Senin, 09 Juli 2018

Beware Of Satan's Latest “New International Reader's Version” (NIRV): The Antichrist's Bible!

Beware Of Satan's Latest “New International Reader's Version” (NIRV): The Antichrist's Bible!

By David J. Stewart | October 2014

2nd Corinthians 2:17, “For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God:
but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.”

atan is a master deceiver and he knows that the most effective way to deceive the church is with confusion, incrementally moving the ancient landmark, changing the Bible a little at a time until we cannot even recognize it anymore. By the way, the NIV butchers are at it again, publishing their new “New International Reader's Version” (NIRV), and hundreds of supporting sales products related to it. Tragically, the NIRV is aimed at children. Please don't let your children become children of the Devil by giving them a corrupt Bible version produced by occultists in the 19th century. Hell will be hot!
Listen to what Hitler's Nazi-fascist minister of propaganda said about the ease of deceiving people...
“It would not be impossible to prove with sufficient repetition and a psychological understanding of the people concerned that a square is in fact a circle. They are mere words, and words can be molded until they clothe ideas and disguise.” ―Joseph Goebbels
The preceding quote is important. Learn it, because it explains the dangers behind the modern corrupt Bible versions. I was thinking today that both the Bible and money are printed on paper. They both use ink. They both contain numbers and letters. So what's the difference? What makes one piece of paper with ink and characters any different than the other? Likewise, words can be assigned different meanings. This is what Joseph Goebbels is saying. They are mere words, and words can be redefined to mean anything that we want them to mean. This is why it is so utterly important that we contend for the Christian faith and “Be watchful, and strengthen the things which remain, that are ready to die” as the Bible says in Revelation 3:2. Our precious churches are dying because Satan has succeeded in taking away the holy inspired Words of God.
Do you think Satan is less effective at lying and deceiving than Joseph Goebbels? Notice that he uses the word “disguise.” Satan has disguised his corrupt fake Bible versions as the holy Word of God. The NIV series will continue to corrupt the Word of God, incrementally, preparing the world to receive the coming Antichrist! Let me show you some examples.
NIRV Perverts the Plan of Salvation
The following is a comparison between Mark 1:15 in the King James Bible, the hellish NIV and the new satanic NIRV. Here you can clearly see the way that Satan is incrementally, gradually, corrupting the Word of God...
KING JAMES BIBLE — Mark 1:15, “And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.”
NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION — Mark 1:15, “The time has come,” he said. “The kingdom of God has come near. Repent and believe the good news!
NEW INTERNATIONAL READER'S VERSION — Mark 1:15, “The time has come,” he said. “The kingdom of God is near. Turn away from your sins and believe the good news!
Do you see how sneaky the Devil is? They have corrupted the meaning of repentance. The Greek word for “repent” here is metanoeo, in the King James Bible, which means “to think differently.” The Committee On Biblical Translation has taken upon themselves to corrupt the Bible to mean something entirely different than what God said. The NIRV wrongly defines repent to mean “turn away from your sins,” which is adding human effort to the simple plan of salvation. No where in the entire Bible are we ever told to turn away from our sins to be saved. It is Roman Catholic theology. Look in any modern dictionary under “repent” and you'll see that it is defined as “turning from sins,” but the Bible defines repent as a change of mind or to think differently. By the way, beware of all the Greek lexicons and Bible study aids which have been corrupted as well. For an excellent book on the subject, please read Dr. Gail Riplinger's excellent book, “Hazardous Materials” (Greek and Hebrew Study Dangers - The Voice Of Strangers).
Beware of today's corrupt theology that defines repentance as amending one's ways, bettering one's life, forsaking the old paths of sin, turning from sin, and surrendering one's life to Christ in order to be saved. These are proper in their place, but are absolutely not required for salvation. The Bible irrefutably teaches that we are saved solely by the gift of God's grace, by the sacrifice of His only begotten Son on the cross for our sins and His resurrection from the grave. 1st Thessalonians 4:14, “For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.” Unholy hands on the Bible have perverted the plan of salvation. The NIV turns salvation into a process.
Pastor Charles Stanley errantly teaches, “To be saved, you must place faith in Christ for the forgiveness of sins. That decision requires a change of mind, or repentance, about your way of life. Both happen at the same time.”[1] Mr. Stanley is wrong, repentance is not a change of mind about your way of life. The Bible doesn't tell us what the change of mind is concerning. Romans 3:19, “Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.”
Repentance is seeing yourself as an unholy sinner in the eyes of a holy God and realizing that you are totally incapable of saving yourself. It is impossible to get saved without repenting, because repentance is what compels you to put your trust in Christ, and repentance and faith happen at the same time. Repentance is simply a change of mind, nothing more or less. Whereas the unsaved world doesn't want anything to do with Jesus Christ because they don't want to be reproved for their sins (John 3:20); the person who believes on Jesus to be saved does so because they've changed their mind and are now acknowledging their sinnership.
NIRV Publishers Condemn Themselves by Selling Bibles to Make Money
What knuckleheads and hypocrites! They pervert 2nd Corinthians 2:17 from corrupting the wording of God to selling the Word of God...
KING JAMES BIBLE — 2nd Corinthians 2:17, “For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.”
NEW INTERNATIONAL READER'S VERSION — 2nd Corinthians 2:17, “Unlike many people, we aren’t selling God’s word to make money. In fact, it is just the opposite. Because of Christ we speak honestly before God. We speak like people God has sent.”
Zondervan sells Bibles to make money! Don't let them kid you!
The King James Bible condemns those who “CORRUPT THE WORD OF GOD.” It doesn't surprise me that the greedy people who butcher the Word of God to make it more marketable would change this Bible passage in an attempt to exonerate themselves. The Greek word for “corrupt” in the King James Bible is kapēleuō and means, “(a huckster); to retail, that is, (by implication) to adulterate.” A huckster is someone who sells shoddy goods. It means much more than simply “selling God's Word” as the NIRV wrongly states; but rather, it refers to someone who is shady, like a shifty used car salesman, or a crooked politician like Barack Obama and his fraudulent ObamaCare that doesn't care about anybody!
The word kapēleuō refers to shady people who pervert (adulterate) the Word of God to sell it and make money. The publishers of the NIV series and all who profit lucratively from it's massive sales are criminals in God's eyes. They have perverted (corrupted) the living Words of God!!! If, as the NIRV states in 2nd Corinthians 2:17, selling the Word of God is wrong, then they are big time guilty, because the NIV series is the most used Bible in churches today. I wish every pastor in America would teach this truth to their congregation.
By the way, the original 1984 NIV has been discontinued...
Zondervan to Discontinue the Original NIV Bible
Having failed to successfully promote an alleged "gender inclusive" version of the Bible from 2005 to 2009, publishing giant, Zondervan, has elected to try again. This time, however, instead of publishing an edited version of the NIV in addition to the standard 1984 edition, Zondervan has elected to simply kill the original NIV and call what's coming out this month an "update." If some of the problems inherent in the original NIV weren't troubling enough, Zondervan editors and management appear bent on revising it to fit the tastes of the modern world, i.e., inclusion and feminism. As they do, they also appear to be content with alienating at least a portion of their base in the process.

