Dividing Line ( James White ) Reply by Will Kinney

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Will Kinney on the Dividing Line (With Continued Discussion of Theology)

Posted in Uncategorized | 4 Comments

The Six Lies Modern Scholarship Tells Us, a post by Will Kinney

Six Lies Modern Scholarship Tells Us

The Six Lies Modern Scholarship Tells  Us  


Brother Dave Flang and I have now made a teaching video of this topic that you can listen to on Youtube. If you prefer, you may listen to it here – This is Part One where we discuss the first two lies.



Lie Number One – We now have older and better manuscripts.


James White’s tells us in his book, The King James Only Controversy, on pages 152-153  “Every one of the papyrus manuscripts we have discovered has been a representative of the Alexandrian, not the Byzantine text type” and “The early Fathers who wrote at this time did not use the Byzantine text-type” and “the early translations of the New Testament reveals that they were done on the basis of the Alexandrian type manuscripts, not the Byzantine text-type” and “the early church fathers who wrote during the early centuries give no evidence in their citations of a familiarity with the Byzantine text-type”. 


These are such huge whoppers I could not believe he actually wrote this totally false information in his book.


There is tons of evidence that even the early papyrus manuscripts, all of which came from Alexandria Egypt, were a mixed bag and there are many Byzantine readings found in them where they agree with the KJB readings and not the Westcott-Hort Alexandrian copies of Sinaiticus and Vaticanus.


Furthermore, concerning the church Fathers, John Burgon compiled over 86,000 citations and quotes of the church Fathers and found that not only did the Textus Receptus readings exist, but they predominated.


The early versions like the Old Latin and Syriac Peshitta contain numerous textual readings and entire verses from the Traditional Text of the Reformation bibles that are not found in Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, and thus, are omitted in many modern versions.


Even Dr. Hort, of the famed Westcott Hort critical Greek text, said: “The fundamental Text of late extant Greek MSS generally is beyond all question identical with the dominant Antiochian or Graeco-Syrian Text of the second half of the 4th century.” (Hort, The Factor of Geneology, pg 92—as cited by Burgon, Revision Revised, pg 257).


You can see Hort’s own quote here -



The Case for Byzantine Priority – Maurice Robinson


“Yet even though the numerical base of the Byzantine Textform rests primarily among the late minuscules and uncials of the ninth century and later, the antiquity of that text reaches at least as far back as its predecessor exemplars of the late fourth and early fifth century, as reflected in MSS A/02 and W/032… the Byzantine Text form is the form of text which is known to have predominated among the Greek-speaking world from at least the fourth century until the invention of printing in the sixteenth century.” 


Dean Burgon, in his book The Revision Revised, immediately comments: “We request, in passing, that the foregoing statement may be carefully noted. The Traditional Greek Text of the New Testament, —the TEXTUS RECEPTUS, in short – is, according to Dr. Hort, “BEYOND ALL QUESTION the TEXT OF THE SECOND HALF OF THE FOURTH CENTURY.”


In other words, at the very time Sinaiticus and Vaticanus were penned, the Byzantine texts were already the predominate texts of the Christian church!


Somebody is Lying


Contrast the quotes from James White with the quotes found in the 1982 edition of the NKJV. Keep in mind that these NKJV textual scholars are NOT King James Bible onlyists, but they have been to the same seminaries and had access to the same information James White and Dan Wallace have. Yet their conclusions are THE EXACT OPPOSITE of what these modern Vatican Version promoters tell us.


In the preface of the NKJV, which was translated by some of the same men who worked on the NIV, it says on page vii “The manuscript preferences cited in many contemporary translations are due to recent reliance on a relatively few manuscripts discovered in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Dependence on these manuscripts, especially two, the Sinaitic and Vatican manuscripts, is due to the greater age of these documents.”


“However, in spite of their age, some scholars have reason to doubt their faithfulness to the autographs, since they often disagree with one another and show other signs of unreliability.”


“On the other hand, the great majority of existing manuscripts are in substantial agreement. Even though many are late, and none are earlier than the fifth century, MOST OF THEIR READINGS ARE VERIFIED BY ANCIENT PAPYRI, ANCIENT VERSIONS, AND QUOTATIONS OF THE EARLY CHURCH FATHERS. This large body of manuscripts is the source of the Greek text underlying the King James Bible. It is the Greek text used by Greek-speaking churches for many centuries, presently known as the Textus Receptus, or Received Text, of the New Testament.”


Then on page 1231 the NKJV editors say: “The Byzantine Text. This text was largely preserved in the area of the old Byzantine Empire, the area which is now Turkey, Bulgaria, Greece, Albania, and Yugoslavia. OVER EIGHTY-FIVE PERCENT of the extant manuscripts belong to the Byzantine text type. Also, from the oldest to the most recent manuscripts of this type, there is greater homogeneity than among the manuscripts of any other text type. The King James Version is based largely on a Byzantine type Greek text.”


Manuscript Comparison Chart

p 45 agrees with 19 times 24 times 32 times
p 66 agrees with 14 times 29 times 33 times
p 75 agrees with 9 times 33 times 29 times
p 45, 66, 75 agrees with 4 times 18 times 20 times
p 45, 66 agrees with 7 times 3 times 8 times

(The above chart data, taken from A Survey of the Researches into the Western Text of the Gospel & Acts; part two 1949-1969, by A.F.K. Klijn.)

Papyrus (p45) contains excerpts of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John and Acts. It is presently in the Chester Beatty Museum, Dublin, Ireland.

Papyrus (p66) contains excerpts from the Gospel of John. It is presently located at Cologne/Geneve, in the Bibliotheque Bodmer.

Papyrus (p75) contains excerpts of Luke and John. It is presently located at Cologne/Geneve, in the Bibliotheque Bodmer.

Note, please, that these lately discovered manuscript fragments, agree more frequently with the Textus Receptus, than they do with Westcott and Hort’s favored Aleph and B. p45 is thought to date from the 3rd century. p66 is dated circa 200 A.D. And, p75 is dated from the beginning of the 3rd century.



Lie Number Two – Vaticanus and Sinaiticus Are The Best Manuscripts


Most modern version promoters who keep repeating this Mantra have no idea what these two so called “Oldest and Best Manuscripts”, upon which today’s modern versions are based, are actually like.  I have done a fairly extensive comparative study of these two manuscripts proving that they not only differ from the vast Majority of remaining Greek texts, but also from each other. There are many concrete examples you can see here, but this is just a sampling of what you will find.


The character of Sinaiticus and Vaticanus texts – the so called “Oldest and Best Manuscripts”




Mr. Burgon states on page 11; “Singular to relate Vaticanus and Aleph have within the last 20 years established a tyrannical ascendance over the imagination of the Critics, which can only be fitly spoken of as a blind superstition. It matters nothing that they are discovered on careful scrutiny to differ essentially, not only from ninety-nine out of a hundred of the whole body of extant MSS. besides, but even from one another. In the gospels alone B (Vaticanus) is found to omit at least 2877 words: to add 536, to substitute, 935; to transpose, 2098: to modify 1132 (in all 7578): – the corresponding figures for Aleph being 3455 omitted, 839 added, 1114 substituted, 2299 transposed, 1265 modified (in all 8972). And be it remembered that the omissions, additions, substitutions, transpositions, and modifications, are by no means the same in both. IT IS IN FACT EASIER TO FIND TWO CONSECUTIVE VERSES IN WHICH THESE TWO MSS. DIFFER THE ONE FROM THE OTHER, THAN TWO CONSECUTIVE VERSES IN WHICH THEY ENTIRELY AGREE.”



SINAITICUS (Aleph) completely omits the following verses while they are found in Vaticanus. Matthew 24:35 – “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away”; Luke 10:32 – “And likewise a Levite, when he was at the place, came and looked on him, and passed by on the other side.”; 17:35 – “Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left.”; John 9:38 – “And he said, Lord, I believe. And he worshipped him.”(omitted in Sinaiticus original and P75, but found in Vaticanus and P66);  16:15 – “All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you.”; 21:25 – “And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.”; and I Corinthians 2:15- “But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.” and 13:1b -2 – “I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not – (charity, I am nothing).”

VATICANUS (B) omits Matthew 12:47 – “Then one said unto him, Behold thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee.” and Luke 23:17 while Sinaiticus retains them. Luke 23:17, “For of necessity he must release one onto them at the feast”, is omitted in B, the NASB, and NIV, yet it is in Sinaiticus and the majority of all Greek texts. Yet B omits Luke 23:34, “Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do”, while it is retained in Sinaiticus and this time kept in the NASB, ESV and NIV. But James White does not believe it is inspired Scripture and says he would not preach on it. Go figure. Vaticanus also omits the entire verse of 1 Peter 5:3 but it is found in Sinaiticus and the Majority of all manuscripts and Bible translations – “Neither as being lords over God’s heritage, but being ensamples to the flock.”

Here are a few more examples taken from what James White and other bible agnostics refer to as an “embarrassment of riches” found in the Sinaitic and Vaticanus “oldest and best”


Luke 10:1,17 KJB – “After these things the Lord appointed other SEVENTY also, and sent them two and two before his face…” V.17 “And the SEVENTY returned again with joy…”  Majority, Sinaiticus, A, C all say 70 and so do Tyndale, the Geneva Bible, Darby, Youngs,  RV, ASV, NASB, RSV, NRSV, NKJV, Holman and ISV.


But Vaticanus says 72 and so do the NIV, ESV, NET and all Catholic Versions.  (See more on this verse at Bible Babble Part Three –   http://brandplucked.webs.com/biblebabel3.htm)


John 17:15- “I pray not that thou shouldest take them OUT OF THE WORLD”. Vaticanus says: “I do not pray that you should take them FROM THE EVIL ONE.”

Acts 27:37 – “216 souls” or “about 76”?

Vaticanus alone has a silly reading in this verse. The Holy Ghost is relating the shipwreck that occured when Paul was on his way to Rome. The Scripture says: “And we were in all the ship two hundred and sixteen souls.”

So read the majority of all texts as well as Sinaiticus and C.  Alexandrinus uniquely reads “275” instead of “276”, but Vaticanus alone reads “we were in all the ship ABOUT 76 souls”. Now, you can have about 200 or about 300, but it is more than a little silly to say ABOUT 76. The number 76 is an exact number, not a round number.

Westcott and Hort initially followed the erroneous reading of Vaticanus and placed “about 76 souls” in their critical Greek text, but later revisors decided to reject this unique reading, and changed their texts to read 276 souls.

The only version I am aware of that actually followed this bogus reading found in the Vaticanus manuscript is Rotherham’s Emphasized bible of 1902. It reads: “Now we were, in the ship, in all, ABOUT SEVENTY-SIX souls.”

