Bob Morey- The Researcher

This comes from a book entitled, "King James Version Ditches Blind Guides" in which Gail Riplinger, the author is doing rebuttals to those who have written lies about her and her book, "New Age Bible Versions". That book is shaking the religious world in a negative sense and the Christian world in a positive sense. Get it and read it, you will be glad that you did.

The Researcher (a now defunct newsletter promoting the work of Bob Morey) printed a critique of New Age Bible Versions. Hunt, the Christian and Missionary Alliance churches and others have leaned heavily on this rubber crutch. After publishing his error and sophistry laden 'critique', Morey lost the financial backers for his newsletter and lost 13 of the 14 stations on which his program was aired. Morey's mordacious tone must shock the air waves like Webster's "voracious" moray eel. Floods of callers to the widely syndicated radio program, Crosstalk, protested his fierce, unchristian tone and slanderous remarks about the KJV and New Age Bible Versions, forcing the stations to cancel the scheduled replaying of his interview. A similar incident on WIXL in Texas prompted the station to permanently cancel the sponsoring program.

Morey has not devoted years of his career to a full collation of new versions, but has written books discussing unrelated topics like Freemasonry and the Muslim religion. As a result, his review interlaces pseudo-scholarship with lies - a pattern often used by the cults to "deceive the hearts of the simple." Morey's beliefs, and those of the book's other critic, Jim White, are that of the reformed school. It denies truths held by most Christians, such as 1.) one must, by an act of free will, believe on the Lord Jesus Christ to be saved and 2.) bible prophecy points to a time of tribulation, a coming antichrist, followed by the second coming of Christ and the millennial kingdom. Books like New Age Bible Versions, which affirm such beliefs, are bound to receive a biased review.

Morey's Lie #1:

"[H]er so-called documentation is incomplete, erroneous,
or misleading... one clear example is found on page 2 where she
quotes from Dr. Ed Palmer (n.2) and from Dr. Ken Baker [sic]
(n.3) but then attributes both quotes to Palmer... Ken Baker [sic]
is correct when he says that there are only a few verses in
the New Testament which directly state that Jesus is God."

Truth: Morey is lying and has apparently never seen the reference books under question, both quotes ARE from Edwin Palmer (n.2 & n.3). Dr. Ken Barker (whom Morey called Baker) never said the quote Morey attributes to him. Palmer said it in chapter 14, p. 143 of The NIV: The Making of a Contemporary Translation, just as my footnotes indicate. Ken Barker was the book's editor; Morey evidently didn't get much past the cover. His "clear" example of "erroneous" documentation is 100% FALSE. His newsletter, The Researcher, was misnamed, to say the least.

New Age Bible Versions documents scores of places in which new versions deny that Jesus is God. Palmer's NIV does it dozens of times. Had he rendered these verses as strongly as the KJV does, he could not say there were "few and decisive texts that declare that Jesus is God." (I Tim. 3:16 is just one of many examples.) Palmer thinks John 1:18 is "one of those few clear and decisive texts that declare that Jesus is God," but only if the verse is rendered "begotten God" (NASB) or "One and Only" (NIV). Actually, the NASB presents an inferior, created "God," not co-eternal with the Father. The NIV says nothing about Jesus Christ here. Only the KJV's "begotten Son" presents Jesus Christ as "equal with God" as stated in John 5:17-26.
When Morey's footnotes are checked, they seldom prove his point at all.

Morey's Lie #2:

"Erasmus was into the occult."(4)
(Colin Wilson, The Occult, (New York:
Random House, 1971), p. 242)

Truth:
Page 242 of The Occult never mentions Erasmus, or any occult involvement by him. It is about the occultism of Peracelus, a medical doctor!

Morey's Misrepresentation #1:

"Erasmus started liberalism. Erasmus' religion was
New Age." (The Encyclopedia of Philosophy,
New York: Macmillian, 1972) 111:42)

Truth:
The Encyclopedia of Philosophy describes Michael Servetus as "liberal," not Erasmus. In fact, it actually says, "Thus Erasmus, who was essentially conservative by nature..." It never uses the term "New Age" to describe Erasmus, nor does it equate any New Age-like philosophies to him. The quote Morey contrived to imply this - when seen in its entirety - gives the distinct impression that Erasmus was a devout Christian.

