Archive: king james bible

In the beginning God…

We were taught in ‘cemetery’ by the experts to begin a new Christian on Bible reading in the gospel of John–supposedly because beginning in Genesis and working through all the Bible in its order was too hard. The result of this, in my opinion, is that many never read the entire Bible and miss the continuing threads that connect the entire revelation, or they start their spiritual growth doctrinally stunted and ignorant of foundations in the Old Testament. The Book says “In the beginning God…” and that’s where we should begin.

A thousand hours..

A thousand hours with the "Church Fathers" is far less productive than a fraction of that time with scripture. It is more profitable to meditate on the pure words of God than the fallible words of men..

The King James Bible is sealed by the blood of martyrs that died to keep it. It has produced more spiritual fruit than all Bible versions. To ignore the KJB and strike out on a new path to seek a "better" meaning from the mass of Hebrew or Greek manuscripts is also foolish. Our King James Bible has the seven seals of God upon it and has already been tried by fire; it is the greatest source of spiritual blessing for all time. Why try to improve the masterpiece? Why seek some dead thought fallen in the dust of history to replace a living, pure, life giving word?

“Thy word is very pure: therefore thy servant loveth it.” (Psalm 119:140)

My King James Bible is before me and in my hand. Before I knew Greek or Hebrew or Latin, the Bible words in my language brought me from death in the flesh to eternal life in the Spirit. Having begun in this Book, shall I now be made perfect by another?

I profess not to know more than all other men, but what I know from scripture, I must speak. If I speak truth, fruit will come forth to the glory of God, and stand. -–Dave Reese

CHURCH – PART TWO

Read Part 1 here »

  1. English Etymology of Church

According to the Oxford English Dictionary [OED], “etymology” is “the process of tracing out and describing the elements of a word with their modifications of form and sense.”

The English word church comes from a Scottish and North England term “kirk.” The term is still used in Scotland to refer to a church. “Kirk” is frequently found in British literature, but a serious distinction between “kirk” and “church” usage is to distinguish the Kirk of Scotland from the Church of England.

Kirk evidently has its etymology in the Greek “kuriakos,” (kurios-Lord, oikos-house) “a house belonging to the Lord.” The word church generally replaced “kirk” during the Fifteenth Century. This etymology no doubt led to not only a group of people but also a building being called a “church.”

B.  Current Usage of the term, Church

The term church is used among English speaking people today and it has various meanings.

1. Any group or groups of worshippers: “Many churches held a joint Thanksgiving Service. It was the largest church meeting in Denver’s history.”

2. A local group of people: “The First Baptist Church of Fort Worth, Texas.”

3. An action by a church: “He was churched in a business session.”

4. A different group from the rest of the world: “The world is fighting against the

Church.”

5. A building where worshippers meet: “They tore down the old Goshen

Church.”

6. The total body of saved people during this age of grace, regardless of denominational affiliation: “The Church will be raptured.”

Although the Bible never uses church to refer to a building (for true worship of God), it was inevitable that in the free usage of English the term would come to mean in certain contexts the place or building where the church gathered and an extension of this would be the descriptive use to describe associated items such as “church pews.” By the same usage, the term became a verb form as in “churching” a person, which did not mean to accept into the church but to dismiss from the church. A strange negative and common feature of English is also found in such profane terms as “church key” –a beer opener.

C.  Bible Usage

1.  Local church

A local church comes together at appointed times and there are many of them in various locales throughout the age. “Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead;) And all the brethren which are with me, unto the churches of Galatia:”(Galatians 1:1-2) The “churches of Galatia” are not called by various names. The word of God does not dictate a specific name for a “church.” In fact, the Bible warns against using names of people or even the Name of “Christ” to distinguish one group of believers from another.

10 ¶ Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.

11 For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.

12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.

13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? (1 Corinthians 1:10-13) 

2. Group of living believers in Jerusalem

This is a reference to the believers living in Jerusalem in the early First Century, and it is used in one passage. The passage does not include past or future believers in various locales as the term, body of Christ, does. Describing his persecution of believers before he was saved, Paul states “…that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it:” (Galatians 1:13) The term “church of God” is not a denominational name. This is used to designate assemblies of people that met to worship God. The word “waste” is the same Greek word as is found in Galatians 1:23 and Acts 9:21 “But they had heard only, That he which persecuted us in times past now preacheth the faith which once he destroyed.” (Galatians 1:23) Those who met Paul immediately after his conversion said: “But all that heard him were amazed, and said; Is not this he that destroyed them which called on this name in Jerusalem, and came hither for that intent, that he might bring them bound unto the chief priests?” (Acts 9:21)  The church that is the body of Christ is positionally secure, “seated in heavenly places” (Ephesians 2:6) and therefore, it can not be “wasted.” The “wasted church of God” must refer to local church(s) at that time in Jerusalem. You can reduce the membership numbers in local churches, burn and remove all buildings, and stop them from meeting together, but not one member of the church which is the body of Christ can ever be wasted: lost or removed from the church which is the body of Christ. (1 Corinthians 12:12-26)

35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?

36 As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter.

37 Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us.

38 For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,

39 Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 8:35-39).

Someone may argue the above passage is like God’s love for the world in John 3:16 or that it only has to do with separation of the believer from the “love” of Christ and “love” of God with no other distinction. In other words, we may die physically due to persecution or sword and know that God still “loves” us. But the passage is more than that. Not only are we assured of God’s love for us in various locations and situations, we are more than conquerors “because neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature…” (one’s self included) can remove or even touch our security “which is in Christ Jesus our Lord”. This “love of God” is our position in the Second Person of the Godhead, Christ Jesus our Lord. Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.” (1 Corinthians 12:27) That position has nothing to do with any membership in any church or organization on this earth.

2.  Body of Christ

The KJB uses church in reference to (1) a local group of people, in reference to all living believers, and also (2) to all the people saved, past, present, and future during the age of grace. The people saved during this age of grace may never see, know, or meet each other on earth but one day they will all be gathered together at the Rapture. This church is also known as “the body of Christ.” “Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.” (Ephesians 5:24-27)

22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church,

23 Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all. (Ephesians 1:22-23)

Read Part 1 here »

Church – Part 1

CHURCH: The word church is a Bible word, a word defined by contextual usage in the King James Bible. In order to understand the doctrine of the church, the term must always be defined by how it is used in the biblical context. The English word church is the usual translation of the Greek word, ἐκκλησία, (transliterated into English, the Greek term is ekklesia). The Greek word ekklesia is a combination of two words: ek “out of” and kaleo “to call.” A basic definition of the Greek term ekklesia is: A called out group of people; the nature and purpose of that group must be determined by the context. In Acts 19:32,39 and 41 the King James Bible (KJB) departed from the normal definition and wisely translated ekklesia as “assembly”. The context of Acts 19 events justifies the departure.

Since the reference in Acts 19:32 is to an uproar by an unruly crowd, the KJB translators put assembly, rather than “church”. “Some therefore cried one thing, and some another: for the assembly (ekklesia) was confused; and the more part knew not wherefore they were come together”. (Acts 19:32). Although this sounds somewhat like certain contemporary Baptist church business meetings, it is actually the silversmiths’ union meeting! In putting “assembly” instead of “church”, the King James Bible makes a doctrinal difference between an unruly union mob and an orderly congregation of God’s people. Thus, a distinction is made between just any meeting of people and an orderly meeting to worship the Lord. The context of usage determines the meaning of a Greek word, not the slavish adherence to Greek lexicons.

