The Bible Per-Version
By Mike Becerra
Although finding a personal bible may seem a simple task, one realizes how frustrating it can become when one gets to the bookstore. With well over 7,000 English-language editions (Giles, 1992, p.26), one can easily get flustered choosing the right bible. With so many choices it grows difficult to understand why new formats and translations keep coming out. New bible versions seem to compete for the title of the most contemporary and the most modern. Obviously, to make the written Word of God contemporary, one will have to change the written Word of God. These changes seem very subtle at first reading due to the fact that nothing new gets added to the bible; instead words and verses disappear in order to keep up with modern times.
Clearly, the accuracy and the integrity of the Holy Bible appear at stake. The 1611 Authorized King James Bible (KJB), a literal word-for-word translation, will be used as the authority of God’s Word in this paper. A side-by-side comparison of the contemporary versions compared to the King James Bible (KJB) shows startling changes and omissions which reveal a possible hidden agenda to transform the bible into a book of syncretism, aligning Christianity with the New Age Movement.
The New Age Movement has submerged the American culture. Currently gaining popularity, it shows as the fastest growing belief system in our country, with over 12 million Americans active in the movement as of 2001, and over 30 million interested; according to sociologists at the University of California-Santa Barbara (Rhodes, 2001, p. 129). New Agers share a vision of world peace through the new age of harmony and enlightenment, also referred to as the Age of the Aquarius (Rhodes, 2001, p.130). New Agers look forward to a perfect world order with a one world government and a one world religion. “Hum quietly to yourself the words of John Lennon’s ‘Imagine,’ and dozens of laws, rights and benefits of one world may pop into your head” (Robertson, 1991, p.195).
This perception creates a spiritual unity among New Agers. This spiritual revival, although seeming godly and well-intended, reveals a cruel trick created by the devil himself. It creates the perception that “a perfect world can be accomplished with imperfect people” (Robertson, 1991, p.203). Because “the heart [of man] is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked” (Jeremiah 17:9), the New World Order must come into play. That means eliminating all governments and monarchies and creating only one world government (Robertson, 1991, p.180).
It applies to the elimination of nationalism and patriotism (Robertson, 1991, p.180). The New World Order calls for a one world currency, most likely through electronic means. It also means the elimination of many rights that we, the people of America, take for granted on a day-to-day basis. And of course, it means the elimination of all religion, creating a one world religion of syncretism. Suitably, the New Age Movement appears purely syncretistic, meaning that it combines different religious beliefs and teachings to fit into its mystical worldview (Rhodes, 2001, p. 131).
New Age beliefs involve a revival of paganism. New Agers reject patriarchal “male-exalting” religion (such as referring to God as “Father,”) a male-dominated society, and man’s abuse of “Mother Earth” (Lash, 1999, p.279). Instead, New Agers share a feminist perspective with “the Sacred Feminine,” or “the One,” referring to their Mother God, the Queen of Heaven (Lash, 1990, p. 280). This Mother/Queen of Heaven worship also appears accepted in the Catholic religion, as well as many other pagan religions throughout the world. Most prayers in these religions seem directed to this Queen of Heaven, Mother God, as opposed to our Father in Heaven or His only begotten Son, Jesus Christ.
This “Goddess Revival” focuses on the divine in its feminine aspect, often looking back to ancient pagan fertility cults (Lash, 1990, p. 280). Although a syncretistic movement, goddess worship centers New Age beliefs. According to New Age author, Sylvia Browne, her spirit guide, Francine, “who has been with me all of my 67 years, has always professed the Mother God’s power” (2004, p. 51). Obviously, this movement can seem alluring to women and appears very popular among feminists.
New Age does not stop at changing Father God’s identity. This movement also changes the identity of the savior, as the New Age high priestess, H.P. Blavatsky, expresses: “Lucifer represents . . . Life . . . Thought . . . Progress . . . Civilization . . . Liberty . . . Independence . . . Lucifer is the Logos . . . the Serpent, the Savior” (Riplinger, 1993, p.52). David Spangler of New Age Journal states, “Lucifer . . . prepares man in all ways for the experience of Christhood. Christ is the same force as Lucifer” (Riplinger, 1993, p.52). According to Riplinger (1993), New Agers address Lucifer as Christ, “the sacrificial lamb,” as New Ager Benjamin Crème calls him (p. 52).
