Do Modern Translations Corrupt the Scriptures? Part 2.

Part 2. Claims about NKJV Alterations and Corruptions.


-Did the NKJV change the word ‘hell’?

-Did NKJV remove ‘devils’?

-Did NKJV remove the command to ‘study’?

-Did NKJV change ‘virtue’ to ‘power’?

-Did NKJV change ‘servant’ to ‘slave’?

-Did NKJV change ‘world’ to ‘age’ to comply with New Age doctrine?

-Did NKJV change ‘Godhead’ to the New Age divine nature?

-Did NKJV change “cannibalize Rebekah?

-Did NKJV change alter the word ‘lieutenants’?

-Did NKJV remove references to Satan?

-Did NKJV change ‘the way’ from easy to difficult?

-Did NKJV change ‘Easter’ to ‘Passover’?

-Changing the word ‘corrupt’ to ‘peddling’?

-Did NKJV change ‘imagination’ into ‘argue’?

-Did NKJV change ‘Jesus’ into ‘Joshua’?

-Concluding comments.


An often heard example of ‘alterations to scripture’ is the word hell. Below is a common argument:

Did the NKJV change the word ‘hell’?

The NKJV removes the word “hell” 23 times! And how do they make it “much clearer”? By replacing “hell” with “Hades” and “Sheol”! Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary defines Hades: “the underground abode of the dead in Greek MYTHOLOGY“. By making it “much clearer” – they turn your Bible into MYTHOLOGY! Not only that, Hades is not always a place of torment or terror! The Assyrian Hades is an abode of blessedness with silver skies called “Happy Fields”. In the satanic New Age Movement, Hades is an intermediate state of purification!

Who in their right mind would think “Hades” or “Sheol” is “up-to-date” and “much clearer” than “hell”?

Matthew 16:18

KJV: “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”
NKJV: “And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.”

Luke 16:23

KJV: “And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.”
NKJV: “And being in torments in Hades, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.”

Hell is removed in 2 Sam. 22:6, Job 11:8, 26:6, Psalm 16:10, 18:5, 86:13, 116:3, Isaiah 5:14, 14:15, 28:15,18, 57:9, Jonah 2:2, Matt. 11:23, 16:18, Luke 10:15, 16:23, Acts 2:27, 31, Rev. 1:18, 6:8, 20:13,14.


One of the biggest problems I have with the KJV only position is that the original text is rarely consulted to resolve the issue. Currently, we have thousands of manuscripts available today that were not available to the KJV 1611 translators. The primary source for the KJV translation was the Septuagint and the Latin Bible (commonly known as the Vulgate). Most of the modern translations such as the NKJV depend on the thousands of manuscripts written in the original Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic. To determine whether the NKJV or other modern translations are accurate, we should draw from the resources that are closest to the original.

Let’s examine the argument above. Critics argue that the NKJV is influenced by Greek mythology and this has corrupted the translation. However, the New Testament was written primarily in Greek. The apostle Paul and almost all of the civilized world at that time spoke Greek. The Roman Empire united conquered nations under a common government and a common language. That language was Greek.

If we look at the Greek word used in Matthew 16:18 we see that it is the word ‘hades’. The KJV translates three different words into the English word ‘hell’:

Sheol – used in the Old Testament in reference to the grave or a pit.

Gehenna – used in reference to eternal judgment and punishment.

Hades – New Testament word used in reference to the grave.

When you look at the KJV’s use of the word hell, it is impossible to tell which word is referenced. There is a big difference in meaning between these Greek words, therefore modern translators made a clear distinction as to which words were going to be referenced. It is not a corruption of scripture to clarify which words the apostles or prophets used when writing the scriptures.

Did NKJV remove ‘devils’?

The word “devils” (the singular, person called the “devil” is) is NOT in the NKJV! Replaced with the “transliterated” Greek word “demon” (ditto NIV, RSV, NRSV, NASV).


An example of this can be found in Matthew 8:16 When evening had come, they brought to Him many who were demon-possessed. And He cast out the spirits with a word, and healed all who were sick, (NKJV)

It is ironic that this critic is offended that the Greek word is used as the source when the Greek text should be our comparison. The word used is ‘daimonion’ which is accurately translated into the word ‘demon’. The word devil comes from the Greek word ‘diabolos’. It is a completely different word and is almost always a reference to Satan. Regardless of personal preference, the word of God uses the word ‘daimonion’ or demon.

Note: in this example, regardless of translational preference (KJV or NKJV) the doctrine has not changed and the intent of scripture, if taken in context with the whole of scripture is consistent across all of the literal translations.

Did NKJV remove the command to ‘study’?

In 2 Timothy 2:15, the NKJV (like the NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV) remove that “obsolete” word – “study”! The only time you’re told to “study” your Bible. AND THEY ZAP IT! Why don’t they want you to “study” your Bible? Maybe they don’t want you to look too close – you might find out what they’ve ACTUALLY done to your Bible! The “real” KJV is the only English Bible in the world that instructs you to “study” your Bible!


2 Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. (KJV)

2 Timothy 2:15 Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. (NKJV)

Let’s examine this passage. The Greek words found in this passage are as follows:

spoudazo – be diligent, make haste, or exert one’s self

paristemi – to present

seautou – yourself

dokimos – accepted, pleasing

theos – God

ergates – workman or laborer

anepaischuntos – no cause to be ashamed

orthotomeo – to cut straight

logos – word

aletheia – objective truth

The word study is not in the original text. It has been added by the KJV translators for the purpose of clarity. The NKJV renders a passage that is literal and closer to the original text, however, the KJV is not inaccurate either. The clear intent of this passage is to know the word of God and divide it accurately. This, of course requires study and both translations clearly communicate this. The KJV added this word for clarity and the NKJV did not. It is a false statement to say that the NKJV ‘zapped’ a word out of the scripture. It is more accurate to say that the KJV added a word.

So that there are no misunderstandings, let me take a moment to clarify why words are added to scripture. It is impossible to translate from Greek to English word for word. It is impossible to translate any language word for word into another language. Anyone who has studied Spanish, French, Greek or any other language should understand this. The best you can do is to choose your words carefully so that you communicate the intended thought as accurately as possible. For the sake of understanding, implied words are added to clarify a thought. When the scriptures warn us not to add to the Word of God and not to take away from it, this does not mean we cannot transliterate the Word of God. To alter a passage to support ones belief would violate the integrity of scripture and fall into God’s warning. To exclude passages we don’t agree with or have trouble with would be to take from the Word. To interject words or ideas into scripture to make it say something God did not say would add to His word and violate the integrity of scripture and the warning God gave.

Adding the word ‘study’ does not alter the intent or context of this passage but this remains true to the original meaning. Not adding the word ‘study’ does not violate the scripture but remains true to the literal translation of the passage. This is clearly a personal preference but does not change any doctrine or intent of scripture. Both renderings are completely accurate and if the passage is examined the meaning is crystal clear in both the NKJV and the KJV versions.

Did NKJV change ‘virtue’ to ‘power’?

That “obsolete” word “virtue” is replaced with “power” in Mark 5:30, Luke 6:19, 8:46! How does anybody confuse “virtue” with “power”?


The word ‘virtue’ in the KJV or ‘power’ in the NKJV comes from the word ‘dunamis’ which means, strength, power, or to exert or put forth. KJV only supporters often confused with the word virtue found in 2 Peter 1:5

And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge;

In this passage, the word virtue comes from the Greek word, ‘arete’, which means moral goodness or purity. As you can see, virtue and power come from two completely different words and the NKJV accurately differentiates between the two. Power is an accurate translation of the word ‘dunamis’ found in Mark 5:30, Luke 6:19, and 8:46.


Did NKJV change ‘servant’ to ‘slave’?

