KJB HATE CRIME LEGISLATION NEEDED
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. - 2 Cor. 2:17
Before the King James Bible issue began to heat up in the sixties and seventies, Bible Correctors were quietly using and introducing and promoting the newer modern perversions. They heralded the better renderings and understandabilities of these newer bibles to make them more palatable to Christendom. There were very little overt attacks on the King James Bible, only subtle insinuations that there was something newer and better on the horizon with better renderings. Certain astute, fundamental leaders and authors began to be aware of the problem in these newer versions, and they began to speak out on the multiplicity of versions that were flooding the market. Edward Hills, David Otis Fuller, Dick Cimino, Peter S. Ruckman, J. J. Ray, and others began to address the problem in the spirit of Dean Burgon and Robert Dick Wilson.
At first they were met with jeers and pejoratives regarding their unscholarly positions, many of which were by no means "King James Only" positions in the beginning. Gradually, their voices began to be heard and the alarm grew. When Bible Correctors discovered that the Bible Defenders' positions were being heard and gaining ascendancy, they began to attack Bible Defenders and their revered King James Bible Defenders gained knowledge of how to defend the so-called errors in the King James Bible and became skilled in not only apologetics on this issue but also polemics, realizing that corruption of the word of God was no new thing. Many had been corrupting the word of God as early as 2 Corinthians 2:17. The enraged Bible Correctors discovering that this was becoming a test of faith to themselves, churches, preachers, and missionaries, and they lashed out in hateful condemnations of both the King James Bible and their defenders. Here we are Today, Repeating Early History
Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers. -- Eph 4:29
Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself. -- 1 Tim. 6:5
2 Tim 3:8 Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith.
But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves. – Jude 1:10
Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners. – 1 Cor 15:33
After a period of revival and many souls being saved under the preaching of the King James Bible (with very little attention being paid to the RV 1881 and the ASV 1901), the Fundamental type churches flourished and grew mightily in the early and mid 1900's. Nevertheless, the seeds of modernism and apostasy grew almost undetected, beginning the slow process of corrupting Christendom. Corrupt communication and evil communications slowly found their way into Christian books and publications by even some great Christian heroes of the faith.
Then liberal men of corrupt minds, who were destitute of truth, took the advantage and propagandized their "perverse disputings" by riding the backs of the good men that had erred from the faith. Collectively, they grouped together to obscure and resist the truth in such matters of inspiration, preservation, infallibility, inerrancy, better renderings, history says this, the Hebrew says that, the Greek says such and such, and etc. The great Christian institutions like Princeton began to fall to modernism due to Warfield's surrender and capitulation to the "ORIGINAL AUTOGRAPHS" to the detriment of anything everything then extant, since Warfield could not weather the criticism in regard to the supposed errors in the extant Bibles, both English and Greek.
The “Dear Dr. John Where Is My Bible?” story about John R. Rice picking up on this, having been an admirer of Warfield. John R. Rice was a good man but was deceived by the subtle suggestions of Warfield and others. In the late sixties and early seventies, I debated John R. Rice in writing. Dr. Rice, as with many liberals on this issue, who neverwere able to tell us what and where “Our God Breathed Bible” existed, hence my published booklet, "Dear Dr. John, Where is my Bible?" - a compilation of snail mail, debate exchanges that occurred between the late sixties and early seventies. I published the exchanges, and subsequent to that publishing of the booklet, I was strongly criticized for my King James Only position and for putting Dr. Rice on the spot. This launched my writing ministry in defending the King James Bible and opposing the corrupt modern perversions.
If not the first, I was among the first among my contemporaries to declare that the King James Bible was inspired and shocked Christendom, since you were supposed to be afraid to get out on the limb on this issue, lest someone saw off the limb. Since then, some are now saying, "Yes, the KJB is inspired but not "given by inspiration" by those who claim a sort of a "derivative inspiration," for the KJB, namely, David Cloud and Thomas Cassidy.
When Dr. Rice died, he passed on the liberal view of the King James Bible to Curtis Hutson, the new editor of the "Sword of the Lord," who carried that view way beyond Dr. Rice, whose book "Our God Breathed Bible" is very good with some exceptions. After John R. Rice's death, his "Sword of the Lord" periodical was succeeded by Curtis Hutson, a Bible Corrector of the first order. Curtis, upon his death, was succeeded by Shelton Smith. Brother Smith, it seems, has come to a more solid King James Bible position according to the December 2007 BBB. If so, Herb Evans has been vindicated by Editor Shelton Smith, of the Sword of the Lord, after 35 Years as follows:
"Dear Bro. Waddle, Thank you for your letter. I'm glad to respond. My position on the KING JAMES BIBLE TEXT . . . . WE HAVE IN THE KING JAMES BIBLE THE INSPIRED, INERRANT, INFALLIBLE, AUTHORITIVE TEXT OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES! I hope this answers your question in regards to where we stand on this." -- Shelton Smith quoted by the December 2007 Bible Believers' Bulletin If this quote is correct, and I suspect that it is, Shelton Smith is effectively telling us that Herb Evans was right and John R. Rice and Curtis Hutson, and the Sword of the Lord were wrong all those years. What a vindication although a belated one. Congratulations and blessings to Shelton Smith for his forth-right declaration that we have held and stood on for these 35 years.
Perseverance, perseverance, perseverance! I can imagine how silly those feel, who followed the Sword of the Lord, through those years on this. Hallelujah! Amen! Thank you Jesus! Praise de Lawd! Does I have a witness? Existentialism, the Engine of the New Hate Orthodoxy Dr. H. T. Spence tells us that "Existentialism is a philosophy holding that existence is prior to essence, and that man makes himself what he is and is responsible personally only to himself . . . It is a philosophy that denounces all absolutes and basically is a rehashing of the old Greek philosophical belief that 'Man is the measure of all things." "Man is allowed to subjectively believe whatever he desires to believe about a matter. Though in reality a thing may be false, one can existentially believe that it is true . . . When it comes to belief of the Bible, Karl Barth declares that the Bible becomes the word of god. . . . Next week that same scripture may not be the Word of God for him if it does not move him. Thus, it rests upon the individual's response to the scriptures as to whether the Bible becomes the Word of God or not."
For some time, we have been looking for a category to put Bible Correctors in, and I think Brother Spence has hit on it, Bible existentialism. Bible Correctors have a humanistic view of the Bible. They believe that God may have flung the Bible out to us, but God no longer superintends the Bible, after authoring it, man does it all! In their minds, God does not preserve the Bible, he has commissioned the textual critics, historians, archeologists, linguists, college professors, and others to tell us what the Bible is or is not. Woe be it to those horrible King James Onlies, who believe the Holy Spirit developed a consensus among Bible believers as to what the Bible is and what it is not, just like God did with the 66 book canon of scripture that we have today. The wrath and hostility of the Bible Corrector will ultimately be on that kind of Bible believer. Moreover, the Bible Corrector will continue participating in the "Bible of the Month Club," gravitating from version to version as he sees fit, while he ignores the King James Bible completely, ever hating its defenders. Such criminal activity is a hate crime of the first order.
--by Herb Evans
1