Although ekklesia in general usage became a Christian word, it had its own secular Greek, pre-Christian history. All language tends to be degraded by common usage and the Greek language is no exception. The inspired New Testament authors adopted Greek, and its major terms had to be redefined by inspired biblical usage. (The exception to prior language corruption is Hebrew; there was no other literature in the Hebrew language before the Old Testament.) 

Ekklesia was the designation for an assembly of citizens in a free city-state. The term simply meant people called out for the discussion and decisions of public business and in itself had no particular religious connotation. The word ekklesia is employed of any assembly, and the word in the Greek language implies no more than a town meeting— or a mob. The translators of the KJB recognized the broad usage, and retained consistent translation of ekklesia as “church” when context demanded it. Israel is called out of Egypt and spoken of in the New Testament Greek as an ekklesia, translated in the KJB as “church in the wilderness.”(Acts 7:38). In no sense was it a New Testament church in organization or practice.

The translation by the KJB accurately defines the Greek ekklesia as well as the English usage of the word “church.” A careful reading of the KJB will always open up more knowledge. The mindset that “the Greek” carries many hidden truths the KJB translators missed, leads to more confusion.

For example, the KJB does another unusual thing with the Acts 19 passage. Right in the midst of translating “ekklesia” as “assembly” for the unruly silversmith mob, the KJB translates ἱεροσύλους as “robbers of churches.” The combination has as part of the Greek term, heiron: temple, a definite reference to a building; the other latter part is sulao: robbers.

For ye have brought hither these men, which are neither robbers of churches, nor yet blasphemers of your goddess. (Acts 19:37).

By doing this, (translating ἱεροσύλους as “churches” in the context of paganism) the KJB makes a statement that every religious thing that calls itself a “church” does not necessarily have true worship of God. The translation gives prophetic warning that a “temple” filled with paganistic worship will also call themselves a “church.” Mere titles on a group of people or on a person guarantee nothing but the fact that “certain men crept in unawares” (Jude 4). Salt Lake City, Utah is a good place to see the prophecy illustrated. (Ecclesiology, or Doctrine of the Church will be continued…)

WHO IS MY FRIEND?

WHO IS MY FRIEND?

And Jesus said unto him, Friend, wherefore art thou come? Then came they, and laid hands on Jesus, and took him. (Matthew 26:50).

It would be a strange use of the word “friend” if Jesus had meant a dear or close friend in Matthew 26:50. Was His reference to Judas a knowledgeable, sarcastic, ignorant or careless reference? Bible critics have no answer.

There are three kinds of “friends” in the Bible:

1. A close, personal, and trusted friend.

The Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say, Behold a man gluttonous, and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners. But wisdom is justified of her children. (Matthew 11:19)

(The false accusation is blasphemous because their charge is that Jesus participates in all these sins with these types. They claim the gluttons, winebibbers, publicans, and sinners are all close and trusted friends of Jesus.)

These things said he: and after that he saith unto them, Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep. (John 11:11)

2. Parties of a recent agreement developed by persuasion.

And Herod was highly displeased with them of Tyre and Sidon: but they came with one accord to him, and, having made Blastus the king’s chamberlain their friend, desired peace; because their country was nourished by the king’s country. (Acts 12:20)

(People from Tyre and Sidon in  some way made a “friend” of Blastus, the King’s chamberlain or keeper of the bedroom. This position was one of a very close nature to the king. Blastus would know of all the king’s escapades.)

3. A comradely association such as:

a. An employee/employer contact.

But he answered one of them, and said, Friend, I do thee no wrong: didst not thou agree with me for a penny? (Matthew 20:13)

b. A “friendship” created by a general invitation extended to both good and bad.

9 Go ye therefore into the highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage.

10 So those servants went out into the highways, and gathered together all as many as they found, both bad and good: and the wedding was furnished with guests.

11 And when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man which had not on a wedding garment:

12 And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless.

13 Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

14 For many are called, but few are chosen. (Matthew 22:9-14)

As stated above, it would be a strange use of the word “friend” if Jesus had meant a dear or close friend in Matthew 26:50. Jesus could not use “Friend” in the sense of a close and emotional tie with this devil (John 6:70) but He could claim somewhat common and broad association since Judas Iscariot was an apostle.

Was Jesus’ reference to Judas as ”Friend” sarcastic?

This is not spoken in sarcasm. It is no bitter or taunting term. In such a setting of the garden betrayal our Lord is not bitter but in perfect holiness, resigned to the “cup” He gladly and willingly will drink.

The term “Friend” is not used in ignorance or in a careless manner. Knowing all things (read carefully John 18:4; 19:28; 21:12) Jesus used the term to not only impress upon Judas the severity of his betrayal and to heap “coals of fire” upon his head (Romans 12:19-20) but to also mark the lesson for us. Be as kind as possible to even your enemies. You may not be able to claim a close tie with a betrayer but claim as close as you can without being self-righteous. In some cases, enemies may eventually become close friends. We can use the term “friend” when addressing total strangers at a town gathering, or as a term of endearment to those closest to us. Context always determines the meaning.

Studies in the Book of Revelation: The Lord’s Day

 

ADJECTIVAL USE IN JEREMIAH 26:10 AND REVELATION 1:10

I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet, (Revelation 1:10).

When the princes of Judah heard these things, then they came up from the king’s house unto the house of the LORD, and sat down in the entry of the new gate of the LORD’s house. (Jeremiah 26:10).

Notice in the passage above that the word of God says both “house of the LORD” and “the LORD’s house“. If we follow strict Hebrew language usage, God’s word in Hebrew cannot say “the LORD’s house.” The King James Version does it by the required contextual translation into English. To end the sentence in Jeremiah 26:10 with “LORD” would confuse the “gate” with “house”.

There are differences between Hebrew and Greek grammar on this issue. The Hebrew has no adjectives. If a descriptive term (adjective) is used, such as “LORD’s” the only way to grammatically express it in Hebrew is by using two nouns, such as “the day of the LORD”. The Hebrew speaker, if he wishes to say “the LORD’s day”, must say “the day of the LORD.”

The Greek does have adjectives. But the differences of possessive use in each language have nothing to do with the point at hand. Regardless of the Hebrew/Greek, the context of the King James Bible has doctrine for the common man that the scholar will never find in his original language studies.

Notice house is italicized in the KJV to note that the word was inserted by the translators to complete the readability, and justifiably so, because the context of Jeremiah 26 shows that the words are all spoken “in the house of the LORD.”

It is interesting that in the English translation of “house of the LORD” there is emphasis on the “LORD” while the “LORD’s house” puts emphasis on the “house.” Thus, the paltry “king’s house” is of no comparison to the “LORD’s house.”  They went “up” from the king’s house to the LORD’s house. A king’s house is always below the LORD’s house. (Modern versions lose this distinction.)

John could have used “the Lord’s day” to refer to a particular day of 24 hours as belonging to worship of the Lord. However, for him to do so in Revelation 1:10 would go against not only Old Testament and New Testament example and doctrine, but also contrary to his own previous descriptive of the “first day of the week” in John 20:1 and John 20:19. The context of the Book of Revelation is an emphasis on the “Lord’s DAY in contrast to the previous age when man had his “day.”

The term “Lord’s day” in Revelation 1:10 is another one of many places in the Bible that reveals whether the interpreter is ignorant of the context of the Bible, or is depending on traditions of men to tell him what the Bible means.

