The California Collection/TheCaliforniaCollection.cdr/his126/markbst1.arj/MARKBST1.TXT

Text File | 1991-02-11 | 60.9 KB | 1,186 lines

MARK OF THE BEAST

by Peter S. Ruckman

CHAPTER ONE

THE DECLINE OF BIBLICAL CHRISTIANITY

      In undertaking a writing of this nature, it is
nearly impossible to begin with an enumeration of the FACTS.
The reader has already been prepared ahead of time (by his
previous religious training), to reject certain ideas which
conflict with religious tradition.  This is true of any
treatise of a "Biblical" nature.  Since "The Book" is the
center and ground of controversy, it is rapidly becoming
rejected, en toto, as a basis for FACT.  Bible Christianity
as it was known to the original Bible-believers in either
Testament, is at present a rare species of pre-historic
animal which no longer makes up a majority.  In vain are the
scriptures quoted to PROVE FACTS, for the religious leaders
have had 1900 years to twist, wrest, pervert, distort,
misapply, and misdirect the verses, and their work has left
an indelible mark on the minds of those who look to the Book
for authority.  Nineteen hundred years of theological
controversy over "interpretations" have gradually beaten down
the resistance of the Bible-believers themselves until they
are now willing to submit to an ecclesiastical authority
OTHER THAN THE BIBLE.  This ecclesiastical authority is, as
it always has been--Roman.

      Therefore, in order to re-orient the reader back
into the true CHRISTIAN setting of study and knowledge, it is
necessary to trace from the beginning the peculiar "Mystery
of Iniquity," which is spoken of as a PRESENT work during the
time of the formation of the New Testament canon.  For a
while we shall be able to deal with historical facts, but
sooner or later we must return to the God of history and
revelation, for as Pope Gregory long ago demonstrated, you
can prove anything by history.  It is answered immediately.
"You can prove anything by the Bible."  But this is a "half
truth."  The only way that you can prove ANYTHING by the
Bible is to do one of three things with its contents.

      1.  Subtract from the verse a word or words.  For
example: the Campbellite method of quoting Mark 16:16 with
half the verse missing, or quoting I Peter 3:21 with two-
thirds of the verse missing.

      2. Adding to the verse words not found in it.  For
example: the addition of the word "baptism" to the passage in
John 3:5 where there is no mention of baptism, or the adding
of the phrase "neither shall ye touch it" (Gen. 3:3), where
God has only said, "Thou shalt not EAT of it" (Gen. 2:17).

      3.  The wresting of the scriptures from their
context.  This is the uniform and standard method in most
cases, as it is more subtle.  It can best be illustrated by
the Romish lifting of John 20:23 out of context, for in the
context more than TWELVE are present and NONE derive their
authority from Peter (see Luke 24:33 and John 20:20 with II
Cor. 2:10).  Another splendid example is the Campbellite
custom of withdrawing Acts 2:38 from its setting which is
entirely Jewish, to Jews only (see verses 5,14,22, and 36),
and forcing it on an unsaved Gentile as the plan of
Salvation.

      If any of the above-mentioned tricks are resorted
to, then it is true that "you can use the scripture to prove
anything."  But if the text is left as it stands, where it
stands, it can only teach one thing--and that is the truth.
Thus, in approaching the tremendous theme, the "Mark of the
Beast," an investigator cannot establish FACTS until he
himself is submissive to the authority of the Bible AS IT IS.

      This brings up a far more complicated problem: "WHAT
IS IT?"  To clear the ground for action, the reader must
retrace not only the course of the leaders who have taught
lies by adding to, subtracting from, or perverting the
context, but he must also retrace the course taken by the
translators themselves in gradually developing a "Bible" that
is no more a Bible than "Gone with the Wind."

      We may as well reconcile ourselves to the fact that
the 20th century has produced one "Bible" for every falsehood
taught from the original Bible.  Every time a man added to or
subtracted from the word (or took the verse out of context),
he was faced with the need of producing a Bible which would
back up the heresy that he had invented.  Such now is the
situation.  There is one Bible per heresy.  Anyone can find a
Bible to prove anything with, and now there is hardly a need
left for adding, or subtracting, or perverting.  The
Russellites, for example, have taught consistently that a
"witness" can lose salvation by the fact that Judas lost it.
This cannot be proved from an AV, for the AV states plainly
that Judas was "a DEVIL."  He was not a human being, although
he appeared so (see Heb. 13:2; II Thes. 2:4).  We arrive
immeidately at a stumbling block.  To avoid the implications
which run contrary to Catholic and Reformation theology, the
fundamentalist or Protestant will resort to the "original
Greek" to rid himself of the passage.  But the Russellite
will go one better; he REVISES the entire translation and
produces the word "slanderer" where the word "devil" was in
John 6:70-71, and thereby MAINTAINS HIS DOCTRINE that a
"Christian" can lose salvation, for did not Judas lose his?
(John 17:12).

      The Reformed Christian Church (Holland, Michigan)
runs in the same groove with the Jehovah Witnesses.  Not
believing in a millennial reign on earth (and adopting the
Augustinian position of a spiritual kingdom only), they are
faced with John 18:36.  The passage has the word "now" in it,
which strongly implies that LATER Christ will have a kingdom
"of this world."  Since the Reformed Church does not believe
this, they produce their own translation, the Amplified
Version, where the "now" is struck out regardless of the fact
that it is in all the Greek manuscripts.  We thus observe one
of the most common practices in the 20th century in full
swing--the practice of DEFILING AND ABORTING THE WORD OF GOD
WHILE CALLING ATTENTION TO THE "ORIGINAL GREEK."  The same
version (the Amplified) goes to extreme lengths in this
corrupting of scripture when it re-translates I Thes. 2:16 to
read that God is through with the Jew, "COMPLETELY AND
FOREVER."  The reason for this perverted translation is not
found in MSS evidence.  It is found in the theology taught by
the Reformed Churches, which forces them to abandon the AV
and make their own Bible which will condone their own pet
sins.