One of the most absurd changes ever made is changing the word “servant” to “slave”! The NKJV in Romans 6:22, reads: “But now having been set FREE from sin, and having become SLAVES OF GOD. . .” The NKJV, in 1 Corinthians 7:22, calls the Christian, “Christ’s slave”. Talk about a contradiction! John 8:36 says, “If the Son therefore shall make you FREE, YE SHALL BE FREE INDEED.”


I am sorry that many critics do not like to be called ‘slaves of God’ but this is what the Bible says. The word ‘slave’ is the word ‘douloo’ which means, to make a slave of, or to reduce to bondage. If you read 3 verses prior to the one in question, the Bible says,

19 I speak in human terms because of the weakness of your flesh. For just as you presented your members as slaves of uncleanness, and of lawlessness leading to more lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves of righteousness for holiness.

The comparison Paul is making is that you were once slaves of sin, but now you are slaves of righteousness. Remember, you were bought with a price and you are not your own (1 Corinthians 6:20). The word ‘servant’ comes from the word ‘doulos’. It is a similar word and a similar meaning with one exception, doulos means to give ones self up for the will of another. In Matthew 25:21 Jesus says, “Well done, good and faithful servant; you were faithful over a few things, I will make you ruler over many things. Enter into the joy of your lord.”

There is a very important principle to understand with the use of these two words in scripture. When you die to yourself and surrender yourself to Christ, by faith you receive salvation and the new life God has created for you. Your salvation and your life in Christ is a free gift but it was not without cost. When you lay down your life, you are willingly receiving citizenship in God’s kingdom and the commandments of God that come with it. Paul stated in 1 Corinthians 9:

17 For if I do this willingly, I have a reward; but if against my will, I have been entrusted with a stewardship.

Notice the principle here, you are rewarded if you fulfill your call willingly. You are then submitting yourself to the will of another – Jesus Christ. You are willingly making yourself a servant and will hear, “Well done, enter into the joy of your lord”. If you are unwilling, you are still required to obey. Why? You are bought with a price and you are not your own. You are still required to obey because you have been purchased by the shedding of God’s own blood. You do not have the right to disobey God’s commands or His calling. Anyone who lives in disobedience is in rebellion against God. Anyone who obeys grudgingly has only done their duty. However, the one who serves God cheerfully from their heart and obeys out of a love for God has a reward. Do not forget that the greatest commandment is to love God with all your heart, mind, soul and strength. Obedience without love is merely duty.

Did NKJV change ‘world’ to ‘age’ to comply with New Age doctrine?

In order to “harmonize” with the satanic New Age Movement (and of course the NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV!), the NKJV changes “end of the WORLD” to “end of the AGE”! And in it’s no longer the “WORLD to come” but “AGE to come”. The New Age Movement teaches a series of ages (hence the name: New AGE). See Matthew 12:32, 13:39, 13:40, 13:49, 24:3, 28:20, Mark 10:30, Luke 13:30, 20:34,35, 1 Cor 1:21.


This is quite a jump in logic. Using the word ‘age’ does not equate to the New Age. This is another example of using one English word to represent multiple Greek words. The word ‘world’ or ‘age’ in Matthew 12:32 is the Greek word, ‘aion’. The word ‘aion’ means, unbroken age or a period of time. Compare this to Matthew 4:

8 Again, the devil took Him up on an exceedingly high mountain, and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory.

The word ‘world’ used here comes from the Greek word, ‘kosmos’. Kosmos means, arrangement of stars, the universe, or earth.

There is a distinct difference between these two words. Matthew 13:39 states “The enemy who sowed them is the devil, the harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are the angels.” The word age (or aion) is the age of rebellion. Satan is allowed a specific period of time in which to test and tempt mankind, but that time is limited and at the end of this age, God will reap the harvest and end the age of rebellion. Satan may have a claim over the kingdoms of this world (or kosmos), but that claim will end at the end of this age (or aion).

The comparison to occultism and the New Age serves no other purpose than to stir up emotions and manipulate others into thinking they are fighting a conspiracy.

Did NKJV change ‘Godhead’ to the New Age divine nature?

And to REALLY show their sympathy with the satanic New Age Movement – BELIEVE IT OR NOT – in Acts 17:29 the New Age NKJV changes “Godhead” to “Divine Nature”! ( ditto NIV, NASV)


This is a self-condemning statement. If referring to the divine nature is evidence that the NKJV is succumbing to the satanic New Age movement, why does the KJV use the exact same phrase in 2 Peter 1:4?

Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.

If there were really a slandering of truth, it would be understandable for people to get upset. In each example given by KJV Only critics, if you reference the manuscript evidence they fall completely flat. Christianity should be putting their focus on teaching sound doctrine rather than desperately trying to conjure up hostility against those who don’t hold to traditions. Jesus even warned that we can nullify the commands of God by exalting traditions beyond rational bounds. We must be careful not to turn personal preference into a measurement of good and evil. Just because we don’t like something does not make it a sin. I know from past experiences that traditions die hard and can easily be mistaken for truth instead of preference.

Did NKJV change “cannibalize Rebekah?

Genesis 24:47: The “old” KJV reads: “I put the earring upon her face”. But the NKJV has different plans for beautiful Rebekah: “I put the nose ring on her nose”. Where did it get the ridiculous idea to “cannibalize” Rebekah? Just take a peek at the NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV!


I am not sure how a nose ring equals cannibalizing, but we will go to the text and see why there is a difference. In this passage, the word for earring / nose ring is ‘nexem’. The word nexem means, ring, nose ring, or earring. Both earring and nose ring are accurate to the Hebrew word, however if we examine the culture of Abraham and Isaac’s day, nose rings were common jewelry. Because of the study of this ancient culture, the NKJV and other translations selected nose ring as the most likely to be an accurate rendering of this word.

Note: in this example, regardless of translational preference (KJV or NKJV) the meaning has not changed and the account is not altered regardless of which type of jewelry you prefer.

Did NKJV change alter the word ‘lieutenants’?

Ezra 8:36: The KJV reads, “And they delivered the king’s commissions unto the king’s lieutenants. . .” The “much clearer” NKJV reads, “And they delivered the king’s orders to the king’s satraps. . .” Who in the world thinks “satraps” is “much clearer” than lieutenants?


Once again, it is unfortunate that many critics don’t like the word used in scripture, but satraps is accurate. The Hebrew word used here is ‘achashdarpan’, which means, satrap, a governor of a Persian province. A lieutenants is a generally referring to a military officer. This is a derivative of a Persian word referring to a political governor. This may not be clear, but if we are ‘being diligent to rightly divide the word of truth’ we will search out the meaning of unclear words.

Did NKJV remove references to Satan?

Psalms 109:6: removes “Satan”. (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV).


This is one of the many examples that show that many critics hunt for perceived faults, but never study the scriptures. Let’s read this passage in context. Psalm 109:

2 For the mouth of the wicked and the mouth of the deceitful Have opened against me; They have spoken against me with a lying tongue.

3 They have also surrounded me with words of hatred, And fought against me without a cause.

4 In return for my love they are my accusers, But I give myself to prayer.

5 Thus they have rewarded me evil for good, And hatred for my love.

6 Set a wicked man over him, And let an accuser stand at his right hand.

7 When he is judged, let him be found guilty, And let his prayer become sin.

This passage is David’s prayer for God’s deliverance. Those who he thought were friends were actually deceivers. He showed them love, but they sought for an opportunity to destroy him. They stood beside him and became his false accusers, therefore, God will set a wicked judge over them and an accuser will stand by their side. When you compare verse 4 with verse 6, it becomes clear that either this KJV only critic is dishonest or has not bothered to study. The word ‘accusers’ in verse 4 is the exact same word ‘accuser’ in verse 6. Why didn’t the KJV translate the same word in both places? The name ‘Satan’ means accuser or adversary. On six different occasions the KJV ‘changes’ the word ‘Satan’ into the word ‘adversary’ or ‘adversaries’. The context of scripture makes it clear whether a passage is referring to the name of Satan or referring to an adversary or accuser. The context reveals which is the accurate translation and the context of this passage makes it clear that accuser is an accurate rendering of this word.