Hence, Lucifer becomes the New Age Savior. Lucifer becomes the New Age Christ. Lucifer reveals enlightenment as opposed to salvation. Lucifer prepares man to become his own god. One can realize the deception of this cruel trick which the devil has used since creation by reading the Word of God.
Being syncretistic, the New Age movement easily works into and absorbs Christianity. Things regarded heretic and deviant not long ago, now seem socially acceptable in the church and in most Christian beliefs. In these contemporary times, many Christian churches have adopted the new definition of tolerance. Tolerate defined by Webster’s Dictionary conveys: “to recognize and respect [other’s lifestyles, practices, belief’s, etc] without sharing them,” or in other words, to bear with or put up with although in disagreement (McDowell & Hostetler, 1998, p. 15-16).
The “new tolerance is defined as the view that all values, beliefs, lifestyles, and truth claims are equal” (McDowell & Hostetler, 1998, p.19). When speaking of tolerance today, one normally describes this new definition of tolerance. In order to create peace and harmony, all beliefs must be equally valid; therefore absolute truth can not exist. According to this new definition, it rings true when referring to deviant lifestyles as well; one should not impose morality on others.
The new view of tolerance allows society to determine right from wrong. One decides his own personal ethics and morality. Though obviously not a biblical view, nothing new derives from this perspective. Remember the serpent in the Garden of Eden. First, the serpent casts doubt on the Word of God, “has God said . . . (Gn 3:1)?” Then the proposal by that old serpent, Satan, “in the day ye eat . . . your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil” (Gn 3:5). This new tolerance gives one the power to be one’s own god, to decide good from evil for oneself. Remember, according to New Age, Lucifer reveals enlightenment by preparing man for Christhood. Lucifer, the father of lies, knows that this lie truly works among people; it worked since the beginning.
One can easily see how this new tolerance justifies the re-wording and feminization of the newer inclusive versions of the bible. As society becomes more liberal, so do the new versions of the bible. “[This is demonstrated] by, among others, the New International Version (NIV) in which the translator [and/or editor] takes on the role of interpreter and commentator” (Ellis, 2003), then marketed as the most contemporary and the most modern, which in turn creates the most popular version among unknowing Christians. The problem arises, how far can a bible change before considered New Age? One will find that the newer versions do become more and more New Age as the nation becomes more and more tolerant.
The New Age goal of invading and infiltrating the evangelical church by gradually changing the bible appears evident in the modern versions. Dr. Frank Logsdon, Editor of the New American Standard Version, states:
“I must under God renounce every attachment to the New American Standard. I’m afraid I’m in trouble with the Lord. We laid the groundwork; I wrote the format; I helped interview some of the translators; I sat with the translator; I wrote the preface…
When questions began to reach me at first I was quite offended. Upon investigation, I wrote my very dear friend, Mr. Lockman, explaining that I was forced to renounce all attachment to the NASV. . .The deletions are absolutely frightening. . .there are so many. . .Are we so naïve that we do not suspect satanic deception in all this?” (Riplinger, 1994, p.49-50).
With the new versions of the bible becoming more New Age, or tolerant, conservative Christians charge that, “nothing less than the integrity of the Word of God is at stake” (Woodward, 1997). This statement appears very evident in these last days. According to CNN news broadcast aired June 17, 2006, leaders of the Presbyterian Church (USA) have proposed a new Trinity to substitute “Compassionate Mother, Beloved Child, and Life-Giving Womb” instead of “Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.” These people seem to follow modern feminism and Dan Brown’s blasphemous fictional account based on the heretic Gnostic gospels in his best selling novel, The Da Vinci Code,as opposed to truth.
The Gnostics, who wrote these gospels between 200 and 600 years after the death of Jesus Christ, believed Christ as a “celestial being . . . who temporarily associated himself with an earthly being (Jesus)” (Rhodes, 2001, p.134). The Gnostic Christ in these fictional gospels came to the world not to suffer and die for our sins, but “to release the divine spark hidden in man and nature” (Rhodes, 2001, p.134). This should sound familiar after investigating the New Age “Christ,” Lucifer, and his promise. Again, Satan, understanding our spiritual emptiness and our pride, takes full advantage with his lie to make mankind divine through him. This ancient heretic belief certainly revived in this modern day.