In reality, the "updated" NIV appears to be little more than a rehash of the aforementioned 2005 gender neutral mishap known as Today's New International Version (TNIV). According to a March 14, 2011, article in The Christian Post, statistics compiled by Christian web techies Robert Slowley and John Dryer show that "31 percent of the TNIV is retained in the updated NIV." The Christian Post story also reported that The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, one of the leading critics of the short-lived TNIV, have released a statement saying it could not recommend the new NIV Bible because of "over 3,600 gender-related problems" that were previously described in its critique of the TNIV. ...
We are at war ladies and gentlemen, and we are losing the battle. Thankfully, we are ultimately on the winning side in Jesus Christ!
NIRV Says Jesus Didn't Want to Hold On to Being God
The NIV butchers attack Christ's deity (that He is almighty God) by corrupting Philippians 2:6...
KING JAMES BIBLE — Philippians 2:6, “Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God.”
NEW INTERNATIONAL READER'S VERSION — Philippians 2:6, “In his very nature he was God. But he did not think that being equal with God was something he should hold on to.”
Do you see how the NIRV totally 180 degrees, says the exact opposite of the King James Bible! Ladies and gentleman, there is not one verse in the entire King James Bible where Jesus downplays His deity. The Bible says that Jesus humbled Himself as a man, but He never said that He didn't think He should be equal with God the Father.
NIRV Changes Jesus' Words from “my Father” to “the Father”
Look how the NIRV perverts Christ's deity further in John 10:30...
KING JAMES BIBLE — John 10:30, “I and my Father are one.”
NEW INTERNATIONAL READER'S VERSION — John 10:30, “I and the Father are one.”
Notice that they change “my Father” to “the Father,” implying that God is not Jesus' Father, and thus, Jesus is not the Son of God. You must understand that the Devil hates Jesus Christ. You must understand that Satan's primary goal is to convince people that Jesus was a great man, a powerful influence, a charismatic leader, a major prophet, a gifted speaker and a miracle worker, but NOT THE SON OF GOD, THAT IS, THE INCARNATE WORD, GOD ALMIGHTY IN THE FLESH.
Revelation 1:8 in the King James Bible calls Jesus “the almighty,” but the NIRV changes it to “the Mighty One.” There's a big difference between being mighty verses almighty! Jehovah's Witnesses (JW's) errantly claim that Jesus is “a god,” but not “The God.” In fact, JW's claim that Michael the archangel became Jesus on earth, and then returned as Michael to Heaven. This is satanic doctrine. In sharp contrast, the Bible teaches that Jesus came to earth as the Godhead incarnate.
NIRV Brutally Attacks the Godhead and Deity of Jesus Christ
Look how the Devil has messed-up the Word of God in Colossians 2:9, attacking the Godhead and Christ's deity...
KING JAMES BIBLE — Colossians 2:9, “For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.”
NEW INTERNATIONAL READER'S VERSION — Colossians 2:9, “God’s whole nature is living in Christ in human form.”
Huh? Whoa! Talk about butchering the Bible. Zondervan publishers and those involved in producing the NIV series are shady hucksters, who've corrupted the Word of God to broaden their marketing base as much as possible. It breaks my heart that Independent Fundamental Baptist Churches are as indifferent as anybody on the issue! It is wickedness!
Modern corrupt Bible versions remove the word godhead. All three mentions of the word godhead (Acts 17:29; Romans 1:20 and Colossians 2:9) are completely stricken from all modern corrupt Bible versions. Wake up my friends, because Satan is attacking the Godhead and the deity of Christ Jesus. I challenge you to look up other Scriptures in the NIRV, which you can freely read online and search its contents. God's nature wasn't living in Christ; but rather, God the Father and the Holy Spirit indwelt the Savior, manifesting themselves to the world in the person of Jesus Christ.
Jesus is almighty God! 1st Timothy 3:16, “And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.” John 1:1-2 and 14, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. ... And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.” Jesus came to earth as the incarnate Word, and the Word was God!
Jesus Did Not Spill His Blood!
I could give you hundreds of serious problems with the NIRV. Here's another blunder, teaching bullcrap theology, saying that Jesus “spilled” His blood like some bumbling drunk...
KING JAMES BIBLE — Hebrews 9:12, “Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.”
NEW INTERNATIONAL READER'S VERSION — Hebrews 9:12, “He did not enter by spilling the blood of goats and calves. He entered the Most Holy Room by spilling his own blood. He did it once and for all time. He paid the price to set us free from sin forever.”
Hebrews 12:24 teaches that Jesus “SPRINKLED” His precious blood on the heavenly mercy seat, which is what the Old Testament high-priest did once a year in the holy of holies to atone for the sins of the people. Hebrews 12:24, “And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.”
NIRV Perverts Biblical Curse Upon Booze Drinkers
In Proverbs 20:1 of the King James Bible, the Word of God teaches that intoxicating beverages mock the idiot who drinks them, but the corrupt NIRV says that your only a fool if led down the wrong path by them...
KING JAMES BIBLE — Proverbs 20:1, “Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging: and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise.”