Did NKJV change ‘the way’ from easy to difficult?

Matthew 7:14: change “narrow is the way” to “difficult is the way”. There’s nothing “difficult” about the salvation of Jesus Christ! Jesus says in Matt. 11:30, “For my yoke is EASY, and my burden is light.” THE EXACT OPPOSITE! Boy, you talk about a contradiction!


The word ‘narrow’ in this passage is the word ‘stenos’ which means, narrow or strait. Notice that this word is ‘strait’ not ‘straight’. A strait is a narrow path or a difficult situation. One dictionary definition reads,

Strait: A position of difficulty, perplexity, distress, or need. Often used in the plural: in desperate straits.

The word ‘difficult’ in this passage is the Greek word ‘thlibo’ which means, to press hard upon, to press (such as pressing grapes), trouble, afflict, distress. Jesus taught from the beginning that the Christian walk would not be easy. Paul said that we are pressed from every side. Jesus said that we will be persecuted, brought before judges and even killed for His name sake. Jesus said in Luke 19:23-24 that anyone who desires to follow Him must die to self, take up his cross and follow Me. The cross is a symbol of suffering. Consider these passages:

2 Corinthians 4:
7 But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellence of the power may be of God and not of us.
8 We are hard pressed on every side, yet not crushed; we are perplexed, but not in despair;
9 persecuted, but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed —

John 15:
18 ” If the world hates you, you know that it hated Me before it hated you.
19 “If you were of the world, the world would love its own. Yet because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you.
20 “Remember the word that I said to you, ‘A servant is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted Me, they will also persecute you. If they kept My word, they will keep yours also.

1 Peter 4:
12 Beloved, do not think it strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened to you;
13 but rejoice to the extent that you partake of Christ’s sufferings, that when His glory is revealed, you may also be glad with exceeding joy.
14 If you are reproached for the name of Christ, blessed are you, for the Spirit of glory and of God rests upon you. On their part He is blasphemed, but on your part He is glorified.

There are many, many such passages that forewarn us that this life will not be easy. Does this contradict with Matthew 11:30, “for My yoke is easy and my burden is light”? Absolutely not. A yoke is a harness that binds two oxen or mules together. They can then pull as one unit to accomplish more. The symbolism is that we have surrendered ourselves to become a servant of Christ, yet we are not alone. We are yoked together with Christ. The work is ours to do, but He carries the bulk of the load. His work and His ways lift much of the burden off our shoulders as we learn to depend on Him. This does not mean that the Christian life is a cake walk, but it does comfort us to know that He carries our burdens.

Did NKJV change ‘Easter’ to ‘Passover’?

Acts 12:4: change “Easter” to “Passover” (NIV, NASV, RSV, NRSV)


The word is ‘pacha’ or Passover. It refers to the day that the Israelites were set free from the bondage of Egypt. The Jews did not celebrate Easter and still do not celebrate Easter. Even the early church did not call it Easter during infant stage of the church.

Changing the word ‘corrupt’ to ‘peddling’?

2 Cor. 2:17: With all the “corruptions” in the NKJV, you’d expect 2 Cor. 2:17 to change. IT DOES! They change, “For we not as many which CORRUPT the word of God” to “For we are not, as so many, PEDDLING the word of God” (ditto NIV, NASV, NRSV, RSV)


The word ‘corrupt’ that is used in the KJV is the Greek word, ‘kapeleuo’ which means, to be a retailer, to peddle or to make money by selling. Bilking others in the name of God does indeed corrupt the word of God, but the accurate word is peddling.

Continue to note that in these examples, regardless of translational preference (KJV or NKJV) the doctrine has not changed and the intent of scripture, if taken in context with the whole of scripture is consistent across all of the literal translations.

Did NKJV change ‘imagination’ into ‘argue’?

2 Cor. 10:5: change “imaginations” to “arguments”. Considering New Age “imaging” and “visualization” is now entering the church, this verse in the “old” KJV just won’t do. (NIV, RSV)


These stretches in logic hurt the KJV only argument much more than they help. The word ‘imagination’ is not a dirty word nor is it sinful to user your imagination. Being a man of vision is not wrong nor is it wrong to stir a child’s imagination. Putting trust in your imagination or visualization as though it had power in itself is a form of idolatry, but using your mind to imagine or to visualize a plan is healthy and these skills are created by God and given to mankind for a purpose. Ideas or actions only become sin when they are taken outside of God’s intended design. The author of this argument is making a false claim that imaging is the same as the New Age movement’s doctrine of visualization. The word ‘imaginations’ in this passage in the KJV comes from the Greek word ‘logismos’ which means arguing and reasoning in a way that is hostile – in other words, arguing is such a way that conveys hostility toward Christianity. Arguments are an accurate rendering of this word.

Did NKJV change ‘Jesus’ into ‘Joshua’?

Hebrews 4:8 & Acts 7:45: “Jesus” is changed to “Joshua”. (NIV, NASV, RSV)


This is yet another example of poorly studying a passage before jumping into an argument. This passage is an apostle using an Old Testament example to teach the gospel of Jesus Christ. This passage is teaching that Joshua did not lead Israel into her rest but spoke of another day that would be fulfilled in Christ. Both Jesus and Joshua are translated from ‘lesous’ which is the word used here. If someone takes just a few minutes to look at both of these passages, they will clearly see that they both refer directly to Joshua and the time Israel inherited the Promised Land. Based on the context of the scriptures around it, this word is clearly translated into Joshua.

In conclusion

I am sure there are many, many more examples available to examine. However, if we take the time to study we will find that most disputes are due to tradition, personal preference in wording, and either dishonest or a lack of understanding concerning the manuscripts by which we receive our Bible. Let me stress again the importance of realizing that the differences rarely if ever alter doctrine. If we take the Bible as a complete revelation, the doctrine is never altered. If someone prefers the KJV, I would not intend to discourage them. Many scholars have thrived on the KJV and many scholars thrive on other literal translations. Keep in mind that the old time great preachers and teachers did not rely on the KJV itself, but they also took time and care to diligently study the intent of scripture. Charles Spurgeon spent 30 or more hours a week preparing sermons and researching the Hebrew and Greek meanings behind the English words. In our modern day, we are blessed with easy access to computerized concordances and other materials. I can do in a few hours what took scholars of old many hours to research.

We can know how to love God and understand His word without being scholars, however, we will miss so many rich treasures if we neglect to delve in deep and find the meanings of the text behind our translation.

Eddie Snipes


Do Modern Translations Corrupt the Scriptures? Part 1.

The King James Only debate.

The purpose of this study is not to disprove any translation but rather to look realistically at the facts and give the reader clear information and clear up misinformation so we are informed concerning this controversial issue. I realize that this topic can be emotionally charged and that some will never read this beyond the point where ideas that are held sacred begin to be challenged. Even so, this is a worthy topic and hopefully others will benefit from this information.


This first part will address the history behind the KJV debate and part 2 will look at the questionable scriptures that are used as evidence against modern translations. If you have heard or read about the New Age and pagan influences that polluted the modern translations, you my find interest in part 2.


I have heard dozens of arguments claiming the KJV is the only true word of God. The arguments range from claims that God only allows one translation per language up to the claim that modern versions are part of a New Age conspiracy. Rarely will the KJV be compared to the Hebrew, Greek or Aramaic that the scriptures are translated from. Instead, all translations are compared only to the KJV. Some go as far as to claim that the KJV writers corrected the errors in the Greek and therefore it has become the standard of measure. Shortly we will look at the examples that claim to be errors in the NKJV and examine these in detail, but first I want to take a moment to address the claims I mentioned above.


