Chapter 8

Go ye forth of Babylon, flee ye from the Chaldeans, with a voice of singing declare ye, tell this, utter it even to the end of the earth; say ye, The LORD hath redeemed his servant Jacob. Isaiah 48:20

 

Protestants as true Protestants reject the false teachings of the Roman Catholic Church. And it would follow that the language of the Protestant would be different from that church. However, many of us being several generations removed from the Catholic Church are quite ignorant of the terms used in that church and what meaning is attached to those terms. Because of this ignorance we may find ourselves using those terms without realizing their significance. The same holds true of our use of heathen terms. We, in a large degree, are ignorant of Satan’s various religions like Hindu, Buddhist and such. Each of those many religions have terms for things that we as Bible believing Christians should reject.

In this chapter I wish to review various aspects of the Catholic Church and how those are incorporated into many of the new translations. As you read keep in mind that the Roman Catholic Church could no longer keep the Bible from the people with the advent of the printing press so other means have been devised to incorporate that church into the Bible. Not all of the translations change the words the same in each text but collectively many of the catholic doctrines and phrases can be found scattered here and there throughout. I will not be able to address all of the problems but will address as many as I can.

In the Living Bible we find that worshipping idols of the saints is allowed in the Ten Commandments. It says, "You shall not make yourselves any idols; any images resembling animals, birds, or fish." Exodus20:4. Do you see the difference in the meaning between that and the meaning found in the KJV? "Anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:" The KJV rendering includes humans, angels, deities and dead people. There are actually two changes that are important here. Besides the narrowing of the things included the change to idols from graven images is also important. You see, to justify the use of statues of ‘saints’ they make a distinction between images and idols. Images are acceptable in the Catholic theology and idols are not. In fact throughout the bible versions that follow the Vulgate and such bibles that have been promoted by the Catholic Church you will see the change of the term image to idol frequently. I recognize that the word ‘images’ is in this text but it is defined so narrowly that the text fits Catholic theology with no problems.

Another example is found in Deuteronomy 7:5; the KJV reads this way:

But thus shall ye deal with them; ye shall destroy their altars, and break down their images, and cut down their groves, and burn their graven images with fire. Deuteronomy 7:5 KJV

The NIV uses the terms ‘sacred stones’ and ‘idols’. Another example of that is 2 Kings 3:2. There is no mention of an image of Baal in the NIV like there is in the KJV but a ‘sacred stone of Baal’ is the term used.

The changes are not 100% but give earth’s history more time and you will probably see 100% change.

Infant Baptism

How could infant baptism be introduced into the Bible? Partly by omission of texts stating what is required for baptism and partly by the introduction of an object used in infant baptism.

True baptism is more than getting wet. It should be preceded by an understanding of the doctrines of God. It means belief in Jesus Christ as our Lord. Turn to one of the best texts for an understanding of this fact: Acts 8:37. Here Philip and the eunuch are studying God’s word. The eunuch becomes convicted and converted and desires baptism. He requests it in verse 36 and in verse 37 is Philip’s response:

And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. Acts 8:37 KJV

If you are reading from most of the new translations you won’t find this text in the bible. Instead, the eunuch makes the request and without question he is baptized.

Now, turn to the Old Testament. In Numbers 7:55 there is a list of items used in the Sanctuary. In that list in the NIV you will read that a silver ‘sprinkling’ bowl is there included. In the KJV that is simply a bowl. We are not told what these bowls are used for in the KJV, whether they are used for the grain offering or for the priest to eat from or to catch the blood that was to be sprinkled on the alter. They may have been for any of these things. The bowls contained flour when they were given to the priests. Remember that God said not to add to His word. In trying to understand the reason for this addition I asked a former Catholic what a sprinkling bowl was without giving her a reason for my question. She said that it is the big basin that is under the baby to catch the water during baptism.

Flagellation and Penance

The KJV reads:

But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway.

1 Corinthians 9:27

The RSV reads: "but I pommel my body and subdue it." The NIV says, "I beat my body and make it my slave..." The NASB says, "I buffet my body and make it my slave...". The NEB says, "I bruise my own body..."

My dictionary says that pommel means, "to beat soundly" and buffet means, "a blow with the hand; beat."