      Much more could be said in regard to these
practices, but these few samples will suffice to show the
reader what he is up against when he determines to find out
the FACTS about any given situation that is connected with
the word of God.

      Two lines of people, then, can be said to be
responsible for the esprit-de-corps of Bible-believing
Christians today.  One line is that of preachers and teachers
who INSIST on correcting the AV because it will not line up
with their church traditions (and more will be said about
this line later).  The other is that line of translators and
"revisers" who have, under the cover of desiring "more
accurate translations," destroyed the word of God until the
common man no longer knows what it is or where to find it.

      These two lines of corrupters must clearly be
searched out, named, located, and defined before anyone will
have any confidence in what the Bible actually has to say
about a subject.  For without this knowledge, every proof-
text produced will be met with the objection, "Oh, that's
just your interpretation," or "you just say that because you
belong to such-and-such church," or "There are a lot of ways
to take that, now," etc.  The Bible no longer holds any awe
for its rejector, for the men entrusted with preaching and
preserving it have corrupted it so badly, the common man no
longer believes that it is any more "holy" than Hitler's
swastika.

      No exposition on the "Mark of the Beast" could ever
be authoritative or final without the investigator first
being thoroughly enlightened about the men and the churches
who have destroyed the authority of the word of God so that
it is no longer considered to be an authority in dealing with
FACTS.  At every turn in reading the scriptures appropriate
to the subject, the sincere seeker of truth will be
confronted by pre-judicial opinions so thoroughly instilled
into his being by brain-washing, that he cannot hope to find
the truth on the subject unless he abandons himself to the
authority of the word of God.  WHICH WORD?

      To begin at the beginning, we find the corrupting
influence of the scripbes well under way before the first
coming of Christ.  Christ in Matthew 23:35 places the bounds
of the canon of the Old Testament at Genesis and II
Chronicles.  Read the passage very carefully, and make sure
that you understand that what you read does NOT HAVE TO BE
"INTERPRETED."  It is a couple of FACTS which need to be
noticed.  "From the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of
Zacharias the son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the
temple and the altar" (Matthew 23:35).  The death of Abel (in
any Bible) is found in Genesis, and the death of Zachariah,
"the son of the blessed one" (Jehoiada), is found (in any
Bible) in II Chronicles (II Chr. 24:20).

      Now to this day, a Hebrew Bible, written by the
Hebrews, given to the Hebrews (Rom. 3:2) by the God of the
Hebrews (Ex. 5:3), is written in Hebrew.  This series of
facts is incontestable.  Whatever attitude the Catholic,
Protestant, Communist, Buddhist, Taoist, Hindu, Mohammedan,
Atheist, or Pragmatist may take toward the TRUTH in those
writings, one historical fact is irrefutable; and that is
that Genesis to II Chronicles, in a Hebrew Bible, was written
by Hebrews who professed to have received these oracles from
God, and both Jesus and Paul bear witness to this in the New
Testament passages.

      Now of course there are always irascible dissenters
who will object to the establishment of any kind of fact.
These men will invent hypotheses and try them out, and if
they work, will then announce that they are "fact" and
"scientific" (I Tim. 6:20); yet the same men will not be able
to tell you what the word "science" means, or from whence it
was derived.  In the tyranny of words and sources of
information, modern day man has wholly overlooked the fact
that Jesus or Paul would be far more authoritative in the
field of RELIGIOUS LITERARY WORKS OF THE HEBREWS than any
living Hebrew scholar today.  Driver, Gesenius, and Delitzsch
admit that when the library at Alexandria burned to the
ground, it destroyed thousands of valuable documents more
authentic than those available today; but they will not
believe Jesus and Paul, both living before that time, could
be higher authorities.  You see, at every turn we are faced
with the problem of ABSOLUTE OR FINAL authority.  With the
decline of Biblical Christianity facing us, the Bible has
been flatly rejected as the final authority--even where it is
professed to be that authority.  We shall see how true that
is as we study the matter of canon.  Canon (that is, the
proper number of books in a real Bible) must be ascertained
before there can be any discussion of Bible truth or Biblical
Christianity.  After all, if no one knows what a Bible is,
and no one can prove that his Bible is the right one, what
kind of authority would it be anyway?

      Now face the truth squarely one time, just for
diversion's sake.  According to the greatest living authority
on religious teaching, truth, and principles, the Old
Testament begins in Genesis and ends in II Chronicles (Matt.
23:35).  At the time Jesus speaks these words, there are no
New Testament books in print, Paul is unconverted, and
Christ's audience is composed of Old Testament, pork-
abstaining, temple-attending, bearded, sabbath-observing
Jews.  Not a man in the bunch, believer or unbeliever, would
question the fact that the beginning of the Old Testament is
Genesis and the end is II Chronicles.

      That is, the authorities themselves, who lived in
the day and time in which the statements are made, accept
them to be FACT with full knowledge of the facts and with
resource to MORE KNOWLEDGE about the facts than we have
today!  What is there left to question!