Not the First

Some die-hard KJV only supporters that I have encountered claim that God only ordains one translation per language and that once God has given scripture to a language, no other translations are necessary. The KJV is an excellent translation, but it is not the first English translation. Here is a list of early English translations of the Bible:

  • Tyndale’s English New Testament 1525 AD
  • Coverdale Bible (first complete English Bible) 1535 AD
  • Matthews Bible 1537
  • Great Bible (the first Authorized version) 1539
  • Geneva Bible 1560
  • Bishop’s Bible 1568, intended to replace the Geneva Bible which had become too popular according to Church authorities.
  • Douay-Rheims 1582, first Catholic version of the New Testament
  • King James Version with Apocrypha 1611


Tyndale was the first English translator. Prior to 1525, the Bible was primarily available in Latin and out of the hands of the common man. The church establishment greatly opposed Tyndale’s effort and he suffered persecution for his commitment. King Henry VIII, Cardinal Wolsey, and Sir Thomas Moore were enraged over Tyndale’s unauthorized effort and sought to prosecute him. He fled and remained on the run in various countries in Europe while he translated the scriptures into English. He was eventually captured and martyred in 1536. His translation paved the way for the reformation and influenced later translations of the Bible.


KJV Corrected the Original

I also have repeatedly heard the claim that the KJV translators were inspired by the Holy Spirit and corrected the errors in the Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic text. In reality, the translators borrowed information and used work from those before them. This is perfectly acceptable in writing as long as credit is giving to those who have done the work. Biblical historian Laura H. Wild states:

A few of Wycliffe’s phrases are here [in the KJV], but Tyndale is largely responsible for the Bishops’ Bible which was used as its foundation. [Through the Great Bible] Coverdale put his delicate touch on [the KJV, and] the sturdy tone of the Geneva Text and the sonorous Latinisms of the Rhemish New Testament modified certain sentences. But Tyndale was the genius who penetrated to the very heart of the Scripture, finding priceless treasures, then sent it on its way in English waters like a ship laden with life-giving fruits.


This agrees with the title pages written by the translators of the 1611 printing of the KJV:

The Holy Bible, Conteyning the Old Testament, and the New: Newly Translated out of the Originall tongues: & with the former Translations diligently compared and reuised, by his Majesties speciall Commandement. Appointed to be read in Churches.


The translators themselves testify that they carefully compared their work with the work of the text available to them and the work of former translators. They did not supernaturally begin to write, but they studied all available information and put together the best possible translation by using well respected scholars and previous work of others. Once they finished the translation, they did not rush it to press, but read the text and argued among themselves for months over the correct wording and hashed out their educated assumptions as to the meaning of each line of text.


Even after agreeing on a translation, they did not claim infallibility or divine accomplishment. There were seventeen thousand cross references and marginal notes, which dealt solely with linguistic and textual matters such as alternative renderings or variant readings from other manuscript sources. As we will discuss a bit later, there are multiple words that can be rendered from most Greek or Hebrew words. Based on the context of the passage, historical settings and other variables a translator assumes the meaning that was intended.


Another consideration is that most of the text the King James Version draws upon is Latin. In the 19th century, archaeology unveiled thousands of 1st and 2nd century manuscripts that were not available in the 1500s and 1600s.



The 1611 version of the KJV had 80 books because it was published with the Catholic Apocrypha. If someone demands that the work of the 1611 translators were inspired by God and are infallible, they must also accept the Catholic Apocrypha or stand in contradiction of their own claims. In reality, the KJV translators were a part of the established church of the day and translated the entire church Bible including the Apocrypha. The Apocrypha was not accepted as canonical but was used by the established church from around the 3rd century until the Reformation period and is still accepted in the Catholic Church today. However, the point to be noted is that the KJV only debate claims that the 1611 translation was infallible, yet rejects the Apocrypha. Both cannot be true.


Modern Translations are Corrupt

One of the common arguments we hear today is that the modern translations are a corruption of God’s word. Ironically, this is exactly what the church said about the 1611 version of the KJV. Some critics argued that the translators relied too much on the Greek Septuagint rather than the original Hebrew. The Septuagint was the project of 70 Jewish scholars that translated the Old Testament into Greek around 400 BC. Many called the translators ‘blasphemers’ and “damnable corruptors” of God’s word. The Puritans rejected the KJV because it was translated by ‘high church’ people whom they eyed with suspicion. They remained loyal to the Geneva Bible translation.


One of the highest criticism came from a well respected Bible scholar named Hugh Broughton. He published a vicious critical analysis against the completed KJV calling the translators timid and afraid to publish strong words. He claimed that they placed better renderings of words in the marginal notes rather than in the read text. He said they were answer on the Day of Judgment for their slackness and use of idle words. He said that the organizer of the translation, Richard Bancroft, would find his eternal abode in hell.


Errors and Corrections

In 1611, two versions of the KJV made it to press. This created a controversy that was not resolved until the Oxford Standard Edition was published in 1769. This version is the standard that most people use today. One example of the two varying 1611 versions is Ruth 3:15. One printing read, “he measured six measures of barley, and laid it on her: and he [Boaz] went into the city.” The other read, “and she [Ruth] went into the city.” The text allows for both and since the context is not completely clear, modern translators still are divided on which is accurate.


In 1613 over 300 variants were corrected from the original 1611 version. One printing of the KJV had one of the 10 commandments which read, “thou shalt commit adultery. This was soon labeled the “wicked Bible”. In another printing, the error was made in 1 Corinthians 6:9, “the unrighteous shall inherit the Kingdom of God,” and was soon called the Unrighteous Bible. In 1702 the England Puritan leader said that “scandalous errors” has affronted the Holy Bible itself.


The 1611 has undergone various revisions that intended to improve the text. For example, Matthew 16:16 in the 1611 version said, “Thou art Christ” and was revised to read, “Though art the Christ”. Mark 5:6 said, “He came and worshiped” in 1611 but was revised to read, “he ran and worshiped”. As you can see, these changes are minor and do not alter the doctrine, but it does show that even the translators and publishers of the KJV recognized the need to sharpen the translation for accuracy and readability. Another example of modernizing for the reader is Psalm 23. Here is the 1611 edition of this passage:

The LORD is my shepheard, I shall not want.

He maketh me to lie downe in greene pastures: he leadeth mee beside the still waters.

He restoreth my soule: he leadeth me in the pathes of righteousness, for his names sake.

Yea, though I walke through the valley of the shadowe of death, I will feare no euill: for thou art with me, thy rod and thy staffe, they comfort me.

Thou preparest a table before me, in the presence of mine enemies: thou annointest my head with oyle, my cuppe runneth ouer.

Surely goodnes and mercie shall followe me all the daies of my life: and I will dwell in the house of the LORD for euer.


It is not uncommon for people to refer to the KJV as the 1611 Authorized version, but this is not entirely accurate. It is based on the 1611 version, but it has been revised repeatedly from 1611 until 1769 when Oxford University published the Oxford Standard edition that was accepted and remains until today.

Eddie Snipes

Does the Bible teach that God is a man?

Does the Bible teach that God is a man?
You disagreed with the Word of Faith’s teaching that God is a man 6 foot tall and 200lbs. Isn’t man created in God’s image? If that is the case, wouldn’t God have arms, legs, hands, etc.. Just because He is a spirit, does that rule out having a form of some kind? And if he really does have a form, why then could it not be around 6′ tall?