The Bible student knows that a believer in this age is “in the Spirit” every moment. (Romans 8:9). The interpretation of Revelation 1:10 that refers to John being “in the spirit on a Sunday” is no interpretation at all. It stands on the uncertain grounds of pagan heresy, tradition, and ignorance of the context of Bible doctrine.

We also need a word of balance. This study should not become a battleground with those who differ. If a Christian thinks he is keeping Sunday as “the Lord’s day” (a day to give extra duty to God) and he really observes it as to the Lord, we should not quarrel. We should rejoice that at least one day out of seven is dedicated. A difference of opinion or ignorance on this matter does not deserve starting a new denomination or switching churches.

THE “THOU” AND “YOU” IN THE KING JAMES BIBLE

The Bible was translated into English over a period of 500 years, the process began in part c. 1000 a.d. and culminated with the Authorized Version of 1611. Along with Hebrew, English is the only other major language that developed at the same time as its Bible. The difference is that the Hebrew language of Israel had no other written literature prior to the Pentateuch; the early Anglo-Saxon had few sources but with Gutenberg’s moveable type printing (1349 a.d.) modern English had many printed sources from Europe.


Although not a major intent by the variety of English translators, many helps to Bible study found their way into the English Bible. In addition, the King James Bible of 1611 contains several critical linguistic helps, otherwise unknown to those without knowledge of Hebrew and Greek. This study covers one of those helps: the number of the second person pronoun.


Why does the King James Bible (KJB) have “thee” “thou” “thy” etc., and also have “you” “your”, etc.,? Primarily, because the 54 translators (1604-1611) were concerned with translating the pure words of God. Misunderstanding of this feature abounds, chiefly because those who study grammar and literature in the secular field, fail to see that the KJB was not written in strict English of the 15th century. The English in the KJB is a form of English not spoken by anyone in any century; it is Biblical English. Read the sermons and other writings by even the KJB translators, and you will find their usage of English is markedly different from their translation of the Hebrew and Greek into English.


“In late Middle English and early Modern English, the singular pronouns thou, thee, and thine (like the French tu forms) served as markers of intimacy and informality. (Thou was the subject form, thee the object form, and thy/thine the possessive.) In contrast, the plural you (like French vous) signified politeness and respect–or downright submissiveness: “Social inferiors used you to their superiors, who reciprocated by using thou” (The Oxford History of English, 2006).


This was true regarding common English usage, but the Bible is not common English. Others have imagined that “thou” “thee” “thy” “thine” were used only when speaking to Deity. This was misunderstood due to the fact that the “t” pronoun signifies a singular pronoun and rightly used when addressing God, who is one LORD. (Deuteronomy 6:4)


When the KJB reader sees a pronoun beginning with “t”, it is singular; a “y” is plural. Hebrew and Greek have distinct singular and plural identification of the second person pronouns, so does the KJB. Translation of the word of God demands the utmost ability and care to be sure the target language carries the same meaning as the former. This may not seem to be important at first glance, but Bible doctrine hangs on the proper understanding of the difference between whether one person is spoken to or a plural number is addressed.


One example is in Luke 22:31-32:


31 And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as

32 But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy

brethren. (King James Bible, AV 1611)


(NOTE: Some may object that the KJB also inserted words that were not in the Hebrew or Greek texts. Although not the purpose of our study here, the KJB actually has six reasons for italicized words. All languages have peculiarities that make a word for word translation impossible. These are understood in the base language, but in translation to a target language there must be added words that make the original intent and meaning clear. The KJB put all such words into italics, thereby showing the honesty of the translators to the reader and providing another amazing Bible study principle. Compare Deuteronomy and Matthew: Deuteronomy 8:3 with Matthew 4:4. The Hebrew has no “word” in the language, it is understood by the Hebrew reader. Greek does have “word” and it is essential to the Greek and English. When Jesus quoted Deuteronomy 8:3 in Greek, He removed the italics and thereby proved the inspiration and authority of the future KJB OT quote!)


KING JAMES BIBLE: 31 And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you (PLURAL–all of the apostles), that he may sift you (PLURAL) as wheat:
32 But I have prayed for thee (SINGULAR-Peter), that thy (SINGULAR-Peter) faith fail not: and when thou (SINGULAR-Peter) art converted, strengthen thy(SINGULAR-Peter) brethren. (KJB)


NIV: 31 “Simon, Simon, Satan has asked to sift all of you as wheat. 32 But I have prayed for you, Simon, that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned back, strengthen your brothers.”


NIV ANALYSIS: 31 “Simon, Simon, Satan has asked (“HAS ASKED” AND “HATH DESIRED” ARE DIFFERENT) to sift (THE FORCE OF “HAVE YOU” REMOVED. SATAN DESIRED THE PERSONS, THE “SIFTING”WOULD OCCUR AFTER HE HAS THE PERSONS) all of you as wheat. 32 But I have prayed for you, Simon,(CONFUSING THE NUMBER OF PRONOUN, THE NIV HAD TO INSERT “SIMON” WHICH IS NOT IN ANY GREEK TEXT) that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned back (“TURN BACK” IS NOT THE SAME AS “CONVERTED”), strengthen your brothers.”


AMPLIFIED BIBLE: 31 Simon, Simon (Peter), listen! Satan has asked excessively that [all of] you be given up to him [out of the power and keeping of God], that he might sift [all of] you like grain, 32 But I have prayed especially for you [Peter], that your [own] faith may not fail; and when you yourself have turned again, strengthen and establish your brethren.


AMPLIFIED BIBLE ANALYSIS: 31 Simon, Simon (Peter), listen! (“LISTEN” IS NOT IN ANY GREEK TEXT) Satan has asked excessively (“EXCESSIVELY” IS ADDED TO GIVE THE SIMPLE “ASKED” INTENSIVE FORCE) that [all of] you be given up to him [out of the power and keeping of God], that he might sift [all of] you like grain, (AMP. BIBLE MISSES THE POINT OF “HAVE YOU” JUST AS THE NIV DOES. THE GENERAL “GRAIN” IS NOT THE SAME AS THE SPECIFIC “WHEAT”. ALSO, THE TERM “WHEAT” IN OTHER PASSAGES IS ESSENTIAL TO PROPER INTERPRETATION.)
32 But I have prayed especially (“ESPECIALLY” IS NOT IN ANY GREEK TEXT) for you [Peter], that your [own] faith may not fail; and when you yourself have turned again, (“TURNED AGAIN” IS NOT THE SAME AS “CONVERTED”) strengthen and establish (“ESTABLISH ” ADDED) your brethren.



Other errors and the same in ALL the so-called translations could be mentioned, but the point is

  1. Accepted the doubting attitude of what God said: “Yea, hath God said…”(Genesis 3:1)
  2. Added words to what God said: “…neither shall ye touch it…”(Genesis 3:3)
  3. Subtracting words from what God said: “…surely…”(Genesis 3:3)
  4. Changing what God said: “…surely…” changed to “…lest…”(Genesis 3:3)
  5. Accepted the “new” translation: “Ye shall not surely die…”(Genesis 3:4)


“Updated” and “new”, as well as “easy to understand” English translations since the late 1700’s have done nothing but remove the pure words of God from the readers, and substituted careless, confusing and deceptive terms that hide those words, words the Lord Jesus Christ deemed so important, He said:

“But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.” (Matthew 4:4)

“Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.” (Matthew 24:35)

“5 Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.
6 Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.” (Proverbs 30:5-6)

“Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you. (Deuteronomy 4:2)

“And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.” (Revelation 22:19)


Is the KJB hard to understand? Someone said: “What bothers me about the Bible is not what I don’t understand, what bothers me is all that I do understand.” The KJB is rated today at 5th grade reading level–it was 3rd grade thirty years ago. I know two former Bible college students, who in their adult years learned to read by the King James Bible.– Dr. Dave Reese

Psalm 12: Preserved Men or Preserved Words?

