ORIGINAL Word. They are one and the same and they are eternal.

 

For those who have the settled conviction that the Textus Receptus Greek and the King James Bible in English are the foundation for our faith there is an incumbent obligation. Our prospective college students need to be directed toward a college that has the same position. Keep in mind that the King James Bible may be used for Public Relations. Visit the college bookstore and find out what kind of Bibles it sells. Find out what Greek Text is used by the Greek students.

 

Pastoral candidates and visiting speakers should be certified as to their stand on the King James Bible and the Greek Text. This is not the day to assume anything without a direct question and answer. Many of our traveling Evangelists are not very careful about where they accept meetings. Many are crossing back and forth over the line drawn in the sand. The same is true of missionaries on deputation. Many prefer not to ask questions when seeking meetings. Missionaries should also be questioned directly before they are allowed to gain entrance to your church. Some are under Mission Boards that do not stand on the Received Text and the King James Bible.

 

One such Mission Board is Baptist World Mission of Decatur, AL. The Preface to the afore mentioned Mind of God book was written by the late Ernest Pickering, Field Representative for Baptist World Missions. As mentioned before, The Mind of God book represents the Bob Jones position on the Version Issue. Another book was published in the year 2000 by Bob Jones University Press and written by Fred Moritz, the Executive Director of Baptist World Missions. The title of the book is Contending for the Faith. The statement is made inside the front cover that "His invitation to speak at the 1998 Fundamental Baptist Fellowship meeting prompted the study that resulted in this book." On page 92 Dr. Moritz writes, "the debate whether to use the Textus Receptus, the Majority Text, or the Critical Text should not be a source of bitter contention. Neither should it be a test of fellowship among brethren. This is not to demean the textual variants. The issue is worthy of continual study, and scholars should pursue the accurate wording of the original writings in those areas where uncertainty exists." It is obvious that Baptist World Mission is in the Bob Jones network along with the Fundamental Baptist Fellowship. Mission Boards should all be questioned directly about their position on the Greek Text and the English Bible. There is no fellowship around a corrupt Greek Text and any translation made from it.

It is time for the fence straddlers to choose which side of the issue they are going to stand on. God did not inspire and preserve two Bibles. Things that are different are not the same. We have been taught by the Lord that "faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." [Romans 10:17] For years we have memorized the Word of God from our King James Bible. Now with the multiplication of versions we are only left with the "MESSAGE" of the Bible and not the "WORDS" of the Bible. The power to convert a soul and build up the Christian is fast fading and we will soon reach the place that Jesus spoke of when He said, "when the Son of man cometh will he find faith on the earth?" [Luke 18:8] If we allow the textual scholars to take away our God given sword we will be of all people most miserable. The scholars may talk about Bible Preservation and exchange "FUNDAMENTALIST" for the name "PRESERVATIONIST" but they have yet to produce their infallible Bible. All they can say is that they are seeking to get closer to the ORIGINAL. We have our God-preserved ORIGINAL in our Received Text; we seek no other.

Dr. Paul L. Freeman
1270 Kingsbury Rd.
Washington, IL 61571