Many scriptures may seem contradictory on the surface unless you keep in mind that God’s word does not change and what God has previously revealed is not nullified by what God revealed later in scripture. In other words, God’s word will never pass away but each passage must be interpreted in light of the whole of scripture. Scripture interprets scripture. What God says in the New Testament supplements what God has said in the Old Testament. It does not replace, but complements.
You must also keep in mind that Jesus is fully God but what you see is not all that God is. It is true that in Jesus dwells all the Godhead bodily but keep in mind that God also indwells the heart of every believer. Look at John 14:
23 Jesus answered and said to him, “If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him.

How can the God of the universe make His home with every believer? The Bible tells us that all things were created through Christ and in Him everything consists. He not only created the universe, but He also holds together the universe by His power. Jesus did not come into being as His birth and Word of Faith teachers claim. The Bible says in Hebrews 13:8-9 says:
Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever. Do not be carried about with various and strange doctrines.

Jesus has always been and He is the same today as He has always been. The incarnation did not change the nature of Jesus Christ. When God became a man, it was for our benefit so that we could see the attributes of God that He desired to reveal to us. We beheld His glory, but we did not see all of God’s glory. We saw what God revealed to us. Look at Romans 1:
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,
19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them.
20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,

God’s attributes are invisible (for God is Spirit) but what God has revealed about Himself is clearly seen. In Christ, God revealed His attributes that could not be seen without seeing Him walk, relate to others and express His love towards those walking physically on this earth.

In Christ dwelled the fullness of the Godhead, but His physical body could never contain all that God is. If Jesus’ physical body is God, then Hebrews would be making a false claim by saying, “Jesus is the same yesterday, today, and forever…”. Consider this along with the passage cited above in John 14, “My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him”. How can the Father and the Son make their home with the individual believer and still fill the universe? I think we can get a clearer understanding from 1 John 4:
13 By this we know that we abide in Him, and He in us, because He has given us of His Spirit.
14 And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent the Son as Savior of the world.
15 Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God.

Also read 1 John 3:
9 Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God.

When we are born of God, His seed remains in us. His seed is the Holy Spirit as indicated in 1 John 4 and also in this passage from John 14:
16 “And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may abide with you forever —
17 “the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him; but you know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you.

We are told that when we belong to Christ, He and the Father make their home with us and place the Holy Spirit within us. Our physical bodies do not become limitations for God but rather God becomes the power that works through our physical bodies to do His will and live our lives spiritually. This body of flesh is not the new creation (2 Corinthians 5:17) but it does house the new creation during our walk on earth.

Jesus may have humbled Himself to take on the form of a bondservant, walk among us and then die for our sins on the cross, but that physical body is not all that Jesus is. The physical body of Jesus is how God chose to reveal His invisible attributes to us, but it is not all that God is. God remains Spirit and even during Jesus’ walk on earth, it remained true that the universe could not contain God. The heavens and the earth are in God and God is in them. God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself (2 Corinthians 5:19) but Christ was also in God (John 10:37, John 15:10). In Christ dwells the fullness of the God head and in God dwells Christ. Don’t loose sight of the fact that Jesus is fully God, therefore He is Spirit as well. In Him can dwell God fully but that does not mean that God must fully fit into a physical body.

Finally, you asked that if we are created in God’s image, doesn’t that mean that God would have arms, legs and our physical attributes?

The answer is, No. God is Spirit and man was created in God’s image with a spiritual aspect to his nature. We have become dead because of sin but are made alive in Christ. Because of mankind’s sin, we have all inherited a body of corruption and a sinful nature that is bent on corruption. Anyone who has ever had a child knows that we are born into sin. I never taught my kids to be selfish, to hit, throw fits or misbehave. I use external measures to curb that behavior but only God can create a new heart within us. Our bodies are not eternal and are destined to return to the ground. Man’s physical body was fashioned out of clay – not God’s image. The spirit of life breathed into him comes from God.

When we are redeemed in Christ, we become alive and again inherit God’s attributes He intended for us to have from the beginning. Look at 2 Corinthians 5:
16 Therefore, from now on, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know Him thus no longer.
17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.
18 Now all things are of God, who has reconciled us to Himself through Jesus Christ, and has given us the ministry of reconciliation,
19 that is, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses to them, and has committed to us the word of reconciliation.

This is a very important passage. Notice that we no longer regard each other according to the flesh. Why? Because we are new creations – not according to our arms, legs and physical attributes but according to the new creation we have become in Christ. We no longer regard Christ according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. When we are born in the Spirit, we are now a child of God and can truly know God and have a personal relationship with Christ through the Spirit – not by the flesh. When we are born spiritually, we inherit again the image of God that was intended from the beginning. Until we are born in the Spirit, we are not sons, we are not heirs, and we cannot understand the things of the Spirit.

If you observe the Word of Faith movement, everything is focused on the physical and all doctrine centers around self-gain. However, if we are in Christ, we no longer live for ourselves but die to ourselves; we no longer live for physical things but live now according to the spirit – not storing up treasures on earth but live in hope of the eternal promises of God and the reward He gives to those who are faithful. Jesus said, where your treasure is, your heart will be also. If someone accepts the so-called prosperity doctrine, their heart is in the wrong place. When someone loves the things of the world, the love of the Father is not in them (1 John 2:15).

Romans 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit.

Eddie Snipes

Why does the Bible say that Mary could not touch Christ after His resurrection?

Why does the Bible say that Mary could not touch Christ after His resurrection?

Many people completely misinterpret John 20:17. The KJV’s translation does not clearly reflect the meaning of Mary’s encounter with Jesus. The KJV said, “do not touch me for I have not yet ascended to my Father.” Many incorrectly assume that Jesus is saying that He cannot be touched. We know this is not the meaning of this passage because a few verses later in John 20:27, Jesus asks His disciples to touch Him, feel the wounds and even put their hand in the wound in His side so that they will believe that He has truly resurrected bodily from the dead.
In John 20:17, the word ‘touch’ comes from the Greek word ‘haptomai’. Haptomai means: to fasten one’s self to; adhere to; or cling to. When Mary recognized Jesus, she embraced Him with such emotion that Jesus said not to cling because he has not yet ascended. When I read this passage, I imagine that this was a joyful encounter by Mary and Jesus. Mary and Martha were extremely close to Jesus while He was alive and Mary has at last seen that death did not have a hold of Jesus. When she realized it was Him, she embraced Him and did not let go. I picture Jesus laughingly saying, “Stop clinging, I haven’t yet ascended”. No that she has seen, Jesus instructed her to go and tell the other disciples that He was alive and is coming to see them as well. This is confirmed in Matthew 28:5-9

5 But the angel answered and said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. 6 “He is not here; for He is risen, as He said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay. 7 “And go quickly and tell His disciples that He is risen from the dead, and indeed He is going before you into Galilee; there you will see Him. Behold, I have told you.” 8 So they went out quickly from the tomb with fear and great joy, and ran to bring His disciples word. 9 And as they went to tell His disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, “Rejoice!” So they came and held Him by the feet and worshiped Him.

Notice that Matthew gives additional details that indeed confirm that the women did in fact touch Jesus and were holding him by the feet. Thomas was invited to touch Jesus’ hands and side to resolve his doubts about the resurrection. It is not possible for Jesus to be corrupted or made unclean; therefore, there is no concern with anyone touching Him before His ascension.

Eddie Snipes

How are people saved under different dispensations (i.e. the age of innocence, the law, grace, etc.)?



I read your explanation of how the Old Testament saints were saved by faith. How does this fit into the dispensationalist view? How will people be saved during the tribulation period since this is a new dispensation and the Holy Spirit has been removed?


Your question is based on a commonly taught idea that has been widely accepted in many Christian circles. I once considered myself a dispensationalist, but I no longer believe that this is consistent with the scriptures. I think when I point out a few things from the Greek text, you may well see why this view is flawed.