A student wrote:


Dr. Reese,
I have heard/read Dr. G and Dr. R say that Psalms 12:7 in the Hebrew texts means a preservation of the word of God, but then I have seen where non-KJB believers say that it does not. For example.

“The Hebrew of the verse allows the pronoun to be first person plural (us) or first person masculine singular (him) but not third person plural (them).”

I know some say that verse 7 is referring back to verse 5 rather than verse 6. When you have time could you give me a brief exposition of the 8 verses in the passage and what it means in “the original Hebrew text”? (Alexandrian lingo)

Thank you very much. –EHC


Psalms 12:
[1] Help, LORD; for the godly man ceaseth; for the faithful fail from among the children of men.
[2] They speak vanity every one with his neighbour: with flattering lips and with a double heart do they speak.
[3] The LORD shall cut off all flattering lips, and the tongue that speaketh proud things:
[4] Who have said, With our tongue will we prevail; our lips are our own: who is lord over us?
[5] For the oppression of the poor, for the sighing of the needy, now will I arise, saith the LORD; I will set him in safety from him that puffeth at him.
[6] The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
[7] Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.
[8] The wicked walk on every side, when the vilest men are exalted.

Answer

Dear EHC: Here are my final remarks on Psalm 12. If you received an earlier one, replace it with this.

Psalm 12:7 does refer to the words of God: all of God’s words from Genesis 1:1 through Revelation 22:21.
The critics of a present inspired Bible that can be held in your hand must attempt to deny any passage that states such an infallible authority exists. They do not believe inspiration went past the original; all modern scholars hold that only the originals were inspired, but that any preservation was left entirely in the hands of human instrumentality. This is a humanistic attitude toward the word of God and treats His Book as any other book. This provides the “need” for these Bible scholars to decide which Hebrew and Greek MSS and readings are accurate. None of them believe an exact copy of the inspired words of God is in existence anywhere. They are still searching for the truth.

In an attempt to appear scholarly, many who profess to believe the King James Bible meet the critics halfway. They claim that only the originals were inspired, citing the supposed present tense error of the KJB in 2 Timothy 3:16 “is given” and correcting it to the past tense (“all scripture was given by inspiration”), and that certain OT texts (Hebrew Massoretic Text) and Greek MSS were superintended by God’s providence to keep His words. They call the superintendence “Preservation”. In this way, they are able to say inspiration was confined to the originals but that God superintended His word so that in the Hebrew Massoretic text and the Greek Majority Text, we have the preserved (but not inspired) words of God in Hebrew and Greek. This allows Biblical scholars to determine the correct translation of the merely “preserved” Hebrew and Greek words. Of course, this means the King James translation as all translations, are susceptible to error. This allows the “Bible believing scholar” to determine the translation since “the KJB did miss the correct translation in a few places.”

Their problem is this: In hundreds of places throughout the OT and the NT text in your hand, the King James Bible claims to be the very word of God. There is no biblical statement or example of any person in the KJB text that even hints that all translations are subject to error. Every preacher in the KJB, including Jesus, believed the Bible in his hand and did not mention “a translation” of any kind.
if the KJB is not God’s inspired words, the King James Bible in English, it is the greatest fraud ever in the history of mankind. In treating the Bible as any other book or even as only the preserved word of God, the “scholars” conveniently justify their offices and deluded men provide them with a livelihood. To admit that God’s word is the KJB so that we have all of His inspired words today, would put 99% of all higher critics along with the KJB “scholars” out of their easy chairs onto the street.
This is why you will find modernist and professing KJB “believers” critics of Psalm 12 that claim the Hebrew can not support the third person “them” but will support the first person masculine singular “He”. They think they have it all sewed up. However, God put fox traps in the Book for every critic with a heresy. The Bible critic can’t see these because of their spiritual blindness. Unless a man approaches the King James Bible with childlike trust, believing it is God’s word, it remains a closed Book. Attack the word of God and it reveals your sin. Once the critics learn from a real KJB believer where the trap is, if they don’t repent of their sin, they won’t ever really spiritually see or receive it, but with a head (not heart) knowledge, they simply adjust their position to go around it.

One trap for the “Hebrew expert” here in vss 6-7 is that although there are a plural number of “words of the Lord”, it is also true that all of these words are bound into a singular unit and also called, “the word of the Lord” or “the word of God.”

For example:

“3 And it came to pass the same night, that the word of God came to Nathan, saying,…( then follows the covenant promises to David–many “words of The Lord” in several verses to vs 15)….
15 According to all these words, and according to all this vision, so did Nathan speak unto David.” (‭1 Chronicles‬ ‭17‬:‭3, 15‬ KJB).

“After these things the word of the Lord came unto Abram in a vision, saying, Fear not, Abram: I am thy shield, and thy exceeding great reward.” (‭Genesis‬ ‭15‬:‭1‬ KJB).


The Bible is: “the word of God” “the words of God” “the words of the Lord” “the word of the Lord”, plural yet also singular!

Not only that, the words of the Lord are called “scripture” (an emphasis on the writing of the words) and are designated with Personality: “HE”.
HE speaks (before we can read) and HE raises men up and shows HIS power in them for a designed purpose. HE has mercy on those with childlike faith and HE hardens the reprobate’s heart. A foolish man can not see that the Bible is a present living, life giving Book with Personality because his sin blinds his heart and mind.

“17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.
18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.” (‭Romans‬ ‭9‬:‭17-18‬ KJB).


(This, no doubt, had to be Moses’ words, who knew both Hebrew and Egyptian, translated into the Egyptian language to Pharaoh, who did not know Hebrew–a translation that was called “scripture”).

“The Hebrew” who was consulted by the critics on Psalm 12 did not know enough Bible to be qualified as an authority on the words of the Lord.

Like all interpretation of Bible verses, verse 7 must not be studied apart from the context of Psalm 12. A major theme of the Psalm is “words of the Lord” versus the words from the lips, mouths, tongues and words of vanity from wicked men.

As far as vs 7 being a reference to preserving God’s people, I have always wondered since hearing that argument, why does the Psalm refer (vs1) to the godly man ceasing and the faithful failing–if vs 7 means God PRESERVES THEM FROM CEASING AND FAILING?

And, why would a critic allow that God could keep a man but think that something is wrong with God keeping His words? How does God save, bring about a new birth, and keep a man, apart from the ever present living word of God?

“23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.
24 For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away:
25 But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.” (‭1 Peter‬ ‭1‬:‭23-25‬ KJB)

The “T’s and Y’s” in the KIing James Bible

The Bible was translated into English over a period of 500 years, the process began c. 1000 A.D. in part and culminated with the Authorized Version of 1611. Along with Hebrew, English is the only other major language that developed at the same time as its Bible. The difference is that the Hebrew language of Israel had no other written literature prior to the Pentateuch; the early Anglo-Saxon had few sources but with Gutenberg’s moveable type printing (1349A.D.) modern English had many printed sources from Europe.

Although not a major intent by the variety of English translators, many helps to Bible study found their way into the English Bible. In addition, the King James Bible of 1611 contains several critical linguistic helps, otherwise unknown to those without knowledge of Hebrew and Greek. This study covers one of those helps: the number of the second person pronoun.