I much prefer how Ellen White used this text:

We are under solemn obligations to God to keep the spirit pure and the body healthy, that we may be a benefit to humanity and render to God perfect service. The apostle utters these words of warning: "Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof." He urges us onward by telling us that "every man that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things." He exhorts all who call themselves Christians to present their bodies "a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God." He says: "I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway." Adventist Home p. 123

Martin Luther lived for years a life of severe exaction and penance, thinking he could thus purchase the favor of God. And when Christ was presented to him as the sinner's friend and advocate, a Saviour who so loved man that he gave his precious life to save him, the thought that this salvation was a free gift, not to be purchased by tedious journeys, long and rigorous fasts, or by scourging the body, seemed too great for him to comprehend. He need no longer invoke all the saints to plead with Christ in his behalf. How eagerly his thirsty soul drank in the precious draught! His hand tremblingly grasped the promises of God. He accepted Jesus as his Saviour, who would pardon and redeem his soul. Signs of the Times 09-11-84

How can we render to God perfect service if we are beating and bruising our bodies?

Celibacy

In 1 Corinthians 7:25, 34 & 36 the KJV reads:

Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord: yet I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful.

1 Corinthians 7:25 KJV

There is difference also between a wife and a virgin. The unmarried woman careth for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit: but she that is married careth for the things of the world, how she may please her husband. 1 Corinthians 7:34 KJV

But if any man think that he behaveth himself uncomely toward his virgin, if she pass the flower of her age, and need so require, let him do what he will, he sinneth not: let them marry. 1 Corinthians 7:36 KJV

The NEB reads, "On the question of celibacy,..." "The unmarried or celibate woman cares for the Lord’s business;" "But if a man has a partner in celibacy..."

In Revelation 14:4 the KJV reads:

These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb.

Philips translation reads, "These are the men who have never defiled themselves with women, for they are celibate." There is a difference between being celibate and being a virgin. A virgin has never had sexual relations but a celibate person makes a decision not to have relations at some point but may have had a sexual relation.

The Virgin

In the same way that there is a difference between a Sabbath and the Sabbath there is a difference between a virgin and the virgin. The Catholic Church venerates the virgin, Mary whom they claim remained a virgin. She is regarded as the Virgin. The prophecy of Christ’s birth in Isaiah 7:14 in the KJV reads:

Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

It is again quoted in Matt. 1:23:

Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

But the NIV reads, "The virgin will be with child..." and "The virgin will be with child..." The NKJV reads, "A virgin" in Matthew but, "the virgin" in the book of Isaiah. So Matthew misquoted Isaiah, is that it? The NASB does just the opposite of the NKJV, it has Matthew saying, "the virgin" and Isaiah saying "a virgin". So which is it? Is God the author of confusion? NEB and RSV have "the virgin".

In English classes as children we learned that to capitalize a noun made it a proper noun and is used to express a name. Like taking the words united and states you make the United States. It is a name. Now look what happens to the word virgin in the NIV. It is capitalized in 11 Old Testament verses. "The Virgin Daughter of Zion despises you and mocks you." 2 Kings 19:21; "He said, ‘No more of your reveling, O Virgin Daughter..." Isaiah 23:12; "Return, O Virgin Israel, ..."

My understanding of a virgin is based on Revelation 14:4 that reveals that a virgin is one who has not defiled themselves with false religions. A religion being a church which is symbolized as a woman. But alas, that verse in the NIV says, "for they kept themselves pure." Out goes that biblical definition of a virgin. So what we are left with is The Virgin. A proper name often given to Mary the ‘Mother of God’.

While Christ becomes a son of God, something or someone else is given the title, The Virgin.

Another small change in favor of Mariolatry is found in the angel’s greeting of Mary in Luke 1:28. The KJV read this way:

And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women. Luke 1:28 KJV

The RSV, NEB, NASB, NIV, CEV and the Living Bible all omit ‘blessed art thou among women." Leaving it up for speculation as to whether Mary is a mere human or if she is ‘the mother of God’ the ‘queen of heaven’ or some diety. Perhaps, she is part of the Godhead since 1 John 5:7 is omitted? As with so many other texts this is one of the clearest ones that shows a right doctrine that has been changed. Why?

The Old German Bible translated by Luther includes ‘blessed art thou among women.’.

Saints

In the same way that a soul is changed, the saints are no longer all of God’s people. They have become a select few living in heaven.

In the NEB the word prophets is replaced with saints in Matt. 13:17 and 23:29. In Deuteronomy 33:2 & 3 the NEB, RSV & NASB replaced the ten thousand saints (that are to come with Christ at His return) with holy ones. I guess that was more saints than Rome has on record. I think they only have about 320.

A verse giving a clear definition of who the saints are is Psalms 30:4:

Sing unto the LORD, O ye saints of his, and give thanks at the remembrance of his holiness. Psalms 30:4 KJV

But according to the NASB you are ‘His godly ones’, and according to NEB you are ‘his loyal servants’. But sainthood is not for you. I cannot cite all the changes but be sure that your place in heaven has been diminished and the job of doling out sainthood is taken by Rome. All through out the NIV, NASB, NEB, RSV and CEV saints when referring to all of God’s redeemed children, is changed to something else, yet they keep the term when it fits into the Catholic theology. Look at Dan. 7:22. They keep it there.

