There is a prevalent teaching today in Christianity that God’s people are duty-bound to forgive anyone and everyone at all times and in all circumstances. A new teaching has been spreading for several years that Christians should never hold anything against anybody for any reason -- forgive and forget.

Just a couple years ago, a popular fundamentalist college president instructed his students to go back to their rooms and write letters of forgiveness to parents or relatives who had physically "abused" them while growing up, but there was no condition of repentance necessary for the "forgiveness." In fact, he stated quite boldly that the students were under obligation to forgive their abusers, even if those abusers had never repented. (Now, if they were under obligation to forgive, would that president have forgiven any student who did not forgive his abusers?)

Such a new teaching is a product of the weak and ignorant religion of the day. It is a new, cheap kind of forgiveness about which God knows nothing – a forgiveness which does not require repentance.

Matthew 18:21-22 is often used to teach this new, cheap forgiveness - "Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? Till seven times? Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven."

The amazing thing about this issue is that it only reveals people’s great ignorance of the simple teachings of the Bible and the contexts surrounding Biblical accounts. One need only read the chapter a few verses earlier to find the guidelines for church discipline.

Verses 15-20 speak about how to handle a brother who has sinned against you. It closes saying that if he will not hear you, two witnesses or the church, he is to be treated as if he were a heathen man – that is, you are not to forgive him until he repents!

The Lord’s prayer says, "forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors" (Matt. 6:12). And Christ emphasized even more—- "if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses" (vs. 15).

God himself does not forgive everyone, for there is a hell where people are tormented for eternity. But even among his own children, the Bible expressly states that God will hold your trespasses against you "if ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their trespasses" (Matt. 18:35).

If God believed in the same kind of cheap forgiveness taught in most effeminate churches today, He would not punish anyone or send anyone to hell; but rather, He would be quite permissive, lax and lenient like cursed Eli.

God does not, nor has He, nor will He ever forgive all people.

Forgiveness is not meted out like lottery tickets to guilty souls:

Forgiveness is God’s mercy and grace He shows only to those who repent -- "If we confess our sins [only if we confess], he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness" (I John 1:9). If we confess -- say the same thing -- speak the truth about the vileness and guiltiness of our sins against a holy God - then, God will forgive us for the sake of his Son, who bore our sins in his own body on the tree, paying the full price we owed, granting us repentance, faith and life.

God’s forgiveness is not lenient, lax or permissive. God’s forgiveness is just and righteous and true. The Bible teaches a just and righteous forgiveness; it does not teach a cheap and shallow forgiveness. It was the precious blood of Christ which provided the basis for God to forgive us -- justly.

The brother whom we are to forgive 70 x 7 times is the one who comes to us in repentance. Luke 17:3 is the exact same account as Matthew 18:21-22 and it states, "if thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him." That means that if he does not repent, you are sinning by forgiving him. He is to be rebuked until he repents, then – and only then -- he is to be forgiven.

Jeremiah prayed against those who had plotted his destruction,

"Forgive not their iniquity, neither blot out their sin from thy sight, but let them be overthrown before thee; deal thus with them in the time of thine anger" (18:23). The God of Jeremiah is strangely lacking in most fundamental churches today. Will they not have Jeremiah’s God? Will they have God to be patterned after their own liking? God holds some men accountable, delivering them to the tormentors till they pay all that is due – for eternity (Matt. 18:34). They are not, nor ever shall be forgiven.

God’s forgiveness is only reserved for those who have first called upon Him for mercy. David prayed "For thou, Lord, art good, and ready to forgive; and plenteous in mercy unto all them that call upon thee" (Psalm 86:5). As God is ready to forgive the penitent sinners who come to him for salvation, so should we be ready to forgive our penitent brethren, who come to us in godly sorrow and sincerity.

Imagine for a moment in what state our country would be, if everybody unconditionally forgave everyone! There would be no jails or punishment for criminals, since crimes would be constantly forgiven by all the victims. There would be therefore no court system or enforcement of the law, since all breaches of the law would automatically be forgiven.

That college president preached himself out of over a dozen different majors and courses he offered in his own school! Why be a policeman if you can forgive? Why be a lawyer if there are no parties who are filing charges? Imagine the anarchy, foolishness and injustice a preacher can propagate when he wrests God’s word and tries new approaches to religion!