Why does the King James Bible (KJB) have “thee” “thou” “thy” etc., and also have “you” “your”, etc.,? Primarily, because the 54 translators (1604-1611) were concerned with translating the pure words of God. Misunderstanding of this feature abounds, chiefly because those who study grammar and literature in the secular field, fail to see that the KJB was not written in strict English of the 15th century. The English in the KJB is a form of English not spoken by anyone in any century; it is Biblical English. Read the sermons and other writings by even the KJB translators, and you will find their usage of English is markedly different from their translation of the Hebrew and Greek into English.

“In late Middle English and early Modern English, the singular pronouns thou, thee, and thine (like the French tu forms) served as markers of intimacy and informality. (Thou was the subject form, thee the object form, and thy/thine the possessive.) In contrast, the plural you (like French vous) signified politeness and respect–or downright submissiveness: “Social inferiors used you to their superiors, who reciprocated by using thou” (The Oxford History of English, 2006).

This was true regarding common English usage, but the Bible is not common English. Others have imagined that “Thou” “Thee” “Thy” “Thine” were used only when speaking to Deity. This was misunderstood due to the fact that the “T” pronoun signifies a singular pronoun and rightly used when addressing God, who is one LORD. (Deuteronomy 6:4)

When the KJB reader sees a pronoun beginning with “t”, it is singular; a “y” is plural. Hebrew and Greek have distinct singular and plural identification of the second person pronouns, so does the KJB. Translation of the word of God demands the utmost ability and care to be sure the target language carries the same meaning as the former. This may not seem to be important at first glance, but Bible doctrine hangs on the proper understanding of the difference between whether one person is spoken to or a plural number is addressed.

One example is in Luke 22:31-32:
31 And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat:
32 But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren. (King James Bible, AV 1611)

(NOTE: Some may object that the KJB also inserted words that were not in the Hebrew or Greek texts. Although not the purpose of our study here, the KJB actually has six reasons for italicized words. All languages have peculiarities that make a word for word translation impossible. These are understood in the base language, but in translation to a target language there must be added words that make the original intent and meaning clear. The KJB put all such words into italics, thereby showing the honesty of the translators to the reader and providing another amazing Bible study principle. Compare Deuteronomy and Matthew: Deuteronomy 8:3 with Matthew 4:4. The Hebrew has no “word” in the language, it is understood by the Hebrew reader. Greek does have “word” and it is essential to the Greek and English. When Jesus quoted Deuteronomy 8:3 in Greek, He removed the italics and thereby proved the inspiration and authority of the future KJB OT quote!)

KING JAMES BIBLE: 31 And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you (PLURAL–all of the apostles), that he may sift you (PLURAL) as wheat:
32 But I have prayed for thee (SINGULAR-Peter), that thy (SINGULAR-Peter) faith fail not: and when thou (SINGULAR-Peter) art converted, strengthen thy(SINGULAR-Peter) brethren. (KJB)

NIV: 31 “Simon, Simon, Satan has asked to sift all of you as wheat. 32 But I have prayed for you, Simon, that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned back, strengthen your brothers.”
NIV ANALYSIS: 31 “Simon, Simon, Satan has asked (“HAS ASKED” AND “HATH DESIRED” ARE DIFFERENT) to sift (THE FORCE OF “HAVE YOU” REMOVED. SATAN DESIRED THE PERSONS, THE “SIFTING” OCCURS AFTER HE HAS THE PERSONS) all of you as wheat. 32 But I have prayed for you, Simon,(THE NIV HAD TO INSERT “SIMON” WHICH IS NOT IN ANY GREEK TEXT) that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned back (“TURN BACK” IS NOT THE SAME AS “CONVERTED”), strengthen your brothers.”

AMPLIFIED BIBLE: 31 Simon, Simon (Peter), listen! Satan [e]has asked excessively that [all of] you be given up to him [out of the power and keeping of God], that he might sift [all of] you like grain,
32 But I have prayed especially for you [Peter], that your [own] faith may not fail; and when you yourself have turned again, strengthen and establish your brethren.
AMPLIFIED BIBLE ANALYSIS: 31 Simon, Simon (Peter), listen! (“LISTEN” IS NOT IN ANY GREEK TEXT) Satan [e]has asked excessively (“EXCESSIVELY” IS ADDED TO GIVE THE SIMPLE “ASKED” INTENSIVE FORCE) that [all of] you be given up to him [out of the power and keeping of God], that he might sift [all of] you like grain, (AMP. BIBLE MISSES THE POINT OF “HAVE YOU” JUST AS THE NIV DOES. THE GENERAL “GRAIN” IS NOT THE SAME AS THE SPECIFIC “WHEAT”. ALSO, THE TERM “WHEAT” IN OTHER PASSAGES IS ESSENTIAL TO PROPER INTERPRETATION.)
32 But I have prayed especially (“ESPECIALLY” IS NOT IN ANY GREEK TEXT) for you [Peter], that your [own] faith may not fail; and when you yourself have turned again, (“TURNED AGAIN” IS NOT THE SAME AS “CONVERTED”) strengthen and establish (“ESTABLISH ” ADDED) your brethren.

Other errors and the same in ALL the so-called translations could be mentioned, but the point is made: the modern translations have done nothing but repeated the same sin of Eve in Genesis 3.

  • Accepted the doubting attitude of what God said: “Yea, hath God said…”(Genesis 3:1)
  • Added words to what God said: “…neither shall ye touch it…”(Genesis 3:3)
  • Subtracting words from what God said: “…surely…”(Genesis 3:3)
  • Changing what God said: “…surely…” changed to “…lest…”(Genesis 3:3)
  • Accepted the “new” translation: “Ye shall not surely die…”(Genesis 3:4)

“Updated” and “new”, as well as “easy to understand” English translations since the late 1700’s have done nothing but remove the pure words of God from the readers, and substituted careless, confusing and deceptive terms that hide those words, words the Lord Jesus Christ deemed so important, He said:
“But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.” (Matthew 4:4)
“Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.” (Matthew 24:35)
“5 Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.
6 Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.” (Proverbs 30:5-6)
“Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you. (Deuteronomy 4:2)
“And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.” (Revelation 22:19)

Is the KJB hard to understand? Someone said: “What bothers me about the Bible is not what I don’t understand, what bothers me is all that I do understand.” The KJB is rated today at 5th grade reading level–it was 3rd grade thirty years ago. I know two former Bible college students, who in their adult years learned to read by the King James Bible.

Part two- PHILEMON (Illustration of the second person pronoun in the KJB)

1 Paul, a prisoner of Jesus Christ, and Timothy our brother, unto Philemon our dearly beloved, and fellowlabourer,
2 And to our beloved Apphia, and Archippus our fellowsoldier, and to the church in thy house:
3 Grace to you, and peace, from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
4 I thank my God, making mention of thee always in my prayers,
5 Hearing of thy love and faith, which thou hast toward the Lord Jesus, and toward all saints;
6 That the communication of thy faith may become effectual by the acknowledging of every good thing which is in you in Christ Jesus.

Why ‘Thee’ and “You” vss. 1-6?