      Again, there is always one questioner (Gen. 3:1) who
has been taught from his youth that any man who is not a
skeptic is insincere.  This type of man will question
anything and everything that deals with ABSOLUTE MORAL
STANDARDS, but will blindly accept church tradition without
even analyzing it.  To such a questioner, only this can be
answered:  "If you are so lazy and so immoral that you cannot
spend time investigating Pember, Larkin, Scofield, Sauer,
Bullinger, Wilbur Smith, Harry Rimmer, and A.W. Pink, then
you will simply have to grow up with a prejudiced, lop-sided,
narrow-minded bigotism that only Aquinas, Spellman, Shaw,
Marx, Freud, James, Huxley, Plato, Aristotle, and Darwin can
give you."  A man IS what he eats, as a dietician said, and
man EATS WORDS WHEN HE READS (Job 34:3; Ps. 119:103, Heb.
5:14, I Peter 2:1-3).  It follows, as old-age follows youth,
that a man is WHAT HE READS.  The opinions voiced by our
young collegiates and officers of state these days are not
THEIR opinions.  They are the opinions of Santayana, Maugham,
Hilton, Douglas, Hemingway, Machiavelli, Hegel, Tennison,
Emerson, Neitzsche, Peale, Steinbeck, Faulkner, Darwin,
Paine, Rousseau, Omar Khayyam, and LIFE Magazine.

      You will never find a man who rejects the Bible, or
who wants to change it, or who does not believe portions of
it, or who will not read it, until you find a man who has
been exposed strongly to the group of books that were written
by men WHO NEVER ACCEPTED CHRIST'S OR PAUL'S AUTHORITY IN
MATTERS OF INSPIRATION, CANONICITY, OR ABSOLUTE TRUTH.

      To return to the corrupters of the Bible, a Hebrew
Bible, then as now, begins with Genesis and ends with II
Chronicles.  You can go to any Jewish book store, and you
will find the books laid out exactly as they are cited by
Jesus Christ in 33 A.D.  Further than this, our Lord even
states the correct DIVISIONS into which these books are
divided in a Hebrew Bible.

      Now why have we gone to so much length to establish
these two little truths?  What difference does it make if a
Hebrew Old Testament is correct in its divisions and number
of books?  Who cares?  Doesn't the AV end with Malachi
instead of II Chronicles?  Is it then a violation of the
canon?  If it is, how can we say it is the "Bible"?  Do we
all have to go back and study Hebrew before we can find the
FACTS dealing with Biblical subjects?

      You see, the rush of thought is too great.  What is
needed is a "peeling off" of dense underbrush, and a fresh
beginning with some newly plowed ground.  Instead of jumping
ahead into additional perplexities (which is the Standard
Operating Procedure of the intellectual mind), let us see
what has been uncovered in the above TWO FACTS which will
enable us to proceed safely through the maze of theological
dispute erected to overthrow the authority of the Bible.

      1.<~>To a Hebrew there are 39 books in the Old
Testament--which, don't forget (!), is a HEBREW BOOK.
Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua,
Judges, I Samuel, II Samuel, I Kings, II Kings, Isaiah,
Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah,
Nahum, Zephaniah, Haggai, Habakkuk, Zechariah, Malachi,
Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Song, Ruth, Lamentations,
Ecclesiastes, Esther, Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, I Chronicles,
II Chronicles.

      2.  THESE ARE THE EXACT NUMBER OF BOOKS FOUND IN A
KING JAMES AUTHORIZED VERSION, AND THEY ARE THE EXACT NUMBER
OF BOOKS FOUND IN THE GREEK TREXT (TEXTUS RECEPTUS) FROM
WHICH THE KING JAMES IS TRANSLATED.

      3.  Every Bible-believing Christian in the book of
Acts, up to Acts 10, was a JEW OR A JEWISH PROSELYTE, and
could, under no condition, have accepted any MORE or any LESS
books than those listed above.  Now note that.  That is
Biblical and historical fact.  No amount of investigation by
anyone at any time has ever produced any evidence of any
amount that would even SUGGEST that any Bible-believer in the
New Testament through Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Acts did
not accept 39 books as the inspired "oracles of God."  THE
ONLY QUESTIONERS WERE THE REJECTORS.  To put it another way,
the only questioners of the word of God (Gen. 3:1) are
always, in any age, those who RESENT ITS AUTHORITY IN
SETTLING MORAL ISSUES.  You will notice in reading Matthew
8:23 how this is the constant issue between Christ and the
Pharisees.  It is the constant issue between Paul and his
enemies (Acts 9:27).  It is the issue between Stephen and the
"council" (Acts 7).  Regardless of attitude toward the
scriptures, the plain-printed facts testify that in the "show
down," what is wrong is that someone who believes the Book as
it stands, is up against someone WHO BELIEVES IN A HIGHER
AUTHORITY OR AN EQUAL AUTHORITY (OF A RELIGIOUS NATURE) WHICH
CONTRADICTS THE BOOK.

      Now here we have a perfect point in question.  WHAT
IS THE BIBLE?  Well, the Old Testament is 39 books.  You say,
"I was not raised to believe that..." or, "But my church
teaches that..." or, "Well, what makes you think you're right
and everyone else is wrong...."  But these feeble protests
came from someone who has failed to face up to scientific
fact.

      1. Fact one.  The Old Testament is a Hebrew book
called the Holy Scriptures.  It is written by Hebrews, in
Hebrew.

      2.  Fact two.  Jesus Christ, a Hebrew, defines its
bounds at Genesis and II Chronicles, with three divisions
(Luke 24:44-45).

      3.  Fact three.  It is found in the Rabbinical
schools in 1960, beginning at Genesis and ending at II
Chronicles, with THREE DIVISIONS.