Morey's Misrepresentation

"his philosophy of Christ...was nondoctrinal religion, a religion
without theology...This outlook had a great impact on the most
liberal reformers and the nondoctrinal mystics."

Actual Quote

"In place of the philosophical and theological systems of
the time, Erasmus set forth his 'philosophy of Christ,' to be
arrived by pious study rather than disputations. This
'philosophy' was supposed to represent the simple message of
Christianity in its spirit rather than its letter; it was a
message to be lived, not to be formulated in abstract systems.
It was a nondoctrinal religion, a religion without theology,
which could be approached through the early Church Fathers and
the morality of the New Testament but not through the morass of
distinctions, terminology, and theory built up in the Middle
Ages. This outlook had a great impact on the most liberal
reformers and nondoctrinal mystics." (p. 43)

Morey also claims Erasmus "was opposed to evangelical Christianity," yet his own reference, The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, actually describes Erasmus' "appeal to return to the simple spirit of Christianity."

Morey says Erasmus "was a Roman Catholic," yet neglects to inform his readers that, like Luther, he died outside of the Catholic church (Schaff History) and wrote "biting and satirical attacks on the church." These put books on the Catholic Index of Forbidden Books. "Erasmus saw the Church of Rome as fossilized," adds the Encyclopedia. Morey says Erasmus "had a bad character," yet his own reference book actually calls Erasmus "pius".

The Encyclopedia Britannica (1958) which Morey pretends presents Erasmus as a man consumed with "magic," actually says, "In the mind of Erasmus there were no metaphysical inclinations;" his writing was "a plea for a return to the source of Christianity in its primitive simplicity...he would return to the Bible..." The current 15th edition of the Britannica quotes Erasmus as saying, "If the Gospel were truly preached, the Christian people would be spared many wars." (p. 490) In Erasmus' Handbook of a Christian Knight, he urged readers to "inject into the vitals" the teachings of Christ by studying and meditating on the Scriptures." (p. 489) Please read the Encyclopedia Britannica for yourself and compare it to the picture Morey paints of Erasmus.

Not only does Morey misrepresent his own sources on Erasmus, but the parallels he establishes to disprove New Age Bible Versions rely heavily on sophistic arguments devoid of logic and truth. Note some of the invalid parallels he tries to create:

A lesbian was involved in the production of the NIV. It is therefore a "queer" Bible.	King James was a homosexual, the KJV is thus a "queer" Bible.
Some modern translators were members of a non-Christian church.	King James was a crypto-Roman Catholic.

Such comparisons are invalid for the following reasons.
1.) King James was not a translator!
2.) Morey cites no primary sources (i.e. quotes from James himself) to prove that he was a homosexual; Morey gives no examples of a pro-homosexual imprint on the KJV.
3.) New Age Bible Versions cites numerous verses where new versions omit the censure of homosexual acts. The book documents the homosexuality of NIV Consultant Virginia Mollenknott, using her own books.
4.) Morey invents rude phrases like "queer" Bible, a term which New Age Bible Versions never uses.
5.) History proves King James I was anything but a homosexual or a secret Roman Catholic. The Roman Catholic Church controlled England through Mary I who "became known as 'Bloody Mary' because of the bitter persecution she caused Protestants." Her predecessors, Elizabeth I and King James I, were responsible for "freeing it from Roman Catholic control." (World Book Encyclopedia, 1961, Vol. 5, p. 187, Vol. 12, p. 192, Vol. 10, p. 21) Because of James' anti-Catholic stance, Jesuit Henry Garnet and seven co-conspirators tried to kill him, hiding thirty-six barrels of gunpowder in the basement of Parliament. Because this "Gunpowder Plot of 1605" failed to return the throne to Catholic control, the typical slander campaign followed. Twenty-five years after the death of James, Anthony Weldon, whom James had removed from the court, swore vengeance. Dr. Samuel Gipp, author of the recent book Reading and Understanding the Variations Between the Critical Apparatuses of Nestles' 25th and 26th Editions of the Novum Testamentum Graece writes,