I Corinthians 13:3 – Instead of reading, “and though I give my body to BE BURNED, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing”, both Sinaiticus and Vaticanus read: “and though I give my body THAT I MAY BOAST”. The NRSV actually adopted this reading, but the RSV, and the new ESV went back to “to be burned”.

I Corinthians 13:5- “. . .charity seeketh not HER OWN”. Vaticanus alone reads “love does not seek that which IS NOT HERS” – the opposite meaning.

I Corinthians 15:51- “We shall NOT all sleep, but we shall all be changed” in Sinaticus reads: “we shall sleep but we shall NOT ALL be changed” – the exact opposite.

1 Corinthians 15:54-55- “Death is swallowed up in VICTORY. O death, where is your sting? O grave, where is your VICTORY.” In Vaticanus this verse reads, “Death is swallowed up in CONTROVERSY. O death, where is your sting? O grave, where is your CONTROVERSY.”


The Book of Revelation. The Vaticanus manuscript is missing ALL of the book of Revelation as well as 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, and from Hebrews 9:14 to the end of the book. However Sinaiticus give us some really strange readings in the book of Revelation.

Revelation 4:8 – “HOLY, HOLY, HOLY, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come.” But Sinaiticus says: ” Holy, holy, holy, holy, holy, holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty…”

Revelation 7:4 and 14:3- Both verses mention the number of 144,000. However Sinaiticus has 140,000 in 7:4 and 141,000 in 14:3.

Revelation 10:1 – “And I saw another mighty angel come down from heaven, clothed with a cloud: and A RAINBOW was upon his head…” Sinaiticus says: “clothed with a cloud with HAIR on his head.”

Revelation 21:4- “For THE FORMER THINGS are passed away”. Sinaiticus reads: “For THE SHEEP are passed away.”

Revelation 21:5- “Behold, I make all things NEW”, while Sinaiticus says: “Behold, I make all things EMPTY.”

Here are a couple more examples of what James White and other bible agnostics refer to as an “embarrassment of riches” taken from the Vaticanus mss.
Acts 27:37 – “216 souls” or “about 76”?
Vaticanus alone has a silly reading in this verse. The Holy Ghost is relating the shipwreck that occured when Paul was on his way to Rome. The Scripture says: “And we were in all the ship two hundred and sixteen souls.”
So read the majority of all texts as well as Sinaiticus and C. Alexandrinus uniquely reads “275” instead of “276”, but Vaticanus alone reads “we were in all the ship ABOUT 76 souls”. Now, you can have about 200 or about 300, but it is more than a little silly to say ABOUT 76. The number 76 is an exact number, not a round number.
Westcott and Hort initially followed the erroneous reading of Vaticanus and placed “about 76 souls” in their critical Greek text, but later revisors decided to reject this unique reading, and changed their texts to read 276 souls.
The only version I am aware of that actually followed this bogus reading found in the Vaticanus manuscript is Rotherham’s Emphasized bible of 1902. It reads: “Now we were, in the ship, in all, ABOUT SEVENTY-SIX souls.”
I Corinthians 13:3 – Instead of reading, “and though I give my body to BE BURNED, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing”, both Aleph and B read: “and though I give my body THAT I MAY BOAST”. The NRSV actually adopted this reading, but the RSV, and the new ESV went back to “to be burned”.
I Corinthians 13:5- “. . .charity seeketh not HER OWN”. Vaticanus alone reads “love does not seek that which IS NOT HERS” – the opposite meaning.
I Corinthians 15:51- “We shall NOT all sleep, but we shall all be changed” in Sinaticus reads: “we shall sleep but we shall NOT ALL be changed” – the exact opposite.
1 Corinthians 15:54-55- “Death is swallowed up in VICTORY. O death, where is your sting? O grave, where is your VICTORY.” In Vaticanus this verse reads, “Death is swallowed up in CONTROVERSY. O death, where is your sting? O grave, where is your CONTROVERSY.”

These are just a few samples from these two “oldest and best” manuscripts which so many modern versions are based on. It is my firm conviction that God has preserved His inspired, pure, and perfect words as He promised and they are found today in English only in the Authorized King James Bible.



Lie Number Three – We Are Getting Closer To The Original Autographs



Some critical text scholars are a little more honest about this than others.  


Forever Settled – A Survey of the Documents and History of the Bible.




The neutral method of Bible study leads to skepticism concerning the New Testament text. This was true long before the days of Westcott and Hort. As early is 1771 Griesbach wrote, “The New Testament abounds in more losses, additions, and interpolations, PURPOSELY INTRODUCED THAN IN ANY OTHER BOOK.”


As early as 1908 Rendel Harris declared that the New Testament text had not at all been settled but was “MORE THAN EVER, AND PERHAPS FINALLY, UNSETTLED.” (Caps are mine)


Two years later Conybeare gave it as his opinion that “the ultimate (New Testament) text, IF THERE EVER WAS ONE THAT DESERVES TO BE SO CALLED, IS FOR EVER IRRECOVERABLE.” (Caps are mine)


Later (1941) Kirsopp Lake, after a life time spent in the study of the New Testament text, delivered the following, judgment: “In spite of the claims of Westcott and Hort and of von Soden, WE DO NOT KNOW the original form of the Gospels, AND IT IS QUITE LIKELY THAT WE NEVER SHALL.”


H. Greeven (1960) also has acknowledged the uncertainty of the neutral method of New Testament textual criticism. “In general,” he says, “the whole thing is limited to probability judgments; THE ORIGINAL TEXT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT, according to its nature, MUST BE AND REMAINS A HYPOTHESIS.”


Robert M. Grant (1963) adopts a still more despairing attitude. “The primary goal of New Testament textual study remains the recovery of what the New Testament writers wrote. We have already suggested that TO ACHIEVE THIS GOAL IS WELL-NIGH IMPOSSIBLE.”  Grant also says:  “It is generally recognized that THE ORIGINAL TEXT OF THE BIBLE CANNOT BE RECOVERED.”



Lie Number Four – Erasmus Was A Catholic, so the King James Bible is also a Catholic Bible.


It is a proven fact that modern versions that are based on the UBS/Nestle-Aland ever changing Critical Greek text like the ESV, NIV, NASB, NET, Holman, etc. are the new “Vatican Versions”.  See “Undeniable Proof the ESV, NIV, NASB, Holman Standard, NET are the new “Vatican Versions”




Here you can see the documentation of this fact from right out of their own Nestle-Aland critical Greek textbook, the UBS homepage and the Vatican’s own website.  Then go on to Part Two where you can see the literally thousands of words that have been omitted from the Reformation Bibles in all languages (including the older Catholic bible versions as well) and are omitted in these new “Vatican Versions” and the MODERN Catholic bibles too.  They are ALL based on the same Vatican supervised “inter confessional” texts.


 Here is just a sample of what you will see -



If you have a copy of the Nestle-Aland 27th edition, open the book and read what they tell us in their own words on page 45 of the Introduction. Here these critical Greek text editors tell us:

“The text shared by these two editions was adopted internationally by Bible Societies, and FOLLOWING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE VATICAN AND THE UNITED BIBLE SOCIETIES IT HAS SERVED AS THE BASIS FOR NEW TRANSLATIONS AND FOR REVISIONS MADE UNDER THEIR SUPERVISION. THIS MARKS A SIGNIFICANT STIP WITH REGARD TO INTERCONFESSIONAL RELATIONSHIPS. It should naturally be understood that this text is a working text: it is not to be considered as definitive, but as a stimulus to further efforts toward defining and verifying the text of the New Testament.”

There it is folks, in their own words. They openly admit that this text is the result of an agreement between the Vatican and the UBS and that the text itself is not “definitive” – it can change, as it already has and will do so in the future, and is not the infallible words of God but merely “a stimulus to further efforts”.

The Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity
This from their own site -


Collaboration for the Diffusion of the Bible

“Following the responsibility undertaken by the then Secretariat for the preparation of the dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation, the PCPCU (Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity) was entrusted with promoting ecumenical collaboration for the translation and diffusion of Holy Scripture (Dei Verbum, n. 22). In this context, it encouraged the formation of the Catholic Biblical Federation, with which it is in close contact. TOGETHER WITH THE UNITED BIBLE SOCIETIES IT PUBLISHED THE GUIDELINES FOR INTERCONFESSIONAL COOPERATION IN TRANSLATING THE BIBLE.” (1968; new revised edition 1987).

The Erasmus Was A Catholic Argument

So once the modern version user sees all this documentation, they usually come back with “Well, Erasmus was a Catholic and that makes the King James Bible a Vatican Version too.”  What these people deliberately choose to ignore is the fact that Erasmus himself criticized many of the Romish doctrines. He tried to reform the Catholic church from within, whereas Luther tried from without. The King James Bible translators did not even primarily use the Greek text of Erasmus at all, but rather those of Beza and of Stephanus. And, more importantly, NO Catholic bible version has EVER used the Greek text of Erasmus for their translations.

In fact, the Council of Trent (1545-1564) branded Erasmus a heretic and prohibited his works. In 1559, Pope Paul IV placed Erasmus on the first class of forbidden authors, which was composed of authors whose works were completely condemned.


But guess who one of the chief editors of the UBS/Nestle-Aland/Vatican critical Greek text was. It tells you who on the opening page of the Nestle-Aland Critical Greek textbook; it was the Jesuit Cardinal Carlo Martini.


Lie Number Five – We Now Have More Knowledge About The Bible


The truth of the matter is that with the widespread use and acceptance of these modern versions the level of Biblical Illiteracy has reached scandalous and epidemic proportions.  Read more about this here -




A recent Gallup poll reveals “Americans revere the Bible–but, by and large, they don’t read it. And because they don’t read it, they have become a nation of biblical illiterates.” How bad is it? Researchers tell us that it’s worse than most could imagine. Fewer than half of all adults can name the four gospels. Many Christians cannot identify more than two or three of the disciples. According to data from the Barna Research Group, 60 percent of Americans can’t name even five of the Ten Commandments. “No wonder people break the Ten Commandments all the time. They don’t know what they are,” said George Barna, president of the firm. The bottom line? “Increasingly, America is biblically illiterate.” 


