BATTLE OF THE BIBLES

Chapter Twenty-Two

A Twentieth-Century Burgon

Benjamin G. Wilkinson Phd, Dean of Theology at Washington Missionary College, Washington D.C., was a man with a very inquiring mind. Brought up in the best Protestant tradition of the "Bible and the Bible only", he was concerned that the Bible on which his faith had been founded was increasingly being neglected. In fact, in the academic world in which he moved, the idea was gaining ground that those who persisted with the King James Authorised Version were merely evincing inferior judgment and poor scholarship.

Wilkinson had devoted considerable study to the history of Christianity and the preservation of apostolic truth throughout the Dark Ages, also the hazardous struggles of those who launched and consolidated the Protestant Reformation. He was later to record his research in his classic work, "Truth Triumphant", which was published in 1944 by Pacific Press Publishing Association, and ran into several reprints. During his research, he found that the history of the New Testament Text was inextricably entwined with the struggle to maintain apostolic Christianity against paganism and, later, factional Christianity. It became clear that it was the church which was "driven into the wilderness" that had maintained apostolic truth because it had also been the guardian of God's Holy Word. This line of Scripture is what was known as the Traditional or Byzantine Text, which was later incorporated into the Greek New Testament by Erasmus and then used by Luther, Tyndale and the King James translators. It is now commonly known as the Received Text.

Wilkinson realised that he had sufficient material to bring out a book on this subject alone, so in 1930 he published his findings under the title, "Our Authorised Bible Vindicated". Apparently he had difficulty in finding a publisher for his book, an indication perhaps of a growing preference for modern versions, for he had to act as his own publisher. Hence, the book's comparatively restricted circulation during his lifetime.

Wilkinson's book indicates that he was in possession of Dean Burgon's "Revision Revised" and that he was in complete agreement with Burgon's contention that the very title "Revised Version" is a misnomer and a fraud. But Wilkinson went much further. He dealt with his subject in its historical settings and demonstrated how the diversions from the Received Text affect basic Christian doctrine; eg. the divinity of Christ, the Trinity, and the way in which they are biased toward Roman Catholic theology and against fundamental Protestantism.

But further, he demonstrated the highly damaging effect on the beliefs of the church which employed him as an ordained minister - namely the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

Incredibly, although his book enjoyed wide acceptance among his ministerial colleagues, it was rejected outright by a "Committee of Review" set up in 1930 by the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists with headquarters in Washington D.C.

The term "incredibly" is used deliberately, for this denomination was one which arose in America around the mid-nineteenth century as a direct result of the prevalent interest in the study of the Bible and its prophecies. Many students of prophecy in various Protestant denominations in both Old and New Worlds were convinced by the signs given in Matthew 24 and other parts of the Bible, that Christ's promised return was close at hand. Among such people were members of the Methodist and Baptist Churches who decided that they should lay aside all preconceived beliefs and creeds and turn prayerfully to a thorough study of the Bible and the Bible only.

Naturally, the Bible which they studied was the Protestant King James Version. Having determined to follow only those things revealed in God's Word and to let the Bible be its own interpreter, they soon found themselves in a dilemma. For one thing, they found that the "law of the LORD is perfect" (Psalm 19:7), and that Christ has said that he had not come to destroy the law but to fulfil it and that it would remain as long as heaven and earth should last (Matthew 5:17, 18). Why had they then, along with other Christian churches, ignored one of God's Commandments - the fourth - by keeping holy the first day of the week instead of the seventh? (Exodus 20:8-12). Why had Jesus closed His Revelation to John with the words:

As these inquiring people continued in prayer and study, they were greatly impressed by the message of the three angels found in Revelation 14:6-11, followed by verse twelve which says:

In the first angel's message (Verses six and seven), they came to see that at the time of the end "the everlasting gospel" was to include a call to prepare the world for Christ's imminent second advent and its attendant judgment. This was to be accomplished by emphasising the importance of returning to the true way of worshipping the Creator by keeping holy the day on which God rested from His creative work - the seventh day of the fourth Commandment.

In keeping with their earlier resolve to follow the Bible only, they decided to keep holy the Biblical day of rest (Saturday) and eventually, in the year 1860 the name Seventh-day Adventist was formally adopted, the name being expressive of their beliefs. How then, some seventy years later, could the leaders of the Seventh-day Adventist Church reject the work of B. G. Wilkinson, one of their own educationalists who upheld the purity of the very Bible from which SDA pioneers had discerned their beliefs? In fact, his church had already smeared the integrity of the King James Version, at least within its own theological curricula.