The next time you hear a stupid message on cheap forgiveness, I challenge you to take the keys to the guy’s car and drive it away. You will see very quickly how much he really believes that foolish nonsense he’s been expecting you to buy into. Now, if that preacher dares to call the law on you for taking his car, he is a liar and a hypocrite to teach unconditional forgiveness, for by calling the law against you, he has not forgiven you!

Now, if you follow through with the previous recommended suggestions, the next thing you should do is to tell him you’re sorry once you’ve been caught, ask for his forgiveness, but keep his car. Do you think he would be able to forgive you from his heart? If so, let me know where he keeps the deed to his house.

To ask for his forgiveness and to keep his car is to make the guy look like a fool, and that is how so many people treat God. They expect God to forgive them whenever they utter the magic words. But God is not the fool many would have him to be.

When Zacchaeus really repented, he said to Christ, "Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have taken any thing from any man by false accusation, I restore him fourfold." And Christ said to Zacchaeus, "This day is salvation come to this house..." (Luke 19:1-10).

True repentance makes right past wrongs, It does not say like so many do today, "Well, all my past sinful life is under the blood now!" When a man really repents, he does all he can to rectify past wrongs. Jonah did not say while in the fish’s belly, "Well, I’ll just put my old life behind me." No, he repeated and made right what he should have done. When men repent, salvation is the result.

The Bible says that it is God who grants men repentance to the acknowledging of the truth, for men are blinded prisoners taken captive by the devil at his will (II Tim. 2:25-26). So, all to whom God graciously grants repentance are forgiven for Jesus’ sake.

God forgives us when we do not have the power or ability to make right past wrongs. We stole the invaluable car, wrecked it and have nothing to pay -- how can we prove that we are truly penitent? We prove it the rest of our lives by serving him as his slave -- Jesus paid it all; all to him I owe. And He even gives us a blessed servitude!

The other verse most often used to teach a cheap forgiveness is Christ’s prayer on the cross, "Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do" (Luke 23:34).

This was hardly an occasion where Christ was praying for the forgiveness of the impenitent -- the very verse explains itself-- "for they know not what they do." What were they doing? They were literally, physically crucifying the Son of God, the Creator, the Lord, the Word, the Wisdom of God, the Savior of the World, the friend of sinners, the only man in history who had never sinned - and those stupid men didn’t even know it! Christ prayed that they would be forgiven for their ignorance. Paul says in the first book of Corinthians, "for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory" (2:8). Christ was not praying for God to take them to heaven (even though some of them may have been saved at a later date) but to forgive them for doing the most heinous crime in all of history -- ignorantly.

Christ’s prayer was answered -- His prayers are always answered. It was answered physically for those men immediately, and spiritually for all of us his children throughout time, who have crucified him with our own sins, nailing him to the tree. God physically forgave those men for their ignorance of nailing Christ to the cross, and He spiritually forgave all of us for nailing him to the cross. The significance is serious, because all men are not forgiven -- only the men whose sins Christ was bearing in his own body on the tree. And if Christ died for every man, woman, boy and girl in the world, then God has forgiven everybody, or Christ’s prayer was rejected. And if Christ’s prayer was rejected, then He does not qualify to be our Savior.

The forgiveness of Christ was no cheap leniency; it cost Christ His own blood, pain, sorrow, agony and death. And when Christ forgives, God forgets.

"Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you, Who by him do believe in God, that raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God" (I Peter 1:18-21).

back to top

Just suppose for a moment what would happen the next twenty years if God did not save a single soul in the entire world. There is no command or promise in the Bible that says it will happen, but neither is there a promise that says it won’t happen. In fact, the Scriptures promise that God will save a remnant -- not a large number -- and a remnant can last for years without being increased.

There were only eight people, in the days of Noah, who went into the Ark as a remnant saved upon the earth by God, yet few people ever stop to consider that Noah preached faithfully for 120 years. It can be fairly deduced that prior to the flood, the earth may have actually gone 120 years or more without a single soul having been saved. It could have gone quite a few years after the flood before a soul was saved as well.

What makes the supposition so significant is that the Bible does say that many are on the broad way while only a few are on the narrow way to heaven. The Bible does say that evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse on the earth. The Bible does say that because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold. The Bible does ask, When the Son of man returns, shall he find faith on the earth? The Bible does say, As it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be at the coming of the Son of man.

Granted, due to man’s shorter life span today, this earth could not last 120 years without a single soul being saved for the simple fact that all the Christians would die, and there would be no remnant left as the Bible promises there will be.