NEW INTERNATIONAL READER'S VERSION — Proverbs 20:1, “Wine causes you to make fun of others, and beer causes you to start fights. Anyone who is led down the wrong path by them is not wise.”
The Bible says you're a fool even if you drink booze at all (and that includes all forms of intoxicating alcoholic beverages). You'd be surprised how many drunks started off by having just a little glass of wine with their meals.
NIRV Corrupts Revelation 11:8 Concerning the Wicked City of Jerusalem
There are numerous theological blunders in the NIRV in this Scripture. Notice that the NIRV changes “our Lord” to “their Lord.” These unholy Bible-butchers don't know the Lord Jesus Christ and are not saved, which is why they don't want to claim Jesus Christ as “our Lord”...
KING JAMES BIBLE — Revelation 11:8, “And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified.”
NEW INTERNATIONAL READER'S VERSION — Revelation 11:8, “Their bodies will lie in the street of the great city where their Lord was nailed to the cross. The city is sometimes pictured as Sodom, or as Egypt.”
Notice that the Word of God calls Jerusalem (the city where Christ was crucified) Sodom and Egypt spiritually. These are historically very wicked places, which are equaled by the wicked city of Jerusalem who crucified their Messiah. Today, in 2014, Tel Aviv, Israel is the homosexual tourist destination of the world. Less than 2.5% of Israel's population claim to be Christians. Israel is a wicked nation. The NIRV corrupts the Bible and says that Jerusalem is sometimes pictured as Sodom and Egypt, but the King James Bible says spiritually that THEY ARE Jerusalem. The plot for world government began long ago in the ancient wicked world. Today, the Illuminati control Israel and reign over the kings of the earth. Jerusalem is the great city, “The Great Whore” (Revelation 17:18).
The NIRV is the Antichrist's Bible, corrupt as can be, filled with lies. A corrupt Bible can only produce corrupt doctrines. Satan is the author of confusion in our churches. Here's a list of just some of the available Bible versions today. If the matter weren't so serious it would be utterly laughable. Folks, God only wrote ONE BOOK. Here's a list of just some of the Bible translations...
Abbreviated Bible - TAB - 1971, eliminates duplications, includes the Apocrypha
American Standard Version - ASV - 1901, a.k.a. Standard American Edition, Revised Version, the American version of the Holy Bible, Revised Version
American Translation (Beck) - AAT - 1976
American Translation (Smith-Goodspeed) - SGAT - 1931
Amplified Bible - AB - 1965, includes explanation of words within text
Aramaic Bible (Targums) - ABT - 1987, originally translated from the Hebrew into the Aramaic
Aramaic New Covenant - ANCJ - 1996, a translation and transliteration of the New Covenant
Authentic New Testament - ANT - 1958
Barclay New Testament - BNT - 1969
Basic Bible - TBB - 1950, based upon a vocabulary of 850 words
Bible Designed to Be Read as Literature - BDRL - 1930, stresses literary qualities of the Bible, includes the Apocrypha
Bible Reader - TBR - 1969, an interfaith version, includes the Apocrypha
Cassirer New Testament - CNT - 1989
Centenary Translation of the New Testament - CTNT - 1924, one of the few versions translated solely by a woman
Common English New Testament - CENT - 1865
Complete Jewish Bible - CJB - 1989, a Messianic Jewish translation
Concordant Literal New Testament - CLNT - 1926
Confraternity of Christian Doctrine Translation - CCDT - 1953, includes the Apocrypha
Contemporary English Version - CEV - 1992, includes Psalms and Proverbs
Coptic Version of the New Testament - CVNT - 1898, based on translations from northern Egypt
Cotton Patch Version - CPV - 1968, based on American ideas and Southern US culture, only contains Paul's writings
Coverdale Bible - TCB - 1540, includes the Apocrypha
Darby Holy Bible - DHB - 1923
Dartmouth Bible - TDB - 1961, an abridgment of the King James Version, includes the Apocrypha
De Nyew Testament in Gullah - NTG - 2005
Dead Sea Scrolls Bible - DSSB - 1997, translated from Dead Sea Scrolls documents, includes the Apocrypha
Documents of the New Testament - DNT - 1934
Douay-Rheims Bible - DRB - 1899
Emphasized Bible - EBR - 1959, contains signs of emphasis for reading
Emphatic Diaglott - EDW - 1942
English Standard Version - ESV - 2001, a revision of the Revised Standard Version
English Version for the Deaf - EVD - 1989, a.k.a. Easy-to-Read Version, designed to meet the special needs of the deaf
English Version of the Polyglott Bible - EVPB - 1858, the English portion of an early Bible having translations into several languages
Geneva Bible - TGB - 1560, the popular version just prior to the translation of the King James Version, includes the Apocrypha
Godbey Translation of the New Testament - GTNT - 1905
God's Word - GW - 1995, a.k.a Today's Bible Translation
Holy Bible in Modern English - HBME - 1900
Holy Bible, Revised Version - HBRV - 1885, an official revision of the King James Version which was not accepted at the time
Holy Scriptures (Harkavy) - HSH - 1951
Holy Scriptures (Leeser) - HSL - 1905
Holy Scriptures (Menorah) - HSM - 1973, a.k.a. Jewish Family Bible
Inclusive Version - AIV - 1995, stresses equality of the sexes and physically handicapped, includes Psalms
Inspired Version - IV - 1867, a revision of the King James Version
Interlinear Bible (Green) - IB - 1976, side-by-side Hebrew/Greek and English
International Standard Version - ISV - 1998
Jerusalem Bible (Catholic) - TJB - 1966, includes the Apocrypha
Jerusalem Bible (Koren) - JBK - 1962, side-by-side Hebrew and English
Jewish Bible for Family Reading - JBFR - 1957, includes the Apocrypha
John Wesley New Testament - JWNT - 1755, a correction of the King James Version
King James Version - KJV - 1611, a.k.a. Authorized Version, originally included the Apocrypha
Kleist-Lilly New Testament - KLNT - 1956
Knox Translation - KTC - 1956, includes the Apocrypha
Lamsa Bible - LBP - 1957, based on Peshitta manuscripts
Lattimore New Testament - LNT - 1962, a literal translation
Letchworth Version in Modern English - LVME - 1948
Living Bible - LB - 1971, a paraphrase version
McCord's New Testament Translation of the Everlasting Gospel - MCT - 1989
Message - TM - 1993, a.k.a. New Testament in Contemporary English, a translation in the street language of the day, includes Psalms and Proverbs
Modern Reader's Bible - MRB - 1923, stresses literary qualities, includes the Apocrypha
Modern Speech New Testament - MSNT - 1902, an attempt to present the Bible in effective, intelligible English
Moffatt New Translation - MNT - 1922
New American Bible - NAB - 1987, includes the Apocrypha
New American Standard Version - NAS - 1977
New Berkeley Version in Modern English - NBV - 1967
New Century Version - NCV - 1987
New English Bible - NEB - 1970, includes the Apocrypha
New Evangelical Translation - NET - 1992, a translation aimed at missionary activity
New International Version - NIV - 1978
New Jerusalem Bible - NJB - 1985, includes the Apocrypha
New JPS Version - NJPS - 1988
New King James Version - NKJ - 1990
New Life Version - NLV - 1969, a translation designed to be useful wherever English is used as a second language
New Living Translation - NLT - 1996, a dynamic-equivalence translation
New Millennium Bible - NMB - 1999, a contemporary English translation
New Revised Standard Version - NRS - 1989, the authorized revision of the Revised Standard Version
New Testament in Plain English - WPE - 1963, a version using common words only
New Testament: An Understandable Version - NTUV - 1995, a limited edition version
New Translation (Jewish) - NTJ - 1917
New World Translation - NWT - 1984
Noli New Testament - NNT - 1961, the first and only book of its kind by an Eastern Orthodox translator at the time of its publication
Norlie's Simplified New Testament - NSNT - 1961, includes Psalms
Original New Testament - ONT - 1985, described by publisher as a radical translation and reinterpretation
Orthodox Jewish Brit Chadasha - OJBC - 1996, an Orthodox version containing Rabbinic Hebrew terms
People's New Covenant - PNC - 1925, a version translated from the meta-physical standpoint
Phillips Revised Student Edition - PRS - 1972
Recovery Version - RcV - 1991, a reference version containing extensive notes
Reese Chronological Bible - RCB - 1980, an arrangement of the King James Version in chronological order
Restoration of Original Sacred Name Bible - SNB - 1976, a version whose concern is the true name and titles of the creator and his son
Restored New Testament - PRNT - 1914, a version giving an interpretation according to ancient philosophy and psychology
Revised English Bible - REB - 1989, a revision of the New English Bible
Revised Standard Version - RSV - 1952, a revision of the American Standard Version
Riverside New Testament - RNT - 1923, written in the living English language of the time of the translation
Sacred Scriptures, Bethel Edition - SSBE - 1981, the sacred name and the sacred titles and the name of Yahshua restored to the text of the Bible
Scholars Version - SV - 1993, a.k.a. Five Gospels; contains evaluations of academics of what are, might be, and are not, the words of Jesus; contains the four gospels and the Gospel of Thomas
Scriptures (ISR) - SISR - 1998, traditional names replaced by Hebraic ones and words with pagan sources replaced
Septuagint - LXX - c. 200 BCE, the earliest version of the Old Testament scriptures, includes the Apocrypha
Shorter Bible - SBK - 1925, eliminates duplications
Spencer New Testament - SCM - 1941
Stone Edition of the Tanach - SET - 1996, side-by-side Hebrew and English
Swann New Testament - SNT - 1947, no chapters, only paragraphs, with verses numbered consecutively from Matthew to Revelation
Today's English New Testament - TENT - 1972
Today's English Version - TEV - 1976, a.k.a. Good News Bible
Twentieth Century New Testament - TCNT - 1904
Unvarnished New Testament - UNT - 1991, the principal sentence elements kept in the original order of the Greek
Versified Rendering of the Complete Gospel Story - VRGS - 1980, the gospel books written in poetic form, contains the four gospels
Westminster Version of the Sacred Scriptures - WVSS - 1929
Wycliffe Translation - TWT - 1380, a very early version translated into English
William Tyndale New Testament - WTNT - 1989, an early version with spelling and punctuation modernized
William Tyndale Translation - WTT - 1530, early English version, includes the Pentateuch
Williams New Testament - WNT - 1937, a translation of the thoughts of the writers with a reproduction of their diction and style
Word Made Fresh - WMF - 1988, a paraphrase with humour and familiar names and places for those who have no desire to read the Bible
Worrell New Testament - WAS - 1904
Wuest Expanded Translation - WET - 1961, intended as a comparison to, or commentary on, the standard translations
Young's Literal Translation, Revised Edition - YLR - 1898, a strictly literal translation
Most of the Bible translations have been published within the last half century. Has the English language changed that much over the past 50 years?
NIRV Corrupts Romans 10:9-10 & Teaches a False Plan of Salvation
The King James Bible plainly teaches that we are saved by believing in our heart on the Lord Jesus Christ. Since people cannot see into our heart to know whether we are saved or not, they can only go by the words of our mouth. There is no way of knowing if a person is truly born-again apart from the direct testimony of their own mouth. Confession is not something that a person does to be saved; confession is something that a saved person does! This is what the Bible is saying. You don't have to confess “Jesus is Lord” to be saved, which is ridiculous...
KING JAMES BIBLE — Romans 10:9-10, “That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.”
NEW INTERNATIONAL READER'S VERSION — Romans 10:9-10, “Say with your mouth, 'Jesus is Lord.' Believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead. Then you will be saved. With your heart you believe and are made right with God. With your mouth you say that Jesus is Lord. And so you are saved.”
You don't make Jesus Lord, He is Lord!!! When you get saved, Jesus is automatically your Lord. The Greek word here for “Lord” means kurious, “Supreme in authority.” Receiving Christ as one's Lord is entirely a matter of discipleship and followship, not salvation. 1st Timothy 4:10, “For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.” Jesus is the Saviour of ALL MEN, specially of those that believe!!! If you choose to go to Hell, it will only be because you rejected Christ as your personal Savior. It has nothing to do with receiving Jesus as your Lord. Jesus is the Savior of all men, but you must receive Him personally as your Savior to be saved. You do this by receiving the Gospel as payment for your sins. By simply believing that Christ died in your place on the cross to pay for YOUR SINS, and was raised up from the dead three days later, you are saved (1st Corinthians 15:1-4). It's that simple.
The false Bible translation and heretical teaching in today's churches that you must proclaim “Jesus is Lord” to be saved turns the plan of salvation into a process, instead of the new birth that God intended for it to be. Satan's greatest weapon is to con people into living the Christian life without ever being born-again!
NIRV Removes Mention of Worshipping Christ
The King James Bible says that the 24 elders worshipped Jesus Christ; but the NIRV just says they worshipped...
KING JAMES BIBLE — Revelation 5:14, “The four living creatures said, 'Amen.' And the elders fell down and worshiped.”