Multiple surveys reveal the problem in stark terms. According to 82 percent of Americans, “God helps those who help themselves,” is a Bible verse. Those identified as born-again Christians did better–by one percent….Some of the statistics are enough to perplex even those aware of the problem. A Barna poll indicated that at least 12 percent of adults believe that Joan of Arc was Noah’s wife. Another survey of graduating high school seniors revealed that over 50 percent thought that Sodom and Gomorrah were husband and wife. A considerable number of respondents to one poll indicated that the Sermon on the Mount was preached by Billy Graham. We are in big trouble.The larger scandal is biblical ignorance among Christians. Choose whichever statistic or survey you like, the general pattern is the same. America’s Christians know less and less about the Bible. It shows.” (End of article portions)

The Lord Jesus Christ tells us in Matthew 7:17-20 that a good tree brings forth good fruit and a corrupt tree brings forth evil fruit, and that “by their fruits ye shall know them.”

The King James Bible has consistently brought forth good fruit for over 400 years now, while the imposter versions come and go almost as fast as the seasons change. The KJB has been used of God to convert multitudes of lost sinners into Bible believing children of God. It was used to begin the world wide missionary outreach, and is the only Bible still believed by multiplied thousands of blood bought saints of God to be the complete, inspired and inerrant words of the living God.

By contrast, the influx of the modern Bible Babble Buffet versions has produced more confusion, Biblical ignorance and unbelief in the inerrancy of the Scriptures than at any time in history.

Lie Number Six – Professional Liars Who SAY “I believe the Bible IS the infallible words of God.”

There are an number of well known men today who promote these new Vatican Versions who still like to put on a pious pretense of being Bible believers. Men like James White, Dan Wallace, Doug Kutilek, James Price, John MacArthur, Hal Lindsey and others who will stand in the pulpit or affirm in their writings “I believe the Bible is the infallible words of God.”  

And yet if you ask these same men where we can get a copy of this infallible Bible they profess to believe in, they will NEVER tell you.  Why? Simply because the do NOT believe that any Bible in any language you can actually hold in your hands, read and believe is the very inspired and inerrant words of God actually exists.  

The polls themselves tell us in no uncertain terms that the majority of professing Christians today do NOT believe in the inerrancy of the Bible – ANY Bible.  

For more documentation on this see – “The Bible is NOT the inspired and inerrant words of God.” 


Why do so few Christians today believe that any Bible in any language is the complete and inerrant words of God?

Pastor Michael Youseff’s Message on His “Leading The Way” program. The title of todays message was “The Bible, The World’s Most Relevant Book – Part 2. In his message he gave statistics of a poll that was conducted. Here is what the poll revealed:

85% of students at America’s largest Evangelical Seminary don’t believe in the inerrancy of Scripture.

74% of the Clergy in America no longer believe in the inerrancy of Scripture.

George Barna, president of Barna Research Group, reported that a study exploring the religious beliefs of the 12 largest denominations in America highlights the downward theological drift that has taken place in Christian churches in recent years. The study found that an alarmingly high number of church members have beliefs that fall far short of orthodox Christianity. ONLY 41 PERCENT OF ALL ADULTS SURVEYED BELIEVED IN THE TOTAL ACCURACY OF THE BIBLE. Only 40 percent believed Christ was sinless, and only 27 percent believed Satan to be real.

Of the Baptists surveyed 57 percent said they believed that works are necessary in order to be saved, 45 percent believed Jesus was not sinless, 44 percent did not believe that the Bible is totally accurate, and 66 percent did not believe Satan to be a real being. Barna said, “The Christian body in America is immersed in a crisis of biblical illiteracy.”

“WITHIN EVANGELICALISM THERE ARE A GROWING NUMBER WHO ARE MODIFYING THEIR VIEWS ON THE INERRANCY OF THE BIBLE SO THAT THE FULL AUTHORITY OF SCRIPTURE IS COMPLETELY UNDERCUT. But is happening in very subtle ways. Like the snow lying side-by-side on the ridge, the new views on biblical authority often seem at first glance not to be very far from what evangelicals, until just recently, have always believed. But also, like the snow lying side-by-side on the ridge, the new views when followed consistently end up a thousand miles apart. What may seem like a minor difference at first, in the end makes all the difference in the world … compromising the full authority of Scripture eventually affects what it means to be a Christian theologically and how we live in the full spectrum of human life” (Francis Schaeffer, The Great Evangelical Disaster, 1983, p. 44).



Recent Gallup Poll On American’s View of Bible Reveals Utter Chaos Regarding Nature and Authority of Scripture


The Christian Post recently published the findings of a Gallup poll designed to gauge Americans’ opinion on the Bible. The findings reveal the utter chaos in our culture regarding the nature and authority of Scripture.

Gallup’s poll found that only 28 percent of Americans believe that the Bible is the Word of God and should be taken literally. And yet nearly 50 percent believe that the Bible is the “inspired Word of God” while insisting that not all of its content be taken literally, but rather as “metaphors and allegories that allow for interpretation.”

“Allowing for interpretation” seems to be key for our postmodern, pluralistic society, as 58 percent – representing the majority of self-identifying Christians in America – accept that the Bible is the “actual Word of God” but insist, “multiple interpretations are possible.”


At a basic level, self-elevation to ultimate authority falls into the category of circular reasoning, and is a clear failure in logic. However, more importantly, this error reveals a fundamental failure in theological education.

Such mass confusion is only possible as deviance is aided and abetted by Christian pastors who refuse to defend the inspiration, infallibility, and inerrancy of the Word of God. The inerrancy of Scripture is sacrificed in pursuit of so-called academic respectability. The authority of God’s Word is explained away to make allowance for homosexuality, fornication and other sins of personal convenience. The result is this situation reflected by this Gallup poll.

Note. To have John MacArthur try to defend the inerrancy of the Bible is like having Hugh Hefner extol the virtues of celibacy.

This quote from that article is right on. “the majority of professing Christians in America have rejected the objective authority of the inerrant Word of God and have replaced it with the authority of self.”

And John MacArthur is the Poster Boy for this very thing. He is going to tell people what parts are right and which are not, and which parts he’s not sure about and you can’t be sure about them either – yet somehow in the midst of 200 bible versions which differ from each other by literally 3000 to 5000 thousands of words of actual text in the N.T. alone, scores of different readings in the O.T., hundreds of words added in some Old Testaments  but not in others, and hundreds of verses that have totally different meanings from one another, we somehow have an “inerrant” Bible. 

Of course John Mac still won’t be able to tell people where to get a copy of this inerrant words of God he professes to believe in, but, Hey, it all sounds so nice and religious and you only have to pay him 400 dollars to have him lie to you.  What a deal!

John Mac Arthur does NOT believe that any Bible in any language is or ever was the complete and inerrant words of God.  See how he contradicts himself in his own words.

John MacArthur – Confused and Self-Contradictory Pastor with No Infallible Bible





Regarding the REAL beliefs of some of these men like James White, John MacArthur, Hal Lindsey and Dan Wallace, see these studies taken from their own words and videos regarding the Bible version issue.


James White – The Protestant Pope of the new Vatican Versions 




Hal Lindsey – Answers Which Bible do you use and Why




Dan Wallace is a Nut!




And finally “Stop Lying About It!”  What the Bible Babble Buffet Versionists Really Believe about “The Bible”




By the sovereign grace and mercy of Almighty God and our Lord and Redeemer Jesus Christ, I and many thousands of other Christians DO believe God has acted in history to give us a complete, inspired and inerrant Bible and we don’t have to lie about what we really believe when we affirm this.  AND we can tell anybody who wants to know where to get a copy of it for themselves. It is called the King James Holy Bible.  Accept no substitutes.  


All of grace, believing The Book – the King James Bible.


“He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.”  Luke 8:8 


“Thy words were found, and I did eat them; and thy word was unto me the joy and rejoicing of mine heart: for I am called by thy name, O LORD God of hosts.”  Jeremiah 15:16  


Return to Articles –  http://brandplucked.webs.com/kjbarticles.htm


Notes from the Internet


Modern Version Biblical Illiteracy


This is just a portion of a recent article by a concerned Christian and the man is not even King James only.



The young people in churches who say that only the original manuscripts of the Bible were inerrant are for the most part Biblically illiterate. A survey commissioned for Christianity Today magazine found that 80% of Evangelical young people could not place Moses, Adam, David, Solomon, and Abraham in chronological order. 85% could not place the major events of Jesus’ earthly life in the actual order in which they happened. Only 20% knew to look in the book of Acts for the account of Paul’s missionary journeys. Only 60% of these young people in what claim to be Bible-believing churches could locate the Ten Commandments in Exodus chapter 20. Only 33% knew where to find the Sermon on the Mount.2 Although the survey cited in this particular article did not mention it, one wonders if these young people knew how to find any passage where the Bible says how they are to be saved from sin.

What about the adults? Among the people who call themselves Bible-believing Christians in America today, less than one adult in six reads the Bible at least once a week outside of a church service. 35% of the adults in Bible-believing churches never read the Bible at all.3 Yet the latest fad religious books sell by the millions and enjoy avid readership.

Consider these statistics on Evangelicals’ beliefs about essential doctrines: 37% of adults in Evangelical churches do not believe the Bible is totally accurate. 45% do not believe Jesus Christ was sinless. 52% do not believe Satan is real. 57% do not believe that Jesus is the only way to eternal life. 57% believe that good works play a part in gaining eternal life. A similar number of Evangelical adults believe that other religions are valid ways to God.4

  1. Gary M. Burge, “The Greatest Story Never Read,” Christianity Today, August 9, 1999.
  2. Based on surveys by Barna Research, http://www.barna.org; Bible Literacy Center, centerforbibleengagement.com.
  3. These statistics are from Barna Research, http://www.barna.org, especially the Barna Research report, Religious Beliefs Vary Widely By Denomination, 2001.
  4. Source: Barna Research, http://www.barna.org/
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Do Not Tempt the Lord Jesus – But Worship Him Instead! Pt. 3b, a post by Sam Shamoun

Do Not Tempt the Lord Jesus –

But Worship Him Instead! Pt. 3b

We proceed from where we left off.


Third Case


All three Gospels record an instance where a leprous man not only fell down to worship the Lord, but also physically touched him which resulted in his miraculous healing:


And it happened when He was in a certain city, that behold, a man who was full of leprosy saw Jesus; and he fell on his face and implored Him, saying, ‘Lord, if You are willing, You can make me clean.’ Then He put out His hand and touched him, saying, ‘I am willing; be cleansed.’ Immediately the leprosy left him.” Luke 5:12-13


Matthew’s Gospel indicates that the man was clearly worshiping Christ when he fell on his face and implored him:


And behold, a leper came and worshiped Him, saying, ‘Lord, if You are willing, You can make me clean.’” Matthew 8:2


To say that what Jesus did here was absolutely astonishing would be putting it mildly.