      4.  Fact four.  There are 39 books in the Hebrew
Bible before Christ.

      5.  Fact five.  There are 39 books in the Hebrew
Bible after Christ.

      6.  Fact six.  There are 39 books TODAY, divided
into three divisions beginning at Genesis and ending at II
Chronicles.

      According to the Lord Jesus, the divisions are--
Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms (Luke 24:44).  Notice
that in the passages cited, no one is called upon to
INTERPRET ANYTHING.  The perennial slander that some groups
believe in "every man interpreting the Bible for himself" is
a heretical teaching in its own accusation.  Since the Bible
is SELF-INTERPRETING, it is ITS OWN INTERPRETER!  No man,
church, priest, pope, or denomination was ever given the job
as interpreter, for you are told over, and over, and over
again in the body of scripture itself, THAT ITS AUTHOR (THE
HOLY SPIRIT) IS THE INTERPRETER!  (See Luke 24:45, Gen. 40:8,
I Cor. 2:10-14, Dan. 5:10-12, etc.)

      In the passage in Luke (Luke 24:44), Jesus names the
divisions.  We should not be surprised to buy a Hebrew Bible
and find that the divisions are exactly as He named them--and
surely enough, they are!

      A Hebrew Bible is found with three divisions.  They
are called:  the LAW (TORAH), the PROPHETS (NABHIM), and the
WRITINGS (KETHUBIM).  The first of the "Law" contains
Genesis, where Abel was killed, and the last of the
"Writings" contain II Chronicles, where Zechariah was killed!
(In the Hebrew Bible, Daniel is found in the "Writings" and
Joshua is found in the "Prophets.")  The "Writings"
(Kethubim) begin exactly where any Bible believer would
expect them to begin after hearing Jesus' comment in Luke
24:44.  The last section, the "Writings," begin with the
Psalms.  Jesus' division, then, fixes the bounds of the canon
and fixes the divisions of the canon of the Old Testament.
Without resorting to "interpretation" or "tradition" or "ex-
cathedra hallucinations," any man can grasp the first
fundamental FACT of Biblical Christianity; that fact is that
the OLD TESTAMENT BEGINS WITH GENESIS, ENDS WITH II
CHRONICLES, AND IS DIVIDED INTO THREE SECTIONS, WHICH ALL
JEWS ACKNOWLEDGE AS THE PROPER DIVISION IF THEY AT ALL
PROFESS TO BELIEVE IN THE INSPIRATION OF THEIR SCRIPTURES.

      So you see, if you believe that there are any more
books that should be in the Old Testament, and your church
has taught you so, then obviously three things follow:

      1.  Your church resents the authority of Jesus
Christ and desires to place herself on equal authority with
Him.

      2.  Your church is willfully ignorant of facts and
manifests blind adherence to unscientific superstition.

      3.  You are a sucker and fool to believe a fact-
rejecting body of men in 1960, who do not have access to the
information and knowledge to which Jesus Christ had access.

      To put it bluntly, you have blown your wages at a
flat-joint on the mid-way of Vanity Fair, and your ideas
about what SHOULD BE and what SHOULD NOT BE in an Old
Testament are absolutely worthless in view of the FACTS.  You
and your church are asauthoritative as a four-year-old Eskimo
discoursing on nuclear physics.

      Now why go to the bother of establishing these
facts?  Well, they must be established before one can bring
himself to believe the Bible, for a change, instead of the
traditions handed down by men who wish to believe THEM.  In
tracing the course of the decline of Biblical Christianity,
it is ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL that men realize where and when
the corruption began.  Having realized this, the man is
forewarned and fore-armed when he runs into the sourceof
corruption in Bible exegesis.  That old original "corrupter"
of the word of God was at work in Christ's day and in Paul's
day (see II Cor. 2:17).  THE FIRST CORRUPTION, WHICH YOU MUST
SEE AND RECOGNIZE, is a group of religious leaders
SUPERIMPOSING TRADITION over the WORD OF GOD.  The
outstanding PROOF that this was done is the fact herein
attested to, that somewhere down the line, someone INJECTED
INTO THE CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT books that neither Jesus
nor Paul would recognize as scripture.

      Who could this be?  Who would add Tobit, Judith, Bel
and the Dragon, I and II Esdras, the Wisdom of Solomon, Song
of the 3 Children, additions to Esther, the History of
Susanna, Baruch, Prayer of Manasses, Ecclesiasticus, and I
and II Maccabees to the Hebrew Old Testament, IN THE FACE OF
THE FACT THAT CHRIST NEVER RECOGNIZED ONE OF THEM, AND THAT
NEITHER PAUL NOR CHRIST EVER QUOTED FROM THEM IN CITING OVER
200 OLD TESTAMENT REFERENCES?  Who would do a thing like
that?

      WOULD A BIBLE-BELIEVER DO IT?

      Would YOU do it?

      Would your "CHURCH" do it?

      What do you think of someone who WOULD do a thing
like that?  I mean, here is the Lord Jesus, admittedly the
final and acknowledged authority in religious matters (by all
Bible-believing Christians), stating the contents and
divisions of the Old Testament, and along comes someone
(guess who!) and insists that he (or they) have EQUAL
AUTHORITY with Christ, and then use this "equal authority" TO
FLATLY CONTRADICT JESUS CHRIST.  Whoever it was, they
absolutely refused to face the glaring FACTS set forth by our
Lord, and proceeded to MANUFACTURE an "Old Testament" that
wasn't over there and never will be!  The Old Testament does
not contain 53 books!  It contains 39 books according to the
best and MOST RELIABLE AUTHORITIES at the time of the
completion of the canon.