1. Philemon is the leader. (church meets in his house) “unto Philemon”, but “to Apphia, and Archippus”.
2. The letter is a personal request to Philemon and of special interest to him.
v.6 The best “communication of thy (Philemon’s) faith requires “every good thing which is in you”(all the church. No man should try to be isolated, a secluded worker in Christ Jesus.)
7 For we have great joy and consolation in thy love, because the bowels of the saints are refreshed by thee, brother. “Bowels” from “bowl”, the major organs of body protected by the skeletal frame, shoulders, backbone, ribs, pelvis. Emotions and feelings stem from here. (heart rate, stomach unsettled, largest nerve network of body in the digestive system–called the “Second Brain”.)
8 Wherefore, though I might be much bold in Christ to enjoin thee that which is convenient,
9 Yet for love’s sake I rather beseech thee, being such an one as Paul the aged, and now also a prisoner of Jesus Christ.
“enjoin” is to command, “beseech” is to make a plea, or request.
10 I beseech thee for my son Onesimus, whom I have begotten in my bonds:
11 Which in time past was to thee unprofitable, but now profitable to thee and to me:
12 Whom I have sent again: thou therefore receive him, that is, mine own bowels:
13 Whom I would have retained with me, that in thy stead he might have ministered unto me in the bonds of the gospel: 14 But without thy mind would I do nothing; that thy benefit should not be as it were of necessity, but willingly.
15 For perhaps he therefore departed for a season, that thou shouldest receive him for ever;
16 Not now as a servant, but above a servant, a brother beloved, specially to me, but how much more unto thee, both in the flesh, and in the Lord?
17 If thou count me therefore a partner, receive him as myself.
18 If he hath wronged thee, or oweth thee ought, put that on mine account;
19 I Paul have written it with mine own hand, I will repay it: albeit I do not say to thee how thou owest unto me even thine own self besides.
20 Yea, brother, let me have joy of thee in the Lord: refresh my bowels in the Lord.
21 Having confidence in thy obedience I wrote unto thee, knowing that thou wilt also do more than I say.
22 But withal prepare me also a lodging: for I trust that through your prayers I shall be given unto you.
23 There salute thee Epaphras, my fellowprisoner in Christ Jesus;
24 Marcus, Aristarchus, Demas, Lucas, my fellowlabourers.
25 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit. Amen.

The book is the last of Paul’s epistles and records a living illustration of 2 great doctrines in this age of grace: Imputation and Justification. Romans 5:6-9. Onesimus (name means “profitable”), a servant in Philemon’s house stole something valuable. He ran away and was arrested in Rome. Paul, in prison for preaching the gospel, led Onesimus to the Lord. Paul writes this letter to Philemon and sends it to Philemon by Onesimus. Paul illustrates imputation by taking the cost of replacing the goods upon himself. Philemon is to receive Onesimus with as much love as he would have given to Paul, had Paul been able to come. Philemon is to receive Onesimus now as “above a servant, a brother beloved.” That is Justification. The debt is paid by another (imputation) and the previous offender is accepted, above and beyond what he was before (justification).

WILL THE REAL DISPENSATIONALIST PLEASE STAND UP?

We were in the Amazon jungle in 1984 and met a tribal group that called themselves “Yanomami” (THE People) who were firmly convinced there were no other peoples on earth except themselves. Of course that proud, pagan idea even extended to the other Yanomami villages. When someone in one village died of infection, or was attacked by a jaguar, it had to be because someone in another village had cast an evil curse against them. The only answer was retaliation. Many missionaries have found themselves ducking the long 8′ curare tipped arrows flying from the bows of neighbor Yanomami villagers.

Preparing us for one of these attacks, a friend who was with us on this trip, related a lesson he had learned earlier.
During one of these attacks at a Yanomami mission station years before, he told us of his surprise when the veteran missionary, standing up in the open, yelled: “Stand up and let them see you! Otherwise, you may be accidentally hit by an arrow!” Our friend had found out the Yanomami wanted to kill each other, not the “white ghosts of Yanomami ancestors”.

Of course, when first seeing pale, white missionaries with the fantastic tools of deity such as flashlights, sticks of fire (matches), clothing not made of leaves, and coats that send water away, these beings made the Yanomami rethink their “only us and no more” position. A combined “theological/anthropological” committee met, and the consensus was spread throughout the villages: there was no mistake on their part, Yanomami are indeed the only people on earth. Did not the strangers come from the sky in a bird? Don’t they speak our language? They have white leaves that say the same words today the leaves said yesterday. They are the spirits of our ancestors, come back to visit us!

Failing to see the forest because of a few trees is not only found in the jungle; proud, exclusive club attitudes also thrive in USA churches, Bible study groups, and among individual Christians. It matters not that you claim Jesus Christ is God, it matters not that you have accepted Him as your Savior, it matters not that you believe He saves by His grace and there is nothing you can do to get it or keep it, it matters not that you believed ON Him and His work for your eternal salvation: “IF YOU DON’T AGREE IN TOTAL WITH OUR SYSTEM, WE CAN HAVE NO FELLOWSHIP WITH YOU.” This proud, know-it-all attitude implies that perhaps other Christians are not even saved since they are continually sinning against God by disobeying THIS EXCLUSIVE HYPER position.

The issue is not that every doctrine Hyper-Neo-Dispensationalists believe is wrong; I do not question their salvation or sincerity. In fact, my fellowship with them, as members of the body of Christ, is not affected by their foolish and popish edicts. I know Whom I have believed and His words are pure and sure. Like my friend who is now in glory, Dr. Herb Noe, whispered to me as we sat in a preachers’ meeting, upon hearing a preacher issue forth some silly demand: “All the popes are not in Rome.”

Many of the Hyper doctrines are sound and that is why their conclusions are so easily swallowed by gullible Christians. They believe in the Deity of Christ, salvation by grace, etc., and all of what men would call “fundamentals of the faith.” The error of Hyper-Dispensationalism lies in exaltation of a private interpretation that excludes much biblical truth; one verse here is combative to another verse there. Analogy of scripture is secondary to a divisive chopping apart passages and even books, so that the complimentary whole of the Bible is destroyed. Some small attempt is made to avoid this accusation by their critics, but the practical results and outcome of their system belies any real effect. Law and Grace are absolute opposites in their scheme. The Hyper view cannot realize the dual concept that a Christian is not under the Law but yet, in Christ, fulfills the Law, and thereby validates the unity between Law and Grace that proceeds from God, Who is Righteous, Just, Merciful, and Gracious. Baptism by the Spirit cannot co-exist with a water baptism of any kind for any purpose. Hypers cannot comprehend the many non-essential and non-effectual specks in their own eyes, for the bloated, ponderous beam they have crammed into their practice of theology. Absolute truth it is that man does not live by bread alone–but just try to live 6 months without any! Jesus’ never condemned non-essentials, His condemnation was reserved for those who put temporal matters above eternal values.

All men are dispensationalists, whether they call the grand division of any Bible translation “Old Covenant-New Covenant” or by the correct “Old Testament-New Testament”. Covenant and Testament do not carry the same definition in English or in Biblical Greek–a critical distinction both Hyper-Dispensationalists and Covenant Theologians have missed.

“Dispensation” is not strictly a period of time; the word by contextual definition is an administration or stewardship. Generally, a “dispenser” may give out soap, towels, candy, etc., at various times to various people. God gave (dispensed) the OT/NT. Anyone who recognizes that division, is in some sense, a “dispensationalist”.