The Hebrew Bible absolutely forbade any physical contact with lepers, since such an infectious skin disease could easily end up contaminating a whole camp of people if left unchecked (cf. Leviticus 5:2-3, 5-6; 7:21; 13:45-46; Numbers 12:9-15; 2 Chronicles 26:16-21). And yet not only does Jesus willfully touch the leper, but in so doing he miraculously made him whole. This highlights Jesus’ absolute purity and incorruptibility since nothing could defile him.


These same inspired Scriptures are equally clear that leprosy is one of those diseases which God alone heals:


Now Naaman, commander of the army of the king of Syria, was a great and honorable man in the eyes of his master, because by him the Lord had given victory to Syria. He was also a mighty man of valor, but a leper. And the Syrians had gone out on raids, and had brought back captive a young girl from the land of Israel. She waited on Naaman’s wife. Then she said to her mistress, ‘If only my master were with the prophet who is in Samaria! For he would heal him of his leprosy.’ And Naaman went in and told his master, saying, ‘Thus and thus said the girl who is from the land of Israel.’ Then the king of Syria said, ‘Go now, and I will send a letter to the king of Israel.’ So he departed and took with him ten talents of silver, six thousand shekels of gold, and ten changes of clothing. Then he brought the letter to the king of Israel, which said, Now be advised, when this letter comes to you, that I have sent Naaman my servant to you, that you may heal him of his leprosy. And it happened, when the king of Israel read the letter, that he tore his clothes and said, ‘Am I God, to kill and make alive, that this man sends a man to me to heal him of his leprosy? Therefore please consider, and see how he seeks a quarrel with me.’” 2 Kings 5:1-7


This explains why there isn’t a single recorded instance of a prophet healing anyone of leprosy. Take, for instance, this same example of Naaman who ended up going to the prophet Elisha for healing. Notice what Elisha didn’t do:


And it was so, when Elisha the man of God had heard that the king of Israel had rent his clothes, that he sent to the king, saying, Wherefore hast thou rent thy clothes? let him come now to me, and he shall know that there is a prophet in Israel. So Naaman came with his horses and with his chariot, and stood at the door of the house of Elisha. And Elisha sent a messenger unto him, saying, Go and wash in Jordan seven times, and thy flesh shall come again to thee, and thou shalt be clean. But Naaman was wroth, and went away, and said, Behold, I thought, He will surely come out to me, and stand, and call on the name of the Lord his God, and strike his hand over the place, and recover the leper. Are not Abana and Pharpar, rivers of Damascus, better than all the waters of Israel? may I not wash in them, and be clean? So he turned and went away in a rage. And his servants came near, and spake unto him, and said, My father, if the prophet had bid thee do some great thing, wouldest thou not have done it? how much rather then, when he saith to thee, Wash, and be clean? Then went he down, and dipped himself seven times in Jordan, according to the saying of the man of God: and his flesh came again like unto the flesh of a little child, and he was clean. And he returned to the man of God, he and all his company, and came, and stood before him: and he said, Behold, now I know that there is no God in all the earth, but in Israel: now therefore, I pray thee, take a blessing of thy servant. But he said, As the Lord liveth, before whom I stand, I will receive none. And he urged him to take it; but he refused. And Naaman said, Shall there not then, I pray thee, be given to thy servant two mules’ burden of earth? For thy servant will henceforth offer neither burnt offering nor sacrifice unto other gods, but unto the Lord. In this thing the Lord pardon thy servant, that when my master goeth into the house of Rimmon to worship there, and he leaneth on my hand, and I bow myself in the house of Rimmon: when I bow down myself in the house of Rimmon, the Lord pardon thy servant in this thing. And he said unto him, Go in peace. So he departed from him a little way.” 2 Kings 5:8-19


Here we see that Elisha never came out to meet Naaman until after the latter was cleansed from his infectious skin disease, and therefore never actually touched or healed him. As the context makes clear, it was God who miraculously healed Naaman by means of the Jordan River. This explains why Elisha didn’t come out of his house, since by remaining inside the prophet basically silenced any potential attempt of ascribing this miraculous healing to his authority or agency.


Thus, Jesus is depicted as doing a work that God alone does, and as being morally incorruptible in the same way that God is immutably righteous and holy.


This brings us to the next example.


Fourth Case


But as He went, the multitudes thronged Him. Now a woman, having a flow of blood for twelve years, who had spent all her livelihood on physicians and could not be healed by any, came from behind and touched the border of His garment. And immediately her flow of blood stopped. And Jesus said, ‘Who touched Me?’ When all denied it, Peter and those with him said, ‘Master, the multitudes throng and press You, and You say, “Who touched Me?”’ But Jesus said, ‘Somebody touched Me, for I perceived power going out from Me.’ Now when the woman saw that she was not hidden, she came trembling; and falling down before Him, she declared to Him in the presence of all the people the reason she had touched Him and how she was healed immediately. And He said to her, ‘Daughter, be of good cheer; your faith has made you well. Go in peace.’” Luke 8:42b-48


Here is another instance where Jesus is touched by someone whom the Law expressly warns against making contact with, lest a person become ceremonially unclean (cf. Leviticus 15:25-30). And yet as we saw in the case of the leper, Jesus didn’t become defiled or unclean by such contact. Rather, touching the Lord Jesus resulted in the miraculous cleansing and healing of the woman.


Fifth Case


The following is another case of Jesus confronting an “untouchable”:


So it was, when Jesus returned, that the multitude welcomed Him, for they were all waiting for Him. And behold, there came a man named Jairus, and he was a ruler of the synagogue. And he fell down at Jesus’ feet and begged Him to come to his house, for he had an only daughter about twelve years of age, and she was dying…While He was still speaking, someone came from the ruler of the synagogue’s house, saying to him, ‘Your daughter is dead. Do not trouble the Teacher.’ But when Jesus heard it, He answered him, saying, ‘Do not be afraid; only believe, and she will be made well.’ When He came into the house, He permitted no one to go in except Peter, James, and John, and the father and mother of the girl. Now all wept and mourned for her; but He said, ‘Do not weep; she is not dead, but sleeping.’ And they ridiculed Him, knowing that she was dead. But He put them all outside, took her by the hand and called, saying, ‘Little girl, arise.’ Then her spirit returned, and she arose immediately. And He commanded that she be given something to eat. And her parents were astonished, but He charged them to tell no one what had happened.” Luke 8:40-42a, 49-56


Once again, Matthew’s Gospel shows that this act of falling down at the feet of Jesus was clearly meant to be an act of worship:


While He spoke these things to them, behold, a ruler came and worshiped Him, saying, ‘My daughter has just died, but come and lay Your hand on her and she will live.’” Matthew 9:18


And once again, Jesus does what the Law strictly prohibited any Israelite from doing, namely, touch a dead body (cf. Numbers 19:11-13).


The foregoing examples show that, whereas these individuals which the Law deemed to be unclean and/or untouchables were incapable of defiling or transmitting their uncleanness to the sinless Son of God, the Lord Jesus, on the other hand, was able to transmit his perfect holiness and absolute purity to them, thereby making them whole again!


This conclusively proves that Christ is immutably holy and pure in the same exact way as God is. And like God, Christ possesses the divine authority to heal and cleanse everyone that turns to him by faith, whether spiritually or physically.


Therefore, these folk were appropriately worshiping Jesus since this is the kind of response and gratitude that one shows whenever God himself decides to show up and stand in our midst!


We’re not through yet since we still have further examples of Christ being worshiped in contexts that point to his divine identity and authority.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

How Women are to be treated in Islam, a post by Sam Shamoun

How Women Are To Be Treated in Islam


Paul Bilal Williams has produced a post (http://bloggingtheology.org/2014/09/15/7746/) titled, How women are saved according to the New Testament,” where he quotes four different English translations of 1 Timothy 2:15 to give the impression that the New Testament teaches that women are saved, or granted everlasting life, by bearing children, provided they continue in faith, love, and holiness with self-control.


We have already provided a thorough response to Williams’ misuse of this text, and even turned the tables on him to show that it is Muhammad who actually denigrates women, in the following rebuttals:


Do You Know What Paul Really Taught About Women Obtaining Salvation? http://badmanna.wordpress.com/2013/09/29/what-did-paul-really-teach-about-the-issue-of-women-obtaining-salvation-by-sam-shamoun/


Did You Know That Muhammad Was A Misogynist? http://answeringislam.net/authors/shamoun/rebuttals/williams/mo_misogynist.html


In this post we would like to return the favor by highlighting one specific Quranic verse which highlights Muhammad’s view of women. We will then proceed to reference a few ahadith and commentaries which further illuminate Islam’s view of women in general.


The Quran


MEN SHALL take full care of women with the bounties which God has bestowed more abundantly on the former than on the latter, and with what they may spend out of their possessions. And the righteous women are the truly devout ones, who guard the intimacy which God has [ordained to be] guarded. And as for those women whose ill-will you have reason to fear, admonish them [first]; then leave them alone in bed; then beat them; and if thereupon they pay you heed, do not seek to harm them. Behold, God is indeed most high, great! Muhammad Asad


Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are the obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them. Then if they obey you, seek not a way against them. Lo! Allah is ever High, Exalted, Great. Pickthall


Husbands should take good care of their wives, with [the bounties] God has given to some more than others and with what they spend out of their own money. Righteous wives are devout and guard what God would have them guard in their husbands’ absence. If you fear high-handedness from your wives, remind them [of the teachings of God], then ignore them when you go to bed, then hit them. If they obey you, you have no right to act against them: God is most high and great. Abdel Haleem


Men are in charge of women by [right of] what Allah has given one over the other and what they spend [for maintenance] from their wealth. So righteous women are devoutly obedient, guarding in [the husband's] absence what Allah would have them guard. But those [wives] from whom you fear arrogance – [first] advise them; [then if they persist], forsake them in bed; and [finally], strike them. But if they obey you [once more], seek no means against them. Indeed, Allah is ever Exalted and Grand. Sahih International


Men are superior to women on account of the qualities with which God hath gifted the one above the other, and on account of the outlay they make from their substance for them. Virtuous women are obedient, careful, during the husband’s absence, because God hath of them been careful. But chide those for whose refractoriness ye have cause to fear; remove them into beds apart, and scourage them: but if they are obedient to you, then seek not occasion against them: verily, God is High, Great! Rodwell