1 Sam. 2:9 in the KJV shows that there are two classes of people, saints and the wicked. It reads:

He will keep the feet of his saints, and the wicked shall be silent in darkness; for by strength shall no man prevail.

But the word saints is changed to ‘faithful ones’ in the RSV. The NASB changes it to ‘godly ones’. CEV reads, ‘loyal people’. Of course the saints are faithful, godly and loyal but they are saints. There are saints that Rome didn’t canonize.

Have you heard of the Pope demoting a saint? According to one book on the ‘saints’, I found that Saint Barbara and Saint Christopher were dropped from the calendar of feast days because their existence could not be proved. So you can imagine why this text has been changed in the NASB, NIV, NEB, CEV, NAB and RSV:

For the LORD loveth judgment, and forsaketh not his saints; they are preserved for ever: but the seed of the wicked shall be cut off. Psalms 37:28

For further study on this look at Ps. 50:5; 89:5 & 7; 97:10; Proverbs 2:8 and Dan. 7. The claim is made that the wording was changed because the old English was too difficult. Is the word saint difficult? What Protestant wasn’t understanding that term? If it is so difficult why isn’t it changed consistently?

Confession and Prayer

The doctrine of confessing to a priest rather than to God is gradually gaining Biblical proof in some of the newer bibles. The first that I have found is in Joshua 7:19. Here Joshua is speaking to Achan. The KJV says,

And Joshua said unto Achan, My son, give, I pray thee, glory to the LORD God of Israel, and make confession unto him; and tell me now what thou hast done; hide it not from me.

The NIV changes the remark about confession to, ‘and give him the praise’. The NASB says, ‘and give praise to Him.’. The RSV says, ‘and render praise to him’. The CEV quotes Joshua as saying, "Tell me what you did, and don’t try to hide anything." In the last one here, the CEV, Joshua is telling him to make a ‘good confession’. That is a term used by Rome for when the person tells absolutely everything.

And look at this text:

For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God. Romans 14:11 KJV

In the RSV and NASB the same change that is found in Joshua is made here. Confess to God is changed to ‘shall give praise to God’. The Good News bible says, ‘everyone will confess that I am God.’. The NEB says, ‘acknowledge God’.

Romans 15:9 again has the same change:

And that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy; as it is written, For this cause I will confess to thee among the Gentiles, and sing unto thy name. Romans 15:9 KJV

The RSV, NEB, NIV and NASB all say, ‘I will praise you...’. The Good News says, ‘I will give thanks to you...’. Now I whole heartily agree that God should be praised but the important doctrine here being conveyed is that our confession is to God. There are many other texts that address the subject of praise and they are important but let’s not lose the Protestant doctrine of confessing to God and not to man!

When you combine those changes with this one you are left without defense. James says:

Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.

James 5:16 KJV

The NASB, NIV, RSV and NEB all change faults into sins. So it reads, ‘confess you sins one to another’. The CEV says, ‘If you have sinned, you should tell each other...’.

Tell me, what biblical defense do we have against Rome if we accept these bibles? I don’t see how we can say that confession to a priest is unbiblical if we believe the interpretation of these books.

Our confession of sin is to be made to God. It is God, our Father who we are to represent to the world that has been dishonored and crucified afresh by our sin. Apology to other people that we have wronged is important but that is not the same as confessing our sins to them.

Another instance of confessing to God is found in 2 Chronicles 30:22. The KJV reads:

And Hezekiah spake comfortably unto all the Levites that taught the good knowledge of the LORD: and they did eat throughout the feast seven days, offering peace offerings, and making confession to the LORD God of their fathers.

The RSV and NASB say, ‘and giving thanks to the Lord...’. The NIV says, ‘and praised the Lord,...’ The CEV says, ‘and by praising the Lord God of their ancestors.’

So one of the few texts we have left that speak about confession is this one:

I give thee charge in the sight of God, who quickeneth all things, and before Christ Jesus, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed a good confession;

1 Timothy 6:13 KJV

So Christ and Pilate went into the confessional? Now how do you explain to someone that the confessional as taught by Roman Catholicism is wrong? What used to be upheld by the Bible is now primarily found in the writings of Ellen White. How much better it would be if we kept the KJV and confirmed our belief in Ellen White as a true prophet of God by the Bible rather than rejecting the Bible and finding ourselves out on a limb with the cults that have some false, non-biblical prophet that is not founded on the Bible. Read what Ellen White wrote about confession.