So, just suppose that for the next twenty years, only the present, born-again believers who don’t pass away will be the only Christians on earth. Just suppose -- as Acts says that the Lord added to the church "such as should be saved" -- that none are added for the next twenty years --

What would be different?

Would churches continue to grow at the same rate?

Would building programs continue right on schedule?

Would baptisms continue as before?

Would Christian schools continue, unchanged?

Would positions in Christian schools be easily and readily filled by qualified young teachers?

Would youth groups, Awanas, Vacation Bible Schools and kids camps continue to operate, unhindered?

Would evangelistic crusades and "revivals" continue unabated?

Would "altar calls" continue to produce the same results?

Would young missionaries continue to feel "called of God" to the field?

Would preachers continue to get people saved?

In short, If the saving work of God were halted for twenty years, would Christianity today evidence it? or would most people in their busy man-made programs even be able to tell, as Samson, who whist not that the Holy Ghost had departed from him?

Carry on ... carry on.

We now have more copies available to those interested in a supplement to their church hymnbook. Many have already found the little book -- which has now been expanded to over 111 different songs -- to be quite a blessing just to have on hand, or as a supplemental devotional. If you are tired of contemporary choruses, charismatic drivel and Ron Hamilton-style nursery rhymes, write for a copy of this fine songbook today!

The following poem is one that was added to the latest edition -.

"Dies Irae"
Tr. by Sir Walter Scott, 1805

Tune: Federal Street

The day of wrath the dreadful day,
When heav’n and earth shall pass away!
What pow’r shall be the sinner’s stay?
How shall he meet that dreadful day?

When, shriv’ling like a parched scroll,
The flaming heav’ns together roll,
And louder yet, and yet more dread,
Resounds the trump that wakes the dead?

O, on that day, that wrathful day,
When man to judgment wakes from clay,
Be Thou, O Christ, the sinner’s stay,
Tho’ heav’n and earth shall pass away. Amen.

--------------------------

The following is a sample of our tracts available --

by Charles P. Jones

When judgment day is drawing nigh,
When God the works of man shall try,
When east and west the fire shall roll,
How will it be with your poor soul?

When wicked men his wrath shall see,
And to the rocks and mountains flee,
When hills and mountains flee away,
When all the works of men decay,
Where shall you be?

When heaven and earth as some great scroll,
Shall from God’s angry presence roll,
When all the saints redeemed shall stand,
Forever blest at God’s right hand,
Where shall you be?

All trouble done, all conflict past,
And old Apollyon bound at last,
When Christ shall reign from shore to shore,
And peace abide forever more,
Where shall you be?

Other Gospel tracts by Pastor Fellows are available as well. They include --

The Resurrection of the Body -- the cornerstone of Christianity

The Eternal Sonship of Christ -- good to give to cults

A Dying Man to Dying Men -- death brings all into perspective

Forgiveness - God’s Forgiveness and man’s forgiveness

Pretenders -- good to give to religious hypocrites

How Can You Escape the Damnation of Help – powerful!

An Earnest Call/or Biblical Repentance -- on godly sorrow

The LORD -- a great many verses which magnify the Lord

"Smile, God loves you "-- A Theological Absurdity -- well said

The Prophet’s Forgotten Prayer -- why hast thou made us to err?

Hybrids: A Perversion of God’s Created Order-- coming famine

Parents --and the general disregard for the souls of their children

Sin: Its plague and its cure -- on the heinousness of sin

Reading and Writing -- on/he importance of reading good books

Questions that need to be posed-- about Roman Catholicism

Suffering? -- Why there is so much suffering

Armada -- showing God’s hand in history, the Spanish Armada

Has God ever taught You -- on real vs. temporal wealth

Holy, Holy, Holy - on the holiness of God

Fifteen Reasons why God is just to damn sinners -- Romans 1

On Divorce -— how to get it (just kidding)

When? -- Many say they intend to become religious, one day

A Roman Miracle -- a good poem mocking transubstantiation

Where Shall You Be? – When judgment day is done -- a poem

We’ll take these direct and well-written tracts any day above the generic, Arminian Roaming road tracts --which are just about as helpful in quoting scripture as 1)"Judas went out and hanged himself" 2)"Go thou and do likewise" 3) "what thou doest, do quickly." -- The only drawback would be that in this case, you wouldn’t have people writing in to the address saying that they had done it and what time it was.