      Josephus, who was a contemporary of the Apostles,
testifies that the Jews had 39 books in their Old Testament,
and that at no time did any of them, WHO PROFESSED TO BELIEVE
IN THE AUTHORITY OF THE BIBLE, ever accept the Apocrypha (the
14 books listed above) or the Apocalyptic literature
(Jubilees, Assumption of Moses, Enoch, Diatesseron, etc.).
Then the student of true knowledge (Greek: gnosis, Latin:
science) should realize, at the very beginning, he is going
to run into extra-canonical sources which claim, and in many
cases DEMAND, as much authority as the Bible.  Furthermore,
religious leaders within the realm of Bible-believing
"Christianity" will pay heed to these sources.  The objection
is raised:  "Why shouldn't they?  The Bible isn't the only
book in the world containing truth, is it?"  The objection
shows shallowness and insincerity on the part of the
objector.

      1.  The issue is not, "Are there any books outside
the Bible that contain the truth?"  The issue is, "When you
find an outside source that directly and flatly CONTRADICTS
or denies the Bible, can it be truth?"

      2.  The issue is not, "How do you know there are not
other books beside those found in the Bible which are just as
authoritative?"  The issue is, "In view of the fact that the
LORD JESUS CHRIST already told you which were authoritative,
why do you fancy you know more about it than He does?"

      3.  The issue is not, "Doesn't the church have the
right to decide what belongs in and what doesn't?"  (I Tim.
3:15).  The issue is, "Why should ANY CHURCH be recognized as
`Christian' when it absolutely refuses to accept CHRIST'S
AUTHORITY in matters of what `belongs in' and what doesn't?"

      Don't confuse the issue with a lot of glib thinking.

      The whole question (and the answer to it) resolves
in whether or not you are WILLING to believe the Lord Jesus
and accept what He said in regard to the matter as final.  It
is proposed, "But didn't He say that all the books in the
world could not contain what Jesus did if they should be
written?" (John 21:25).  To which it may be answered
emphatically, "No matter how many books were written, and no
matter who authorized them, and no matter who accepted them,
they certainly could in no way be connected with John 21:25
if they OPENLY DEFIED THE AUTHORITY OF JESUS CHRIST."  That
is, you cannot go to scripture to justify something non-
scriptural.  You cannot run to the Bible and wrest out a
verse to justify the authority of a teaching, book, or books
which violate the authority of the Bible from whence you
derived the verse!  In plainer words, it is a rank act of
hypocrisy and charlatanism to try to WREST THE AUTHORITY FROM
THE WORD OF GOD BY APPEALING TO THE WORD OF GOD FOR AUTHORITY
TO DO SO.  It is like the Pope appealing to Matthew 16:19 to
get authority to bind something by a Papal bull that
CONTRADICTS MATTHEW 16:18.  God does not give any man or
church the power to contradict the Book through which God
delegated the power.  This is stealing if it is practiced.

      Now returning to the source and causes of the
decline of Biblical Christianity, two lines of corrupters are
discernible in the defeat of the Bible as the accepted
authority: translators and revisers who have destroyed the
word of God by changing it till no one knows what it is and
cares less; and secondly, preachers and teachers who INSIST
on going to the "original Greek" to correct the A.V. because
it will not line up with their church doctrines.

      Now we have purposely examined the canonical
statements of Jesus in Matthew 23:35 and Luke 24:44 for the
purpose of discovering the source of these two "lines" of
corrupters.  Here is one place where both meet on a common
ground BEFORE THE TIME OF CHRIST.  It is of the utmost
importance, then, that any polemic on the "Mark of the Beast"
be first buttressed by the fact that the Bible always has
been and still is reliable.  It is only the CORRUPTERS who
have sold you on the impression that it is not reliable, and
those corrupters begin their work by first INSISTING THAT YOU
DO NOT HAVE ALL THE BIBLE, AND THAT EXTRA-CANONICAL,
UNINSPIRED, SPURIOUS LITERATURE IS AS AUTHORITATIVE AS THE
WORD OF GOD.

      Once this gross error is accepted and believed, then
the door is wide open to thrust ANYTHING at you (or on you!)
in the "name" of Christianity or Jesus Christ, whether it
contradicts the scripture or not.  This is exactly what has
happened to the body of Christ in the last 1900 years; bit-
by-bit, piece-by-piece, a little leaven has leavened the
whole lump till, from steeple to basement, the church is
infected with the leprosy of Bible rejection.