Muhammad’s Sunna


Narrated ‘Ikrima: Rifa’a divorced his wife whereupon ‘AbdurRahman bin Az-Zubair Al-Qurazi married her. ‘Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil (and complained to her (Aisha) of her husband and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by beating). It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah’s Apostle came, ‘Aisha said, “I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women. Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!” When ‘AbdurRahman heard that his wife had gone to the Prophet, he came with his two sons from another wife. She said, “By Allah! I have done no wrong to him but he is impotent and is as useless to me as this,” holding and showing the fringe of her garment, ‘Abdur-Rahman said, “By Allah, O Allah’s Apostle! She has told a lie! I am very strong and can satisfy her but she is disobedient and wants to go back to Rifa’a.” Allah’s Apostle said, to her, “If that is your intention, then know that it is unlawful for you to remarry Rifa’a unless Abdur-Rahman has had sexual intercourse with you.” Then the Prophet saw two boys with ‘Abdur-Rahman and asked (him), “Are these your sons?” On that ‘AbdurRahman said, “Yes.” The Prophet said, “You claim what you claim (i.e., that he is impotent)? But by Allah, these boys resemble him as a crow resembles a crow.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 7, Number 715)


Muhammad b. Qais said (to the people): Should I not narrate to you (a hadith of the Holy Prophet) on my authority and on the authority of my mother? We thought that he meant the mother who had given him birth. He (Muhammad b. Qais) then reported that it was ‘A’isha who had narrated this: Should I not narrate to you about myself and about the Messenger of Allah? We said: Yes. She said: When it was my turn for Allah’s Messenger to spend the night with me, he turned his side, put on his mantle and took off his shoes and placed them near his feet, and spread the corner of his shawl on his bed and then lay down till he thought that I had gone to sleep. He took hold of his mantle slowly and put on the shoes slowly, and opened the door and went out and then closed it lightly. I covered my head, put on my veil and tightened my waist wrapper, and then went out following his steps till he reached Baqi’. He stood there and he stood for a long time. He then lifted his hands three times, and then returned and I also returned. He hastened his steps and I also hastened my steps. He ran and I too ran. He came (to the house) and I also came (to the house). I, however, preceded him and I entered (the house), and as I lay down in the bed, he (the Prophet) entered the (house), and said: Why is it, O ‘A’isha, that you are out of breath? I said: There is nothing. He said: Tell me or the Subtle and the Aware would inform me. I said: Messenger of Allah, may my father and mother be ransom for you, and then I told him (the whole story). He said: Was it the darkness (of your shadow) that I saw in front of me? I said: Yes. He struck me on the chest which caused me pain, and then said: Did you think that Allah and His Apostle would deal unjustly with you? She said: Whatsoever the people conceal, Allah will know it. He said: Gabriel came to me when you saw me. He called me and he concealed it from you. I responded to his call, but I too concealed it from you (for he did not come to you), as you were not fully dressed. I thought that you had gone to sleep, and I did not like to awaken you, fearing that you may be frightened. He (Gabriel) said: Your Lord has commanded you to go to the inhabitants of Baqi’ (to those lying in the graves) and beg pardon for them. I said: Messenger of Allah, how should I pray for them (How should I beg forgiveness for them)? He said: Say, Peace be upon the inhabitants of this city (graveyard) from among the Believers and the Muslims, and may Allah have mercy on those who have gone ahead of us, and those who come later on, and we shall, God willing, join you. (Sahih Muslim, Book 4, Number 2127)


Here is another version of the above narration:


“… No sooner had I laid down but he came in and said: ‘What is the matter, O ‘Aisha? Why are you out of breath?’ I said: ‘It is nothing.’ He said: ‘Either you tell me or the Subtle One, the All-Aware will tell me.’ I said: ‘O Messenger of Allah, may my father and mother be sacrificed for you!’ And I told him. He said: ‘So you were the person that I saw in front of me?’ I said: ‘Yes.’ He gave me a painful shove on the chest, then he said: ‘Did you think that Allah and His Messenger would be unjust to you?’…” (English Translation of Sahih Muslim, compiled by Imam Abul Hussain Muslim Ibn al-Hajjaj, Ahadith edited & referenced by Hafiz Abu Tahir Zubair ‘Ali Za’i, translated by Nasiruddin al-Khattab (Canada), Final review by Abu Khaliyl (USA) [Darussalam Publishers & Distributors, First Edition: June 2007], Volume 2, From No. 1161 to 2262, Number 2256, pp. 505-506: http://www.kalamullah.com/Books/Hadith/Sahih%20Muslim%20Vol.%202%20-%201161-2262.pdf; bold and underline emphasis ours)



Narrated Abdullah ibn AbuDhubab:
Iyas ibn Abdullah ibn AbuDhubab reported the Apostle of Allah as saying: Do not beat Allah’s handmaidens, but when Umar came to the Apostle of Allah and said: Women have become emboldened towards their husbands, he (the Prophet) gave permission to beat them. Then many women came round the family of the Apostle of Allah complaining against their husbands. So the Apostle of Allah said: Many women have gone round Muhammad’s family complaining against their husbands. They are not the best among you. (Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 11, Number 2141)


Narrated Umar ibn al-Khattab:
The Prophet said: A man will not be asked as to why he beat his wife. (Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 11, Number 2142)


Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:
Once Allah’s Apostle went out to the Musalla (to offer the prayer) on ‘Id-al-Adha or Al-Fitr prayer. Then he passed by the women and said, “O women! Give alms, as I have seen that THE MAJORITY of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women).” They asked, “Why is it so, O Allah’s Apostle?” He replied, “You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion THAN YOU. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you.” The women asked, “O Allah’s Apostle! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?” He said, “Is not the evidence two women equal to the witness of one man?” They replied in the affirmative. He said, “THIS IS THE DEFICIENCY IN HER INTELLIGENCE. Isn’t it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?” The women replied in the affirmative. He said, “This is the deficiency in her religion.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 6, Number 301; see also Volume 2, Book 24, Number 541)


Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: The Prophet said, “Isn’t the witness of a woman equal to half of that of a man?” The women said, “Yes.” He said, “THIS IS BECAUSE OF THE DEFICIENCY OF A WOMAN’S MIND.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Volume 3, Book 48, Number 826)


“The Messenger of Allah said: ‘If I were to command anyone to prostrate to anyone else, I would have commanded women to prostrate to their husbands. If a man were to command his wife to move (something) from a red mountain to a black mountain, and from a black mountain to a red mountain, her duty is to obey him.’” (Sunan Ibn Majah, Number 1852)


The Muslim Expositors


Men are in charge of, they have authority over, women, disciplining them and keeping them in check, because of that with which God has preferred the one over the other, that is, because God has given them the advantage over women, in knowledge, reason, authority and otherwise, and because of what they expend, on them [the women], of their property. Therefore righteous women, among them, are obedient, to their husbands, guarding in the unseen, that is, [guarding] their private parts and otherwise during their spouses’ absence, because of what God has guarded, for them, when He enjoined their male spouses to look after them well. And those you fear may be rebellious, disobedient to you, when such signs appear, admonish them, make them fear God, and share not beds with them, retire to other beds if they manifest such disobedience, and strike them, but not violently, if they refuse to desist [from their rebellion] after leaving them [in separate beds]. If they then obey you, in what is desired from them, do not seek a way against them, a reason to strike them unjustly. God is ever High, Great, so beware of Him, lest He punish you for treating them unjustly (Tafsir al-Jalalayn: http://altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=74&tSoraNo=4&tAyahNo=34&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2)


(Men are in charge of women) they are in charge of overseeing the proper conduct of women, (because Allah hath made the one of them) the men through reason and the division of booty and estates (to excel the other) the women, (and because they spend of their property (for the support of women)) through paying the dowry and spending on them, which the women are not required to do. (So good women) He says: those wives who are kind to their husbands (are the obedient) they are obedient to Allah regarding their husbands, (guarding) their own persons and the wealth of their husbands (in secret) when their husbands are not present (that which Allah hath guarded) through Allah’s protection of them in that He gave them the success to do so. (As for those from whom ye fear) know (rebellion) their disobedience to you in bed, (admonish them) by means of sacred knowledge and the Qur’an (and banish them to beds apart) turn your faces away from them in bed, (and scourge them) in a mild, unexaggerated manner. (Then if they obey you) in bed, (seek not a way against them) as regards love. (Lo! Allah is ever High Exalted) above every single thing, (Great) greater than every single thing. Allah has not burdened you with that which you cannot bear, so do not burden women with that which they cannot bear of affection. (Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs: http://altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=73&tSoraNo=4&tAyahNo=34&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2)


(Men are in charge of women…) [4:34]. Said Muqatil: “This verse (Men are in charge of women…) was revealed about Sa‘d ibn al-Rabi‘, who was one of the leaders of the Helpers (nuqaba’), and his wife Habibah bint Zayd ibn Abi Zuhayr, both of whom from the Helpers. It happened Sa‘d hit his wife on the face because she rebelled against him. Then her father went with her to see the Prophet, Allah bless him and give him peace. He said to him: ‘I gave him my daughter in marriage and he slapped her’. The Prophet said: ‘Let her have retaliation against her husband’. As she was leaving with her father to execute retaliation, the Prophet called them and said: ‘Come back; Gabriel has come to me’, and Allah, exalted is He, revealed this verse. The Messenger of Allah said: ‘We wanted something while Allah wanted something else, and that which Allah wants is good’. Retaliation was then suspended”. Sa‘id ibn Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Zahid informed us> Zahir ibn Ahmad> Ahmad ibn al-Husayn ibn Junayd> Ziyad ibn Ayyub> Hushaym> Yunus ibn al-Hasan who reported that a man slapped his wife and she complained about him to the Prophet. Her family who went with her said: “O Messenger of Allah! So-and-so has slapped our girl”. The Prophet kept saying: “Retaliation! Retaliation! And there is no other judgement to be held”. But then this verse (Men are in charge of women…) was revealed and the Prophet said: “We wanted something and Allah wanted something else”. Abu Bakr al-Harithi informed us> Abu’l-Shaykh al-Hafiz> Abu Yahya al-Razi> Sahl al-‘Askari> ‘Ali ibn Hashim> Isma‘il> al-Hasan who said: “Around the time when the verse on retaliation was revealed amongst the Muslims, a man had slapped his wife. She went to the Prophet: ‘My husband has slapped me and I want retaliation’. So he said: ‘Let there be retaliation’. As he was still dealing with her, Allah, exalted is He, revealed (Men are in charge of women, because Allah hath made the one of them to excel the other…). Upon which the Prophet said: ‘We wanted something and my Lord wanted something different. O man, take your wife by the hand’”. (‘Alī ibn Ahmad al-Wahidi, Asbab al-Nuzul: http://altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=86&tSoraNo=4&tAyahNo=34&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2)

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Do Not Tempt the Lord Jesus – But Worship Him Instead! Pt. 3a, a post by Sam Shamoun

Do Not Tempt the Lord Jesus –

But Worship Him Instead! Pt. 3a


We resume our discussion by focusing on the worship which the Lord Jesus received according to Matthew and Luke-Acts.