Pastor Fellows has been working on getting his fourth book published. It deals with a history, of banking in the United States -- for better or worse. If you would like to help with the expenses of publishing this book, it would be appreciated. Other books written by Pastor Timothy Fellows, Sr. are available. They include --

God Hath Spoken -- deals with the inspiration of the Bible.

The God Who Is -- deals with the attributes of God.

Letters -- deals with current issues from a Biblical perspective

Robert L. Dabney (1891) wrote a defense of I John 5:7(KJB) in which he said:

First, if it be made [the excision], the masculine article, numeral, and particle . . . are made to agree directly with three neuters -- an insuperable and very bald grammatical difficulty.

But if the disputed words are allowed to stand, they agree directly with two masculines and one neuter noun. . . where, according to a well known rule of syntax, the masculine among the group controls the gender over a neuter connected with them.

Second, if the excision is made, the eighth verse coming next to the sixth, gives us a very bald and awkward, and apparently meaningless, repetition of the Spirit’s witness twice in immediate succession.

Third, if the excision is made, then the proposition at the end of the eighth verse, [and these three agree in one], contains an unintelligible reference..." And these three agree to that (aforesaid) One," ...What is that aforesaid unity to which these three agree? If the seventh verse is excinded, there is none... Let the seventh verse stand, and all is clear the three earthly witnesses testify to that aforementioned unity which the Father, Word, and Spirit constitute.

R. L. Dabney, Discussion of Robert Lewis Dabney (Carlisle, Bonnie of Trust, 1961, revised edition), p. 1061-2.

(Front In Defense of 1st John 5 7 by Dr. Phil Stringer)

Dr. Frank Logsdon, Co-Chairman of the N.A.S.B. translation committee said:

"I must, under God, renounce every attachment to the New American Standard Version. 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 translators: I wrote the preface...I’m in trouble: I can’t refute these arguments; its wrong, terribly wrong: its frighteningly wrong; and what am I going In do about it?

When questions began to reach me at first I was quite offended . . . I used to laugh with the others... However in attempting to answer, I began to sense that something was not right about the New American Standard Version. I can no longer ignore these criticisms I am hearing and I can’t refuse them. The deletions are absolutely frightening ... there are so many... Are we so naive that we do not expect Satanic deception in all of this?

Upon investigation, I wrote my dear friend, Mr. Lockman, explaining that I was forced to renounce all attachment to the NASB. The product is grievous to my heart and helps to complicate matters in these already troublous times . . . I don’t want anything to do with it.

The finest leaders that we have today... haven’t gone into it [the new versions’ use of a corrupted Greek text], just as I hadn’t gone into it... that’s how easily one can be deceived... I’m going to talk to him [Dr. George Sweeting, president of Moody Bible Institute] about these things.

You can say the Authorized Version [KJV] is absolutely correct. How correct? 100% correct! ... I believe the Spirit of God led the translators of the Authorized Version."

(The History of the English Bible, Dr. Phil Stringer pp. 19-20)

back to top

Bible believers are constantly bombarded by Greek experts, who claim to have special insight to the hidden nuggets of the Greek N.T., which cannot be found in the plain, ordinary English of the King James Bible. Most believers, not proficient in the Greek, may lack a refuting authority for such claims. Fortunately, most Bible believers are wisely either skeptical or suspicious regarding that which they cannot read, trusting only in that which they can read, thus escaping the pitfalls of blindly following after the claims of these new age Rosicrucians.

Just as the King James Bible is rich in synonyms (purposely according to its translators), the Greek N.T. is also rich in synonyms. Both Greek and English synonyms fit into different contexts or blend into the rhythm of the text more suitably than others, Sometimes, one Greek word is translated by more than one English synonym; at other times, multiple Greek synonyms are represented by one English word.

W.E. Vine, Bible Corrector First Class, confesses, and admits, regarding the Greek word for "love" (AGAPAO), "enquiry into its use (AGAPAO), whether in Greek literature or in the Septuagint throws but little light upon its distinctive meaning in the N.T." In other words guy distinction must be found within the N.T., for it cannot be found in other Greek literature. It is not always easy to confine Bible correctors to the scriptures. So, thank you, Mr. Vine!

The following passages test both the Greek Bible teachers/ experts’ honesty and accuracy, as they claim there is a radical distinction between the Greek noun "AGAPE" & the Greek verb "AGAPAO" as opposed to the Greek "PHILEO," all translated "love" in the King James Bible, (with the exception of where the Greek noun "AGAPE" is translated "charity").