      This infection began with the ADDING of an Apocrypha
(seven books never recognized by Jesus or Paul) into the Old
Testament canon.  This act was officially sanctioned at the
Council of Trent (1546), and its sanctioning marks out
clearly, once and forever (to the Bible believer), WHO IS THE
SOURCE OF CORRUPTION.  Now there is no use sweating and going
to the psychiatrist, or calling out the Knights of Columbus.
We are here dealing with facts.  Someone has deliberately
insisted that seven books belong in the Bible that are not in
the Bible.  No Christian in the first century ever recognized
them, no New Testament writer ever quoted them.  Jesus
purposely cancelled them, and Paul would quote pagan poetry
by unsaved men (Acts 17:28, Titus 1:12) before he would quote
one book from the Apocrypha!  The fount of corruption is thus
discovered, and every move in the gradual decline of Biblical
Christianity can be traced to this source.  For example,
there is not a single translation on the market today that
does not take as final authority the Greek text of Nestle or
Westcott and Hort--AND THIS TEXT CONTAINS THE SEVEN BOOKS
THAT JESUS CANCELLED WHEN HE MARKED OUT THE CANON.  For
example, the church that accepts these seven books has
pronounced a "divine" curse (see Prov. 26:21) on anyone who
believes the canon to be WHAT JESUS SAID IT WAS!  Again (this
is not evangelistic "stirring up"), there is the anathema
stated in the articles of the Council of Trent (1546).  For
example, every fundamental scholar, who corrected the
Reformation Textus Receptus found in the King James Bible,
CORRECTED IT FROM THE WESTCOTT AND HORT, HESYCHIAN TEXT,
which contains the seven pagan books.  For example, every
anti-Christian doctrine or practice found in the Protestant
church can be traced to the church that accepted these seven
godless books.  For example, both major Christian holidays
(Christmas and Easter) are dated and observed according to
the pagan traditions of unscriptural teaching.  This teaching
runs CONTRARY to the words of Jesus Christ (for example,
"Good Friday" instead of "Bad Wednesday"--Matt. 12:40), and
never ever considers HIS AUTHORITY in a final show-down of
strength.  Though not one apostle in the Bible ever mentioned
Mary's name in prayer, and although 30 years of church
history is found in the book of Acts and not one person ever
remembers Jesus' birthday, still the pagan tradition goes
right on and will CONTINUE ON TILL GOD STOPS IT.  There is
not a single heresy found in Protestantism that cannot be
traced to the great monster-mother who added seven books to
the Holy Bible and reduced it to a text book for religious
lawyers.

      Get mad.  It will raise your blood pressure.  You
look a little anemic anyway.

      Having discovered the source by analytical
examination of the facts involved, attention should be turned
to the actual linkage of names and events that run from this
first monstrous rejection of the Bible, and its replacement
with a glorified telephone book where no one can occasionally
"ring the right number."

      Irenaeus (130), Eusebius (340), Origen (254),
Symmachus, Aquila, Theodotian, Heracleon, Augustine, Jerome,
Aquinas, Abelard, Kant, Hegel, Delitzsch, Griesbach, Moffatt,
Darwin, Tillich, Sockman, Calvin, Kagawa, Driver, Wellhausen,
Weigle, Dahlberg, Spellman, Nestle, Weymouth, Goodspeed,
Tregelles, Tischendorf, Gesenius, Trench, Strauss, Astruc,
Bushnell, and Caiaphas may not seem to be a very homogeneous
grouping.  But all these gentlemen have two great bonds of
religious affinity that make them "blood brothers" beneath
the skin.

      EVERY MAN IN THE LIST ACCEPTED AS AUTHORITATIVE SOME
RELIGIOUS OR CHURCH TRADITION THAT DIRECTLY CONTRADICTED A
CLEAR PASSAGE IN THE BIBLE.  From Irenaeus to Bishop Oxnam,
the scholarly succession can all agree about one thing--that
the Bible is spurious, incomplete, filled with fatuities,
glosses, errors, fables, and contradictions, and that matters
of "CANON" are DEBATABLE, and that only someone in their own
line is able to determine what should be accepted and what
should be rejected.  As Caiaphas and Ananias superimposed the
Talmud over the 39 books, as Origin superimposed Platonic
philosophy over the 39 books, as Augustine superimposed a
"spiritual" interpretation over the literal passages in
Revelation, as Jerome and Eusebius added the Apocrypha to the
original 39, as Kant and Hegel superimposed rationalism over
the revelation of the Pauline epistles, as Spellman and Sheen
superimposed the fiats of the popes over the words of Jesus
Christ, as Aquinas and Abelard accepted the Vaticanus and
Sinaiticus as inspired (they contain the seven apocryphal
books!), as Strauss and Astruc superimposed evolutionary
romanticism over the doctrine of the Kingdom of God, as
Weigle and Poteat today superimpose the findings of Christ-
rejecting, Bible-denying "scholarship" over the entire Bible.

      Birds of a feather flock together (Col. 2:8; I Tim.
6:20).

      This business can be traced as easily as you can run
a tracer back to the gun barrel.  The men who have been
firing away at the word and puncturing it with the shells of
infidelity, form a neat and regular line from the first group
that elevated a Talmud to equal authority with the scripture,
to the last group that elevated the Apocrypha to the same
position.  The final authority, the Lord Jesus Christ, never
recognized EITHER AS HAVING ANY VALIDITY IN REGARDS TO
ANYTHING THAT GOD HAS REVEALED.  (See Mark 7:2-13, and don't
just note it--GO READ IT!)

      The whole question then is a matter of authority.
As the Bible loses its authority, Biblical Christianity
declines.  The forces bent on destroying Biblical
Christianity are not only readily discernible, but they also
have motive and purpose behind their desire to destroy the
word of God.  If we could find out WHAT THE WORD OF GOD IS
AGAINST, we could more easily find its enemies.  If you can
find where a General has concentrated his troops, you can
find the possible avenue of attack or the point of defense.
OPPOSITES ATTRACT.  In other words, the furious, consistent,
perennial, and never-ending attempt to do away with the
received text of the King James Bible (Protestants,
Catholics, and Jews all cooperating) must have a logical
PURPOSE BEHIND IT.  Why would the time, talents, money, and
efforts of the greatest brains in 19 centuries be devoted to
DESTROYING a book, unless there was something in that book
that was a threat to their existence?  Analyze it.  Why would
19 centuries of books, polemics, tracts, bulls, sermons,
decrees, and catechisms be ordered and published with things
in them DENYING THE WORD OR CHANGING THE WORD, unless there
was something IN THE WORD which challenged or threatened the
lives and minds of the men attacking it?  What is it in that
old black-backed Book that men hate so terribly?  How can it
be, in these last days, that the organized forces of
professed Christianity itself are being mustered to RID the
world of the authority of the Book?