Moving on, Joel Belz, publisher of the conservative Christian magazine, World, states, “gender is the issue that can split Evangelicalism. The question is, how far are we prepared to compromise God’s truth in order to get along with [modern] culture?” (Woodward, 1997). The “PC Bible-The New Testament and Psalms: An Inclusive Version–from Oxford University Press replaces references to God as ‘Father’ with ‘Father-Mother’” (Maxwell, 1995). Remember the importance of Mother God to the New Age Movement. By disguising as “gender-inclusive,” this new version easily slips Mother God into the bible.
The 1996 New International Version Inclusive Language Edition (NIVI) published in Britain, as well as the 2002 Today’s New International Version (TNIV), seem equally termed feminist editions. “It [feminism/New Age] is present both in deletions and in alterations of masculine references, sometimes even those referring to Jesus” (Ellis, 2003). The power to corrupt the Word of God seems evident through this “new” tolerance and has been fully taken advantage of by the New Age Movement.
Lucifer, the Christ of the New Age Movement, boasts, “I will be like the most High” (Isaiah 14:14), which explains his ultimate goal. This takes us to the name game of “morning star” in Isaiah 14:12: “How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!” The NIV, among other versions, read, “How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn.” NIV committee member R. Laird Harris claims Isaiah 14 does not refer to Satan, but refers to a king from Babylon (Riplinger, 1993, p.42). This also appears the belief of most biblical scholars today. The Hebrew text says otherwise. The Hebrew states, “helel, ben shachar,” which correctly translates as, “Lucifer, son of the morning.”
The new versions give a translation as if the Hebrew said, “shachar kokab, ben shachar,” or “morning star, son of the morning” (Riplinger, 1993, p.42). This change obviously does not come from translating, but from the theology of the translators and editors involved. These new version editors match Lucifer with “morning star” for a reason; according to Rev 22:16, 2:28 and II Peter 1:19, the title “morning star” belongs to Jesus Christ. Remember, Lucifer, the counterfeit, wants to replace the true Lord, the most High. The New Age Movement makes this possible. Arthur C. Clark, author of the popular 2001 Space Odyssey and 2010 writes, “Lucifer, as Christ, the bright and morning star. . .” (Riplinger, 1993, p. 63).
Next, turn to the Lord’s Prayer found in Luke 11:2-4. This writer will quote the entire prayer from the King James Version and highlight in bold and caps the words erased from ALL modern versions:
WHICH ART IN HEAVEN
<> Hallowed be thy name
Thy kingdom come
THY WILL BE DONE,
AS IN HEAVEN,
SO IN EARTH
Give us day by day
our daily bread
And forgive us our sins;
For we also forgive everyone
that is indebted to us
And lead us not into temptation;
BUT DELIVER US FROM EVIL”
The NIV version reads,
Hallowed be your name.
Your kingdom come.
Give us each day our daily bread.
Forgive us our sins,
For we also forgive everyone who
Sins against us.
And lead us not into temptation.”
According to Riplinger, New Ager Eliphas Levi admits “[this is an] . . . occult version of the Paternoster [Latin for ‘Our Father’]” (1993, p.58). New Ager H.P Blavatsky’s book cover reads “The Real Paternoster” as well as “Holy Satan” (1993, p.58). Blavatsky boasts proudly that this occult version has “stepped into the new bible versions” (Riplinger, 1993, p. 58). Madame Blavatsky also admits that occultists use this shortened prayer to pray to Lucifer, the New Age “father” (Riplinger, 1994, p.17). In the King James Bible, the Apostle Paul calls Elymas the sorcerer “thou child of the devil” (Acts 13:10) while Jesus Christ states, “Ye are of your father the devil” to the men of “religion” in John 8:44. New Agers pray to their own father, Lucifer, not our Father in Heaven.
Moving on, New Agers develop a common vocabulary to generalize religions toward a one world religion. With this goal, “New Age literature has changed the names Buddha, Krishna, Lucifer, and all the national and occult gods, to ‘the Christ,’ ‘the Lord,’ ‘the One,’ and ‘the Spirit’” (Riplinger, 1994, p.34). All of the copyrighted versions have made changes to conform to this common vocabulary. Jehovah, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost are becoming “the One,” “the Christ,” “the Spirit,” and “the Lord” (Riplinger, 1994, p.34). As one does a side-by-side comparison with any of the copyrighted versions compared to the King James Version, one will see Jehovah has completely disappeared and replaced with a general vocabulary term. Apparently, New Agers dislike Jehovah.
Looking at the “Lord Jesus Christ in the new versions is much like looking through the wrong end of a telescope at a vanishing Jesus” (Riplinger, 1994, p.36). Galatians 4:7 states that “[we are] an heir of God through Christ.” The new versions drop “through Christ” (Riplinger, 1993). Ephesians 3:14 says, “I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.” The new versions drop “of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Riplinger, 1993). Bowing before the Father seems acceptable to all religions in the world, but not bowing to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. Ephesians 3:9 says, “God, who created all things by Jesus Christ.” Of course, the new versions remove “by Jesus Christ” (Riplinger, 1993). This list can go on and on with the contemporary versions.
Philippians 4:13 says, “I can do all things through Christ which strengthneth me.” Most new versions replace “Christ” with “Him” (Riplinger, 1993). The reader can fill in the blank with his own belief, such as Krishna, Buddha, Lucifer, etc. This seems more evidence of the bible moving to become an all-inclusive religion bible. Next, 1Timothy 3:16 says, “God was manifest in the flesh.” This proves as an unquestionably powerful verse. This verse makes it very clear that God became man. The new versions state, “he appeared in a body,” or “he who was revealed in the flesh” (Riplinger, 1993). Obviously every person that has ever lived has “appeared in a body” and “was revealed in the flesh.”
The new version editors and translators go on to change Philippians 2:6: “[Jesus Christ] thought it not robbery to be equal with God.” The NIV, among other new versions, reads, “did not consider equality with God something to be grasped.” Notice the subtle twist of words which create a completely opposite meaning. The King James Bible makes it unquestionably clear that: God was manifest in the flesh as the Lord Jesus Christ (1Timothy 3:16), and God appears as a trinity: Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, “and these three are one” (1Jn 5:7). Therefore, Jesus, God, and the Holy Spirit are one.
Next, let’s look at the virgin birth of Jesus Christ. The KJB states in Luke 2:33, “And Joseph and his mother.” The NIV, among other new versions, reads, “The child’s father and mother.” Take a moment and ponder who Jesus’ father really is. If one believes in the virgin birth as told in the gospels of the Holy Bible, then the answer becomes God in Heaven. Joseph is Jesus’ foster father. Luke 2:43 also states in the KJB “Joseph and his mother.” The new versions subtly change the words to, “his parents.” Again, the subtle twists reveal the heretic beliefs of the new version editors and translators. The goal to remove the divinity of our Lord seems apparent.
Obviously, entire verses have also disappeared in the newer versions. Over 40 appear missing from the New Testament alone. In the King James Bible, Acts 9:37 states, “and he [the eunuch] answered [Phillip] and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God” right before being baptized. Instead of twisting the words here in the new versions, the editors instead decide to erase the entire verse. Other verses erased are, “For the Son of man [Jesus] is come to save that which was lost” (Mt 18:11), “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all” (Romans, 16:24), and “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word [Jesus], and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one” (1Jn 5:7). These verses have also disappeared from the heretic Jehovah’s Witness “bible,” the New World version.
Of course, this depicts just a partial list of the dozens of verses omitted from the new versions. The new version bibles, including the New World Bible (Jehovah’s Witness), line up with the New International version, which deletes 64,576 words from the true Holy Bible (Watkins, 1995). Remember the warning God placed on the last page of the Holy Bible concerning those who “take away from the words of the book” (Rev 22:19).
Lord Jesus Christ warns us to “beware of the scribes, which desire . . . the highest seats in the synagogues . . . and for a shew make long prayers” (Lk 20:46). Jesus Christ also warns, the “scribes . . . indeed appear beautiful outward; . . . outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within . . . are full of hypocrisy and iniquity” (Mt 23:27-28). “The scribes . . . consulted that they might take Jesus by subtilty and kill him” (Mt 26:3-4). This agenda continues to this day. The modern “scribes” still seek ways to subtly kill the person of Jesus Christ.
Modern scholars and editors of new versions of the bible claim the translation derives from “better manuscripts” than those which were used for the King James Bible, the Textus Receptus, which justifies the changes and omissions. According to this theory, “Codex B, the Vaticanus manuscript, must be the purest [better] because of omissions” (Fuller, 1970, p.108). With this claim, the Textus Receptus, used for the King James Version, must have added scripture where in Codex B, the Vaticanus manuscript, also called the Westcott and Hort [Greek] text, used for all copyrighted versions, did not (Riplinger, 1993, p.398). This ridiculous argument continues to hold ground today with modern bible scholars.
The Westcott-Hort Greek text gave weight to the Vaticanus and to the Sinaiticus, which was discovered in a trash basket in a monastery in 1844 (Reynolds & Costella, 2000). It appears noted that over 12,000 changes have been made to these manuscripts by people other than the original copyist (Reynolds & Costella, 2000). It seems logical to understand why these corrupted manuscripts were thrown away. The simple fact that the Textus Receptus, used for the King James Version, “agreed with 90-95% of all known Sripture-related manuscripts, numbering over five-thousand, [is ignored]” (Reynolds & Costella, 2000). Modern scholars, as well as Westcott and Hort, even claim the Textus Receptus appears far inferior because it fully presents the doctrines of Christianity.
Westcott and Hort did not believe the infallibity of the Bible (Waite, 1979). They believed the Bible should be treated as any other book. They believed the Textus Receptus and the King James Bible as perverse and corrupt (Waite, 1979). They did not believe in creation, hell, the divinity of Jesus, or salvation through Jesus Christ; but held the New Age beliefs of many ways of salvation and that man could become divine (Waite, 1979). According to author D.A Carson in his book The King James Version Debate, “the theories of Westcott and Hort. . .[are] almost universally accepted today” due to the errors in their revised Greek text (Riplinger, 1993, p. 398).
In Dr. Logsdon’s renouncement to the NASV, he goes on to say, “You can say the Authorized Version [King James Version] is absolutely correct. How correct? 100% correct!” (Riplinger, 1994, p.50). The King James Bible translators used direct word-for-word translation as opposed to interpretation, as found in all the copyrighted versions. The King James Bible can not get copyrighted, therefore, it can never change other than grammatically or spelling. When a reader notices a copyright for the King James Bible, the reader should note that only the introduction, foreword, maps, notes, etc., are copyrighted, not the Bible itself. “Newer versions are suspect in that they are copyrighted and published by major publishers where profit is the main motive” (Riplinger, 1994, p.1). The King James Bible fully presents the doctrines of Christianity such as the deity of Christ, the Trinity, and salvation by faith. The King James Version appears as God’s promise to preserve His words forever.
God promises in Psalm 12:6-7 that He will preserve His pure words, purified seven times, forever. The King James Bible seems the only English version that fits this description. Jesus Christ said, “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away” (Mt 24:35). For English speaking Christians after 1611 to present, we have our divine preservation of the scripture, the King James Bible.
Brown, S. (2004). Mother God: The Feminine Principle to Our Creator. CA: Hay House, Inc.
Ellis, E.E. (2003, October). Dynamic Equivalence Theory, Feminist Ideology and Three Recent Bible Translations [Electronic version]. Expository Times 115(1),7-12.
Fuller, D.O., ed., (1970). Which Bible? Grand Rapids, MI: Grand Rapids International Publications.
Giles, T.S. (1992, October 26). Pick a Bible – Any Bible? [Electronic version]. Christianity Today 36(12), 26.
Holy Bible: King James Version. (2002). U.S.A.: Barbour Publishing, Inc.
Holy Bible: New International Version. (1973). MI: Zondervan Publishing, Inc.
Lash, J. (1990). The Seeker’s Handbook: The Complete Guide to Spiritual Pathfinding. New York: Harmony Books.
McDowell & Hostetler, B. (1998). The New Tolerance: How a Cultural Movement Threatens to Destroy You, Your Faith, and Your Children. IL: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc.
Reynolds, M.H. & Costella, D.W. (2000). All Modern Versions Are Corrupt! Retrieved July 14, 2006, from http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Bible/all_corrupt.htm
Rhodes, R. (2001). The Challenge of the Cults and New Religions. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.
Riplinger, G.L. (1993). New Age Bible Versions. Aratat, VA: A.V. Publications Corporation.
– – – (1994). Which Bible Is God’s Word? U.S.A.: Hearthstone Publishing, Ltd.
Robertson, P. (1991). The New World Order. Dallas, TX: Word Publishing.
Singer, M.T. & Lalich, J. (1995). Cults in our Midst: The Hidden Menace in our Everyday Lives. U.S.A.: Paramount Publishing International.
Waite, D.A., ed., (1979). The Theological Heresies of Westcott and Hort (As Seen In Their Own Writings). Collingswood, NJ: The Bible For Today, Incorporated.
Watkins, T. (1995). New International Perversion. Retrieved July 14, 2006.
Woodward, J. (1997, August 4). Was God Gender-Specific? Alberta Report/Newsmagazine 24(34), 37.