NEW INTERNATIONAL READER'S VERSION — Revelation 5:14, “And the four beasts said, Amen. And the four and twenty elders fell down and worshipped him that liveth for ever and ever.”
Again, we see how the NIV series detracts from Christ's preeminence. They remove every mention of anyone worshipping the Lord Jesus Christ. Listen to what Hitler's Nazi-fascist minister of propaganda said about the ease of deceiving people...
“It would not be impossible to prove with sufficient repetition and a psychological understanding of the people concerned that a square is in fact a circle. They are mere words, and words can be molded until they clothe ideas and disguise.” ―Joseph Goebbels
Again, do you think Satan is less effective at lying and deceiving than Joseph Goebbels? Notice that he uses the word “disguise.” Satan has disguised his corrupt fake Bible versions as the holy Word of God. Goebbels says that circle and square are “mere words.” When he says “mere words,” he means that the power of words is in the ideas which they convey (and that is easy to manipulate). By simply redefining a single word, I can change the entire meaning of something. Thus, a subway can refer to an underground train system or a restaurant that serves sub-sandwiches. Satan is has redefined what it means to repent, to be born-again, and what it means to be a Christian. We must fight the Devil by upholding the true Biblical meaning of these terms.
A good example of what Goebbels is talking about is the twisting of the word “wicked” nowadays. It has become commonplace in Hollywood today to call cool and fun things “wicked cool” or just “wicked.” Literally, our youth are being indoctrinated to believe that “wicked is good!” If wicked means good, then prey tell me, what word remains in the Holy Bible to describe the awfulness of sin?
Other examples are the Biblical words: faith, repentance and salvation. These words have been redefined by false prophets to mean something entirely different than what they used to mean. For example: The word “repent” in modern dictionaries means “to turn from sin,” but when Jesus said to repent concerning salvation, He always meant “to think differently.” Hence, Biblical repentance is to change your mind from what you want to do to get to Heaven, to what God says you must do to get to Heaven. It is realizing that you are a guilty sinner in the eyes of a holy God, understanding that you cannot save yourself. That's what repentance is, a change of mind, to think differently, which compels a person to believe on Christ as their Savior.
Repentance and faith happen together, at the same time, and are inseparable. Repentance is not merely admitting that you are a sinner, but realizing that you have sinned against a holy God. You must acknowledge that you are a sinner in God's eyes. But repentance never has meant “to turn away from your sins,” which is human effort and a false plan of salvation. Modern English defines the word “repent” as “turning from sins,” which is Roman Catholic in origin. Turning from sins is a fruit (result) of genuine repentance, but not required as part of repentance to be saved.
I'm tired of false ministers teaching that if there is no fruit, then their is no tree root (faith). We learn in the parable of the seeds which fell upon four different types of ground in Luke 8:12-15, that the second and third group of seeds sprouted into new life (they were born-again), but never bore any fruit because of the shallow and thorny soil upon which they fell. Most Christians today are as the third group of seeds, which began to grow, but were choked by the cares, riches and pleasures of this earthly life, and so they remained fruitless. My friend, join me in the fourth group, who took heed to the Word of God and bore much fruit. There is much work to be done preaching the Gospel, but you MUST PREACH THE ACCURATE GOSPEL! Here's some awesome books to help you understand, titled I NEVER KNEW YOU! by Michael Bowen and WHAT IS THE GOSPEL? by Harry Ironside.
In this previous example, you can clearly see how Satan has completely changed the plan of salvation merely by altering the idea which a single word conveys. Satan has redefined our words. This is what is so deadly about “New Testament In The Original Greek,” compiled by Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort. And as I showed you earlier, Mark 1:15 has been perverted in the NIRV from “Repent ye” to “Turn away from your sins.” Satan is a master deceiver!
Please understand that from an earthly perspective, there was no difference between Cain and Abel, except that Cain was a farmer and Abel was a shepherd. They both worked hard. They were both capable young men. Yet, when they brought their sacrifice to God, the Lord accepted Abel's offering but rejected Cain's. Why? It is because Cain tried to impress God with the best of his grain, which he prepared from the fields. Cain tilled the soil, sowed the seeds and reaped his crops. In sharp contrast, Abel slew a lamb and shed its blood, which demonstrated his faith in the coming Lamb of God. Cain was self-righteous, but Abel trusted in God's righteousness!
Likewise, Biblical Christianity teaches that a man is saved by faith alone in Christ's death on the cross for our sins, and His resurrection. Lordship Salvation teaches partial faith in Christ plus human effort. Cain trusted in human effort, but Abel trusted in the Lord. Eternal life is a gift. You cannot earn it. Man has no part in his own salvation. Our part is to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and God does the rest!
How Long Halt Ye Between Two Opinions?
1st Kings 18:21, “And Elijah came unto all the people, and said, How long halt ye between two opinions? if the LORD be God, follow him: but if Baal, then follow him. And the people answered him not a word.”
Let me tell you something, Bob Jones PERversity, Moody Bible SINstitute and other ecumenical Bible colleges today (and their graduates pastoring churches) can only hobnob with the Devil's Bible-butchering gang for so long, until they will ultimately be forced to either plunge into total sinful compromise and gross apostasy, or take a stand against the modern corrupt Bible versions.
Look at this big mess. Folks, God only wrote ONE BOOK. The following statistics reveal the confusion and utter perversion which Satan is deliberately causing in our churches today (and that includes Independent Fundamental Baptist Churches). Notice that the updated NIV 2011 is 38.8% different than the original NIV 1984...
The NIV 2011 should be considered the offspring of the TNIV (Today’s NIV), and the grandson of the NIV 1984. The genetic stock shared by all three translations is 18859 verses, which is 60.7% verse similarity. Some genetic traits skip a generation, and this is the case 0.6% of the time, where the NIV 1984 and the NIV 2011 share 171 verses of commonality against the TNIV. But as one would imagine, the child is more similar to the parent, and the TNIV and the NIV 2011 share 31.3% genetic makeup, or 9736 verses. But genetics alone cannot prevent mutations and variation, so the NIV 2011 is unique 7.5% of the time, or 2320 verses of originality. Broken down, this means that the NIV 2011 is 38.8% different than the NIV 1984 and 8% different than the TNIV. (See Robert Slowley. John Dyer has slightly different figures).
Bless God, the good ole King James Bible hasn't changed one bit! Amen! The Devil isn't going to stop changing the Bible. Each succeeding new version, particularly the NIV series is going to wax worse and worse as the Bible teaches. 2nd Timothy 3:12, “Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution. But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived. The churches are being deceived. They might as well begin a “Bible-of-the-month-club.” Heresy is creeping into our Independent fundamental Baptist churches by the hour. 2nd Timothy 4:3, “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears.” Tragically, it's today's shameful pastors who won't tolerate sound doctrine (the truth) anymore.
I handed my former Independent Fundamental Baptist pastor the excellent book by Dr. Al Lacy titled, “NIV: The Antichrist's Bible.” It offended him greatly. I was called into the church office by the pastors and given an ultimatum to stop distributing the book or be asked to leave. They said the book was “divisive” in the church. Bless God, the truth is always “divisive” (dividing). That's why Jesus said apostates won't tolerate sound doctrine in the last days. Sound doctrine is the truth of God's Word. Bless God, I agree with Pastor Bob Gray Sr. down in Longview, Texas who said we were better off when our Baptist churches were regularly splitting!
Today's pastors hypocritically say publicly that they desire to know the truth. They hypocritically claim from the church pulpit to be friends of the truth. But in reality, they censor the truth, picking and choosing what they will or won't allow concerning the truth. They want to stand behind the Bible, but they don't want to takes sides on which Bible to stand behind, even though there are 65,000 words that have been removed or changed in the NIV compared to the King James Bible (and as I just showed you, even the NIV 2011 differs from the NIV 1984 by 38.8%). And as I've just shown you from the NIRV (as compared to our beloved King James Bible), it's a gigantic theological nightmare. In the old days pastors could get by with indifference, but no longer. Satan is butchering the Bible so badly that only a total reprobate pastor would support this bullcrap today in the NIV Bible series.
I triple-dog dare you to prove me wrong. Each new Bible version moves the landmark a little further to the left (error), diminishing Christ's deity and the Godhead. You keep a watchful eye on these new Bibles that are going to be coming out! You watch closely what the updated NIV versions doctrinally change, specifically concerning our Lord Jesus Christ and His deity and Godhead. The truth is that the world is waiting for their coming messiah, the Antichrist, and they are attempting to bring the churches in line with the New World Order by tampering and corrupting the Words of God. I'll stick with the unchanging King James Bible!!!!!!!
The new NIRV (updated NIV) has taken the Devil's tampering with the Word of God even further into the spiritual toilet bowl of modern intellectualism. There's nothing more sad (and it would be laughable if the matter weren't so serious), than some moron who claims to be a Greek expert, who doesn't have enough sense to know that he has been handed a fraudulent manuscript by the Devil. I am speaking about the corrupt Alexandrian, Egypt, manuscripts upon which Westcott and Hort's Greek work is based, from which all modern corrupt Bible versions are translated.
No Greek expert knows as much about the truths of God's Word than the old-fashioned hell, fire and damnation preacher who walks with God!!! Our religious seminaries are filled with Greek scholars who are woefully ignorant of Biblical truth. Go figure! You don't get truth from knowing Greek; but rather, from spending time walking with God in His holy Word and depending upon Him through constant prayer. Too many of our pastors spend time reading books, blogs, business and sports, but don't abide in God's Word. You can tell on Sunday by the fruit of their preaching, or lack thereof.
The worst pastors in the world are the ones who go along to get along. One thing that I learned about Bob Jones University's (BJU) graduates (at least the pastors and evangelists that I've known) is that they don't stand. I'm sure there are others who do stand. But the ones I know don't stand. BJU is neo-evangelical. They love to talk about wisdom from the pulpit, but they never preach on Hell, fire or damnation. I can't speak for all of them, just from what I've seen firsthand. I won't mention any names, but my former pastor just got back from the inauguration of the new president of Bob Jones University in Greenville, South Carolina. They're close personal friends. They've got their little clique of ministerial friends. They won't go against each other or break away from the religious temperature of their particular crowd.
BJU refuses to take a stand against modern corrupt Bibles. They are sitting idle on the sidelines, instead of being faithful soldiers as God wants us to be (2nd Timothy 2:3-4). The popular attitude these days in apostate mainstream new-evangelicalism is to be a good Christian, but not an offensive Christian who takes a stand. There is no debate if you read Revelation 3:15-16, where God says He wants us to be hot or cold, but not lukewarm. God vomits out lukewarm Christianity. What is lukewarm? It means to be halt between two opinions, middle-of-the-road, trying to make both sides happy, not taking a stand for God. 1st Kings 18:21, “And Elijah came unto all the people, and said, How long halt ye between two opinions? if the LORD be God, follow him: but if Baal, then follow him. And the people answered him not a word.”
I say “former” because I was told to stop handing out books and sermons by Dr. Jack Hyles and Dr. Al Lacy on the King James Bible or be asked to leave the church. I could never support such wickedness by staying in a church where the pastor rejects truth. They go along to get along with apostate mainstream new-evangelicalism. They don't preach on Hell. They don't pound the pulpit. Dr. Jack Hyles (1926-2001) went against the crowd. He was the best preacher of the 20th century, which is why he is the most hated and loved still today in 2014. Most pastors are characterized by lukewarmness and mediocrity. God said He wants us hot or cold (Revelation 3:15-16). Well, I by God's grace want to be hot for the Lord Jesus Christ. We are at war over the Bible. Satan is corrupting the Word of God.
Our pulpits have lost their authoritativeness because the new corrupt Bible versions are no longer authoritative. God's Word was written authoritative! A bunch of kooks, quacks and queers have butchered the Bible, making it read like a newspaper or comic-book. Bless God, I'll stick with the good old faithful King James Bible that uplifts the Lord Jesus Christ, proclaims His deity, teaches the Godhead, and still calls homosexuals wicked “sodomites”! Where do you stand? How long halt ye between two opinions?
Proverbs 22:28, “Remove not the ancient landmark, which thy fathers have set.”