AGAPE (noun) and AGAPAO (verb)

... I loved (‘AHAB) Jacob... -- Mal 1:2

... Jacob have I loved (AGAPAO) --Rom. 9:13

... thou shalt love (‘AHAB) thy neighbour as thyself: -- Lev 19:18

... thou shalt love (‘AHAB) the LORD thy God with all thine heart...-- Deut 6:5

... Thou shall love (AGAPAO) the Lord thy God with all day heart... Thou shall love (AGAPAO) thy neighbour thyself. -- Matt. 22:37-39

... Demas hath forsaken me having loved (AGAPAO) this present world... -- 2 Tim. 4:10

... men loved (AGAPAO) darkness rather than light -- John 3:19

... For they loved (AGAPAO) the praise of men more than the praise of God. -- John 12:43

... sinners also love (AGAPAO) those that love them. -- Luke 6:32

The theories, which we have heard regarding the word "AGAPE" (which some tell us is the highest form of love) are many, i.e., selfless love, intimate love, moral love, spiritual love, and Christian love. Could Demas actually have had a selfless or spiritual or Christian or moral love for this present world? Is it possible for sinners to have the same kind of selfless, moral, spiritual love that saved people have? Can darkness (John 3:19), praise of men (John 12:43), masters (Matt 6:4), the world (I John 2:15; 2 Tim. 4:10) nations (Luke 7:5), creditors (Luke 7:42), wages of unrighteousness (2

2:15), life (I Pet 3:10) be loved in such away?

Strong tells us that the Hebrew word for love, "‘AHAB" (Lev. 19:l8), means "to have affection for (sexually or otherwise)" Could Matthew (Matt. 22:37-39) have mis-rendered the Hebrew word for "love" of God and one’s neighbour? Or is the "original" Hebrew word for "love" in error (for one’s neighbor -- Lev 19:18 or for God –Deut. 6:5 or for women – 2 Sam. 13:1; 1 Kings 11:1; 2 Chron. 26:10)? Could Paul have mis-rendered the Hebrew word for love regarding Jacob (Mal. 1:2 and Rom. 9:13)? Are both the Hebrew and the English words for love too inclusive and in need of correction?

PHILEO

... the Father himself loveth (PHILEO) you, because ye have loved (PHILEO) me... - John 16:27

... If any man love (PHILEO) not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema... -- I Cor. 16:22

... For the Father loveth (PHILEO) the Son... -- John 5:20

...Greet them that love (PHILEO) us in the faith. -- Titus 3:15

We are told by the Greek experts that the Greek word "PHILEO" means only a casual or friendly type of love. Does God love the saints casually because they love His Son casually? Should we love our brothers in the faith casually? Should we love the Lord Jesus Christ casually? Does the Father love the Son or us casually? Is love in the faith casual?

Puzzling Greek Cross-references

... Then Peter...seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved (AGAPAO) -- John 21:20 (19:26; 21:7)

... She... cometh... to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved (PHILEO)... -- John 20:2

... For whom the Lord loveth (AGAPAO) he chasteneth...-- Heb. 12:6

... As many as I love (PHILEO), I rebuke and chasten... -- Rev. 3:19

... ye love (AGAPAO) the uppermost seats in the synagogues, and greetings in the markets. – Luke 11:43

... love (PHILEO) greetings in the markets, and the highest seats in the synagogues ... -- Luke 20:46

Why would John tell us that Jesus loved that disciple intimately, deeply, selflessly, and spiritually in one place but tell us in another that Jesus loved him only casually? Why would Luke tell us that the Pharisees loved "greetings" and "uppermost seats" in the synagogue intimately, deeply, selflessly, morally, or spiritually in one place but tell us in another place that they only loved these things casually?

Is Phileo Love or Agape Love Brotherly Love?

But as touching brotherly love (Philadelphia)... ye yourselves are taught of God to love (AGAPAO) one another. -- I Th. 4:9

...obeying the truth...unto unfeigned love of the brethren (Philadelphia), see that ye love (AGAPAO) one another... – I Peter 1:22

If our Bible correcting friends are correct, it would seem that the word for brotherly love or love for the brethren would be based on the higher, more intimate, deep, selfless, spiritual Greek word "AGAPAO," rather than on the casual Greek word "PHILEO," but this is not the case. But then, King James Onlys are ignorant and don’t understand. Or do we? AGAPE or PHILEO Thou Me?