      The answer is not hard to find once a person submits
to the authority of what the Book says, instead of the
tradition derived from it by a church that makes itself its
own authority.

      In Revelation 17 and 18, we find a city.  It is said
to be "a city" (Rev. 17:18).  Since it is SAID to be a city,
it si probably A CITY.  I realize this is difficult doctrine
for a dense mind, as the scholar is always tempted to think
"But could not a city STAND for something, or symbolize
something?"  Thus his own knowledge strangles him and he
loses the revelation.  (For example, Christ says, "THIS IS MY
BODY" at the last supper, and yet it is apparent to anyone
that He is symbolizing His body for his REAL BODY IS HOLDING
THE BREAD!)  But here we cannot take time out for our
scholarly friends to keep up with things, for a simple rule
of common sense would tell anyone what to do with the passage
in Revelation 17:18, for in the passage the city is
symbolized by A WOMAN! (Rev. 17:18).  Both are given right in
the same verse so no one would have any trouble in
identifying them.  ONLY RELIGIOUS PREJUDICE COULD PREVENT
ANYONE FROM RECOGNIZING THE CITY.  Let us proceed carefully
lest we be guilty of "interpreting."  For a while, let us put
ourselves in place with the poor benighted heathen in America
who are taught by their leaders that they can't understand
the Bible (even though many of them have college
educations!), and that they need their church to "interpret."
So instead of interpreting, let's just read, shall we?  The
freedom to READ has not yet vanished from the shores of
America, has it?  Or has it?

      1. The woman in Revelation 17:1,3 is a city (Rev.
17:18).

      2. This city is built on seven mountains (Rev.
17:9).

      3. This city has purple and scarlet for colors (Rev.
17:4).

      4. The symbol of this city is a golden cup (Rev.
17:4).

      5. This city has killed martyrs and saints (Rev.
17:6).

      6. This city is a political power (Rev. 17:18).

      7. This city is drunken (18:3), commercial (18:15),
rich (18:12), proud (18:7), mystical (18:18), and DAMNED BY
GOD (17:5; 18:24).

      NOW, IF YOU WERE IN THAT CITY, HOW WOULD YOU FEEL?

      Don't you see the trouble?  Where the average
investigator or scientist is only looking for A-MORAL,
OBJECTIVE TRUTHS IN THE PHYSICAL REALM, the Bible deals with
MORAL, ABSOLUTE TRUTHS IN THE RELIGIOUS REALM.  The question
is not, "Do we have the right interpretation?"  The question
is, "Having read the passage and UNDERSTANDING EXACTLY WHAT
HE IS TALKING ABOUT, how would YOU feel if it were aimed at
YOU?"  Scientists, as Nicodemus (see John 3:1-4), are
interested only in the abstraction that involves SOMEONE
ELSE.  Note that Nicodemus did not ask, "How can I be born
again?" but, "How can A MAN be born again?"

      Now, before we join the crowd and attempt to
eliminate the passage in Revelation 17 and 18 (the scholars
have thought of a hundred ways to do it!), let us consider
some FACTS.

      1. If you read the passage, you DID identify the
city.

      2. You identified it with no help from a lexicon or
the "original Greek."

      3. You could not have possibly identified it as New
York, Washington, London, Manila, Shanghai, Hollywood, or New
Orleans.

      4.  YOU KNOW WHAT THE PASSAGE REFERS TO.  YOU HAVE
FULL KNOWLEDGE OF IT.  ANY MAN WHO EVER READ IT HAD FULL
KNOWLEDGE OF IT.

      You have only one problem really--HOW ARE YOU GOING
TO GET RID OF IT IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT?

      The whole problem is, "If I find something in the
Bible that I object to, HOW CAN I GET RID OF IT?"

      This question is the first and foremost
consideration of every scholar who ever went about
translating or revising the Bible, unless he believed what he
was handling was the complete and absolute, authoritative,
infallible word of God--as the AV translators did (see their
prefatory remarks).

      Thus the whole rotten mess is exposed.  Under the
hypocritical excuses of "better translations," "clearer
readings," "church authority," "grammatico-historico
exegesis," "Christian tradition," "Talmudic authority," and
"helps for the reader," the corrupters of the Bible have
undertaken to rid themselves of everything in the Bible that
they DON'T LIKE.  The methods, after all, are secondary; what
needs to be considered here is the MOTIVE.  Once the motive
is established, the methods can be spotted for what they are-
-simply variations of an original plan to destroy the
authority of the word of God.

      Revelation 17--18 is an excellent test passage.  It
is excellent because any reader at a glance can identify the
city.  Now as far as 17:7,8,10,16, and 18:2-23 are concerned,
there may be some confusion, but why start with confusion?

      Why would ANY honest, sincere truth-seeker desire to
reject what was plain and begin with what was obscure unless
HE DID NOT LIKE WHAT HE UNDERSTOOD?  We have laid the ax to
the root of the tree, and a tree full of birds it is!  (Matt.
13:31-32).

      The Decline of Biblical Christianity can be traced
to ONE motive: hatred for the authority of the Word.  So an
attack begins and is carried out meticulously and unceasingly
by the people who DO NOT LIKE WHAT THE BOOK SAYS.  These
people make up two classes in any and every century.

      1. Preachers and teachers who INSIST on correcting
the AV.  The only tool they have to do this with is the Greek
text of Westcott and Hort (or Nestle's), which is an
Hesychian, Egyptian type text, INCLUDING THE APOCRYPHA.