Romans 1:25, “Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

2nd Peter 3:16, “As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.”


Virginia Mollenkott testified on her lesbianism

Virginia Mollenkott testified, My lesbianism has always been a part of me 

Updated September 17, 2001 (first published October 20, 1997) 
(David Cloud, Fundamental Baptist Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061-0368, 866-295-4143, - On January 25, 1997, we published an article on Virginia Mollenkott, a literary consultant for the New International Version. Many have asked us for information on this woman because of her connection, however significant, with this popular modern version. Thus we gave a general overview of her life and writings as follows. (A more complete overview is contained in the article Virginia Mollenkott, which can be viewed at the Way of Life web site.) 

She studied at Bob Jones University and taught at Shelton College in the 1950s. She has moved miles from that position, though. Today she moves in the most radical ecumenical feminist circles. In the 1970s, Virginia Mollenkott was a consultant to the New International Version translating committee. She was involved with this project through its completion.

In 1978 Mollenkott co-authored (with Letha Scanzoni) the book entitled Is the Homosexual My Neighbor?, in which she called for nondiscrimination toward homosexuality. The book argues that the Sodom account in Genesis does not teach the evil of homosexuality, but the evils of violent gang rape and inhospitality to strangers. The book also claims that ‘the idea of a life long homosexual orientation or 'condition' is never mentioned in the Bible (p. 71), and that Romans 1 does not fit the case of a sincere homosexual Christian (p. 62).

In 1979 Mollenkott participated in the 9th General Conference of the Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Church (a denomination composed largely of homosexuals). In a report which was published by the Christian Century, Sept. 26, 1979, Mollenkott stated, ‘This was the most grateful celebration of Christ I had ever attended...

In the early 1980s Mollenkott was a member of the National Council of Churches' committee that produced an inclusive-language lectionary which addressed God in feminine terms. At a news conference at the NCC's governing board meeting on November 10, 1983, Mollenkott claimed there is some evidence that Jesus Christ was really a woman.

In October 1985, Mollenkott's signature appeared on a statement supporting homosexuality which was published in the Sojourners magazine.

In her plenary address before the July 1986 convention of the Evangelical Women's Caucus International (EWCI), in Fresno, California, Mollenkott warned against heterosexism, the idea that everyone must be heterosexual.

In 1987 Mollenkott wrote an article claiming that refusal to ordain homosexual clergywomen is unscriptural discrimination.

In the June 1991 issue of the Episcopal monthly entitled The Witness, Mollenkott testified,
My lesbianism has always been a part of me. ... I tried to be heterosexual. I married myself off. But what I did ultimately realize was that God created me as I was, and that this is where life was meaningful.

In 1993 Mollenkott published a book entitled Sensuous Spirituality: Out from Fundamentalism (New York: Crossroad), in which she reflected on her rejection of fundamentalism, her lesbian coming out, and her belief in a female God. Mollenkott concludes that in a very physical sense we are all gay, we are all lesbian, we are all heterosexual, we are all bisexual--because we are all one (p. 153). Her view of the kingdom of God on earth is a society in which lesbian women, bisexual people, and gay men are going to be accepted as first-class citizens in the church and in society as a whole (p. 153). Mollenkott claims that providing mutual sexual pleasure, whether it be homosexual or bisexual or whatever, is one of the most important things in life.