...Jesus saith to Simon Peter...lovest (AGAPAO) thou me more than these? He saith unto him again the second time...lovest (AGAPAO) thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love (PHILEO) thee... He saith unto him again the THIRD time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest (PHILEO) thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the THIRD time, Lovest (PHILEO) thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love (PHILEO) thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep. – John 21:15-17

Self styled Greek expositors go bonkers with this passage, seeking to get something out of the passage that is not there, while they miss the main point that Peter was asked this question three times because he denied his Lord three times. Their idea, however, is that Jesus was asking Peter, with the higher Greek word (AGAPAO), if he loved Him deeply and intimately.

Supposing that Jesus thought Peter fudged by using the lower Greek love word (PHILEO), Jesus repeated the question three times to Peter. But Bible correctors have missed something. It says that Jesus said to Peter the "THIRD TIME, Lovest (PHILEO) thou me?" Now, poor ignorant Bible believers understand this to mean that the first and second time were the same as the third time. Either the Greek matching words are in error or it doesn’t make a hill of beans worth a difference which Greek words, "AGAPAO" or "PHILEO," are used in either place. Selah! Ho Hum!

---by Herb Evans

back to top

What about Easter in the King James Bible? Well, here is the crowning point of Bible correcting scholarship, the word "EASTER." Bible correctors and experts (fellows who used to be spurts) lecture us that the Greek "PASCHA" means "Passover" and that the King James translators mistranslated it in Acts 12:4. Have they finally pinned Astarte, Easter Bunnies, and Easter eggs on King James Onlys? We think not!

Bible correctors have layd (Old English spelling for laid) some mighty big "Easter" eggs (or should we say "pask eggs" or Passover eggs—Oxford English Dictionary, 1933, Vol. III), in this regard, making "much ado about nothing." Could it be that they did not receive an Ester basket, when they were small fries? Could their real motives, for correcting the KJB, be that they are mad at the Easter Bunny?

The word "Easter" was chosen by Tyndale to supply a much needed English word in the absence of an English word for Jewish feast. A word for spring feast, Easter, was available, so Tyndale used it throughout his New Testament. Later, Tyndale "invented" a new word (Passover), which he used in his Old Testament. Subsequent English Bibles used both words (even in expressions like the "Easter lamb"), Tyndale is responsible for both Bible words.

Tyndale’s Bible (1525)

The first English Bible, from the so-called "original" Greek, translates "PASCHA" –"paschal lamb" in Matthew 26:17, "ester" in the next verse (26:18), and "ester lambe" in the next verse (26:19). Also, it translates it "pascall lambe" in Mark 14:12 and "ester lambe" in Mark 14:14, 16. Then it has the nerve to translate I Cor. 5:7, "Christ oure ester lambe is offered up for us."

The Great Bible (1539)

The old "great Bible" renders the Greek "PASCHA"—"Passover" in Matthew 26:17, "Easter" in the next verse (26:18), and "passeover" in the following verse (26:19). Huh? Could the Passover feast and the Easter feast (spring feast) really be used synonymously? Well, that rendering could still be a fluke. Yet, the "great Bible" translates "PASCHA" – the "Jewes Easter" AND "Easter" in John 11:55. HMMMMM!

The Bishop’s Bible (1568)

And what about the old Bishop’s Bible? Well, it translates "PASCHA" – "Easter" twice in John 11:55 and "passeover" in the very next verse (12:1).

The 1933 Oxford Dictionary

The Oxford Dictionary, 1933, Oxford University Press, Vol. III, gives the secondary and obsolete definition of "Easter" as the "Jewish Passover," citing six quotations from ancient English literature, dating from 971 to 1611, which used the word Easter in reference to the "Jewish Passover."

Evidently, the inferior scholars from Oxford, Cambridge, and West Minster (who were often fluent in several languages) were not troubled by the things, which bother the superior scholars of our time. And, what about "Oster (Easter)" in Martin Luther’s German Bible? Nah! You really wouldn’t want to go into that. It gets worse! (Ich nicht Nazi, Ich Polski! Schiessen Sie nicht!)

---by Herb Evans

OPEN BOOK TEST FOR BIBLE CORRECTORS

 1.__________________________ is given by inspiration of God

1. the first manuscript of each Bible Book
2. copies of inspired originals
3. lost originals and/or copies
4. possessed scripture
5. all the above

2. ________________ scripture is given by inspiration of God.

