The James White Controversy- 5th. Part

From King James Version Ditches Blind Guides by Gail Riplinger

She is also author of New Age Bible Versions and Which Bible is God's Word?

WOE UNTO THEM THAT GO DOWN TO EGYPT IS. 31:1

White bases his assertions about the correctness of Bible readings on the critical apparatus in his UBS 4th edition, Nestle's 27th edition, and Hodges' Majority Text. When the International Greek New Testament Project investigated most apparatuses, Colwell, their Director, determined that they "fail to cite witnesses accurately or completely." Anyone who has spent time actually collating manuscripts knows this. Secure for yourself through ILL (Inter-library loan) a Facsimile of the Washington Manuscript of the Four Gospels (MSW) from The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan (Henry A. Sanders, 1912). Check Luke 5:6, 16:31, Matthew 16:2-3, 26:26, and John 6:2, for example. The witness given for Manuscript W is wrong in the Nestle Aland text. In addition, they cite only 7% of the cursive manuscripts, .02% of the lectionaries, 33% of the versions and 24% of the church fathers. If all evidence supporting the KJV readings was listed, it would not fit on the page! Von Bruggen has also proven that Aland does not collate Byzantine type manuscripts, he collates Egyptian MS.

Furthermore, The Greek New Testament According to the Majority Text, which White often cites to support his errors (i.e. Rev. 1:11), makes an error in John 21:7 and Romans 16:1, carelessly omitting words which are found in the majority of manuscripts, the KJV and even new versions.

Readers (& White) naturally assume that the term 'Majority Text' and the German sigla "M" represent a numerical majority of a full collation of the five thousand-plus Greek New Testament documents. Nothing could be further from the truth. This so-called 'Majority Text' White cites is based on von Soden's collation of 414 of the 5,000+ documents. Even these 414 were not fully collated. White must not have carefully read the preface which admits, "We were forced to rely on von Soden's work...his presentation of the data leaves much to be desired....The present edition does not cite the testimony of the ancient versions or church fathers."

The editors of this 'Majority Text' took von Soden's work, and by comparing group variations within the manuscripts listed for each group, derived the apparent wording of the Greek witnesses for each verse. The group that von Soden called Kx is followed in most cases.

Frederik Wisse, in his The Profile Method for the Classification and Evaluation of Manuscript Evidence as Applied to the Continuous Greek Text of the Gospel of Luke: Studies and Documents (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1982) pp. 16-17, found a LARGE number of errors in von Soden's work. His conclusion was that "von Soden's inaccuracies cannot be tolerated for any purpose. His apparatus is useless for a reconstruction of the text of the MSS he used." Even the editors admit, "all decisions about M p t [even split] readings are provisional and tentative." (Hodges 1985, xxii) Kevin James in his brilliant book, The Corruption of the Word: The Failure of Modern New Testament Scholarship notes, "We do know that at times von Soden examined only 13 of the more than 300 manuscripts that make up his Kx group to determine the wording" (p. 248). (It is important to note that Hodges has not misrepresented his work, but unlearned students like White have. In Luke 1 von Soden cites 120 MSS; Wisse profiles nearly 1400. When the KJV Departs from the Majority Text by J.A. Moorman summarizes such findings. Wisse explains that, "Of the 99 checked MSS, 76 were missing one or more times when they should have been cited, or were listed when they should not have been. This breaks down to 59 MSS which were missing in von Soden's apparatus from one to four times, and 39 which were added incorrectly from one to six times" (pp. 16,17).

In conclusion, I will say the 'Majority Text' White cites is based on a collation of less than 10% of the extant documents. These 10% were not fully collated and were very frequently miscited. H.C. Hoskier said of von Soden's work, "I regret to have to condemn it strongly... the apparatus is positively honeycombed with errors." (JTS, 15-1914, p. 307)

The book of Revelation in Hodges-Farstad's so-called "Majority Text" relied, for the most part, on H.C. Hoskier's collation of the book of Revelation. In spite of the fact that the eighty or so Andreas MSS are older and stylistically superior, Hodges-Farstad relied on an equal number of MS in the 046 line. To excuse this prejudicial move, they list only one-third of the Andreas line. This distortion allows the omission of vital texts such as Revelation 1:11, "I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last."

Again, White's reliance upon secondary, not primary, sources, leads him into error. I recommend he secure the work of Alford, Tischendorf, Souter, Merk, Vogels, Legg, Moorman, James, Charles, International Greek New Testament Project, Migne, as a start. Then secure the manuscripts listed in James' Corruption of the Word. From there, he can begin securing facsimiles through ILL from the Ancient Biblical Manuscript Center, 1325 North College Ave., Claremont, CA 91711 U.S.A.