At the November 1993 Re-imagining conference in Minneapolis, Minnesota, which was sponsored by the World Council of Churches, Mollenkott said: [Jesus] is. . . First born only in the sense that he was the first to show us that it is possible to live in oneness with the divine source while we are here on this planet. ... As an incest survivor, I can no longer worship in a theological context that depicts God as an abusive parent [referring to Christ's death on the cross] and Jesus as the obedient, trusting child.

In 1994 Mollenkott published The Divine Feminine: The Biblical Imagery of God as Female (New York: Crossroad). In this book she describes God as the One Mother of us all (p. 19).

In the year 2001, Mollenkott published Omnigender: A Trans-religious Approach. Among other things, she describes her aversion to wearing dresses. One of the greatest benefits of coming out publicly as lesbian was that I could go through my closets and give away all my dresses and skirts except for a few Gertrude Stein-ish floor-length skirts that somehow seemed less of an affront to my nature (David W. Cloud, Virginia Mollenkott, Fundamental Baptist Information Service, Jan. 25, 1997, updated August 24, 2001).
After publishing this article we received some harsh comments from certain fundamentalists who are defenders of the modern versions. One Bible college professor sent me a note saying, publish the truth; don't stoop to supermarket tabloidism. In our reply to him I made three points:

1. When I first published the article on Mollenkott, I was not trying to make a direct connection between Mollenkott and the NIV's weakness on the issue of homosexuality. My goal in printing the article originally was simply to reply to our readers who are asking for information about this woman.

2. A public letter issued by Kenneth Barker (undated but distributed in late 1993 or early 1994), Executive Director of the International Bible Society, says that they knew nothing about Mollenkott's homosexuality in the early 1970s. That is possibly true, but I do know that others knew of it or at least strongly suspected it. I have heard from people who have known her since the 1950s, both personally and professionally, and her homosexuality was suspected even then. Dr. Donald Waite used to teach at Shelton College, where Mollenkott once taught. In his Bible for Today publication for March-April 1994, Dr. Waite gave the following report:Mollenkott's perversity was known about long before the NIV was first published, so that one man (Arthur Steele) refused to accept the full presidency of Shelton College, Ringwood, New Jersey, where Mollenkott taught during the 1960's unless she was removed from the staff. By 1978 Mollenkott had co-authored Is the Homosexual My Neighbor? As noted previously, the book claims that the Sodom account in Genesis does not teach the evil of homosexuality, that the idea of a life long homosexual orientation or condition is never mentioned in the Bible (p. 71), and that Romans 1 does not fit the case of a sincere homosexual Christian (p. 62).

3. Even though Barker's letter claims that Mollenkott was consulted only in a minor way in matters of English style, the fact remains that her name has been plainly listed in their literature for almost three decades under the heading Literary Critics and Other Consultants. Only recently were we told her role was inconsequential. Furthermore, Mollenkott's own account differs from Barker's. Barker is playing little word games. It would be a different story if Edwin Palmer were still alive; he knew me; had heard me speak and sent me sheaf after sheaf of translations to review over a period of three or more years, including several gift editions for the committee members when the work was first completed (Mollenkott's reply to Robert Kasten, Jan. 20, 1995, cited from Why Not the NIV? by G.R. Guile). Mollenkott said, further: … they would send me big swatches of translations . . . many chapters at a time . . . perhaps several shorter books from the Old Testament or the New Testament. . . . I would write notes all over manuscripts which I was sent, both praising phraseology . . . and asking questions . . . something I would typically write would be, ‘Would the Greek or would the Hebrew permit this word which would seem to me to be much more understandable…(Ibid.).

If we had known earlier what we know today, we would not have hesitated, as we originally did, to suggest that the New International Version is weak on homosexuality due to the influence of homosexuals. The parallels are too striking to be incidental.


Virginia Mollenkott was not the only homosexual who worked on the New International Version. Consider the following letter we received from a friend in Britain --
"A while ago I heard a rumour that Marten Woudstra, who was apparently not just on the Committee for Bible Translation of the NIV, but actually head of the Old Testament Committee, was a homosexual and friend of Evangelicals Concerned. He has been dead for a couple of years at least, but I thought this was vitally important information considering the way the NIV handles homosexuality/sodomy.

"I took the opportunity today to telephone New York psychologist, Dr. Ralph Blair, who in 1976 founded Evangelicals Concerned, Inc. (ECI). Amazingly, both Ralph Blair and Virginia Mollenkott (and Billy Graham) all originally went to Bob Jones University! This is a nationwide task force and fellowship for gay and lesbian 'evangelical Christians' and their friends. The address of ECI is 311 East 72nd Street, New York, NY 10021. They can be found on the internet easily by putting the two words, evangelical + concerned onto a search engine like Alta Vista.

"I asked Dr. Blair if he knew Marten Woudstra. Yes, he was very familiar with him. Woudstra had been on the mailing list of Evangelicals Concerned from its inception. Although Woudstra had no formal ties with ECI, once when he was in New York he called in and had tea with Dr Blair. Dr Blair told me that Marten Woudstra was a life long bachelor, was a homosexual (Dr Blair would not commit himself as to whether Woudstra was celibate or active), and shared the viewpoint of ECI that a life long 'loving monogamous relationships' between gay men or women was acceptable to God.

"Dr Blair categorically stated to me on the phone today (23.9.97) that other members of the NIV translation committee were quietly supportive of ECI, but he was not able to tell me any names for obvious reasons.

"Woudstra was once the OT Professor at Calvin Seminary, the college of the Christian Reformed Church (Dutch Calvinistic). Over 70% of CRC churches now use the NIV. Dr Woudstra wrote a commentary on Joshua which appears in a series of commentaries also contributed to by such illustrious 'evangelical' names as F.F. Bruce.

"In the early 80's (this date would be good to have more accurately) there was a synod meeting of the CRC. At the beginning of the week there was a debate as to whether or not graduates of Calvin Seminary should be required to hold that Adam and Eve were literal persons. Later that week there was to be a debate about homosexuality.

"Woudstra championed the cause of a literal belief in Adam and Eve. The conservatives in the denomination rallied behind his stand and the vote was won. However, later in the week, Woudstra stunned the conservatives by stating (in the homosexuality discussions) that we cannot go to the OT to formulate our views on homosexuality. He limited his comments to the OT (his specialty) and stated that there was nothing in the OT that corresponded to the homosexual orientation and monogamous life long loving relationships among gay people today. The 'sodomy' of the OT simply involved temple rites and gang rape (Gen 19). Woudstra lost this debate but had made his position clear. He was a supporter of homosexuality, and was 'orientated' that way himself.

"Is it any wonder that the OT and NT of the NIV is soft on homosexuality with the involvement of Woudstra, others on the CBT and the likes of Mollenkott? Dr Blair's phone call today has confirmed that to me in no uncertain terms.

"I hope this letter has been helpful. It is merely a report of a phone call, but I feel it is a very revealing one. I have tried to report what Dr Ralph Blair told me as accurately and unexaggeratedly as possible.

"Yours in Christ,
"Michael Penfold

We will probably never know exactly what role Woudstra, Mollenkott, and perhaps other homosexuals had in the translation of the New International Version. The NIV publishers are not necessarily in a position to be candid about all of this. After Carl Graham published his booklet Sodomy and the NIV in 1991, he was threatened with a lawsuit by the publishers of the NIV. The following is his description of this:
Someone must have mailed a copy to the New International Bible Society, for in the fall of 1993 I got a registered letter from them which was threatening in nature. They accused me of slandering the members of the NIV Committee and insisted that I withdraw the booklet immediately or face a possible lawsuit. This is where I called on Dr. D.A. Waite for advice as I knew that he had also been threatened in a similar situation about one of his publications. Following his advice, I got an attorney.