First, the dispensationalist belief is that God has different ways of revealing Himself throughout history. This belief says that God dealt with mankind differently in the time of Adam through Moses (dispensation of innocence); after the law was given, the dispensation was through the law; after Christ, the dispensation was through grace; in the end times, the dispensation is through the Jews (or any number of other theories). The problem I have with the dispensationalist view is that it causes people to completely overlook the most important truth of scripture. God worked through all of these periods of time to communicate ONE truth to mankind – salvation is through Jesus Christ alone. In the beginning, God began to point toward Christ from the curse of Adam’s sin, through Abraham, through Moses and through each of the prophets. If we look at the whole message of scripture we can clearly see that God did not deal differently in each era of biblical history, but instead took mankind by the hand through each step until we reached the cross of Jesus Christ. The entire Old Testament points ahead to Jesus Christ and the entire New Testament (including Revelation) points back to the cross of Jesus Christ. Consider the passage that is often used to introduce dispensational theology:

Ephesians 3:1-7 For this reason I, Paul, the prisoner of Christ Jesus for you Gentiles —  2 if indeed you have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which was given to me for you,  3 how that by revelation He made known to me the mystery (as I have briefly written already,  4 by which, when you read, you may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ),  5 which in other ages was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to His holy apostles and prophets:  6 that the Gentiles should be fellow heirs, of the same body, and partakers of His promise in Christ through the gospel,  7 of which I became a minister according to the gift of the grace of God given to me by the effective working of His power.

Part of the problem is a misunderstanding of the word ‘dispensation’ used here. The term ‘dispensation of grace’ does not mean to dispense grace but rather it means to be a steward of grace. The Greek word translated into ‘dispensation’ in this passage is to word ‘oikonomia’ {oy-kon-om-ee’-ah}, which means to manage, have oversight or stewardship. If we take this meaning and apply it to Ephesians 3:2, it makes a lot more sense. Paul is stating that he has been given the stewardship of presenting the gospel of grace to the Gentiles. This fully agrees with Paul’s statement in 1 Corinthians 9:16-17

16 For if I preach the gospel, I have nothing to boast of, for necessity is laid upon me; yes, woe is me if I do not preach the gospel!  17 For if I do this willingly, I have a reward; but if against my will, I have been entrusted with a stewardship.

The word ‘stewardship’ used here is the exact same Greek word used in Ephesians 3 above. This same Greek word is used in Luke 16:1-3

He also said to His disciples: “There was a certain rich man who had a steward, and an accusation was brought to him that this man was wasting his goods.  2 “So he called him and said to him, ‘What is this I hear about you? Give an account of your stewardship, for you can no longer be steward.’  3 “Then the steward said within himself, ‘What shall I do? For my master is taking the stewardship away from me. I cannot dig; I am ashamed to beg.

In both instances in this passage from Luke, the word ‘oikonomia’ is used. You will not find the term dispensation (oikonomia) used in any other context. Since the Bible never provides any support for the dispensationalist belief system, we should examine this carefully and see if it contradicts scripture. I believe that it does. The Bible says that God’s plan was not only established, but finished before the foundation of the world. Look at the following passages:

Matthew 25:34 34 “Then the King will say to those on His right hand, ‘Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:

Ephesians 1:3-6 3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ,  4 just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love,  5 having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will,  6 to the praise of the glory of His grace, by which He has made us accepted in the Beloved.

1 Peter 1: 20 He indeed was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you

Revelation 13: 8 All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

Hebrews 4: 3 For we who have believed do enter that rest, as He has said: “So I swore in My wrath, ‘They shall not enter My rest,’ ” although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.

Especially take note of Hebrews 4:3. This passage refers to Israel right after the Law of Moses was given. According to dispensational theology, they were under the dispensation of the Law, but the Bible says that the work of God was finished before the foundation of the world and if you read this passage in context to the rest of Hebrews 4, you see that both they and the New Testament church enter into the rest of God’s completed work through faith. They did not have faith and the Bible is warning that we should be careful not to miss this promise by our own unbelief.

So the question we should ask ourselves is: how can God say to Israel, who were under the law that His work was complete, if Jesus Christ’s sacrifice on the cross is the completed work of God? Both cannot be true – unless both we and the ancient world are under the same work – dispensation of grace. The Bible clearly says that the law cannot save but rather convicts the whole world of sin and makes everyone guilty before God (Romans 3:19), and that the purpose of the law is to be a schoolmaster that points us to Christ (Galatians 3:24-25). If this is true (and it must be unless we reject the New Testament), then there is no other conclusion that can be drawn other than the fact that there is one dispensation of grace. It was revealed throughout the Old Testament as God unfolded His plan until it was revealed through Jesus Christ.

Even the passage from Ephesians above that most people think supports dispensationalism in fact supports what I am stating to you. I included the whole context above to show that Paul is stating that this ‘dispensation of grace’ is a stewardship to preach the gospel of grace AND Paul states that this is a mystery that was taught by the Old Testament prophets but was not made known in the past ages because it was revealed through Christ. The message of grace is the same as it was from the beginning only it could not be fully understood until our redemption was purchased through the cross of Jesus Christ. Keep in mind that Abraham was justified by faith – the same as we are. The New Testament points back to how God dealt with Abraham to give understanding to the justification by faith given to us through Jesus Christ. Abraham believed God and his faith was accounted for righteousness – we believe God by receiving the free gift of salvation through Jesus and our faith is accounted to us for righteousness.

The message of the gospel has not changed since the beginning and will not change in the future. God will deal with mankind by faith in Christ during the tribulation period. After Jesus rose from the grave, the Jews were saved through faith in Christ – or they rejected Christ. Today, the Jews are saved through faith in Christ, or they reject Christ. In the future, the Jews will be saved through faith in Christ and God will purge out those who reject Him. The Bible tells us that in the last days, God will purge out of Israel those who will not follow Him and will reveal Christ to them. Look at Zechariah 13:8-9

8 And it shall come to pass in all the land,” Says the LORD, “That two-thirds in it shall be cut off and die, But one- third shall be left in it:  9 I will bring the one-third through the fire, Will refine them as silver is refined, And test them as gold is tested. They will call on My name, And I will answer them. I will say, ‘This is My people’; And each one will say, ‘The LORD is my God.’ ”

The fire is the time of Jacob’s trouble during the tribulation period. At the end of this trial, Jesus will be revealed to the house of Israel and they will recognize that they crucified their Messiah. This is explained in Zechariah 12:9-10

9 “It shall be in that day that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.  10 ” And I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on Me whom they pierced. Yes, they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn.

This event continues through chapter 13 which explains that part of this repentance is asking about the wounds in Jesus’ hands. Look at Zechariah 13:

6 “And one will say to him, ‘What are these wounds between your arms?’ Then he will answer, ‘Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.’

So we can clearly see that Jesus is the Deliverer of the Old Testament saints, the New Testament church and even the Jews who will soon recognize their Savior has been calling them from the beginning. Everyone who is saved through the tribulation period will be saved just as people are saved today – through faith in Christ.

Some people teach that in the Tribulation people can only be saved by becoming martyrs. This is completely unbiblical. This is a product of dispensational theology for if you hold to the belief that the Holy Spirit is no longer given and that the New Testament dispensation ends before the Great Tribulation, then you have to come up with another method of salvation. This of course is a man-made salvation that cannot save. Salvation is through Christ alone – it always has been and always will be so. If you look at the passages in Revelation where martyrs are foretold, you can clearly see that they are killed because they already have the testimony of Christ. Look at Revelation 6:9-11

9 When He opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain for the word of God and for the testimony which they held10 And they cried with a loud voice, saying, “How long, O Lord, holy and true, until You judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell on the earth?”  11 Then a white robe was given to each of them; and it was said to them that they should rest a little while longer, until both the number of their fellow servants and their brethren, who would be killed as they were, was completed.