In 1926, the SDA's Berrien Springs College Press published a booklet, "Doctrines for use in Seventh-day Adventist Colleges", in which it claimed the American Revised Version to be "more accurate, more scholarly, more valuable" than the Authorised Bible (p 59).

The author has had the opportunity of examining the SDA General Conference's review of Wilkinson's book. He has to agree with Wilkinson that it is more of an attack than a review, for his unnamed reviewers entirely ignored the historical aspect which involved the papal led intrigue, conceived at the Council of Trent, to replace the Protestant Bible with Rome's counterfeit, the 1881 Revised Version.

So patently devoid of common logic and scholarship is this so-called "Review", that the main reason for rejecting Wilkinson's book is adequately summed up by the fear expressed therein by the reviewers themselves:

So, the leaders of the SDA Church that had proudly proclaimed themselves as "The people of the Bible", succumbed to the pressure of their peers in a system of Protestantism that scarcely regarded them as anything more than leaders of a cult! What a contrast to the unwavering resolve of the brave army of martyrs in the mould of Tyndale and others who sacrificed their lives in order that the world might be given the very Bible which had been responsible for bringing Protestantism in general, and Adventism in particular into existence!

Apparently Wilkinson's book had stirred up a hornet’s nest. Within a year the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists decided to cool the debate by issuing a directive saying "That the controversy over the use of versions should be avoided". Then they threw a sop to both sides by stating that "the 1611 King James Version and the 1901 American Revised Version shall serve us without discrimination". Their chief motivation for concern was made known when they appealed for unity by "Leaving all free to use the version of their choice" (see "Problems in Translation", pp 74, 75, a General Conference Publication, authors undeclared).

In consideration of the fact that we have seen that the King James Version is a Protestant Bible (Received Text), while the Revised Version and the American Revised Version contain Roman Vulgate implants, and that they disagree with the KJV in numerous places in matters of importance (see Chapter Twenty-Seven), we can only conclude that at least some Seventh-day Adventist leaders have absolutely no idea as to which book is God's Word! Hence, seeing their beliefs are claimed to be Biblically-based, they have a problem of gargantuan proportions. They should expect massive doctrinal confusion to follow!

For instance, having noticed the importance which the pioneers of the SDA Church attached to the judgment-hour message of the first angel of Revelation chapter fourteen, we can only wonder why today they should be interested in warning people of a judgment that, in the Revised Version, American Revised Version and New International Version, is placed after a period of punishment! How nicely such a rendition fits with papal dogma of purgatory! (2 Peter 2:9, RSV etc). On the other hand, the King James Version portrays the judgment correctly as a means of determining who are to be punished and who are not.

If both versions of the text are equally inspired, we have to ask the question, "Inspired by whom?" Surely we are not expected to believe that our God is a God of confusion! If so, we would have to reject 1 Corinthians 14:33: "For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints" (KJV).

Fortunately, for Seventh-day Adventism, the laity took absolutely no notice of the General Conference's dualism. As with Protestant churches generally, the King James Bible continued to reign supreme in their homes, their churches and to a large extent, in their primary and high schools. Their young people grew up like other Protestants, learning to give an answer for their faith by memorising and repeating Bible texts in uniformity.

Chapter Twenty-Three

The Romanising of the Bible Societies

In spite of an increasing stream of new versions, the Protestant nature of the Bible Societies in the English-speaking world dominated well into the second half of the twentieth century. A case in point is the history of the British and Foreign Bible Society in New South Wales, Australia. In a graph analysing types of Bibles sales from the year 1961 to 1989 (supplied by the New South Wales Bible Society to the author in May 1992), we find that in the years 1961 and 1962 one hundred percent of sales were King James Versions. In 1963, a small percentage of Revised Standard Versions were sold and by 1966 we find that sales of the RSV had outstripped sales of the KJV.

In 1970, the New English Bible showed up as a small percentage of sales and remained that way until it vanished from the graph in 1977. In 1972 the Living Bible made its appearance and in 1977 there commenced the reign of the Good News Bible. The New International Version arrived in 1979 and has maintained steady sales of around ten percent of total sales. By 1989, the last year shown on the graph, sales of the KJV represented a mere 5.63 percent of total sales!

Such records reflect the scene in most Bible House showrooms where it has become increasingly obvious that little space is devoted to the display of the King James Bibles. How has this state of affairs come about in such a short period of time?

We have already seen how early in its history, the British and Foreign Bible Society showed a surprising capacity to give into the demands of its affiliate societies, especially in European countries. We noted how the Trinitarian Bible Society came into being in response to such vacillation and, in spite of the trend to modern versions, it still maintains its resolve to distribute only Bibles based on the Received Text. The obvious inference is that one Society has succumbed to the will of man, while the other has retained its resolve to make known to man, the will of God.