My attorney assured me that I was on firm legal grounds. He seemed most anxious to get the issue into court because he believed there was a freedom of speech issue involved which should not go unnoticed. He basically told the NIV people to take their best shot and we would see them in court. His communication with the International Bible Society resulted in an apology for the threatening letter, and I have heard no more from them.

In their letter to me, the NIV people denied that Dr. Mollenkott had any influence on the final product. However, they have not been consistent in their explanation of her input, for one letter from them says she was dismissed in the late 60's and another from the same office says she was dismissed in 1972. From what I have read about Dr. Mollenkott's relationship with the NIV, I am left with the impression that she was there for the duration of the project. I really don't know where the truth lies about her influence on the final product, but I know for certain that she is a homosexual, she served on the committee, and the sin of the Sodomites has never appeared on the pages of the NIV (Carl Graham, introduction to the 2nd edition of Sodomy and the NIV, p. iii).
The following article was written by Graham after he researched the connection between the NIV's rendering of passages touching on homosexuality and the presence of a homosexual on the translation review team. It is amazing to see many direct parallels between Mollenkott's views about homosexuality and the translation of the New International Version. In some people's book, two and two still equals four. IF MOLLENKOTT OR WOUDSTRA (ALONE, OR IN CONJUNCTION WITH SOME OTHER HOMOSEXUAL) DID NOT DIRECTLY INFLUENCE THESE TRANSLATIONS, THERE MUST HAVE BEEN OTHER MEMBERS OF THE NIV COMMITTEE WHO WERE AMAZINGLY LIKE-MINDED WITH THESE MODERN EVANGELICAL SODOMITES.

THE SIN OF HOMOSEXUALITY CAN BE CONDEMNED OUT OF THE NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION, BUT IT IS NOT AS PLAIN AS IT IS IN THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. We have seen repeatedly that this is one of the devil's tactics. He does not completely change or remove a doctrine; he merely tampers with it. In a fierce warfare, the difference between winning and losing often depends upon very small details. To clandestinely dull a warrior's sword is tantamount to open sedition.

The sad fact which must be faced is this: IN SCHOLARLY EVANGELICAL CIRCLES, THE IDEA THAT HOMOSEXUALITY IS SOMEHOW COMPATIBLE WITH CHRISTIANITY IS GAINING A WIDENING SYMPATHY. The book by Virginia Mollenkott and Letha Scanzoni, Is the Homosexual My Neighbor? (Harper & Row, 1978), received favorable reviews in Christianity Today, The Christian Century, The Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, and The Christian Ministry. Joe Dallas, author of A Strong Delusion: Confronting the 'Gay Christian' Movement (Harvest House Publishers, Eugene, Oregon, 1996), made the following conclusion: ENDORSEMENTS FROM SUCH RESPECTED CHRISTIAN PUBLICATIONS WAS PROOF THAT THE GAY CHRISTIAN MOVEMENT WAS GAINING MOMENTUM AND CREDIBILITY.

The rest of this report is written by Carl Graham of Angier, North Carolina. We are thankful for his permission to reproduce his study:
By Carl Graham
Revised 1996
Twogistates Publishers, 500 Wheeler Dr., Angier, NC 27501
(919) 639-3143

The question is often asked, "Is the New International Version of the Bible (NIV) a reliable translation?" The answer depends entirely on the basic belief structure of the one replying. It is a general consensus among the evangelical community that the NIV is an excellent rendition of what God has said to mankind. The positive answer among this group is probably brought about for two reasons: (1) the translators claimed to be evangelicals, and (2) the evangelicals endorse the modern techniques of textual criticism which were employed. Others who subscribe to the theory of textual criticism will also hold a high opinion of the NIV. From a scholarly standpoint, the NIV seems to have been accepted.

However, there are those who are comfortable with the King James Bible (KJB) and hold a totally different view about the NIV. They see many new words and concepts and are convinced that these changes not only aren't necessary, some even detract from God's Word. They believe the truth never changes and if the NIV were a true translation of the Bible, it would reflect the same thoughts and comparable words as the KJB which has been around for centuries.

Clearly, there is disagreement between NIV and KJB supporters. While there are many minor problems, the major difficulty falls in the area of providential preservation of the Scriptures and the implications this has on how God has protected His Word and kept it accurate over the passing years.

The KJB translators were fully committed to an accurate translation based on their personal convictions that the Bible is the verbally inspired Word of God, and that He had preserved it in its pure form for all generations. The texts they used were the Hebrew Masoretic and the Greek Textus Receptus.

On the other hand, the NIV translators held the view that the Bible had become corrupted over the centuries and they could reproduce the original wordings by various literary techniques. They discarded the work of the KJB translators and developed an eclectic text. The major discrepancies between the KJB and the NIV are due in part to the two different underlying texts, but the most radical changes stem from the foundational beliefs of the two translating committees.

The NIV committee was made up of over 100 people with various Biblical backgrounds and doctrinal beliefs. There were many who professed inerrancy, but believed the texts of the KJB were severely corrupted. Somewhere between this and the liberal view were those who professed partial inerrancy which basically means the Bible is inerrant in matters of faith and practice but is in error in matters of history and science.

Then there were the extreme group who claimed to hold a high view of Scripture, but whose doctrine was either liberal (didn't believe the Bible was God's inspired Word), or was just generally confused regarding God's Word. The sad part of the whole situation is those who knew better let those with liberal leanings control the process and this resulted in a doctrinally deficient version of the Bible. This is clearly illustrated by the influence of Dr. Virginia Ramey Mollenkott and the treatment of homosexuality in the NIV.

Dr. Mollenkott, one of the literary consultants for the NIV translating committee, is a professed homosexual. This is verified by her own words in an interview in the Episcopal publication, Witness (June, 1991, pages 20-23). The interviewer, Sue Pierce, asked the question, "'Why was it important to both of you to come out as lesbians?" Dr. Mollenkott's reply was, "My lesbianism has always been a part of me. I tried to kill myself in my teens because they told me I'd never be healed, that God had no use for people like me. I couldn't stand the thought of living a life that was useless and offensive to God. I tried to be heterosexual. I married myself off. But what I did ultimately realize was that God created me as I was, and that this is where life was meaningful."

Realizing Dr. Mollenkott's moral direction, one could expect her views to strongly affect the outcome of the NIV translation, and it does, as can be seen in the treatment of the sin of Sodom from which the term "sodomy" is derived. This word, generally used for homosexual behavior, is defined in Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary as "copulation with a member of the same sex or with an animal." As can be seen, sodomy implies more than homosexual behavior, but Dr. Mollenkott was not interested in the human-beast relationship, she was only concerned about justifying the same sex relationship of sodomy.

In her book, Is The Homosexual My Neighbor? (V. Mollenkott and L. Scanzoni, San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1978), Dr. Mollenkott explains fully why she thinks the homosexual got bad press in the Bible. She presents all kinds of fanciful notions that the Old Testament Holiness Codes which forbid sodomy do not apply to the New Testament church. She explains in detail that Jesus did not condemn homosexuality as a loving relationship between two consenting adults. Therefore, she concludes, it has to be OK. Where Paul mentions homosexuality, she again says that it only applies to promiscuous homosexuality. The NIV clearly reflects her views.

THE FOLLOWING READINGS COMPARE THE KJB AND THE NIV IN SEVERAL AREAS WHERE SODOMY OR HOMOSEXUAL BEHAVIOR IS MENTIONED. Going over these, it is easy to see that sodomy was never considered as a viable concept in the NIV and homosexuality was presented from Dr. Mollenkott's viewpoint. The comments of Dr. Mollenkott are from her book, Is The Homosexual My Neighbor? (abbreviated as ITHMN).


KJB - And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, where are the men which came into thee this night? Bring them out unto us, that we may know them.

NIV - They called to Lot, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out so that we can have sex with them."

Mollenkott, ITHMN, page 57 ". . . the Sodom story seems to be focusing on two specific evils: (1) violent gang rape and (2) inhospitality to the stranger."

[NOTE FROM BRO. CLOUD: The Bible plainly states that the sin for which God judged Sodom was connected with gross and strange immorality. 2 Peter 2:7 refers to Sodom's "filthy conversation." The same Greek word is translated wantonness in Rom. 13:13 and 2 Pet. 2:18. Jude 7 refers to Sodom's fornication and "going after strange flesh." God did not send fire upon Sodom for its inhospitality.]