The report was largely ignored since there were enough people alive who knew it wasn't true. In fact, it lay dormant for years, until recently when it was picked up by Christians who hoped that vilifying King James would tarnish the Bible that bears his name... Weldon's false account is being largely ignored by the majority of those with an ulterior motive, such as its author had. The KJV Dedication, written by the King James translators and printed in the front pages of many current editions of the KJV, shows the high regard Christians had for King James. It refers to him as "defender of the faith" whose "very name is precious among them." It refers to "the zeal of your majesty toward the house of God...[his] writing in defense of the truth...frequenting the house of God, by hearing the Word preached, by cherishing the teachers thereof, by caring for the Church as a most tender and loving nursing father."

The false notion that James was favorable to Roman Catholicism is dissolved by the Dedication. It says that King James and his "defense of the truth" was "such a blow to the Man of Sin [the Pope] as will not be healed." (Incidently the Reformers always used the term 'Man of Sin' to identify the Catholic Pope. Recent printings of the Dedication by Zondervan and other publishers have fraudulently misrepresented the translator's text and no longer print 'Man of Sin' as a proper name.)

Morey pretends New Age Bible Versions' conclusions rest solely upon the discovered heresies and liberal theology held by the framers of the new versions. He neglects to tell his readers that to this, the book adds 600 pages of evidence proving that the KJV relies upon: 1.) earlier and better manuscripts, versions, and patristic evidence, 2.) stronger internal and external evidence, 3.) easier to read vocabulary, and 4.) readings which do not give support to humanistic, New Age, or cultic theologies, nor water down the distinctives of historic Christianity.

MOREY'S STORIES

Morey, like McMahon, must change, misquote, and misrepresent what the book says to make a case against it. Are these men liars or careless readers - Don Quixotes, mistaking windmills for giants and flocks of sheep for armies?

MISQUOTATION	ACTUAL QUOTE
"She even makes the absurd statement that the five points of Calvinism 'form a Satanic pentagram'. Thus she condemns all Calvinistic theologian,"	"Palmer devoted an entire chapter in his book, The Five Points of Calvinism, to disprove the idea that man still has the ability to ask God's help for salvation." His "Five Points" form a Satanic pentagram. His book is so irrational that he is periodically forced to interrupt himself with comments like, '...as contradictory as that may seem.'"

The phrase "His 'Five Points'" obviously refers to Palmer's book and his distorted interpretation of Calvin's theology. The sentence which precedes and follows it refers to "his book." The capitalization and quote marks for 'Five Points' is another indicator that the aforementioned book title is being referred to. How does one book's distorted hyper-Calvinistic interpretation condemn all Calvinists? Palmer asserts that "the mistake of a pianist while playing - even sin" is foreordained by God. (pp. 90,92)

This denial of free-will does put Palmer in agreement with Arjina in the Hindu Bhagvad-Gita, which sees man as "extremely passive." It does not put him in agreement with John Bunyan, Charles Spurgeon, and the other men Morey cites.

Morey pretends the book "viciously attacks" men as "heretics," citing its pp. 303, 608-609 as evidence. The word he cites in quotes - heretic - occurs no where on those pages. Those in disagreement with the author were identified on those pages as "friends...brethren" (p.303) and "Christians" (pp. 608-609). I challenge anyone to identify any 'vicious' usage on his cited pages.

MISQUOTATION	ACTUAL QUOTE
"heretics...pp. 303, 608-609"	"friends...brethren" (p. 303) "Christians" (p. 608-609)

THE BLIND LEAD THE BLIND

Morey's Misrepresentation

"The words 'He', 'Him', 'His' and, in particular, 'One' reveals a New Age plot...The KJV
capitalizes the word 'One' dozens of times. (Ps. 16:10, etc.)

Truth: New Age Bible Versions objects to new versions' substitution of impersonal, non-specific pronouns for the specific Christian personal names of Jesus, Christ and God - particularly since almost all Greek manuscripts read as the KJV does. Note the following examples.

NIV, NASB, et al.	KJV
I can do everything through Him who strengthens me.	I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me. Phil. 4:13
He who was revealed in the flesh.	God was manifest in the flesh. Tim. 3:16

Morey must hope his readers will never look up his example, Ps. 16:10 in a KJV; it refers to the 'Holy One'. (This criticism was discussed in the earlier analysis of McMahon's critque.) McMahon actually relied on Morey here, as evidenced by his use of identical wording and repetition of the same error.

"And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch." Matt. 15:14

Misrepresentation:

"All those who have worked on
modern translations...are part of a
New Age conspiracy...The goal of all
new translations is to replace Christ
with Anti-Christ."

Truth: No where in the book does it state that ALL translators, or even MOST translators, are New Agers or a part of a conscious conspiracy. In fact, chapter 29 'The Scribes,' which introduces the section on new version editors, says they are "unconsciously" (p.393) involved. Westcott and Hort say their corrupt Greek text is being received by "rational men [who] are being unawares acted upon." Bold and italic type were used in the book to emphasize these words. Morey slanderously lumps all editors together, ignoring the book's admonition that some are indeed "good men", "Christians", and "saved." (p. 393) The handful, out of the thousands of new version editors, who are quoted and discussed in the charts and book, are never listed as "New Agers" or "Luciferians", but as "New Version Editors."
The goal of many translators was much like that of Uzzah - to help God out - "as though he needed anything" (Acts 17:25).

"Uzzah put forth his hand to the ark of God, and took hold of it; for the oxen shook it. And the anger of the LORD was kindled against Uzzah; and God smote him there for his error; and there he died by the ark of God." 2 Sam 6:6,[7]

"They shall not touch any holy thing" (Numbers 4:15), even if it looks like God needs help. The "holy scriptures" (2 Tim. 3:15) are not to be tampered with without judgement (Rev. 22:18,19). Uzzah "took" (2 Sam. 6:9), Eve "took" (Gen. 3:6) and new versions editors "take away from the words of the book" (Rev. 22:18). Uzzah's sin brought 'fear' (2 Sam. 6:9); Eve "was afraid" (Gen. 3:10) and Dr. Franklin Logsdon, author of the preface of the NASB, said, "I'm afraid." Uzzah dies, Eve dies, and Dr. Logsdon died. Their goals were good - in their eyes - the result was evil. The editor's seeds of pride have been blown into enemy territory by a gale force wind from the publishers' purse; these tares take root and grow in today's careless church which mistakes media for manna and good intentions for obedience and good results. The adage, 'Sin will take you farther than you want to go', describes the situation well. New version editors, desiring, like Eve, "to make one wise" have aided and abetted the adversary "the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil" (Rev. 20:2). Were they "consciously" trying to aid anti-Christ? Rev. 20:10 says, "The devil...DECEIVED them." How? "The pride of thine own heart hath deceived thee" (Obad. 3). Who is the 'king over all the children of pride? Job 41:34 identifies him as the fire breathing dragon. The final bible which will allow worship of the dragon (Rev. 13) will be the "bundle" of accumulated hay and stubble harvested from the multiplied seeds of pride and disobedience sown down through the centuries, "while men slept." (Matt. 13:25)

"Her wise me...shall sleep a perpetual sleep, and not wake, saith the King whose name is the LORD of hosts." Jer. 51:57 Thine enemies shall be found liars. DEUT. 33:29

ARCHAIC SCHOLARSHIP

Morey's review is accompanied by an article entitled "How We Got Our Bible." It rings like a page out of his old college textbook. Whoops...It's his father's textbook! His footnote source is the 1937 General Biblical Introduction by H.S. Miller. In fact, all of his footnotes cite works which are at least 13 years old, the average date being 1955 - at least 40 years old. Because he has not remained current in his study of the recent papyrilogical collations or literature and theories in the field of textual criticism, he must repeat the out-dated ad homenium attacks on Erasmus or King James.
Let's look at the few samples of the out-dated information he is passing along.