When we read, “If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward: (Ephesians 3:2 KJV)” there is no specificity as to a “time boundary”. Some aspect of the eternal grace of God was given to Paul for the purpose of the church’s information. Sound interpretation allows that grace, or the application of it, did not necessarily begin with this revelation to Paul, what had already existed could have been simply revealed through him, then to others. This is important to note, because in a strict sense there are not various periods of time called “dispensations”. However, in a GENERAL sense, Bible teachers for many years have used the term for certain periods of time in which “Innocence” “Conscience” “Law”, etc., were characteristics of an age or time. Therefore, in my study chart we have used in Open Bible College since the 1970’s and painted in 1980 on an 18′ x 4′ canvas in acrylics, I simply designated sections of the KJB, in order as God ordained them, not as “Dispensation of Innocence” “Dispensation of Conscience” etc., but “1” “2” “3”, on through “7”, and indicated by brackets, between each number, the leading person in the previous administration or economy, (“1″[Adam] “2”[Noah] “3”[Abraham], etc. The chart is merely a teaching tool, and never have I claimed it to be infallible, or the only way to study the word of God, or “the doctrinal basis for salvation and fellowship.”

But what makes a Christian become a HYPER or a NEO dispensationalist or Berean? Hyper-anything in Bible teaching takes a Bible truth and twists, magnifies a portion, or exaggerates it into a false doctrine that is non-biblical in both spirit and letter. That main group which claims of the title “Berean” today are a far cry from the Bereans in Acts 17:11. Instead of “rightly dividing” the Bible with the result being edification and increased unity among Christians, the HYPER chops the Bible here and there, constructing a man made system that actually separates scripture from scripture, and Christians from other Christians. Here is an example of a current “Hyper-Dispensation” demand:
“We believe that Eph. 4:1-6 sets forth the doctrinal basis necessary for fellowship in the dispensation of grace.”
Listen to this man’s teaching and his private interpretation of Ephesians 4:1-6 and you will find exactly what he states and means in this preamble and disclaimer to his “Statement of Faith”. I do not give his name because I believe he is a saved man. Although wrong in some of his interpretation and applications, enough naming and attacking individuals has gone on among Christians. The world, flesh, and the devil has enough ammunition to harm the testimony of Christ; I will not give more. Instead, I will show the errors of the system and leave the man alone to answer to his Savior—and Judge. He already knows what I believe and I know very well what he believes. His teacher (now with the Lord) and I spent hours on the same subject, one-on-one, years ago.

What he does not say in his “detailed” Statement of Faith is his one main bone of contention. After you bite the various pieces of seemingly harmless bait, he sets his quantitative hook of Ephesians 4:1-6. The Hyper claims the usage of “one” in Ephesians MUST BE QUANTITATIVE, OR DEALING WITH THE NUMBER OF, RELATED TO EXISTENCE . HE INSISTS IT CAN NOT BE DEALING WITH EFFECTUAL OR ESSENTIAL QUALITY. According to Hyper interpretation, it is not One omniscient Lord among many lesser lords; it is not One Faith, the faith of Jesus Christ, essential and effectual beyond the weak or strong faith of man or creeds; it is not One Spirit, the Third Person of the Godhead, who is above all spirit beings; it is not One Body, the body of Christ, essential and above all material bodies, spiritually and physically; and it is not even One baptism that is essential to being a member of the body of Christ, among several other baptisms in the Bible. The man doesn’t recognize or know the rules of his own native (English) language.
The Hyper ASSUMES the only sense of ONE in Ephesians is, “there is only one that CAN EXIST AT THIS TIME” (while, by implication, God approved many Lords, Faiths, Gods, Baptisms, etc., in other periods of time. God only reduced them to One when Paul went to prison!!!!). By his extrapolation, during the so-called time of the dispensation of Grace (of which time or where it began, he has no Bible proof–only his guesswork) there can be no other baptism, of water or Spirit but the Baptism by the Spirit into the body of Christ (of which manner and how that body is formed, he has no scripture except the Acts epistle of 1 Corinthians 12:13. However, since he has previously determined that all Acts epistles were written before Paul really knew what he was doing, the Hyper cannot be sure that this One Baptism of the “Acts body” actually exists!)

Upon this conjectural and shifting sand of interpretation, the Hyper condemns the dreaded, carnal and even evil practice of water baptism-no matter the mode, no matter the meaning, no matter that Jesus was baptized, no matter that Jesus sent his disciples to baptize in His Name, no matter that Peter baptized, no matter that Philip baptized, no matter that Paul baptized, no matter that Paul never said “Don’t baptize”, no matter that Paul never repented of baptizing his converts after he got the “full revelation of when the dispensation of grace occurred and how it is applied” (according to the Hyper-Neo), no matter anything.

By forcing the “ones” of Ephesians 4 to be quantitative or number that exists, instead of quality or essentiality, he has excised himself from sane exegesis. There are right now as well as in the first century:
Many bodies (physical, heavenly, etc.), although essentially, “There is one body”: many spirits (angels, etc.) although there is essentially “one Spirit”: many lords (Lord Byron, Lord Nelson, etc.) although there is essentially “One Lord”: many different faiths (faith of a man, weak, strong, faith without works- dead faith, statement of faith, i.e., body of doctrine) but there is “ONE FAITH”, and only one, that guarantees your justification-THE FAITH OF JESUS CHRIST, your faith and mine is weak one moment and stronger the next, but always imperfect, THE FAITH OF JESUS CHRIST, HIS FAITHFULNESS, IS THE ONE FAITH THAT IS ESSENTIAL FOR JUSTIFICATION (Romans 3:22 KJB). There are several kinds of baptisms in the Bible, unto Moses, with water, in water, no water, for a future remission of sins, and many outside the Bible, but there is ONLY ONE BAPTISM THAT IS ESSENTIAL AND EFFECTUAL, THE BAPTISM BY THE SPIRIT OF GOD INTO THE BODY OF CHRIST (1 Corinthians 12:13 KJB. That is only found in an Acts epistle): “There is One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all” but there are many other “gods”(Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods…”John 10:34, 35 KJV)and there are many other “fathers” (“Father Abraham..” “all our fathers were baptized unto Moses…”, physical fathers, etc.) but there is ONLY ONE WE ADDRESS, “Our Father, which art in heaven, hallowed be thy name…” (Ephesians 4:4-6 KJB)
Now this phobia of anti-water baptism is magnified by the Hype-Neo even though his own selection of scripture as “the doctrinal basis of fellowship” warns him before he arrives at the “Ones” in verses 4-6:

“1 I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called,
2 With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love;
3 Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.” (Ephesians 4:1-3 KJV)

Somehow throwing your brother in Christ out of your fellowship because he does some non-essential practice that both of you agree does not save or make a man more spiritual, does not fit with Paul’s descriptive: “with all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love; Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace…” Especially when you do non-essential religious traditions yourself…such as, How about Sunday morning 11AM services? Want to try and justify your Wednesday prayer meeting in a prison epistle? We’ll even let you use an Acts epistle–go ahead. Shall we mention “church furniture”, design, and decor? Paul never built a “steeple house” (John Wesley) and even in Acts, Paul said that God “does not dwell in buildings made with hands”. Paul addressed churches “in thy house”. How about your modern advertising methods? Must we list other Hyper-Dispensational “traditionalism” such as church marriage ceremonies? Why, in the name of all that’s whatever, should a man stop half way on a path to total Hyperism??? Go all the way, man! God hates lukewarm, half in, half out, professions. Of course, “I speak as a fool” but sometimes in order to show…well, I think everybody but the Hyper will get the picture.