KJB - Thou shall not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is an abomination.

NIV - Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman: that is detestable.

Author's note: There is quite a degree of difference between the meaning of the words abomination and detestable.


KJB - If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death: their blood shall be upon them.

NIV - If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them has done what is detestable. They must be put to death: their blood will be on their own heads.

Mollenkott, ITHMN, pages 110 through 121 - Dr. Mollenkott argues that this is part of the ceremonial laws, and as such, are to be disregarded by the Christian. She places this act on the same level as wearing clothes of two different materials.


KJB - There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel.

NIV - No Israelite man or woman is to become a shrine prostitute.


KJB - Now as they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of the city, certain sons of Belial, beset the house round about, and beat at the door, and spake to the master of the house, the old man, saying, Bring forth the man that came into thine house, that we may know him.

NIV - While they were enjoying themselves, some of the wicked men of the city surrounded the house. Pounding on the door, they shouted to the old man who owned the house, "Bring out the man who came to your house so we can have sex with him."

Mollenkott, ITHMN, page 57 - "Violence -- forcing sexual activity upon another -- is the real point to this story."


KJB - And there were sodomites in the land: and they did according to all the abominations of the nations which the Lord cast out before the children of Israel.

NIV - There were even male shrine prostitutes in the land; the people engaged in all the detestable practices of the nations the Lord had driven out before the Israelites.

[NOTE FROM BRO. CLOUD: The rendering male shrine prostitutes is an interpretation as is the rendering sodomite. According to Strong's, the Hebrew term is qadesh, kaw-dashe'; from H6942; a (quasi) sacred person, i.e. (techn.) a (male) devotee (by prostitution) to licentious idolatry. In the Authorized Version this Hebrew word is translated sodomite and unclean. The term sodomite was brought over from the Geneva Bible. Many older Bible dictionaries connect sodomy with homosexuality. Eadie defines Sodomite as not dwellers in Sodom, but practisers of unnatural lust--the sin of Sodom (John Eadie, A Biblical Cyclopedia, London: Charles Griffin, 1872). This sin was consecrated in many Eastern kingdoms. The People's Bible Encyclopedia by Charles Randall Barnes (1903) says: The sodomites were not inhabitants of Sodom, nor their descendants, but men consecrated to the unnatural vice of Sodom (Gen. 19:5; comp. Rom. 1:27) as a religious rite. Note that Barnes connects the sin of sodomy with the homosexuality described in Romans 1:27. Hastings (1898) says: The term Sodomite is used in Scripture to describe offences against the laws of nature which were FREQUENTLY connected with idolatrous practices (emphasis ours). Note that Hastings did not claim that the offences against the laws of nature were restricted solely to idolatrous temple worship. The term sodomy in these passages probably did refer, at least in part, to homosexuality connected with immoral pagan religions. The problem with the NIV translation is that it LIMITS this sin to that particular connection rather than allowing the larger meaning of homosexuality in general. It also creates the confusion that the practice of sodomy in the Old Testament and the sin of Sodom itself was limited to male prostitution.]


KJB - And he took away the sodomites out of the land and removed all the idols that his fathers had made.

NIV - He expelled all the shrine prostitutes from the land and got rid of the idols his fathers had made.


KJB - And the remnant of the sodomites, which remained in the days of his father Asa, he took out of the land.

NIV - He rid the land of the rest of the shrine prostitutes who remained there even after the reign of his father Asa.


KJB - And he brake down the houses of the sodomites, that were by the house of the Lord, where the women wove hangings for the grove.

NIV - He also tore down the quarters of the male shrine prostitutes, which were in the temple of the Lord and where women did weaving for Asherah.

Mollenkott, ITHMN, page 59 & 60 - "Most scholars agree that in the fertility religions of Israel's neighbors, male cult prostitutes were employed for homosexual acts. The people who loved and served the God of Israel were strictly forbidden to have anything to do with such idolatry, and the Jewish men were commanded to never serve as temple prostitutes."


KJV - But I say unto you, That it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom, in the day of judgment, than for thee.

NIV - But I tell you it will be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgment than for you.


KJB - But I say unto you, that it shall be more tolerable in that day for Sodom than for that city.

NIV - I tell you, it will be more bearable on that day for Sodom than for you.

Mollenkott, ITHMN, page 59. "Jesus refers to Sodom, not in the context of sexual acts, but in the contents of inhospitality." And on page 71, she expands this thought with "the idea of a life long homosexual orientation or 'condition' is never mentioned in the Bible."


KJB - For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections; for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And like wise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in lust one toward another; man with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet.

NIV - Because of this, God gave him over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.

Mollenkott, ITHMN, page 62 - "The key thought here seems to be lust, 'unnaturalness,' and, in verse 28, a desire to avoid the acknowledgment of God. But although the censure fits idolatrous people with whom Paul was concerned here, it does not seem to fit the case of a sincere homosexual Christian. Such a person loves Jesus Christ and wants above all to acknowledge God in all of life, yet for some unknown reason feels drawn to someone of the same sex, for the sake of love rather than lust. Is it fair to describe that person as lustful or desirous of forgetting God's existence?"


KJB - Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind…

NIV - Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral nor idolators nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders...

Here we would point out that this is the only place in the NIV where the word "homosexual" occurs. It is not clear from the context if this means heterosexuals who abuse homosexuals or homosexuals who abuse each other. See Dr. Mollenkott's explanation in the 1st Timothy comments following.

[NOTE FROM BRO. CLOUD: We also see that the New International Version replaces the effeminate of the KJV with male prostitutes. The word effeminate in the KJV is from the Greek word malakos, which Strong defines as soft, i.e. fine (clothing). The Greek word appears three times in the New Testament, and in the Authorized Version it is translated effeminate one time (1 Cor. 6:9) and soft two times (Matt. 11:8; Lk. 7:25). The New International Version translators had no authority to translate this word as male prostitutes. They have replaced the New Testament term effeminate, which aptly describes male homosexuality in general, with the term male prostitutes, thus diluting and perverting the meaning of the passage.]

I TIMOTHY 1:9 & 10

KJB - Knowing this, that the law is not made for righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers. For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine.

NIV - We also know that law is not made for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious; for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murders, for adulterers and perverts, for slave traders and liars and perjurers, and for whatever else is contrar
y to sound doctrine...

Mollenkott, ITHMN, page 67 - "Interpretation of these passages depends on two Greek words used in I Cor. 6:9 which have presented a problem for translators in the King James Version, they translated 'effeminate' and 'abusers of themselves with mankind.' In the Revised Standard Version of 1952, they were combined and rendered simply 'homosexuals,' which implied that all persons whose erotic interests were oriented to the same sex were by the very fact excluded from membership in the kingdom of God. But the original intent seems to have been to single out specific kinds of same-sex practices which were deplorable."


KJB - Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

NIV - In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire.

Mollenkott, ITHMN, page 59 - "The 'unnatural lust' thus could, in the context, and in view of the apocryphal texts to which Jude made allusion, refer to a desire for sexual contact between human and heavenly beings."


While many believe practicing homosexuals can be Christian, there are many others who have a different conviction about what the Bible says about sodomy. For this group, it is hardly acceptable to call sodomites temple prostitutes, nor to think of same-sex relationships as natural. These same people would take a viewpoint that God hates the sin of homosexuality and will bring judgment on those who live this kind of lifestyle.

The information presented here is not all inclusive, but is intended to sound an alarm. If the NIV is your Bible of choice, it would be prudent to look closely in other areas as well, for there are many other subjects handled just as loosely as sodomy. Don't take anyone's word for what God says. Check it out! After all, He'll hold you alone responsible.
This ends Sodomy and the NIV by Carl Graham.

This also ends Brother Cloud's report Homosexuality and the NIV.

Beware Of Satan's Latest “New International Reader's Version” (NIRV): The Antichrist's Bible!

Beware Of Satan's Latest “New International Reader's Version” (NIRV): The Antichrist's Bible! By David J. Stewart | October...