In the work of overcoming there will be confessions to be made one to another, but the word of God forbids man to put an erring man in God's place, making confessors of frail humanity. We are to confess our faults one to another, and pray one for another that we may be healed. The appointment of men to the confessional of the Roman Church is the fulfillment of the design of Satan to confer upon men power which belongs to God only. God is dishonored by the absolution of the priest and by the confession of the soul to man. Confessions of secret sins are made to men whose own hearts may be as sinks of iniquity. There are sins which are to be confessed to God only, for he knows the whole heart and will not take advantage of the trust reposed in him; he will not betray our confidence, and if we submit ourselves to him, he will cleanse the heart from all iniquity. Signs of the Times 04-20-91

She once again is in agreement with the KJV and not in agreement with the other ‘new’ versions.

Now consider the Lord’s prayer found in Luke 11 as you think of the confessional in the Romish church. Read it as it is found in the NIV, RSV and NASB: ‘Father, hallowed be your name, ...’ Who is this father? The ‘which art in heaven’ is removed. He is no longer the one in heaven. What do people call their priest? Father!

Miscellaneous Terms

Some terms and descriptions used in the various bibles lean toward the Catholic terms that have significance to the people of that church but not to Protestants. One I have noticed in the RSV is the term votive. I first noticed this term in reference to votive candles. I have seen candles in the stores for years with a picture of some saint painted on them. The term is found in several places in the Old Testament of the RSV. A few of them are: Leviticus 22:23, 23:38, Numbers 29:39, Deuteronomy 12:6, 11 & 17.

Another term is libations in reference to the drink offerings. The RSV uses this term in Jeremiah 44:17,18, 19 & 25, 2 Chronicles 29:35 and Psalms 16:4. My dictionary states that libations were practiced by the ancient Greeks and Romans. The term is used very inconsistently here sometimes to describe the drink offering in the sanctuary, sometimes to describe the offerings to the queen of heaven. If it were consistently used when referring to the queen of heaven I would not see a problem. But it is used for both the sacred and the profane inconsistently. The term today, as I have heard it used is in reference to fermented wine, which was not used in the sanctuary.

Ellen White used the term ‘libations’ only three times, that I can find. Here is a sample:

Once a year, special ceremonies were held at Ephesus in honor of the goddess Diana. These attracted great numbers of people from all parts of the province. Throughout this period, festivities were conducted with the utmost pomp and splendor. The gods were represented by certain ones of the people chosen for the purpose, who were regarded as objects of worship, and were honored by processions, sacrifices, and libations. Musical contests, feats of athletes, and fierce combats between men and beasts, drew crowds to the vast theaters. The whole city was a scene of brilliant display and wild revelry. The air rang with the shouts of mirth. The people gave themselves up to feasting, drunkenness, and the vilest debauchery. Advent Review and Sabbath Herald 09-14-11

All three references are concerning the heathen deities as described above. None in reference to the drink offering of the sanctuary.

Now take a minute to picture in your mind a man in a ‘richly ornamented robe’. Who do you see? What does the robe look like? Does it have gold threads, and jewels? Does the coat have gaudy embellishment? Pearls and rare fabric like silk, perhaps? What about the person wearing that robe, how do you think he would behave, kingly? Proud, perhaps? How does that man compare with the boy Joseph? The NIV in Genesis 37 states that Jacob made him a ‘richly ornamented robe’ rather than a coat of many colors. Somehow, I can’t picture anything but a Romish Pontiff when I think of a richly ornamented robe. I don’t see Joseph developing the kind of character that would fit him for the Lords service if he grew up wearing a ‘richly ornamented robe’.

The RSV says, ‘long coat with sleeves’. Was he the only one in his family to have a coat with sleeves? The NEB says, ‘long, sleeved robe’. What would be unique about that? Mrs. White speaks of it as a coat of many colors. Was he the only one in his family to be warm in winter?

Is there a cloister in you bible? There is if you read from one version of the NEB. I have a concordance for the NEB New Testament that states that cloister is used in place of porch in John 10:23; Acts 3:11 & 5:12.

The NEB adds the word ecstasy or ecstatic to the verses about speaking in tongues. In Catholicism this is a term used in reference to the false visions that their ‘visionaries’ have. St. John of the Cross a priest who lived from 1542 to 1591 is said to have had ecstasies. He wrote books on the subject.

Who removed this text from some translations? Why might they do it?

Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation. Matthew 23:14 KJV

And how long will it be before the other texts that repeat Christs other denunciations of hypocrites are deleted?

The term celebrate is used frequently in reference to many of the ceremonies of the Romish Church. During the dark ages the burning of ‘heretics’ was ‘celebrated’. It was called the auto de fe. The term celebrate has replaced ‘keep a feast’ in the NIV, NASB & CEV.