1. All
2. Some
3. Only the inspired scripture
4. Uninspired scripture
5. All the above

 3. All scripture__________ given by inspiration of God

1. was
2. is
3. might be
4. that is
5. all the above

 4. All scripture is ____by inspiration of God.

1. transmitted once
2. remaining in heaven
3. given
4. extant
5. all the above

 5. All scripture is given by ________of God.

1. one time transmission
2. inspired apostles and prophets
3. those born along by the Spirit
4. inspiration
5. all the above

 6. All scripture is given by inspiration of

1. textual critics and linguists
2. church councils and canons
3. God
4. Bible critics
5. all the above

 7. All scripture...is ___________________

1. profitable
2. not profitable, being lost
3. profitable in conjunction with extra scriptural sources
4. profitable in conjunction with the Greek and Hebrew
5. all the above

 8. All scripture...is profitable for ________________--

1. (all) doctrine
2. (some) doctrine
3. only doctrine that does not concern the Bible itself
4. doctrine in the original languages
5. all the above

 9. All scripture...is profitable for ___________________

1. reproof (of Ruckmanites)
2. reproof (of anyone, including Bible correctors)
3. reproof (of Everyone but scholars and linguists)
4. reproof of any heresy but Bible tampering
5. all the above

 10. All scripture ...is profitable for ________________

1. correction (of all extra-scriptural views)
2. correction (of King James Onlies)
3. correction (of the King James Bible)
4. correction (of only non-issues)
5. all the above

 11. All scripture...is profitable for ____________________

1. instruction (in Greek and Hebrew)
2. instruction (in history)
3. instruction (in textual criticism)
4. instruction (in righteousness)
5. all the above

 12. All scripture...is profitable that the ___________________

1. Hebrew and Greek scholar
2. Bible Corrector
3. Textual critic and historian
4. Man of God
5. None of the above

 13. All scripture...is profitable that the man of God may___________

1. be perfect
2. be obligated to the scholars and linguists
3. be perfect only insomuch as he uses other sources of truth
4. be uncertain about what he reads and preaches
5. all the above

 14. All scripture...is profitable that the man of God may____________

1. be partly furnished
2. be throughly furnished
3. be furnished until more truth is discovered
4. be throughly impoverished in having the real scriptures
5. none of the above

 15. All scripture...is profitable that the man of God may be throughly furnished unto______________

1. some good works
2. only the good works that don't involve Bible choosing
3. all good works
4. all good works except those that promote the Bible as being magnified above God's name
5. all the above

-- by Herb Evans

"The Lord spoke to me and I don't know if this is true or not" Benny Hin

Here let me add a warning against tampering with the Word of God. No habit can be more ruinous to the soul. It is cool, contemptuous impertinence to sit down and correct your Maker, and it tends to make the heart harder than a milstone. We remember one who used a pen knife on his Bible, and it was not long before he had given up all his former beliefs. The spirit of reverence is healthy, but the impertinence of criticizing the inspired Word is destructive to all proper feeling towards God.

If ever a man does feel his need of a Savior after treating Scripture with a proud, critical spirit, he is very apt to find his conscience standing in the way and hindering him from comfort by reminding him of ill-treatment of the sacred Word. It comes hard to him to draw consolation out of passages of the Bible which he has treated cavalierly, or even set aside all together as unworthy of consideration. In his distress the sacred texts seem to laugh at his calamity. When the time of need comes, the wells which he stopped with stones yield no water for his thirst. Beware when you despise a Scripture, lest you cast away the 0nly friend that can help you in the hour of agony.

A certain German duke was accustomed to call upon his servant to read a chapter of the Bible to him every morning. When anything did not square with his judgment, he would sternly cry, "Hans, strike that out." At length Hans paused a long time before he began to read. He fumbled over the book, until his master called out. "Hans, why do you not read?" Then Hans answered, "Sir there is hardly any thing left. It is all struck out!" One day his master’s objections had run one way, and another day they had taken another turn. Each time another set of passages was blotted out until nothing was left to instruct or comfort him.

Let us not destroy our mercies by carping criticism. We may yet need those promises which appear needless, and those portions of Holy Scriptures which have been the most assailed by skeptics may yet prove essential to our very lives. Therefore, let us guard the precious treasure of the Bible, and determine never to resign a single line of it."

"They that observe lying vanities forsake their own mercy."