Worshiping the Lord Jesus


What follows is a list of passages where the Lord Jesus is worshiped in contexts that highlight his divine identity.


First Case


Jesus is depicted as receiving worship from the demonic realm, from unclean spirits who were perfectly aware of his divine identity:


Then they sailed to the country of the Gadarenes, which is opposite Galilee. And when He stepped out on the land, there met Him a certain man from the city who had demons for a long time. And he wore no clothes, nor did he live in a house but in the tombs. When he saw Jesus, he cried out, fell down before Him, and with a loud voice said, ‘What have I to do with You, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I beg You, do not torment me! For He had commanded the unclean spirit to come out of the man. For it had often seized him, and he was kept under guard, bound with chains and shackles; and he broke the bonds and was driven by the demon into the wilderness. Jesus asked him, saying, ‘What is your name?’ And he said, ‘Legion,’ because many demons had entered him. And they begged Him that He would not command them to go out into the abyss.” Luke 8:26-31, 39

Here is a legion of evil spirits who were meeting Christ for the first time on earth and yet they knew full well that he was/is the Son of the Most High God who was/is capable of not only tormenting them, but of also casting them into the abyss. This caused them to fall down in worship before the sovereign Son of God.

Mark’s Gospel shows that this falling down before the Lord Jesus was intended as an act of worship:

When he saw Jesus from afar, he ran and worshiped Him.” Mark 5:6


It is therefore crystal clear from the context that these unclean spirits were worshiping Christ in recognition of his divine identity, as well as from the utter terror they felt from knowing the divine power he possessed, which not only enabled/enables the Lord to destroy the kingdom of darkness with complete ease, but also bring the entire creation under his complete control:

For our citizenship is in heaven, from which we also eagerly wait for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will transform our lowly body that it may be conformed to His glorious body, according to the working by which He is able even to subdue all things to Himself.” Philippians 3:20-21

Second Case

In the following example, Jesus displays both omniscience and sovereign authority over creation:

So it was, as the multitude pressed about Him to hear the word of God, that He stood by the Lake of Gennesaret, and saw two boats standing by the lake; but the fishermen had gone from them and were washing their nets. Then He got into one of the boats, which was Simon’s, and asked him to put out a little from the land. And He sat down and taught the multitudes from the boat. When He had stopped speaking, He said to Simon, Launch out into the deep and let down your nets for a catch.’ But Simon answered and said to Him, ‘Master, we have toiled all night and caught nothing; nevertheless at Your word I will let down the net.’ And when they had done this, they caught a great number of fish, and their net was breaking. So they signaled to their partners in the other boat to come and help them. And they came and filled both the boats, so that they began to sink. When Simon Peter saw it, he fell down at Jesus’ knees, saying, Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord!For he and all who were with him were astonished at the catch of fish which they had taken; and so also were James and John, the sons of Zebedee, who were partners with Simon. And Jesus said to Simon, ‘Do not be afraid. From now on you will catch men.’” Luke 5:1-10


Peter’s reaction to Jesus’ divine knowledge and authority is virtually identical with the way the OT saints responded when confronted by the visible presence and majesty of Jehovah God himself:


Then Job answered the Lord and said: ‘I know that You can do everything, And that no purpose of Yours can be withheld from You. You asked, “Who is this who hides counsel without knowledge?” Therefore I have uttered what I did not understand, Things too wonderful for me, which I did not know. Listen, please, and let me speak; You said, “I will question you, and you shall answer Me.” I have heard of You by the hearing of the ear, But now my eye sees You. Therefore I abhor myself, And repent in dust and ashes.’” Job 42:1-6

In the year that King Uzziah died, I saw the Lord sitting on a throne, high and lifted up, and the train of His robe filled the temple. Above it stood seraphim; each one had six wings: with two he covered his face, with two he covered his feet, and with two he flew. And one cried to another and said: ‘Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts; The whole earth is full of His glory!’ And the posts of the door were shaken by the voice of him who cried out, and the house was filled with smoke. So I said: ‘Woe is me, for I am undone! Because I am a man of unclean lips, And I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips; For my eyes have seen the King, The Lord of hosts.’ Then one of the seraphim flew to me, having in his hand a live coal which he had taken with the tongs from the altar. And he touched my mouth with it, and said: ‘Behold, this has touched your lips; Your iniquity is taken away, And your sin purged.’” Isaiah 6:1-7(1)


We have more examples of Jesus being worshiped in the next section of our discussion.





(1) This example from Isaiah is particularly interesting since the NT identifies the LORD God that Isaiah saw as none other than the Lord Jesus Christ in his prehuman existence!


For instance, John’s Gospel attempts to explain why the Jews refused to believe in the Lord despite all the miraculous signs and wonders which he performed:


But although He had done so many signs before them, they did not believe in Him, that the word of Isaiah the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spoke: ‘Lord, who has believed our report? And to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed? Therefore they could not believe, because Isaiah said again: He has blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts, Lest they should see with their eyes, Lest they should understand with their hearts and turn, So that I should heal them.’  These things Isaiah said when he saw His glory and spoke of Him.” John 12:37-41


John cites Isaiah 53:1 to show that the prophet had already prophesied that the Jews would not believe Jesus’ message who refused to see in him the revelation and manifestation of the Arm of the LORD. John then quotes Isaiah 6:10 to explain that the Jews could not believe because God was basically blinding their eyes and hardening their hearts as the judgment which they deserved for persistently turning their backs on God’s repeated pleas to them to repent from their evil ways:


Also I heard the voice of the Lord, saying:Whom shall I send, And who will go for US? Then I said, ‘Here am I! Send me.’ And He said, ‘Go, and tell this people: “Keep on hearing, but do not understand; Keep on seeing, but do not perceive.” Make the heart of this people dull, And their ears heavy, And shut their eyes; Lest they see with their eyes, And hear with their ears, And understand with their heart, And return and be healed.’” Isaiah 6:8-10


The blessed Apostle then says something quite interesting which most of us often miss. He explains that the reason why Isaiah said these things is because he saw the glory of the Lord Jesus and wrote about him! Note, once again, v. 41 reads:


Isaiah said this because he saw Jesus’ glory and spoke about him.” John 12:41 New International Version (NIV)


As the NIV makes clear, the glory which John says the prophet saw is none other than Jesus’ glory, whom the Jews rejected despite all the miraculous signs that he had performed in their midst. And yet as the immediate context of Isaiah 6 which we quoted earlier shows, the One whose glory Isaiah saw was actually Yahweh’s glory, since he is the One whom the prophet saw seated on his throne surrounded by the seraphim who kept proclaiming his holiness!


In other words, the inspired Apostle is identifying Jesus Christ as the LORD God Almighty that the prophet saw seated on his throne in his heavenly glory!


This only further confirms that the reason Jesus Christ received and accepted worship is because he is Yahweh God Incarnate (even though he is not the Father or the Holy Spirit).

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Has the Roman Catholic Church betrayed the Faith once delivered to the saints?

As Spiritual Mediator, Francis Moves His Geopolitical Agenda Forward

Share This Review

Richard Bennett and Robert Nicholson

PDF Download the PDF version of this review. If you do not have Adobe Acrobat installed on your system please click here on Adobe Acrobat Reader to download.

Today the world political situation is increasingly unstable. Russia’s Putin has taken Crimea from Ukraine. The Middle East remains engulfed in fighting. Clearly, the shifting global balance of power and impotence of the UN has created an opportunity for Pope Francis to expand his own geopolitical agenda. Thus, donning the guise of a peacemaker, Francis was able to use the occasion of the fiftieth anniversary of Pope Paul VI’s visit to Israel in 1964 to launch his latest offensive for papal dominion in several spheres. It is under this rubric that Pope Francis’s trip to Israel and Palestine in May 2014, and the subsequent June 8th prayer meeting in Rome, ought to be viewed.


The basis on which Francis premised his mission was flawed. This became evident when Francis’s diplomatic rhetoric did not equate with a number of well-known facts. For example, he stated in his greeting to Shimon Peres, the president of Israel, “Peacemaking demands…respect for the dignity and freedom of every human person….”[1] Next, he said that Jews, Christians, and Muslims all believe that each person is created by God and destined to eternal life. Immediately he followed with a calculated untruth when he said, “This shared conviction enables us resolutely to pursue peaceful solutions to every controversy and conflict.”[2]Everyone knows that this so-called “shared conviction” does nothing of the sort. Rather with this statement, Francis has tacitly glossed over the fact that Muslims have vowed death to all Jews and the Jewish state. Nor does the Roman Catholic system “resolutely” pursue peaceful solutions to every controversy. Rather the Papal systemdemands a submission of intellect and will to its claimed infallible Pope. The stipulated demand is given in the following official words: “The Supreme Pontiff, in virtue of his office, possesses infallible teaching authority when, as supreme pastor and teacher of all the faithful…he proclaims with a definitive act that a doctrine of faith or morals is to be held as such.”[3] Moreover, the system pronounces a punishment for not obeying its dictates: “The Church has an innate and proper right to coerce offending members of the Christian faithful by means of penal sanctions.”[4] There is a distinct disparity between the Papacy’s words of peace and its own modus operandi. Consequently, it becomes plausible that the purpose of the Pontiff’s visit to Amman, Bethlehem, and Israel was something other than simply seeking geopolitical peace for the sake of good will.


The Plea for Peace

At the outset, Francis’s visit to Israel was a bid for world attention under the guise of a plea for “peace.” Romanist media broadcast the events stage by stage; for example, it was stated, “Upon arriving in Israel on Sunday, Pope Francis reiterated his call for peace in the Holy Land, asking that Jerusalem might truly become a ‘city of peace,’ as its name means. The Holy Father spoke of the urgency of peace, not only for Israel, but for the entire region.”[5] The Pontiff went on to say, “In union with all men and women of good will, I implore those in positions of responsibility to leave no stone unturned in the search for equitable solutions to complex problems, so that Israelis and Palestinians may live in peace.”[6] Again and again,Francis highlighted the concept of peace, although from his remarks there can be no understanding of how real peace is accomplished – that first of all, true and lasting peace is peace with God through His Son, Jesus Christ. This all-important truth had no part in Francis’s “Christian” outreach. Alongside Francis, the Jewish rabbi, Rabinowitz, spoke of “the Jerusalem of dreams.” Thus, the rabbi welcomed the Pope with, “The Jerusalem you have arrived to, honored Pope, is not only the earthly Jerusalem. It’s also the Jerusalem of dreams.”[7] Hope for the Jewish people does not consist in the establishment of some inter-faith peace program for Jerusalem but in the acknowledgment that Jesus Christ the Lord is their Savior and King. Christ alone is the one who has made peace with God on the behalf of every believing sinner, Jew and Gentile alike (see Ephesians 2:11-22; compare Romans 11:25, 26).


