Sermon Tone Analysis

Announcements

Re-enrollment and enrollment has begun for the Academy.

Keep this very important time in prayer!

(Show Video)

Diaper/Wippee Table for the Griffeth’s in the lobby

Our missions revival is coming up beginning on Wednesday, Feb. 23 and going through Sunday, Feb. 27.

Begin purchasing gift cards for the missionaries.

We will have 2 new missionaries, one of our own missionaries and Bro.

Maldoff

Why Do I Personally Use the KJV?

This series of messages is designed to answer the question, “Why do I, personally, only use the KJV and why do I, as pastor, continue to lead SCBC to use only the KJV?”

My personal stated position and the stated position of SCBC is

We believe that God inspired His Word in the original languages.

We believe that God has preserved His Word through the ages so that we can confidently say, “Thus saith the Lord.”

We believe that God has preserved His Word, for English speaking people, in the KJV.

Dr. Charles Surret, in his book, The Certainty of the Words, wrote:

It would seem, then, more consistent to not only prefer the Textus Receptus for one’s Greek Text, but for those who desire an English Bible to choose the old King James Version.

Whether one considers one translation more “readable” or not, the Bible-believer should desire accuracy above all other considerations when choosing a translation of God’s Word.

We must also never forget:

The Devil hates God’s Word!

Ever since the Living Word ascended back into Heaven, Satan has concentrated his attack on the Written Word of God.

Satan has never been able to defeat the Living Word and we can rest assured that he will never be able to defeat the Written Word of God either.

Satan’s attacks on the Written Word of God have been...

The Devil seeks to cause people to doubt God’s Word!

Genesis 3:1 (KJV 1900)

...Yea, hath God said...

Why Do I Personally Use the KJV?

Reason 1: Why did Tischendorf go looking to begin with?

Tischendorf did not believe that he had the Word of God.

So, he went looking to “recover” the Word of God.

I can tell you this, Textual Critics are still seeking to “recover” the Word of God.

However, a group of scholars, led by Eberhard Nestle and Kurt Aland, decided that Westcott-Hort had not gotten it right, so, in 1898, they produced the Nestle-Alland Greek Text.

As of right now, there have been 28 versions of the Nestle-Alland Greek Texts published.

Changes to the actual Greek text were made between each version.

Textual critics are still trying to discern whether or not they have the actual Word of God.

Reason 2: The Catholic Connection

Last week I pointed out the how very different the Catholic church treated William Tyndale, the first person to translate the Bible into the English language (They burned him at the stake.)

and how the Catholic church treated Constantine Tischendorf (The Catholic church welcomed him with “open arms.”).

As I mentioned last week, one writer stated:

Satan’s first strategy had been to kill the Christians and destroy their Bible…Satan’s second strategy was to substitute a fake Bible for the real one.

Allow me to add an additional “connection” to this point:

Members of the Editorial Committee of the United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament which is he Nestle-Aland Text that I have already referenced included, from 1975 until his death in 2012, a Jesuit and Catholic Cardinal, Carlo M. Martini.

God’s Word says:

Reason 3: Doctrine has been affected.

I have already, in the previous weeks, mentioned this.

However, I decided to go ahead and give it its own “Reason.”

Turn to and read Acts 8:36-38.

The eunuch, to whom Philip was witnessing asks, “Can I be baptized?”

Notice Philips response in vs. 37:

Pretty important doctrine, wouldn’t you agree?

Before a person can be baptized, they need to be saved!

However, in the ESV:

And as they were going along the road they came to some water, and the eunuch said, “See, here is water!

What prevents me from being baptized?”

38 And he commanded the chariot to stop, and they both went down into the water, Philip and the eunuch, and he baptized him.

In the ESV there is no vs.

37!

How many times does doctrine need to be changed or altered for you to say, “I had better stay away from that translation?!?!?”

Reason 4: Where did they come from?

Where did the Textus Receptus come from?

Where was its origin?

Where did the Codex Sinaiticus & Codex Vaticanus come from?

Where did they originate?

Dr. David Sorenson, in his book, God’s Perfect Book, states:

There clearly have been two streams of Bibles through history.

One had its roots in Antioch-Syria, dating from the mid-second century onward.

The other stream of Bibles had its roots in Alexandria, Egypt, dating from the fourth century.

All scholars agree with this assessment.

The Textus Receptus can trace its roots to Antioch-Syria.

(This is also often referred to as a “Byzantine Text type.”)

The Sinaiticus and Vaticanus trace their roots to Alexandria, Egypt.

(They are often referred to as being “Alexandrian Text types.”)

Why is this important?

What is the significance?

Antioch-Syria

Without belaboring the point, you’ll remember that Antioch-Syria was the center of Paul’s missionary missionaries.

(Acts chapter 13.)

It was the hub from which Paul took the Gospel to the rest of the world!

Alexandria, Egypt

Alexandria, Egypt was, at one time, the capitol of Egypt.

It has the largest library in ancient history containing some 900,000 works.

Alexandria, Egypt was also the home for many perversions of the Gospel.

Alexandria, Egypt was the home of Gnosticism.

…Which, among other things, denies the deity of Jesus Christ.

They would teach that Jesus Christ only “became” God when the Spirit of God rested upon Him at His baptism.

Once again, I reference Dr. David Sorenson:

…the Alexandrian-based Critical Text diminishes the virgin birth of Christ to the point of almost eliminating it.

There appears to be a pattern of random and incremental eroding of the doctrine of Christ.

You’ll remember, from several weeks ago, that I pointed out the fact that the Westcott-Hort left out the phrase, the Son of God, from Mark chapter 1 and verse 1.

The Apostle John warned of this teaching; the denial of the deity of Christ.

Alexandria, Egypt was also the home of Arianism.

Arianism is an influential heresy which also denies the deity of Christ which originated with the Alexandrian priest Arius ( c. 250– c. 336).

Arianism maintained that Jesus was created by the Father and was therefore not God on the same level as God the Father.

Arianism also denies the existence of the Trinity.

1 John 5:7–8 (KJV 1900)

For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.

But, notice the ESV (a translation based upon the Westcott-Hort):

For there are three that testify: 8 the Spirit and the water and the blood; and these three agree.

The ESV leaves out part of vs. 7 and part of vs. 8 - the part which states that the Three that bear record in Heaven are the Father, the Word (Jesus Christ), and the Holy Ghost!

Scholars agree that the Westcott-Hort is based upon an Alexandrian Text type meaning that it comes from an area well known for their heresy.