So, to answer our question, we shall now go behind the scenes and look at the out-working of Rome's continuing plan to subvert Protestantism by displacing its Bible with what Rome is pleased to call "interconfessional Bibles". And, as in the past, we shall see how Rome clearly uses professing Protestant organisations and institutions to do her subversive work.

Let us never forget that all of Rome's schemes and efforts are designed with the sole purpose of achieving the goal set at the Council of Trent - to bring about unity on Rome's terms. Remove the basis of Protestantism by destroying confidence and faith in the Bible as God's revelation of His will for man, and then it becomes relatively easy to replace Biblically-based faith with trust in a religious system - a system whose priests then become the sole guardians of the gateway to heaven.

Those who are tempted to think that Rome's ideas on unity allow for compromise on her part will do well to ponder her history and take note of her numerous considered statements. At a Catholic Conference held in Preston on September 10, 1894 Cardinal Vaughan appealed to "the conscience of our separated brethren ":

Rome was willing to make such a "change or modification" in her attitude to the availability of Scripture in order to break down Protestant opposition and capture the great Bible Societies. She therefore was willing to demonstrate an important change in attitude by relaxing her restrictions which heretofore has banned the possession of the Scripture by her laity. But at the same time she made sure that the versions approved for their use carried appropriate notes and explanations - all designed to interpret certain readings in line with her doctrines and liturgy.

It was not long before wishful-thinking Protestants saw this change as a healthy Roman move towards accepting Scripture as authority, and they took the bait. In this regard, we could mention the Council of Churches, formally a professedly Protestant group who were largely responsible for forming the "United Bible Societies" (UBS) in 1946. Under the umbrella of this "Bible Society wing" of the World Council of Churches are to be found most of the World's Bible Societies. One notable exception is the Trinitarian Bible Society with headquarters in England.

With some seventy-five Bible Societies thus affiliated, the UBS presented an ideal medium which, if infiltrated by Rome's agents, would allow her great influence, if not virtual control of the vast majority of Bible Societies.

With this objective in mind, the Second Vatican Council, held from 1962 to 1965, recommended that Roman Catholics cooperate with Protestant organisations in the translation and distribution of Scripture. Interestingly, as noted by the graph of sales supplied by the New South Wales Bible Society, a modern version shows up for the first time in 1963 in the form of the Revised Standard Version - right in the middle of Vatican II!

The recommendation was acted upon almost immediately, when in June 1964 the Roman Catholics attended a major conference of Bible Societies in Driebergen. The Trinitarian Bible Society did not attend. (Brown, "The Word of God Among All Nations", p 122).

This conference turned out to be a watershed in the UBS policy on Bible distribution. It was agreed:

In 1966 the British and Foreign Bible Society acted on this recommendation and amended its constitution to allow the Apocrypha to be included in their translation, and the same policy was adopted by the United Bible Society. (Trinitarian Bible Society, "Ecumenism and the United Bible Societies", Article No 72, p 8).

Simultaneously, talks between the Vatican Secretariat for Promoting Christian Unity and the Executive Committee of the United Bible Society got under way. So fruitful were those meetings that it was publicly announced in 1968 that Pope Paul VI had approved a document agreed to by both parties entitled, "Guiding Principles for Interconfessional Co-operation in Translating the Bible".

As the American Bible Society had become associated with the National Council of Churches in 1950 and, like the British and Foreign Bible Society, had become a member of the UBS, Rome now succeeded in co-opting the resources of two of the world's great Bible Societies in producing and or distributing interconfessional Bibles. In plain language, this means Bibles that are doctrinally and liturgically acceptable to both Rome and present-day Protestants would be distributed as a united team effort.

All that was needed now was for Rome to work through various Protestant churches to bring about a spirit of tolerance and ecumenism, and a preference for the coming avalanche of corrupted versions. With this object in mind, the Vatican formed an organisation known as the: "World Catholic Federation for Biblical Apostolate".

The World Catholic Federation for Biblical Apostolate (WCFBA), is a Roman Catholic organisation formed solely for the purpose of promoting ecumenism through participation in the translation of interconfessional Bibles. But it does seem that the Vatican is quite happy to let so-called Protestant organisations such as the Bible Societies bear the brunt of the cost of production and distribution of these Bibles.