Francis’s Meeting with Islam’s Grand Mufti to Enhance Mutual Acceptance

The Vatican’s news service reported the setting and Francis’ words:


Meeting on Monday morning with the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Muhammed Hussein, Pope Francis pointed to the fraternal dialogue and exchange between Christians and Muslims, which he said “offers new strength to confront the common challenges before us.”


Your Excellency, Dear Muslim Faithful, Dear Friends,

I am grateful for the opportunity to meet with you in this sacred place. I thank you for the courteous invitation you have extended to me and, in particular, I wish to thank the Grand Mufti and the President of the Supreme Muslim Council…. At this moment I think of Abraham, who lived as a pilgrim in these lands. Muslims, Christians and Jews see in him, albeit in different ways, a father in faith and a great example to be imitated…. In our earthly pilgrimage we are not alone. We cross paths with other faithful; at times we share with them a stretch of the road and at other times we experience with them a moment of rest which refreshes us. Such is our meeting today. Dear brothers, dear friends, from this holy place I make a heartfelt plea to all people and to all communities who look to Abraham: may we respect and love one another! May we learn to understand the sufferings of others! May no one abuse the name of God through violence! May we work together for justice and peace! Salaam![8]


Thus, Pope Francis attempted to engender a mood of respectful rapprochement between the Papacy and Islam. The Pontiff’s objective was that of embracing Islam and its peoples within an international community of religious life and faith as “brothers and sisters.” Such a rapprochement is not Biblically possible. Christians believe in one God, wherein, within the one Godhead, there exist three Persons. Islam rejects this Biblical truth.  The Qur’an declares, “Certainly they disbelieve who say: Surely Allah is the third (person) of the three; and there is no god but the one God, and if they desist not from what they say, a painful chastisement shall befall those among them who disbelieve” (Surah 5:73).[9]


The Bible proclaims Christ’s sacrificial death on the cross in place of the believer, “In Whom we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His grace” (Ephesians 1:7). Islam passionately rejects the crucifixion of Christ Jesus. Thus, the Qur’an declares,


And their saying: Surely we have killed the Messiah, Isa son of Marium, the apostle of Allah; and they did not kill him nor did they crucify him, but it appeared to them so (like Isa) and most surely those who differ therein are only in a doubt about it; they have no knowledge respecting it, but only follow a conjecture, and they killed him not for sure. (Surah 4:157)[10]


The Bible proclaims Christ Jesus as divine, being the brightness of the divine glory, and the express image of God. In the Qur’an Christ Jesus is debased as solely an apostle of Allah. Thus, the Qur’an states, “O followers of the Book! do not exceed the limits in your religion, and do not speak (lies) against Allah, but (speak) the truth; the Messiah, Isa son of Marium is only an apostle of Allah” (Surah 4.171).


However, Christ Jesus declared, “Before Abraham was, I am” (John 8:58).“I and my Father are one” (John 10:30).“I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins” (John 8:24).


A religion that rejects Christ’s divinityis irreconcilably anti-Biblical and anti-Christian and leaves its adherents without hope, dead in their sins. It is an absurd blasphemy that Pope Francis, in accepting Muslims as “brothers and sisters,” implied that the sovereign God of the Bible is the same one as the infidel god of Islam. Thus, for Francis to show respect and deference to the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem and Islam before the Lord God is a denial of Christ’s person and work, and hence, of the Gospel itself. Nevertheless, the media reported that on June 8, 2014, “Islamic Prayers and readings from the Quran were heard from the Vatican for thefirst time in history.”[11]This was occasioned at Pope Francis’s express invitation.


Pope Francis’s Homily at Mass in the Upper Room Denies Biblical Truth

The Pontiff presented the Roman Mass as an enactment of Christ’s sacrifice at the alleged site of the Last Supper. Francis’s performance was impeccable with richly anointed serpentine words:


The Upper Room reminds us, through the Eucharist, of sacrifice. In every Eucharistic celebration Jesus offers himself for us to the Father, so that we too can be united with him, offering to God our lives, our work, our joys and our sorrows…offering everything as a spiritual sacrifice.[12]


The one offering of Christ, willed by the Father, was a single, never to be repeated historical event. The divine perfection is seen in the fact that it was the one acceptable sacrifice, once offered (see Hebrews 10:12-14). Only on Calvary, in the person and work of the Son of God, do we see that “Mercy and truth are met together; righteousness and peace have kissed each other” (Psalm 85:10). Only for those who trust solely in God’s work of redemption is it true that “the work of righteousness shall be peace; and the effect of righteousness quietness and assurance forever” (Isaiah 32:17; compare Romans 10:4; 1 Corinthians 1:30; 2 Corinthians 5:21; and Philippians 3:9). To teach that the Roman Mass is a reenactment and repetition of the one offering is to denigrate the very will and purpose of the Father. The majesty, power, and absolute perfection of Christ Jesus the Lord is seen in this one satisfaction, once offered, to divine justice. The truth of the exclusive excellence of Christ’s sacrifice is highlighted by the word “once.” For example, the Scriptures teach, “For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God” (Romans 6:10). And“so Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation” (Hebrews 9:28; compare 10:15). Thus, for the Pope to say, “We too can be united with him, offering to God our lives, our work, our joys and our sorrows…offering everything as a spiritual sacrifice” is arrogance of the highest order. His statement shows that there is no fear of God in his eyes. Christ Jesus alone was qualified to offer Himself. He alone had the absolutely unique qualifications as the Holy Spirit teaches, “For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens” (Hebrews 7:26). Consequently, for Francis to enact a sacrifice in what is called the Mass, in which people were also advised to offer themselves, is utter blasphemy! The death of the Lord Jesus Christ on Calvary’s cross was a singular, once for all time, redemptive act of the Lord God. Thus, for Francis to say that “In every Eucharistic celebration Jesus offers himself for us to the Father” not only attempts to denigrate the will and purpose of God but also eviscerates the divine standard for absolute holiness and righteousness in Christ as the unique, perfect, spotless Lamb of God (see John 1:29, 36: compare 1 Peter 1:18-20). The Lord’s insightful words apply now to Francis and his upper room theatrics, “Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity” (Matthew 23:28).


Neither Pope Francis nor Orthodox Patriarch Bartholomew Believe the Gospel

Since returning to the Vatican, Francis has spoken of his Roman Church as Christians “along the path to Christian unity.” His exact words are,


Dear Brothers and Sisters: My apostolic journey to the Holy Land in these days was a great grace for me and for the whole Church. It commemorated the fiftieth anniversary of the meeting of Pope Paul VI and Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras, which marked a milestone along the path to Christian unity. Patriarch Bartholomaios and I prayed together as brothers before the tomb of the Risen Lord and we renewed our commitment to work for full communion between the Churches.[13]


In Jerusalem, Francis began his address with these words, “In this Basilica, which all Christians regard with the deepest veneration, my pilgrimage in the company of my beloved brother in Christ, His Holiness Bartholomaios, now reaches its culmination.”[14] Francis’s presupposition is that both he and the Orthodox Patriarch are Christians. This is an absolute falsehood. It is totally untrue, in both cases. In the case of the Orthodox Church, it plainly teaches a system of salvation radically different from what God’s Word teaches. The major area in which Eastern Orthodoxy differs radically from the plain teaching of Holy Scripture is justification. Here are two examples of Orthodox teaching on the subject:


Justification is not given once and for all, nor is it a guarantee of eternal salvation, but it depends on how much a man will live righteously or sinfully in the future. There exists no such thing judicially that instantly converts a sinful person into a righteous one.[15]


Therefore, it is no wonder that the Orthodox doctrine of justification plays such a minor role. The most common presentation of the Orthodox teaching on religion by John of Damascus does not mention the concept of justification at all.[16]


In contrast, numerous passages in Holy Scripture demonstrate that true believers, depending on justification received by faith alone in Christ alone, know they are accepted by God the Father in Christ as the beloved, precisely because of who He is and what He alone accomplished (see Ephesians 1:6, 7; compare Romans 1:17; Galatians 3:11; and Hebrews 10:38). Examples include: “Verily, verily, I say unto you, he that heareth my word, and believeth on Him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life…. And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand” (John 5:24; 10:28). In spite of these clear words that both men ought to know and recognize as absolute truth, Francis lauded the Orthodox Patriarch Bartholomew as a brother, which in some ways he may be. But by their words and their positions, each of them demonstrates that he is not in Christ.


Pope Thanked Mary Through Prayer for the Outcome of His Visit.

A Romanist website gave an account of Francis’s prayer to Mary in these words:


Pope Francis made a private visit to the basilica of Saint Mary Majoron Tuesday morning to thank Our Lady for the positive outcome of his apostolic visit to the Holy Land…. Vatican Radio reports that Cardinal Abril y Castello, Archpriest of the Basilica, said that Pope Francis arrived at about 11 A.M. with a bouquet of flowers for Our Lady to thank Her for the good outcome of his journey and to entrust to Her the fruits of his pilgrimage.[17]


The Scripture teaches that believers are to exalt Jesus Christ in prayer. Thus, Mary, like all the blessed believers who have gone before us, is not to be addressed at all, let alone exalted in prayer. Prayer in its very essence is an act of worship that bows in acknowledgement of God’s transcendent excellence. “Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else” (Isaiah 45:21, 22; compare Psalm 32:6; 69:13; Micah 7:7; and John 3:13). As Scripture states, “thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve” (Matthew 4:10).The Lord God in Jesus Christ alone is worthy of exaltation in prayer. Consequently, He alone justly deserves our praise, “Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honor and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created” (Revelation 4:11). All is of Him and all must be to Him (see Romans 11:36). Francis did not obey the Lord God in this important matter; rather, he exalted Mary in prayer. In Scripture the question is asked, “Should not a people seek unto their God? for the living to the dead? To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them” (Isaiah 8:19, 20). Thus, the verdict of the Lord according to His Word is true for Francis because,“there is no light”in him. Francis’s prayer to “Our Lady to thank Her” was from the depths of spiritual darkness within him. After his trip to Israel, the Pontiff chose the falsehood of the Roman tradition of praying to Mary rather than praying to the Lord.