This testimony is described further in Revelation 12:

11 “And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony, and they did not love their lives to the death.

The enemies of Satan are the Christians who keep the word of God and have salvation in Jesus Christ. Look also at Revelation 12:

17 And the dragon was enraged with the woman, and he went to make war with the rest of her offspring, who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

So you can see that even in the Tribulation, salvation does not change. There is only one way of salvation – through Jesus Christ. During the time that the entire world will be tested, people are killed because they already have the testimony that they have salvation in Jesus Christ – not the other way around. No one receives salvation because they are martyred; they are martyred because they have faith in Christ. The evidence that they are in Christ is that they keep the word of God.

We know that the Holy Spirit is active during the Tribulation because without the Holy Spirit there is no conviction of sin and it is the Holy Spirit that draws us to Christ (John 16:8). There is nothing in scripture that even remotely indicates that the Holy Spirit is removed from the earth. There is a blind assumption that people have applied in error to 2 Thessalonians 2:7

For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way.

Many assume that the ‘restrainer’ is the Holy Spirit. This is a complete assumption that is inconsistent with scripture and is not supported anywhere else in scripture. The modern church has built an entire doctrine off one phrase taken completely out of context. Who is ‘he’? The Bible does not reveal this to us. This should not be surprising since prophesy frequently reveals to us what God is doing but not how He will do it. Keep in mind that the Bible fully foretold the death, burial and resurrection of Christ, but even the students of prophesy could not understand God’s plan until after Jesus rose. After God fulfilled the promise of our redemption, the plan could be fully seen and fully understood. God gave enough information so that His people could be watching for their Messiah and those who walked by faith did not miss Him – even though they did not understand what was happening until after the fact.

In the same way, God has revealed to us that something will be in place to hinder the man of sin from rising to power and will continue to prevent this event until God determines the time and then he will be taken out of the way. Who is ‘he’? God did not tell us. It could be a world leader; it could be a religious leader; it could be any number of things. It cannot be the Holy Spirit for many are called to salvation after ‘he’ is taken out of the way. The Bible speaks of a multitude that cannot be numbered that come out of the Tribulation. The world has no power to resist the devil without the Spirit of God at work in their lives. In fact, the church age is the first fruits of the harvest and the Tribulation period is the full harvest. The harvest is the bulk of the crop. Since the Bible compares salvation to the harvest, this should indicate how effective the gospel will be during the time of tribulation. The Bible says that no one can come to Christ unless the Father draws him. How are we drawn? By the Holy Spirit.

The gospel is preached through the Holy Spirit (1 Peter 1:12), the word of God cannot be received without the Holy Spirit revealing it to us (1 Corinthians 2:12-14). The Holy Spirit is placed within us when we believe the word (1 Peter 1:22-23 and 1 John 3:9). We become a new creation that is spiritual (2 Corinthians 5:17) and this spiritual nature is by the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit cleanses our sins and sets us free from the law of sin and death (Romans 8:1-2). The Holy Spirit dwells in the heart of the believer (Romans 8:11) and we are now the temple of Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 3:16, 6:19). The Holy Spirit helps us in our weakness (Romans 8:26). Can anyone be strong enough to endure the Great Tribulation without the Spirit of God giving them strength? Even more important, the Bible tells us that the natural man (someone who has not been redeemed) cannot receive the things of God (1 Corinthians 2:14). Salvation, by definition is our regeneration through the Holy Spirit; therefore, salvation is not possible without the Holy Spirit. This is explained in Titus 3:4-7

4 But when the kindness and the love of God our Savior toward man appeared,  5 not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit6 whom He poured out on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior,  7 that having been justified by His grace we should become heirs according to the hope of eternal life.

There are dozens of more passages I could give, but if we stop for a moment it is clearly understood by scripture that the sign of our salvation is the Holy Spirit. The Spirit is given to us when we come to Christ; the Holy Spirit seals our hearts and becomes our confidence until we stand before God; when we come to faith in Christ we are given a new nature (new creation) that is by the Holy Spirit. Our spiritual nature cannot exist outside of the Holy Spirit. It is important that we examine the whole word of God and allow the scriptures to give us understanding rather than try to make the scriptures fit into what we already think we understand. If we put away our assumptions and preconceived theologies, it is clear that there is one salvation, one way to that salvation and that God does not change. Ephesians 4:4-6 says it well:

4 There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called in one hope of your calling;  5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism;  6 one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

We are called in one hope, one faith, one baptism and are part of one body drawn by one Spirit – the Holy Spirit who draws us to redemption in Christ.

Eddie Snipes

Is it unscientific to question misleading computer models that ‘prove’ evolution?

Is it dishonest to question misleading computer models that ‘prove’ evolution?

From Wesley:
I just read your article on the evolution of the eye and I’ve got to say it’s the worst thing I’ve read in awhile and demonstrates quite clearly the scientific ignorance that creationists of use to defend their premise. I believe in God but I don’t believe in the interpretation of Genesis that God created the world basically by magic in six literal days, but the overwhelming scientific evidence clearly points that it did not and God would not have made the world to seem like something that it is not because he loves the truth. I also do not believe a God that loves truth would approve of you not taking the time to fully understand the science you are writing against or deliberately misunderstanding it in order to try to trick people into thinking that you make sense. I’m a Christian but reading sites like this makes me embarrassed to be associated with the kind of tricks and sloppy thinking that some other Christians publish.

This is a challenge to the section on my critical thinking study about the evolution of the eye (

This is typical of the types of letters I get from atheists and those who claim to be Christians but hold to the doctrine delivered by atheists. Ironically, the scientist I quoted heavily from was Richard Dawkins who is a self proclaimed atheist and rabidly anti-Christian. This challenge is defending Richard Dawkins against my criticism of his deceptive explanation of the evolution of the eye. In this article I quoted Dawkins’ analysis of Nilsson and Pelger’s computer model that supposedly proves that the eye evolved through evolutionary processes. Dawkins first explains that they bypassed the development of the components of the eye and created a model that assembles the pieces which are assumed to have already developed.

Nilsson and Pelger then arbitrarily applied two rules to ‘guide’ the evolutionary process: gradual change and no negative mutations. Since only negative mutations have been observed by science, it is completely dishonest to create a model that does not allow negative mutations and then claim that it proves evolution. Apparently I am an embarrassment to Christianity for pointing out this fact. Perhaps the evolution promoting publication from Atomic Scientists would be less embarrassing. Consider this quote:

“It is entirely in line with the accidental nature of mutations that extensive tests have agreed in showing the vast majority of them detrimental to the organism in its job of surviving and reproducing — good ones are so rare we can consider them all bad.” (Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 11:331)

Dawkins also stated the following, “Unlike human designers, natural selection can’t go downhill not even if there is a tempting higher hill on the other side of the valley”. So the evolution argument declares that no harmful change is allowed to occur, loss of information is not allowed (going downhill), and gradual increases are required. This junk science is just the opposite of what is observed. The changes observed are always the loss of information, mutations are always harmful, gradual change that adds to a species has yet to be observed. All the rules these scientists have applied completely contradict the evidence and give the impression of success when in truth science contradicts evolution.

Since pro-evolution scientists point out the problem of negative mutations, it is unscientific to create a so-called scientific computer model that excludes the primary problem of evolution. Which shows more scientific ignorance, pointing out the flaw in the research model or allowing an intentionally deceptive demonstration to go unchallenged?

Eddie Snipes

Psalm 104:5 says that the earth does not move. Isn’t this a contradiction?

Does the Earth Move?

Psalm 104:5 says, You put the earth on it’s foundations, and from there it will never move.