WHITE'S WOES

"One woe is past; and behold, there come two woes more hereafter." Rev. 9:11-12

My heart goes out to this young man's family, and to the families of the other critics, as well, some of whom are Christians. They are bringing upon themselves and their precious families, much unnecessary woe. "Vengeance is mine, saith the Lord, I will repay." "It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God." God will no doubt 'correct' those who 'correct' the Bible and falsely accuse those who defend his word.

WOE UNTO YOU, YE BLIND GUIDES

KJV antagonists love to quote White's remarks about my brief comments about the letter "S". I stated:

"Their Greek differs from the overwhelming majority of manuscripts by one letter, 's'. The former has the genitive eudokios while the latter has the nominative eudokia. Watch out for the letter "s"--sin, Satan, Sodom, Saul (had to be changed to Paul). The added 's' here [emphasis added] is the hiss of the serpent."

The new versions destroy the meaning of Luke 2:14 because of an added 's' in their minority Greek text. My comments about the 's' were intended as satire and fit Webster's definition:

"trenchant wit, irony or sarcasm, used for the purpose of exposing or discrediting vice or folly"

That was the intent. HOWEVER, White is wrong to assume that the comment is devoid of truth. The realities regarding the letter 's' are known to any student of linguistics. A brief history follows, if only to prove that: 1.) even simple statements in New Age Bible Versions were not made without years of study behind them. 2.) Mr. White's background in most of the subjects under discussion is shallow, at best.

It creeps into our lives at birth
And makes us kindred to the earth
It grows like some destroying weed
With every wanton act and deed
It robs of virtue and of youth
And cunningly perverts the truth
It offers fruits of pleasure rare
But fills partakers with despair
It binds the strong, deceives the wise
And masquerades in keen disguise
It builds its castles all of sand
And leaves a torn and wasted land
It blinds the eye and mocks the soul
And exacts an everlasting toll
It lost its power our souls to damn
When Jesus Christ became our Lamb.

The Bible calls it SIN... Kaster

Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!...which justify the wicked for reward, and take away the righteousness of the righteous from him! Is. 5:21, 23

Is the letter 's' (and some words using it) connected with 'the hiss of the serpent'? (Remember, I merely said, "Watch out for 's'...here it is the hiss of the serpent." White jumps over the word 'here' and pretends I'm saying that all "s" words are bad. White comments, "Such arguments would lead us to abandon such terms as salvation." He and hostile radio hosts take my satirical jab and pretend I actually think all "s" words are bad. They must have a very weak case to employ so vacuous a ploy. My "watch out," though intended satirically, has a linguistic basis. Written language began as ideography; each picture conveyed an idea. From this logography developed in which signs were abstracted from pictures to represent a word. (Chinese is the only current alphabet that still uses such a system.) Stephen's classic Runic Monuments of Scandanavia and England (Copenhagen, 1868, Vol. 1) is only one of scores of books which show that the letter 's' developed from a logography of a serpent. When the syllabic system replaced the logographic, the sign that stood for one word could not only be used for that word, but also phonetically similar words. (Rebus writing, for example, replaces an abstract picture of a serpent for the 's' sound.)

Every dictionary and reference book (look up 's' in Webster's) calls 's' "the hissing sound." The sound phonetically associated with the serpent shaped pictograph was the sound made by the serpent--hiss. (pronounce 's' as "hiss") Even Webster's "Guide to Pronunciation" identifies 's' "as in hiss," on p. vii. 'S' is the hissing sound in French, German, and most other European languages.

The Semite (Shem) and Phoenician 'S' first appeared as a reclining serpent. All alphabets from this fertile crescent area do likewise. (A Hebrew word for 'serpent' tanneen even means "to stretch out." Another Hebrew word for serpent tsiph-ohnee means 'a hissing serpent'. It is from the root 'to hiss'.) The Hebrew, Samaritan, Arabic and Syriac 'S' is called "Sin". This fact and sample letters which all appear as serpents can be seen in Webster's (1828) The American Dictionary of the English Language. The Syrian 'skin or sin' can be seen to uncoil as it changes positions in a word from final, medial, and initial. Even the Ethiopic sa, su, sy, look like a snake pictogram. (Even today, the handsign for the deaf for 'a snake' mimics the Arabic final 'sin' letter.)