As an example, an examination of the Bible Society's (New South Wales, Australia) report on donations received from denominations during the 1990/1991 financial year is revealing. Of the seventeen contributing denominations listed, by far the strongest supporter was the Anglican Church ($129,864.00). This probably reflects the continuing ties with the British and Foreign Bible Society, in spite of the relatively recent name change to "The Bible Society in Australia". But the Roman Catholic Church's contribution during that year was a mere ~, $917.00! This compared unfavourably with one of the smaller Protestant churches - The Seventh-day Adventist Church, which gave $4,045.00.^18.

(18 -Evidently the SDA's admiration for the Bible Society's ecumenical role and the type of Bibles being sold, has now increased considerably. A report on Page 11 of the SDA's March 13, 1993 issue of "The Record" carries a report containing the gratitude expressed by the NSW Director of the Bible Society in Australia for the SDA's magnificent contribution during the year of 1992 which amounted to $24,148.00!)

Although insignificant in monetary terms, the fact that Rome is contributed anything at all is highly significant, and is indicative of her perception of success in changing the original purpose of the British and Foreign Bible Society.

Rome's previous attitude to the Society's Protestant Version of the Bible was revealed by Pope Pius X when in 1911 his prescribed "Larger Catechism" stated:

"If a Christian should be offered a Bible by a Protestant, or by some emissary of the Protestants, he ought to reject it with horror, because it is forbidden by the Church; and if he should have accepted it without noticing what it was, he should at once pitch it into the fire, or fetch it to his Pastor" (Cited, "The Word of God Among All Nations", p 121).

The reason for such drastic behaviour is explained by Rome while stating her hostility toward the Bible Societies:

The obvious implication of such a radical change in attitude is that the Roman Catholic Church no longer regards the Bible Societies as an effective instrument of Protestantism. No doubt it is joyfully aware that, throughout Australia at least, the value of the Protestant King James Versions sold (1990/1991) has shrunk to a paltry 9.9 percent of total sales (Source, "Bible Society in Australia", May 27, 1992).

Architects of this successful capture of Bible Societies which come under the umbrella of the United Bible Society, such as Monsignor Alberto Ablondi, must experience smug satisfaction with the results. Back in 1984, while Bishop of Livorno, Italy, he was a member of the General Committee and European Regional Executive Committee of the UBS. Undoubtedly his influence on the Societies helped to shape their present-day policies. He views the interconfessional translations of the Bible as:

And, overcome prejudice they did! In that same year:

This, of course, is an indirect way of informing the world that Roman Catholics may serve on the Boards of former Protestant Bible Societies. They wasted no time in claiming their advantage.

"Word-Event" No 56/1984 happily confirms that many Roman Catholics, including several Bishops, were now members of National Bible Society Boards and/or regional committees and that Roman Catholics are serving as Bible translators.

We are indebted to the Trinitarian Bible Society for revealing that:

This information should be of particular interest to those Christians who feel that in the New International Version of the Bible they have discovered God's revelation to man. They should be aware that the New International Version (NIV) has generally followed the United Bible Society's Greek Translation of the New Testament (Third Edition) which in turn, like Westcott and Hort's New Testament, is largely based on the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus manuscripts (See Trinitarian Bible Society article No 74, p 16).

Mind you, the translators of the NIV in their Preface, prefer to tell it another way:

In plain language, this means selecting the text that best suits one's fancy or need. What a convenient device for facilitating a subjective translation!

When such a device is employed in selecting texts from the great variety of Bible versions now available, the mind boggles at the possibility of finding some semblance of Biblical support for practically any doctrine which man is capable of devising! As a case in point, let us briefly consider the "New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures", the Bible of the Jehovah's Witnesses.

According to J. P. Lewis, the unidentified translators used the Westcott and Hort Greek Text: "But many other sources were utilised" ("The English Bible from KJV to NIV", p 229).

So, like many other translators, they took an eclectic approach in order to support their doctrines. Especially is this so in respect to their Unitarian belief. Hence in Mark 1:1, all reference to Jesus Christ as the "Son of God" is deleted:

So blatant has been this eclectic approach, that this version has been categorised among "Tendentious translations because it fosters the distinctive views of a particular sect" (ibid p 230).

We have seen how Rome has infiltrated the main Bible Societies through its ecumenical approach and relegated the King James Version to a mere asterisk in their business. But such success would not have been possible had there not been a demand for the modern versions. It is quite obvious that the Protestant churches have co-operated with Rome to replace the very Bible, which has been responsible for bringing them into existence, with other Bibles, which are approved by Rome. In Section IV to follow, we shall see how one of the formerly most ardent of Protestant denominations has co-operated with Rome in her grand plan to discredit the Protestant Bible and in the process has turned to corrupted versions which are now being used to negate and even remove the very basis of its distinctive beliefs!

Bible Battle TOC