The Pope’s pilgrimage to the holy land and its aftermath show again Francis’s astute Jesuistry. He has made it known again and again that he is not attempting to mediate politically between his Israeli and Palestinian visitors. Rather, the role he is purportedly attempting to play is that of spiritual mediator. Several issues come to mind. First, the Pope represents both an apostate religious system, the Roman Catholic Church, and a civil state, the Holy See. Its ruling structure is absolutely authoritarian and totalitarian. Secondly, that he invited two heads-of-state, Peres and Abbas, to make a joint visit in his private apartment was clearly a political-diplomatic act. These men are not known for their roles in their respective religions, but both are civil-political functionaries. A two-fold cover was used: first, the Orthodox Patriarch Bartholomew was also invited and secondly, this gathering was to be a prayer meeting. This Pope is very aware that any country’s civil order is based on the dominant religion of its people. It must be remembered that the Papacy has for centuries thought of itself as “from above” or spiritual while all others, including all heads of civil states, as “from below” or earthly. Francis fully believes this and is simply putting into practice what he credits as true about the Roman system and himself as its head. Therefore, having gone out to visit these “lesser” heads in their own countries, he has publicly invited them to his home in Rome for a prayer gathering – as would be expected of a Pope, purportedly putting the religious before all else.


This new praxis is really just an application of a global inter-faith extension of principles Rome adopted in their Second Vatican Council of 1962-1965. One of the major changes formally drafted at that Council was the initiation of a program of false ecumenism. The resolve was that all other “Christian” institutional denominations and their members are now to be drawn back into full communion under Papal Rome. Before Vatican Council II, Roman Catholics called Evangelicals heretics. From Vatican Council II onwards, they have been called “separated brethren,” and hence are to be wooed, “little by little,”[18] back into the Roman Catholic fold. Moreover, post-Vatican Council II Roman Catholics are being taught to identify themselves not as Catholic, which they had done previously, but rather as “Christian,” a distinct change. Thus, since Vatican Council II, Papal Rome has been working tirelessly to have itself recognized as the Christian Church. All others, especially Evangelicals, remain designated as “separated brethren,” and they may only obtain recognition as authentic Christians by returning to communion with Mother Church. Papal Rome is working towards the time when she will be accepted as the ipso facto Head of Christendom.


This policy of appropriating power by stealth over all of Christendom has a wider reference. Contemporaneously, the Papal system has other fish to land: the Muslims and the Jews. The Vatican wants to sit at the head of a world-encompassing religious-unity. An intensely subtle, but important unwarranted claim of this coveted privilege of headship has been projected to the world both with the May visit of the “peacemaker” Pope to the Middle East and the subsequent visit of Peres and Abbas to Rome on June 8, 2014. It was clever that the home of the Pope was chosen for this meeting of men from four different religions. As such, it could be said that it was a private home in which all were asked to pray for peace, not together, but at least in the same place. Each representative could pray to his own god without being in another’s consecrated space. So this dramatic exhibition of practical inter-faith peace seeking among four major religions (Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Jewish, and Muslim) under the Pope’s sponsorship, set a precedent. The Pontiff had graciously taken the initiative to host and support the spectacle. The use of mock humility, elaborate diplomatic courtesy, specious hospitality, and benign directive encouragement positioned Francis as honorary chairman of the inter-faith effort for peace. The fish indeed fell to the baited lure, hook, line, and sinker. Thus while aping Christ’s divine prerogatives as spiritual mediator over His Church, this Pope is achieving major diplomatic-political gains for the Vatican.


Francis is first and always a Jesuit, his mind having been specifically formed to think within those terms.[19] For nearly five hundred years, the Jesuits have led a movement to restore the Roman Catholic Church to the position it enjoyed before the Reformation of the sixteenth century. As an elite cohort of foot soldiers absolutely loyal to the Papacy, Jesuits became tutors and teachers to the children of kings, rulers, and important families in each country. Thus, they gained access to those in positions of civil power and influence to the end that the nations that had been part of the Holy Roman Empire would again submit to Roman Catholic teachings and law.[20] Even in modern democracies, the Jesuits have wormed themselves into positions of influence in politics, media, and state agencies. They always act firstly, and only, in the interests of the Roman State Church. If Francis the Jesuit has become the honorary conductor of the world’s peace train, we may be sure that the Vatican will set the price of the tickets.


But there is only one spiritual peacemaker, the Lord Jesus Christ. The true believer looks to Christ Jesus as the sole mediator, “for there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus”(2 Timothy 2:5). The splendor of the Gospel is that the believer’s heart is set on Christ, the fountain of life, where he drinks more and more deeply of the rivers of pleasure that are at His right hand. Eternal life is to be found only in Christ Jesus through His perfect life and all sufficient sacrifice. “But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord” (2 Corinthians 2:18). This is the true focus, because a believer learns to look more consistently to the Lord Jesus Christ alone for life. How completely different this is from the goal and destiny that Francis and Papal Rome hold out to people.Rome directs her people, and mankind in general, to look to physical sacraments and her ruling hierarchy that upholds her sacraments. The Biblical Gospel does not involve looking to physical signs. Rather, believers are to follow the Biblical injunction to look “unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God”(Hebrews 12:2). He is the author and finisher of their faith, its beginning, and end. “Looking to Jesus” is to keep one’s heart and mind stayed upon Him. In Him is grace. He is the fountain of all grace and supplies all the needs of each believer. The believer’s life is drawn from Christ, and directed to Him. He is its initial principle and the final end of it. True life is that which is lived in personal, intimate communion with Christ, as the Apostle Paul so eloquently stated, “For to me to live is Christ.” It means that, as a person justified by the All Holy God alone, he is to walk with the Lord Jesus Christ, taking His yoke upon him and learning of Him, so that he drinks deeply from His written Word and begins to follow what the Scripture says rather than devising his own ways. Abundance of grace far surpasses the evils of sin. Once a believing sinner accepts Christ Jesus as his only surety before the All Holy God, he finds himself not only freed from his sins, but also made to “reign in life.” “For if by one man’s offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ” (Romans 5:17). Those who receive the abundant grace given by Christ are not only redeemed from the empire of death, they live and reign with Him as they are sanctified daily through His Word by the Holy Spirit, and by constant fellowship with Him. With Him also they shall forever live and reign, world without end. Through Christ Jesus, grace reigns with sovereign freedom, power, and bounty! “Blessed be his glorious name for ever: and let the whole earth be filled with his glory; Amen, and Amen” (Psalm 72:19).


Richard Bennett’s free Videos are easy to view and forward to others at:



[3] Catechism of the Catholic Church, Paragraph 891.

[4] Code of Canon Law,Latin-English edition (Canon Law Society of America, 1983), Canon 1311.

[5] “Pope’s Address to Israeli Authorities on Arrival in Tel Aviv,” May 25, 2014, http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/pope-s-address-to-israeli-authorities-on-arrival-in-tel-aviv.

[6] “Pope’s Address to Israeli Authorities on Arrival in Tel Aviv,” May 25, 2014, http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/pope-s-address-to-israeli-authorities-on-arrival-in-tel-aviv.

[7]Ari Yashar, “Pope Francis I Makes Trip to Israel; Stirs Controversy over ‘State of Palestine’ Remark,” May 28, 2014, http://jewishvoiceny.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=7522:pope-francis-i-makes-historic-trip-to-israel-stirs-controversy-over-state-of-palestine-remark&catid =107:israel&Itemid=290.

[8]Official Vatican Network, “Pope Francis to Muslims: We Must Confront Common Challenges,” May 26, 2014, http://www.news.va/en/news/pope-francis-to-muslims-we-must-confront-common-ch.

[9] Unless otherwise noted, all quotes from the Koran are from this site: http://www.hti.umich.edu/k/koran/.

[10] “Pope’s Address to Israeli Authorities on Arrival in Tel Aviv,” May 25, 2014, http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/pope-s-address-to-israeli-authorities-on-arrival-in-tel-aviv.

[11]Jordon Schachtel, “On Sunday, Islamic Prayers and Readings from the Quaran Heard from the Vatican for the First Time in History,” June 9, 2014, http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/06/08/Islamic-Prayers-Heard-at-Vatican-For-First-Time-as-Pope-Hosts-Israeli-Palestinian-Leaders-For-Interfaith-Prayer

[12] “Pope Francis’ Homily at Mass in the Upper Room,” May 26, 2014, http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/pope-francis-homily-at-mass-in-the-upper-room.

[13]“Pope Francis General Audience St. Peter’s Square, Wednesday, 28 May 2014,” http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/audiences/2014/documents/papa-francesco_ 20140528_udienza-generale.html

[14]“Francis’ Address at Prayer Service with Patriarch Barthol-omew,” May 25, 2014, http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/francis-address-at-prayer-service-with-patriarch-bartholomew.

[15] What Do Orthodox Christians Believe? (Lamp Publishing of the Little Orthodoxy Library, 1996), 9.

[16] Ernst Benz, The Spirit and Life of the Eastern Church (Sarajevo, Bosnia: Svetlost Press, 1991), 48.

[17] “Pope Visits Rome Basilica to Thank Our Lady for Holy Land Pilgrimage,” May 27, 2014, http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/pope-visits-rome-basilica-to-thank-our-lady-for-holy-land-pilgrimage.

[18]Vatican Council II Document Number 32, “Decree on Ecumenism,” Section 4, “…little by little, as the obstacles to perfect ecclesiastical communion are overcome, all Christians will be gathered, in a common celebration of the Eucharist, into the unity of the one and only Church…. This unity, we believe, subsists in the Catholic Church as something she can never lose….”

[19] See Richard Bennett, “Key to Pope Francis’s Identity:  Master of the Jesuit Spiritual Exercises,” http://www.bereanbeacon.org/articles/on-catholicism/master-of-the-jesuit-spiritual-exercises.html.

[20]In the Holy Roman Empire, if king or prince did not bow to papal demands, the Pope could issue an Interdict, which released the people of that nation from their oaths of allegiance to the ruler. When a country was placed under Interdict, public worship ceased, the churches were closed, the sacraments deemed necessary for salvation were no longer administered. Thus the people would rise up against the civil power, as happened in England with King John II. It is hard to think that the modern papal cabal would willingly lay aside this old but proven tactic.

- See more at: http://www.trinityfoundation.org/latest.php#sthash.Ygmqp2BC.dpuf

The Trinity Foundation hereby grants permission to all readers to download, print, and distribute on paper or electronically any of its Reviews, provided that each reprint bear our copyright notice, current addresses, and telephone numbers, and provided that all such reproductions are distributed to the public without charge. The Reviews may not be sold or issued in book form, CD-ROM form, or microfiche. – See more at: http://www.trinityfoundation.org/latest.php#sthash.Ygmqp2BC.dpuf
Copyright © 1998-2011 The Trinity Foundation
Post Office 68, Unicoi, Tennessee 37692
Phone: 423.743.0199 Fax: 423.743.2005 – See more at: http://www.trinityfoundation.org/latest.php#sthash.Ygmqp2BC.VmVwEMsc.dpuf
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment