The Lord Jesus said ‘Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.’ Jesus also said of Himself “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” Sadly, some “twist” God’s truth and thereby many miss the ONLY way to Heaven. The following article concerns a woman who leads First Presbyterian in Birmingham, AL https://www.fpcbham.org/projects.
The article states ‘We’ve seen a lot of scripture twisting in our day, but nothing quite like the dark arts performed by Pastrix Terry Hamilton Poore, Head of Staff at the Crypt Church of Birmingham, Alabama, which is a PCUSA Church. Poore gained prominence when she led the fight in her state AGAINST restrictive anti-abortion laws, declaring ” The religious community needs to stand with women, work for just laws, and demonstrate respect for women’s abilities to make decisions about their own lives.”
‘“Whatever may be urged in favor of Biblical Revision, it is at least undeniable that the undertaking involves a tremendous risk.
Our Authorized Version is the one religious link which at present binds together ninety millions of English-speaking men scattered over the earth’s surface. Is it reasonable that so unutterably precious, so sacred a bond should be endangered, for the sake of representing certain words more accurately, here and there translating a tense with greater precision, getting rid of a few archaisms?
It may be confidently assumed that no ‘Revision’ of our Authorized Version, however judiciously executed, will ever occupy the place in public esteem which is actually enjoyed by the work of the Translators of 1611, the noblest literary work in the Anglo-Saxon language. We shall in fact never have another ‘Authorized Version.’
Here’s what Gordon College states on their website saying ‘Gordon is a vibrant community of believers, a place where Christian faith frames all aspects of the experience—from residence life to athletics to academics. We want students to think deeply and holistically about how their faith informs their influence in society—now and well into the future. Intentional programming and organic relationships propel students to grow in Christian character and deepen their trust in Jesus.’
However, what they state and what they do is different for ‘Gordon College in Wenham, Massachusetts, this week cancelled three speaking engagements with a speaker who sparked student protests for his alleged “misogynist” and “transphobic” comments.
The speaker, Marvin Daniels—an ordained minister and executive director of The Hope Center—spoke in chapel at the evangelical school on Monday. According to Gordon’s student publication, The Gordon Review, Daniels was scheduled to address the school in three more sessions as part of “Deep Faith Week.” But those were cancelled after students objected to Daniels’ chapel address on social media and announced a walkout.
During his chapel talk, Daniels addressed issues of gender and sexuality, affirming the categories of male and female. Then, speaking about what he called “a culture in chaos,” Daniels added, “We got individuals that say, ‘I feel like I’m a female,’ and they get a chance to participate in female activities. Back in the day I wish that would work. I would have been saying ‘I feel like a female,’ so I can get into girls’ locker room. Come on now.”
Daniels also addressed issues related to dating and premarital sex, stating: “It’s amazing to see that even in the church, my Christian brothers (are) out there treating young ladies like they’re urinals and I am concerned about that.”
He added: “And I’m concerned about my Christian sisters who dress like they desserts on a menu and then they get upset when a brother wants to place an order.”
During the service, students began to react via social posts. “Who does he think he is?” asked one student on Instagram with the moniker ‘Gordon Gossip Girl.’
Another account, @AlanaGordonCollege, posted details of a student rally in solidarity with women and the LGBTQA+ community “traumatized by the degrading statements made in chapel this morning.” It was planned for after Daniels’ session that evening.
A student account stated: “We believe the words Daniels chose to make his point were hateful to both women and the trans community as well as many others . . . We want to show Gordon that they cannot continue inviting someone who will spread more hate than love.”
Shortly after the chapel address, Gordon College president Michael Hammond e-mailed the student body to say he would “personally address” them in a session that evening but Daniels would not.
My advice to any Bible believing Christian is to stay with the Authorized King James Bible. Now, ‘Bible Gateway is a searchable online Bible in more than 200 versions‘ so it was therefore a surprise at least to me that ‘A controversial Bible version popular among charismatic and Pentecostal Christians has been pulled from the world’s top Bible search website, Bible Gateway.
Frequently criticized by biblical scholars as a paraphrase mislabeled as a translation, The Passion Translation (TPT), which seeks to “recapture the emotion of God’s Word,” was reportedly removed from the site as of February 1.
TPT was first released in 2017 as a New Testament with the Psalms. It now also includes Genesis, Isaiah, Proverbs, and the Song of Solomon.
BroadStreet Publishing, which markets and distributes The Passion Translation (TPT), confirmed the removal from Bible Gateway in a statement to Christianity Today(CT). BroadStreet noted that Bible Gateway gave “no explanation” for TPT’s removal but added: “Bible Gateway has the right to make decisions as they see fit with the platforms they manage.”
A representative of HarperCollins Christian Publishing, which owns Bible Gateway, told CT that the decision involved a realignment of business goals.
However, as first reported by Church Watch Central, evangelist and TPT lead translator Brian Simmons of Passion and Fire Ministries blamed the removal on cancel culture.
“So, cancel culture is alive in the church world,” wrote Simmons. “Bible Gateway just removed TPT from their platform.” Simmons also alleged that a critic of TPT paid scholars to “trash” the translation, but did not post any documentation.
Simmons then called on his followers to contact Bible Gateway and request it back. However, that Facebook post has since been deleted.
The Roys Report reached out to Simmons but did not hear back by publication time.
Several scholars of various Protestant Christian traditions have criticized TPT since its release. Andrew Shead, Ph.D., a member of the NIV Committee on Bible Translation, authored a 7,600-word criticism in The Gospel Coalition’s Themelios journal.
“TPT is not just a new translation; it is a new text, and its authority derives solely from its creator,” wrote Shead. “TPT is not a Bible, and any church that treats it as such and receives it as canon will, by that very action, turn itself into an unorthodox sect.”
Other vocal critics of TPT include Reformed charismatic pastor Andrew Wilson of King’s Church London and Calvary Chapel-trained pastor Mike Winger. Winger’s website and YouTube channel, Bible Thinker, has produced 12 videos with scholars critically reviewing the Bible version.
Evangelical parachurch ministry Got Questions provides lengthy analysis of TPT. The website includes an earlier statement from Simmons, since revised on the TPT website. He once stated his translation is “about prioritizing God’s original message over the words’ literal meaning.”
Got Questions compares one verse, Luke 1:37, in several translations. “For nothing will be impossible with God,” the verse states in the ESV. “For no word from God will ever fail,” it reads in the recent NIV translation. The Passion Translation renders this verse as: “No promise of God is empty of power, for with God there is no such thing as impossibility.”
The Message, which late author Eugene Peterson maintained was his own paraphrase of the Bible and not a translation, remains on Bible Gateway. Peterson, who died in 2018, told CT in a 2002 interview that he felt “uneasy” about The Message being used in public worship. By contrast, Simmons and his ministry applaud using TPT as the primary text in sermons.
An official website for TPT lists about 20 Christian ministers who have given “Endorsements” to the paraphrase. These include figures such as Bill Johnson of Bethel Church, Chuck Pierce of Glory of Zion International Ministries, Heidi Baker of Iris Global, and Bible teacher John Bevere.
On the TPT website, an FAQ page notes that “respected scholars and editors” have evaluated Simmons’ translation work but does not name them.
Addressing his qualifications to serve as lead Bible translator, Simmons said in a recent interview: “My qualifications are that I was told to do this from the Lord. Whatever he tells you to do, he will meet the need you have to finish it.”
Dr. Jeff Riddle reviews ‘…Matthew Barrett’s comments on problems with modern translations, with respect to the doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son, in his book Simply Trinity (Baker 2021), recently named by Christianity Today as a 2022 book of the year in the category of theology and ethics (read about it here). Among other things, Barrett points out that in the twentieth century scholars “erased ‘only begotten’ from John’s corpus and replace this phrase with ‘only’ or ‘unique’ instead,” adding that due to this change “generations of Christians were never introduced to the concept of eternal generation” (186). He also announces, “that consensus is now changing, and fast” (187). This illustrates the sometimes subtle (or not so subtle) theological problems that arise from modern texts and modern translations. I also covered this issue in WM 207, reviewing part of a conversation between Barrett and Charles Lee Irons, and I did a text note on John 1:18 in WM 56.’http://www.jeffriddle.net/2022/01/wm-222-barrett-modern-translations.html
The Masoretic Hebrew Text and the Traditional Received Text gives the Bible believing Christian stability knowing they have the very Words of the Living God. John 17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.
Translation whether it is the Bible or some other book is taking one language over into another. In the case of the Bible it is taking the Hebrew Old Testament and the Greek New Testament over into the English language. The supreme English translation for over four hundred years has been the Authorized Bible also known as the King James Bible. However, since the late 1800’s there has been hundreds of Bible versions published from what is called the Critical Greek text produced by Westcott and Hort. It is that text that most translators use today in the New Testament.
Does it really matter if the Critical Greek text is used rather than the text the Authorized Bible translators used? Well, yes it does. It has been shown by Dr. Jack Moorman that there are eight thousand difference between the New Testament Greek Words of the King James Bible compared to the Text used by the modern versions such as the ESV and others.
Now, all the above is said because ‘The headlines in Christian media this weekend seemed to tell a remarkable, feel-good story: Attendees at a virtual women’s conference pledged more than $1.5 million to an effort to translate the Bible for unreached people.
More than 750 women viewing the IF: Gathering conference March 6 signed up within the first five minutes to support IllumiNations’ 12 Verse Challenge, which asks donors to pledge $35 a month for a year to help cover translation costs for 12 Bible verses. Christianity Today was among those reporting the story. The women raised enough to translate a full Bible—$1 million—in five hours, CT said.
The total number of givers as of March 16 has topped 6,300, which organizers of the event said would fund more than 46,300 verses.
If you go to https://illuminations.bible/about you will see they partner with many translation organizations including the United Bible Societies (UBS). The UBS’s Greek New Testament second Edition states on page v that one of its four principal translation stages is based ‘on the basis of the Westcott and Hort’s edition of the Greek New Testament’. Westcott and Hort despised the Greek Text underlying the King James Bible!
Any translation from a text other than the one underlying the King James Bible will give you an unreliable version of the Bible. Simply put the money given to IllumiNations and others like it are simply producing counterfeits! As Dr. Floyd Nolen Jones says in his book WHICH VERSION IS THE BIBLE Page 22 ‘Is there someone who has always hated God’s Word, wanted to destroy it, and has attempted to cloud man’s mind and heart about its validity? In other words, as we read the Bible, is there any evidence that somebody has founded a “Yea, has God said” society? According to Genesis 3:1, Bible corruption began with Satan. Satan is the original Bible revisor. When he confronted Eve in the garden, he added to God’s Word, he subtracted, he diluted and finally substituted his own doctrine for that which God had said. We find this occurring today. People are trying to add books to the Old and subtract words from the New Testament. Nothing has changed. We need to understand that the devil is promoting this continuing attack on the Word of God.’
Many years ago after attending schools that leaned toward the NIV and other versions based on the Critical text of Westcott and Hort I came to the personal conviction that the Authorized Bible based on the Received Greek Text and the Masoretic Hebrew Text was God’s Word in the English language. Here is the testimony of Alex Bowler https://www.alexbowlerevangelism.com/why-i-use-the-king-james-bible.html as to why he uses only the Authorized Bible, the King James Bible.
The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever. Psalm 12:6 & 7
‘A Personal Testimony
Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you: Matthew 7:7
As a new Christian I decided to read three Bibles: the New International Version, the Good News Bible and the King James Bible. I thought that the NIV and GNB, written in modern English, would help me to understand the King James Bible better. During my Bible studies however, I began to notice great differences between the King James Bible and the other two versions. I saw that passages about the deity of Christ, the blood of Jesus, the Trinity and other important doctrines had been changed, watered down or even deleted in the NIV and GNB and I grew increasingly uneasy about this. I knew in my heart that God must have preserved His true word for us to read so one day I prayed: “Lord, please show me which Bible you want me to use, which Bible is your true word.” Later that same day I decided to go for a walk in a nearby park, and saw in the distance a Christian friend, who attended a local Anglican Church, walking towards me. As she approached me I could see that she was carrying a Bible under her arm. We greeted each other and then she said, “Hi! Guess what? The Lord spoke to me today and told me to bring this King James Bible to your parents’ house and to give it to you!”
From that day I have only read and preached from the King James Bible – God’s pure preserved words in English.
For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ. Jude:4
Brooke Foss Westcott (1825 – 1901) Fenton John Anthony Hort (1828 – 1892)
‘ …. ye have perverted the words of the living God, …’ Jeremiah 23:36
The 4th Century Roman emperor Constantine wanted to bring unity between Christians and pagans. He therefore commissioned the creation of fifty Alexandrian ‘bibles’. It is speculated that the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus manuscripts, which underlie modern versions, are part of this fifty but if so, why are there so many differences between them?
In 1844 Lobegott Friedrich Constantin (von) Tischendorf claimed to have found 86 sheets of vellum, in a wastepaper bin which were to be burned, in the Roman Catholic St Catherine’s Monastery at the foot of Mt. Sinai in Egypt. He later claimed that by 1859 he obtained what they came from: a huge codex he called Sinaiticus. This included parts of the Old Testament, all of the New Testament, as well as the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas. A Greek palaeographer, Constantine Simonides, really threw the cat amongst the pidgeons and infuriated Von Tischendorf, who was glorying in his ‘discovery’ and his publication of Sinaiticus in 1862, when he claimed that same year to have produced Sinaiticus himself twenty years earlier!
Two 19th Century liberal Anglican churchmen, Westcott and Hort, studied Vaticanus and Sinaiticus and liked what they saw! They set out to create a NEW bible and saw their inclusion on the committee formed to undertake a modest revision of the King James Bible as a golden opportunity to introduce their radical and heretical changes, even insisting on the inclusion in that committee of the Unitarian scholar Dr. Vance Smith! (This revision of the King James Bible was sanctioned by the Southern Convocation of the Church of England.) Using Vaticanus and Sinaiticus they changed the historical Greek New Testament text to conform to those corrupt Alexandrian manuscripts! The result was the notorious English Revised Version of 1881, which horrified evangelical Christians on its publication and caused an outcry! This was the start of the counter-Reformation in earnest! The rot truly set in in 1881. (NB The New Testament was published in 1881, the Old Testament in 1885)
A wicked plan was put in place to flood Bible colleges, churches and bookshops with fake ‘bibles’ produced from these corrupt manuscripts and to attack by all means the pure preserved words of the Lord in English – the King James Bible. This plan continues to this day with a vengeance!
18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.. 19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. 20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. Matthew 7:18-20
Statements of Westcott and Hort
The following quotes are taken from the diaries and letters of Westcott and Hort.
1846 Oct. 25th – Westcott: “Is there not that in the principles of the “Evangelical” school which must lead to the exaltation of the individual minister, and does not that help to prove their unsoundness? If preaching is the chief means of grace, it must emanate not from the church, but from the preacher, and besides placing him in a false position, it places him in a fearfully dangerous one.” (Life, Vol.I, pp.44,45).
Oct., 22nd after Trinity Sunday – Westcott: “Do you not understand the meaning of Theological ‘Development’? It is briefly this, that in an early time some doctrine is proposed in a simple or obscure form, or even but darkly hinted at, which in succeeding ages,as the wants of men’s minds grow, grows with them – in fact, that Christianity is always progressive in its principles and doctrines” (Life, Vol.I, p.78).
Dec. 23rd – Westcott: “My faith is still wavering. I cannot determine how much we must believe; how much, in fact, is necessarily required of a member of the Church.” (Life, Vol.I, p.46).
1847 Jan., 2nd Sunday after Epiphany – Westcott: “After leaving the monastery we shaped our course to a little oratory…It is very small, with one kneeling-place; and behind a screen was a ‘Pieta’ the size of life (i.e. a Virgin and dead Christ)…I could not help thinking on the grandeur of the Romish Church, on her zeal even in error, on her earnestness and self-devotion, which we might, with nobler views and a purer end, strive to imitate. Had I been alone I could have knelt there for hours.” (Life, Vol.I, p.81).
1848 July 6th – Hort: “One of the things, I think, which shows the falsity of the Evangelical notion of this subject (baptism), is that it is so trim and precise…no deep spiritual truths of the Reason are thus logically harmonious and systematic…the pure Romish view seems to me nearer, and more likely to lead to, the truth than the Evangelical…the fanaticism of the bibliolaters, among whom reading so many ‘chapters’ seems exactly to correspond to the Romish superstition of telling so many dozen beads on a rosary…still we dare not forsake the Sacraments, or God will forsake us…I am inclined to think that no such state as ‘Eden’ (I mean the popular notion) ever existed, and that Adam’s fall in no degree differed from the fall of each of his descendants” (Life, Vol.I, pp.76-78).
Aug. 11th – Westcott: “I never read an account of a miracle (in Scripture?) but I seem instinctively to feel its improbability, and discover some want of evidence in the account of it.” (Life, Vol.I, p.52).
Nov., Advent Sunday – Westcott: “All stigmatise him (a Dr. Hampden) as a ‘heretic,’…I thought myself that he was grievously in error, but yesterday I read over the selections from his writings which his adversaries make, and in them I found systematically expressed the very strains of thought which I have been endeavouring to trace out for the last two or three years. If he be condemned, what will become of me?” (Life, Vol.I,p.94).
1850 May 12th – Hort: “You ask me about the liberty to be allowed to clergymen in their views of Baptism. For my own part, I would gladly admit to the ministry such as hold Gorham’s view, much more such as hold the ordinary confused Evangelical notions” (Life, Vol.I, p.148).
July 31st – Hort: “I spoke of the gloomy prospect, should the Evangelicals carry on their present victory so as to alter the Services.” (Life, Vol.I, p.160).
1851 Feb. 7th – Hort: “Westcott is just coming out with his Norrisian on ‘The Elements of the Gospel Harmony.’ I have seen the first sheet on Inspiration, which is a wonderful step in advance of common orthodox heresy.” (Life, Vol.I, p.181).
1851 Dec. 29,30th – Hort: “I had no idea till the last few weeks of the importance of texts, having read so little Greek Testament, and dragged on with the villainous Textus Receptus. Think of that vile Textus Receptus leaning entirely on late MSS.; it is a blessing there are such early ones” (Life, Vol.I, p.211).
1858 Oct. 21st – Further I agree with them in condemning many leading specific doctrines of the popular theology as, to say the least, containing much superstition and immorality of a very pernmicious kind…The positive doctrines even of the Evangelicals seem to me perverted rather than untrue…There are, I fear, still more serious differences between us on the subject of authority, and especially the authority of the Bible” (Life, Vol.I, p.400).
1860 Apr. 3rd – Hort: “But the book which has most engaged me is Darwin. Whatever may be thought of it, it is a book that one is proud to be contemporary with. I must work out and examine the argument in more detail, but at present my feeling is strong that the theory is unanswerable.” (Life, Vol.I, p.416).
Oct. 15th – Hort: “I entirely agree – correcting one word – with what you there say on the Atonement, having for many years believed that “the absolute union of the Christian (or rather, of man) with Christ Himself” is the spiritual truth of which the popular doctrine of substitution is an immoral and material counterfeit…Certainly nothing can be more unscriptural than the modern limiting of Christ’s bearing our sins and sufferings to His death; but indeed that is only one aspect of an almost universal heresy.” (Life, Vol.I, p.430).
1864 Sept. 23rd – Hort: “I believe Coleridge was quite right in saying that Christianity without a substantial Church is vanity and dissolution; and I remember shocking you and Lightfoot not so very long ago by expressing a belief that ‘Protestantism’ is only parenthetical and temporary. In short, the Irvingite creed (minus the belief in the superior claims of the Irvingite communion) seems to me unassailable in things ecclesiastical.” (Life, Vol.II, p.30,31).
1865 Sept. 27th – Westcott: “I have been trying to recall my impressions of La Salette (a marian shrine). I wish I could see to what forgotten truth Mariolatry bears witness; and how we can practically set forth the teaching of the miracles”.
Nov. 17th – Westcott: “As far as I could judge, the ‘idea’ of La Salette was that of God revealing Himself now, and not in one form but in many.” (Life, Vol.I. pp.251,252).
Oct. 17th – Hort: “I have been persuaded for many years that Mary-worship and ‘Jesus’-worship have very much in common in their causes and their results.” (Life, Vol.II, p.50).
1867 Oct. 17th – Hort: “I wish we were more agreed on the doctrinal part; but you know I am a staunch sacerdotalist, and there is not much profit in arguing about first principles.” (Life, Vol.II, p.86).
1890 Mar. 4th – Westcott: “No one now, I suppose, holds that the first three chapters of Genesis, for example, give a literal history – I could never understand how any one reading them with open eyes could think they did – yet they disclose to us a Gospel. So it is probably elsewhere.”
The True Manuscripts
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: II Timothy 3:16
The King James Bible is translated from the traditional Greek text (Textus Receptus). It has been proven through recent collation of the very earliest papyri that the King James readings are early and not late as some supposed. There are 5500 Greek New Testament manuscripts in existence today. From these existing manuscripts over 99% agree with each other – the text which underlies the King James Bible.
Dr Kenyon, curator of the British Museum said, ” This is the text found in the great majority of manuscripts.” “Until 1881 it held the field as the text in practically universal use.”
In 1881 Westcott and Hort changed this traditional Greek text in 8413 places!
Dr Hort said the following words about the changes they made: ” I do not think the significance is generally understood. It is quite impossible to judge the value of what appears to be trifling alterations merely by reading them one after another. Taken together, they have often important bearings which few would think of at first …… The difference between a picture say of a Raffaelle and a feeble copy of it is made up of a number of trivial differences …. It is, one can hardly doubt, the beginning of a new period in Church history. So far the angry objectors have reason for their astonishment.”
Hort also said: ” At present many orthodox (but rational) men are being unawares acted upon by influences which will assuredly bear good fruit in due time if the process is allowed to go on quietly.”
The testimony of Dr. Franklin Logsdon
Dr Frank Logsdon was the co-founder of the New American Standard Bible (NASB). He has since renounced any connection to it as well as to the Amplified Version.
“I must under God renounce every attachment to the New American Standard Version. I’m afraid I’m in trouble with the Lord … We laid the groundwork; I wrote the format; I helped interview some of the translators; I sat with the translator; I wrote the preface … I’m in trouble; I can’t refute these arguments; it’s wrong, terribly wrong … The deletions are absolutely frightening … there are so many … Are we so naive that we do not suspect Satanic deception in all of this? Upon investigation, I wrote my dear friend, Mr Lockman, (The benefactor through which the NASB was published) explaining that I was forced to renounce all attachment to the NASV (NASB). You can say that the Authorized Version (KJV) is absolutely correct. How correct? 100% correct …
Dr Franklin Logsdon also said, “As a member of the editorial committee in production of the Amplified New Testament, we honestly and conscientiously felt it was a mark of intelligence to follow Westcott and Hort. Now, what you have in these books (Which Bible? and True or False? , by Dr. D.O. Fuller) strikes terror to my heart. It proves, alarmingly, that being conscientiously wrong is a most dangerous state of believing. God help us to be more cautious, lest we fall into the snares of the arch deceiver.”
‘Many modern Bible versions employ what they call “gender neutral” language. So, for example, the Authorized, King James Version of John 1:9 reads: John 1:9 That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.by way of contrast, the New International Version reads: John 1:9 The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world. There is no textual variant here. The Greek text reads:ἦν τὸ φῶς τὸ ἀληθινόν, ὃ φωτίζει πάντα ἄνθρωπον ἐρχόμενον εἰς τὸν κόσμον.ēn to phōs to alēthinon, ho phōtizei panta anthrōpon erchomenon eis ton kosmon. The KJV translates the Greek word anthropos as “man”–which is what the word means, recognizing that “man” is the generic term for the entire human race, even as Adam, not Eve, represented mankind (Romans 5:12-19). For another example, consider John 12:32. The King James Version reads: And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me. In contrast, the NKJV, New King James Version, reads: And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all peoples to Myself.” There is no textual variant here either. The Greek text reads:
kagō ean hypsōthō ek tēs gēs, pantas helkysō pros emauton.
The masculine form of pantas is properly rendered “all men.” The NKJV alters the text to the more feminist “all peoples” to prevent “man/men” from being the generic word for mankind (oops, excuse me, “humankind”; using “mankind” might have been a microaggression and evidence of systemic racism and sexism). Note also that here, as in vast numbers of other places, the NKJV is not simply updating archaic and hard-to-understand language in the KJV; “all men” is not hard to understand in the least.For another example, note Matthew 25:40 in the King James Bible:Matt. 25:40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.Compare the same verse in the New International Version:Matt. 25:40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’Here again there is no textual variant. The Greek reads:
The plural adelphon, “brethren,” is from the Greek word adelphos, “brother.” The “and sisters” is simply not contained in the text, but has been added in by the NIV translators to make their version more feminist.
When the New Testament writers, under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, translated the Old Testament, did they follow the practice of modern feminism and transform the inspired Hebrew Old Testament into something more “gender neutral”? Or did the New Testament specifically use “man” as the generic term for all people–does it specifically make the male the representative of generic humanity?Consider Romans 11:4: Rom. 11:4 But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal. ἀλλὰ τί λέγει αὐτῷ ὁ χρηματισμός; Κατέλιπον ἐμαυτῷ ἑπτακισχιλίους ἄνδρας, οἵτινες οὐκ ἔκαμψαν γόνυ τῇ Βάαλ. alla ti legei autō ho chrēmatismos? Katelipon emautō heptakischilious andras, hoitines ouk ekampsan gony tē Baal.
Romans 11:4 is referencing 1 Kings 19:18:
1Kings 19:18 Yet I have left me seven thousand in Israel, all the knees which have not bowed unto Baal, and every mouth which hath not kissed him.
Notice that the word “men” is not specifically contained in 1 Kings 19:18, but it is in Romans 11:4. Furthermore, Romans 11:4 does not use the Greek word anthropos, which is commonly a generic word for “mankind” or the entire human race, but the word andros (lexical form aner)–“men” as “males.” So when the New Testament, under inspiration, makes reference to the Old Testament, it is so far from removing masculine terms and making the Scripture more gender neutral that it specifically states “all men” in translating a less-specific original language reference.
The Lord Jesus Christ does the same thing as the Apostle Paul. Consider Matthew 12:41:
Matt. 12:41 The men [andros, “males,” from aner] of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here.
The Lord Jesus is referring to Jonah 3:7-8:
And he caused it to be proclaimed and published through Nineveh by the decree of the king and his nobles, saying, Let neither man [Hebrew ‘adam, properly rendered “man” but frequently a generic word for the entire human race, not for “males” in particular] nor beast, herd nor flock, taste any thing: let them not feed, nor drink water: but let man [Hebrew ‘adam again, frequently a generic term] and beast be covered with sackcloth, and cry mightily unto God: yea, let them turn every one from his evil way, and from the violence that is in their hands.
When Christ refers to the Old Testament, He takes a more generic Hebrew word for “mankind” or “humankind” and employs the word aner, the word specifically for a “male … in contrast to woman” (BDAG). Christ, speaking in Greek, does not make the Hebrew Old Testament “gender neutral.” He does exactly the opposite. Luke 11:32 indicates this fact as well.
So, what does the Bible teach? When the New Testament quotes the Old Testament, it translates and paraphrases the Hebrew in such a way that the text is less gender neutral, not more gender neutral.
In light of the inspired and infallible practice of translation modeled by the sovereign, all-wise God, we should:
1.) Reject modern Bible versions influenced by feminism and gender-neutral language, from the New International Version to the New King James Version, and cleave to the Authorized, King James Bible.
2.) Reject gender-neutral replacements for classical terms for humanity. We should retain expressions such as “all men” and “mankind” if we are engaged in the holy practice of Bible translation ourselves.
3.) We should continue to use “man,” “mankind,” and such like terms in our own speech when reference is made to the entire human race. We should follow the practice of Christ and His Apostles instead of bowing to anti-Scriptural feminism in our language.
4.) Recognize that feminists know exactly what they are doing when they seek to make the English language, and even more importantly, God’s infallible Word, less patriarchal. They oppose patriarchy, while the resurrected Lord and Son of Man, Jesus Christ, their Creator, taught patriarchy Himself and led His prophets and Apostles to support it through what He dictated to them through the Holy Spirit from God the Father. Let us consciously agree with the Father, the Son of God, the Holy Ghost, the Apostles, and the infallible Word of God, and support male headship in our common language and in our English Bible version.’https://kentbrandenburg.com/2021/01/23/2491/