Lest some might think the above are trivial and not so serious, in the forthcoming book there is an entire chapter devoted to the doctrines of Paul’s Acts ministry–proven by the Hyper’s “Prison Ministry” to still be in effect. The Hyper-Neo-Dispensationalism system is a house of cards, easily broken down when even the books of Philippians-Colossians are believed. One example:
“Those things, which ye have both learned, and received, and heard, and seen in me, do: (PAST TENSE: LEARNED, RECEIVED, HEARD, SEEN IN ME, in the Acts period, DO (PRESENT TENSE: CONTINUE TO DO NOW) and the God of peace shall be with you.” (Philippians 4:9 KJB, my emphasis. The full book will be available August 1, 2014)

Bible with Bible, who could make Ephesians 4:1-6 (among Christians) the “doctrinal basis necessary for fellowship”? Even Paul, whom the Hyper-Neo claims to follow as the “pattern” never severed fellowship with the “carnal babes” in Corinth. With longsuffering and patience, and with charity (the bond of perfection) Paul carefully outlines and defines in 1 Corinthians all the Corinthian church problems, but he sought, and did continue his fellowship with them. All of us have “social circles” of close and far fellowship (some farther than others) but we do not have the right nor do we have the necessary wisdom to divide what God has joined together: the church, which is His body. This is not a plea for ecumenical sweetness and compromise, but when a man falls out with another brother in Christ over matters that both agree are non-essential for salvation and practical sanctification, somebody is making “mountains out of molehills”. It smacks too much of doctrines and practice like that of Seventh Day Adventists who claim that if you attend Sunday services, you have the mark of the Antichrist.

I have never read that our fellowship is based solely upon the interpretation or application of 6 verses in Ephesians.
I read that our fellowship is with the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ:
“That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.” (1 John 1:3 KJB)
I also read that God does the calling into fellowship with Jesus Christ and regarding the church at Corinth with all its errors, sin, and carnality, Paul says:
“God is faithful, by whom ye were called unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord.” (1 Corinthians 1:9 KJB)

At least the Yanomami repented and revised their exclusiveness. Evidently, jungle living is more conducive to the Bible truth in 1 Corinthians 8:2 than living in LA, Chicago, or Atlanta:
“And if any man think that he knoweth anything, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know.” (1 Corinthians 8:2)

Here are the sad, nebulous, and deceptive doctrines that characterize the Neo-Berean-Hyper-Dispensationalism. When followed to the logical end of such Bible interpretation, every Hyper must swallow “hook, line, and sinker” some form of the doctrines, or take none of them.

Basic to all of the following is the issue of which “Bible” is the perfect word of God. If it is NOT the King James Bible in your hand, you might as well throw your hands up, and “go drifting with the tide”. Some Hebrew, Greek, modern language translation will not be your sword and shield simply because you believe not ONE BIBLE among them, wholeheartedly. You are a practicing Gnostic, still trying to find out where absolute truth exists. You may squeal and yell about originals, but your infallible anchor line has broken. Here are the tenets of the Hyper-Neo:

      The body of Christ could not exist until Paul knew something about it. SCRIPTURE VERSE: 0
      Anyone who baptizes converts (by whatever mode, for whatever reason) is disobedient to God. SCRIPTURE VERSE: 0
      The body of Christ (the body mentioned in Ephesians) did not begin or become functional, until Paul received that revelation in prison. SCRIPTURE VERSE: 0. This popish decree fabricates that the body began SOMEWHERE in “Mid Acts”. Mid-Acts theology is a “take your pick’ of Acts 9-?? chapters–except chapter 28”. A surer sign of confused doctrinal guesswork cannot be found anywhere! Mid-Acts Hypers believe Paul did not yet have all the revelation of the “one body”, even in Acts, but the mid-Acts hypothesis is their infallible rule that governs their Christian fellowship.
      Paul baptized, observed the Lord’s Supper, and in fact throughout Acts, along with the books he wrote during that period, he was following the Kingdom program and gradually, piece by piece, learning God’s plan. SCRIPTURE VERSE: 0
      The order of the books in the KJB is incorrect, along with many of the words. SCRIPTURE VERSE: 0
      The “baptism by the Spirit into the body” (1 Cor 12:13) is merely an “anointing” of the Spirit, nobody is actually “put into” anything in 1 Corinthians 12:13. It is like the nation of Israel being “baptized unto Moses”(1 Cor 10:1). SCRIPTURE VERSE: 0
      The body of Christ mentioned in 1Corinthians 12 is NOT the same as the body of Christ in Ephesians. SCRIPTURE VERSE: 0
      Those who follow the “high calling” of Philippians 3:14 will not go with, or after those lower (by Hyper definition) Christians in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 to meet the Lord. The Hypers will go BEFORE all others. SCRIPTURE VERSE: 0
      Only those who thoroughly understand and teach these things above, will occupy a select place in the “Super-Heavens” in eternity: the real, genuine, absolutely perfect CHURCHOFTHEONEBODY! (Teaching of Charles H. Welch, great-grandfather of all Hypers and Neos.) SCRIPTURE VERSE: 0

The inevitable result of all this foolish system is to spend almost all the ministry in getting people to accept the above. Evangelism dies and proselytization becomes the priority.

Wow! Aren’t you glad that in eternity you will be recognized as the “super body of Christ”(according to the deceased Hypers, C.H. Welch, E.C. Moore, and others)–far above those spiritual babies like William Tyndale, John Rogers, Martin Luther, John Calvin, all 54 translators of the KJB, John Wesley, Sam Jones, Peter Cartwright, Fanny Crosby, D.L. Moody, C.I. Scofield, Arno Gaebelein, Bob Jones Sr., Lee Roberson, Peter Ruckman, M.R. DeHaan, etc., plus thousands of poor tribal Christians who struggle to learn the few Bible verses in their language, along with millions upon millions of unknown Christians who lived and died, some that sealed with their blood the testimony of Jesus Christ. Sitting up there on your high horse above all those who knew not what you claim to know, all because you practiced the “high calling” matters—you really will be “a trophy of his grace”.

Good advice to all of us is that we cannot put the word of God into our little theological box. God’s word is alive. (Hebrews 4:12) We will have more success in handling a man-eating 850 pound male lion with a fly swatter than try to force the word of God into any puny system of man.

Hyper-Neo-Dispensationalists are hard to corner. Persecuted in one text, they flee to another. Not all Hyper-dispensationalists have come to the “perfection” that Charles H. Welch did (9). Undisputed identification of all Hypers are numbers 1-5 above. Every teacher on his way to being a Hyper teaches that water baptism is disobedience to God.

All dispensational Bible teachers are not Hyper-Dispensationalists. Hypers DEMAND a denial of water baptism.
To those who have begun to whine over my comments, I offer this one illustrative advice: Dr. Robert G. Lee stood at the door of the church after delivering his sermon, “I Love Jesus Because…”. As the morning crowd exited, one woman said, “I didn’t like your sermon today, Dr. Lee”. Dr. Lee, ever the quick wit, replied, “The devil didn’t either, Sister. Classify yourself and come back next Sunday”.

So, if my above remarks make your eyes water or blood pressure rise, all I can say is, “if the shoe fits, wear it. If not, I wasn’t talking about you.”

We should obey the first principle of “rightly dividing” the word of truth: Study to shew THYSELF APPROVED UNTO GOD” instead of showing everybody else what they must do. Far better to follow the “prison epistle” order to “work out YOUR OWN salvation, with FEAR and TREMBLING.” (2 Timothy 2:15; Philippians 2:12)

(Excerpts from “The Danger and Deception of Hyper-Dispensationalism” by Dave Reese available August 1, 2014)

Back to Top