This is a contradiction – or do you believe the earth doesn’t move?

Answer: Mar 26, 2009 at 12:41 PM to Wesley
You asked the question, “Do you believe the Earth moves? Psalms 104:5 You put the earth on it’s foundations, and from there it will never move.”

You cannot be so rigid in language that you cannot use descriptive language to communicate ideas. It is interesting that Bible critics apply rules that they will not allow in their own language and communication. For example, I had a Bible critic point out that the scriptures say ‘the sun rises’ and presented this as proof the Bible has errors. They pointed out that the sun does not rise but the earth rotates. That is an odd form of reasoning for each day we refer to daybreak as sunrise and dusk as sundown. Why do people think that the Bible must use rigid word usage that we are not willing to use? The Bible can and does communicate literal meanings while using figures of speech. To say the sun rises represents a literal daybreak even though we understand that it isn’t the sun moving but the earth.

The same applies to the passage you are looking at as a contradiction. To say the earth is on its foundation is a literal communication but does not mean that there is a physical structure the earth is founded upon. Even your speech testifies to this truth. Even secular science says that the earth turns on its axis. Science books show representative drawings where a rod is going through the earth, but we have many photographs of the earth and I have yet to see one that shows a rod going through the earth to provide an axis. I have also never seen a literal North or South Pole. Are these contradictions, or figures of speech to give a visual word picture of a literal truth? If we allow this in our language we should not be shocked to see this type of language in the Bible. Psalm 18:2 provides a good example of this:
The LORD is my rock and my fortress and my deliverer; My God, my strength, in whom I will trust; My shield and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold.

It is foolish to say that this is a false statement because God is not a rock. Do I have to stand in a literal fortress in order to believe this passage? It is clearly figurative speech used to communicate a literal truth. So saying the earth has a foundation is not a contradiction. Nor is it a contradiction to say the earth shall not be moved. We see that same language applied to those who trust in the Lord. Psalm 62 says:
5 My soul, wait silently for God alone, For my expectation is from Him.
6 He only is my rock and my salvation; He is my defense; I shall not be moved.

Does this mean that I can no longer move? Or does it mean that something in my life is established in God and cannot be moved outside of His control? When I put my trust in the Lord and abide in fellowship with my Creator, no circumstance can move me away from the confidence that He is directing my steps and guiding my life. This is also affirmed in the New Testament from this passage in 2 Timothy 2:
19 Nevertheless the solid foundation of God stands, having this seal: “The Lord knows those who are His,” and, “Let everyone who names the name of Christ depart from iniquity.”

This solid foundation is not a physical description but a description that communicates the truth that our lives are founded upon God when we become a child of God and live apart from iniquity. Let me give one more example from Proverbs 8:
29 When He assigned to the sea its limit, So that the waters would not transgress His command, When He marked out the foundations of the earth,

This is closer in meaning to the passage you questioned. Obviously there is not a physical border that the oceans cannot pass over, but all we must do is look out over the sea to observe the truth that the ocean beats against the shore but never overruns the shore. Even the great tsunami that we saw a few years ago testifies to this. An earthquake forced waves onto the shore and even though they were driven quite a distance inland, they returned to their boundaries. The laws that govern the waters were established by the Lord when the earth was created. Many natural laws testify to the foundations that God has established.

The earth has its foundation as do all the planets. None of the planets drift from the orbits that they were founded upon. If even one planet left its foundation and drifted out of orbit, the result would be catastrophic. In fact, how is it that billions of stars in each galaxy maintain a correct orbit without colliding with other stars? The scriptures state that God not only laid the foundation of the earth, but established the heavens and caused them to stand in their place. The big bang would not establish an orbital foundation for all planets that does not allow them to cross into a collision course with other planets. This is not the act of random chance, but a foundation established for the earth and the heavens that they should not be moved from their place but stand as a testimony to their Creator.

Eddie Snipes

Doesn’t the vestigial organs like the appendix prove our evolutionary past?

One of the great errors of evolution is that evolutionists falsely assume that evolution has more answers than they actually have. If an evolutionists says it, it must be a fact. In truth, evolution is based on many assumptions and even disproved data. Ernst Haeckel’s falsified embryo development, disproved and falsified missing links, junk DNA, vestigial organs and other disqualified evidence are still taught as fact in order to persuade students to buy into the evolutionary belief system. As these false assumptions are proven to be false by science, they continue to be taught by educators. Once evolutionary researchers reject an assumption, it is complete dishonesty to continue to teach these things as fact. It could have been claimed that it was a mistake based on a lack of information in the past, but once the truth is known, if evolutionist continue to claim the error as a fact, then it has become a lie.

Almost all students are taught to believe that the appendix is a vestigial organ even though evolutionists know this is completely false. Evolution is dependent on the ignorance of the pupil and the fact that most students are too apathetic to look up the answers to see if what is being stated is true. For over a decade, the belief that the appendix is a vestigial organ that serves no real purpose has been refuted by science, yet the dishonest evolution teachers cling to this falsehood because it is the closest thing to persuasive evidence that they can feed to their students.

Consider this article from Scientific America that cites a professor at Oklahoma State University that was published in 1999. This article can be viewed at

What is the function of the human appendix? Did it once have a purpose that has since been lost?

Loren G. Martin, professor of physiology at Oklahoma State University, replies:

“For years, the appendix was credited with very little physiological function. We now know, however, that the appendix serves an important role in the fetus and in young adults. Endocrine cells appear in the appendix of the human fetus at around the 11th week of development. These endocrine cells of the fetal appendix have been shown to produce various biogenic amines and peptide hormones, compounds that assist with various biological control (homeostatic) mechanisms. There had been little prior evidence of this or any other role of the appendix in animal research, because the appendix does not exist in domestic mammals.

“Among adult humans, the appendix is now thought to be involved primarily in immune functions. Lymphoid tissue begins to accumulate in the appendix shortly after birth and reaches a peak between the second and third decades of life, decreasing rapidly thereafter and practically disappearing after the age of 60. During the early years of development, however, the appendix has been shown to function as a lymphoid organ, assisting with the maturation of B lymphocytes (one variety of white blood cell) and in the production of the class of antibodies known as immunoglobulin A (IgA) antibodies. Researchers have also shown that the appendix is involved in the production of molecules that help to direct the movement of lymphocytes to various other locations in the body.

“In this context, the function of the appendix appears to be to expose white blood cells to the wide variety of antigens, or foreign substances, present in the gastrointestinal tract. Thus, the appendix probably helps to suppress potentially destructive humoral (blood- and lymph-borne) antibody responses while promoting local immunity. The appendix–like the tiny structures called Peyer’s patches in other areas of the gastrointestinal tract–takes up antigens from the contents of the intestines and reacts to these contents. This local immune system plays a vital role in the physiological immune response and in the control of food, drug, microbial or viral antigens. The connection between these local immune reactions and inflammatory bowel diseases, as well as autoimmune reactions in which the individual’s own tissues are attacked by the immune system, is currently under investigation.

“In the past, the appendix was often routinely removed and discarded during other abdominal surgeries to prevent any possibility of a later attack of appendicitis; the appendix is now spared in case it is needed later for reconstructive surgery if the urinary bladder is removed. In such surgery, a section of the intestine is formed into a replacement bladder, and the appendix is used to re-create a ‘sphincter muscle’ so that the patient remains continent (able to retain urine). In addition, the appendix has been successfully fashioned into a makeshift replacement for a diseased ureter, allowing urine to flow from the kidneys to the bladder. As a result, the appendix, once regarded as a nonfunctional tissue, is now regarded as an important ‘back-up’ that can be used in a variety of reconstructive surgical techniques. It is no longer routinely removed and discarded if it is healthy.

Answer posted to the Scientific America website on October 21, 1999

Eddie Snipes