The Greeks and Romans stood the "S" erectly, as we see it now. This erect serpent (standing next to a tree ala Gen. 3) pervaded the art of this period. Even the technical term in phonics for the 'hissing sound' is sybilation, coming from the occult Sybils who spoke then as New Age channelers do today. In the Greek alphabet, the second letter for the lower-case s, sigma, is used only as the terminal letter of a word. This peculiar form of 'S', identical to a serpent pictogram, is used for the Greek number 6. It is called stigma, and means 'a mark' from the root 'to prick'. (Does this not point to Rev. 13 and 14 and its mark of 666.) Stigma (prick) and charagma (sharpen to a point), both translated 'mark' in the KJV, point to the new hypodermically inserted identification microchip, inserted "in" the hand or forehead (not "on" as new versions say!). Incidentally, Xi, which represents 60, is identified as "the symbol of the serpent" in Greek, by one of this century's greatest scholars, E.W. Bullinger. His classic book Number in Scripture shares my "Watch out" view of the "S". [see pp. 49, 150, 156, 282, 283, et al.]

"But 666 was the secret symbol of the ancient pagan mysteries connected with the worship of the Devil...The great secret symbol consisted of three letters SSS, because the letter S in the Greek alphabet was the symbol for the figure 6."

The letter 'S' had such negative roots and associations that it has been suggested the letter "f" was used in its place. Bibles proceeding from the KJV 1611 often used "f" for "s". Matthew Carrey was the first to change "f" to 's'. Even in chemistry, the letter 's' is the symbol for sulfur. (Bible students know sulfur is "brimstone," the final home of those who take the mark (Rev. 19:20) and of the serpent (Rev. 20:10). Bullinger comments,

"It is today the secret connecting link between those ancient mysteries and their modern revival in Spiritism, Theosophy, etc. The efforts of the great enemy are now directed towards uniting all into one great whole...The letter is becoming familiar to us now..."

Was my aside, "Watch out", ludicrous? I have gone to lengths to prove that even the sarcasm in New Age Bible Versions is wiser than White.

"WOE UNTO THEM THAT CALL...GOOD EVIL"

White claims "the deity of Christ" is undermined in the KJV in Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1:1. He must be unaware of the following:

Titus 2:13
1.) All Greek texts have the wording of the KJV. None render it as the new versions do.
2.) The Granville Sharp theory he cites is just that, a theory. It does not require that the Greek word order be changed, or commas added, but simply states that one person, not two, are presented here.
3.) The same grammatical construction is used to express the deity of the Father "God and our Father") in Gal. 1:4, 1 Thes. 1:3, and Phil. 4:20. The O.T. uses such construction frequently (i.e. Is. 45:21, a just God and a Saviour, and Gen. 49:25).
4.) New versions omit the definite article "the" great God, seen in all Greek texts. He is the great God, but is only our Saviour since we believe in him.
5.) The spelling of 'Saviour' as "Savior" denies his deity. See Webster's distinction between a "savior" ("one who saves") (it could be anyone) and the 'Saviour' "Jesus Christ the Redeemer". (The move from a seven letter word, the Bible's number for perfection, to a six letter word, the Bible's number for man, is a downhill move.)

2 Peter 1:1
1.) The Textus Receptus (Elzevir) reads "our Saviour." (See footnote in Berry's Stephen's interlinear.)
2.) P. 371 of New Age Bible Versions quotes Lewis Foster, an NIV editor, confessing WHY they really insert Christ's deity here and omit it nearly 100 other places.
3.) White pretends the KJV says "our God and our Savior, Jesus Christ" in Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1:1. The KJV has only one "our," no comma, and spells Saviour correctly.

NEED A GOOD LAUGH ABOUT NOW?

White includes a lengthy quote from NKJV Old Testament editor James Price to prove that the KJV is New Age too. For example, Price asserts that the KJV rendering "found mules" instead of "found water" is "a New Age attack..."

Gen. 36:24: The new version's translation of yemin as 'hot springs' or 'found water' is based on Jerome's Latin Vulgate interpretation (see Gesenius, "Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon," p. 351). One commentator notes, "Hebrew words have as many as three meanings with the same letters, and as many as ten meanings when traced back to the roots." Calvin, Luther, and Clarke side with the KJV rendering. Price's pretense that "mules" promote the New Age agenda is funny.

I Sam. 2:25: This is a gem! Price's pretense is unconscionable. He faults the KJV for translating elohim as 'judges' here, yet he translated elohim as 'judges' in his NKJV in Ex. 21:6, 22:8, 22:9a, and 22:9b! Using Price's logic, we must ask of his NKJV, "Do you suppose this is a New Age denial that God will judge sinners?" His dissemblance to fool readers that elohim always means 'God' is deceitful at best. All versions variously translate this word dozens of ways. The NIV uses 40 different words to translate elohim such as, "goddesses, angels, idols, and heavenly beings." Even Strong notes that it is "occasionally applied by way of deference to magistrates...judges."

The rest of Price's verse samples are equally devoid of accuracy, content, meaning, or relevance to any 'New Age' implications. The weak and too often deceitful case of new version advocates gives added proof of the veracity of the King James Version.

End of Part 5
To be continued...