      2. Translators and revisers who have revised and
revised until the common man no longer knows what the Bible
is, where it is, or how to get one.

      The motive in both cases is alike; they have found
somewhere in the AV something that they UNDERSTOOD ALL TOO
CLEARLY and did not like--so they changed it.  By doing this
through a period of years, the changes have become so
numerous and so complex that no longer is it possible to find
a truly authoritative Bible anywhere.  With this decline in
authority, Biblical Christianity, in the true sense of the
words, has become extinct.

      In winding things up (before undertaking an actual
study of the Bible doctrine on the Mark of the Beast, a
subject of Bible prophecy--eschatology), a few short
notations can be made on the methods by which the Bible
haters destroyed its authority.  We shall take the passage in
Revelation 17 and 18 as a test case, although Matthew 16,
John 20, Acts 2, Genesis 3, Hebrews 6, or Luke 23 would do
just as well.  (Actually, nearly every verse has been
attacked in the commentaries of Doddridge, Williams,
Ellicott, Macknight, Phillips, Lange, Henry, Dummelow, J. F.
and B., Clarke, etc.)

      Method No. 1.  QUESTION THE AUTHORSHIP OF THE BOOK.

      The purpose for this is to destroy the reader's
confidence in the canonicity of the book being read.  In the
test case (Rev. 17,18) before us, we would run to Eusebius,
who leaned on Papias, and taught that a certain obscure
"Presbyter John" wrote the book, who was not John the
apostle.  Bleek, Neander, Harnack, Moffatt, and Holtzmann
subscribe to this attack, and discussion about it is too
lengthy to take up here.  Suffice it to say, that as most
commentators, they don't know what they are talking about.

      Method No. 2.  ATTACK THE DATE OF THE WRITING OF THE
BOOK.

      The purpose here is to make any prophecy in the book
null and void by either implying the writer wrote it AFTER IT
HAPPENED (Daniel 2--9 for example), or else, better still, to
prove that it ALL HAD TO BE FULFILLED in the apostolic age
and therefore could not possibly OCCUR LATER!  Melito of
Sardis (170) in the Syriac version (the Peshitto) has a note
that will effectually eliminate Revelation 17 and 18 from
meaning what it says.  According to this note, Revelation is
written in Nero's reign, and therefore Revelation 17 and 18
REFERS TO PAGAN ROME ONLY, BEFORE THE DESTRUCTION OF
JERUSALEM.  You see, if you really objected to Revelation 17
and 18, there is always a scholar present to show you HIS OWN
INTERPRETATION so you can rid yourself of what the passage
actually says.  If John were exiled during Domitian's reign,
then REVELATION 17 AND 18 IS YET FUTURE.  Now you've got
something to chew on, don't you?  You see, interpretation was
not really a point in question.  You understood the passage
PERFECTLY the first time you read it.  You only got into
trouble when you went to scholars WHO OBJECTED TO WHAT IT
SAID, and consequently devoted their lives to CHANGING IT!

      Method No. 3.  GO TO THE "ORIGINAL" GREEK.

      This is the method used mainly by the Bible-
believing Protestant when he finds a passage in an A.V. that
condemns his religious upbringing.  In the case before us
(Rev. 17,18), it would be a good idea to pick up Nestle's
Greek New Testament and see the "original Greek."  (The
reader understands, of course, that there is no such thing as
the "original Greek."  The "original" has never been found.
If it be objected that by "original Greek" we do not mean the
"original manuscripts," but only the original "language" in
which the manuscripts were written, it may be retorted, "Then
you are just as much in error, if not worse, for Nestle's
text, as the Westcott and Hort text, is the CLASSICAL Greek
of Alexandrian scholarship, written IN ITALY.  It is not the
KOINE Greek of New Testament scholarship, written IN ASIA
MINOR."  Nestle's "original Greek" is built on the theory
that Vaticanus {the Catholic manuscript containing the seven
corrupt books} is the most perfect text.  Thus, "going to the
Greek" to correct the King James, AV 1611, involves running
to a CHRIST-DEFYING POPE to correct a Bible-believing
Protestant translation.  And who is sufficient for these
things?)

      But to return to Method No. 3, "How can going to the
Greek enable us to get rid of the obvious implications of
Revelation 17 and 18?"  Answer:  You go to the Greek of
Revelation 22:19 and retranslate "BOOK of life" to "TREE of
life" (see Nestle's), and then prove that Erasmus added the
ending anyway with no real Greek manuscript evidence
(Reuchlin, Ir), so consequently, no one has to take the book
of Revelation seriously!  Was it not a disputed book in
deciding the New Testament canon?  Was it not disputed along
with Jude and II Peter?  Yes, it was.  I wonder why?  No man
who ever read Jude of II Peter or Revelation 17 and 18 ever
wondered "why" any more.  They were disputed because the
material found in those books in the Greek was OBJECTIONABLE
to the men AT WHOM THEY WERE AIMED.  (Thus, Vaticanus, the
Greek vellum manuscript authority for all the new
translations, OMITS HEBREWS 10.  Why?  Read it and find out
why.  Hebrews 10 states that a repetition of Christ's
sascrifice is futile and un-Christian.)

      In regard to Method No. 3, you will find a man going
to the Greek in I Corinthians 12:13 to rid himself of the
baptism of the Holy Ghost.  You will find a Campbellite
running to the Greek of Acts 2:38 to enforce baptismal
regeneration.  You will find a Fundamentalist running to the
Greek of II Thessalonians 2:3 to assure himself of a rapture.
You will find a money-grabber running to the Greek of I
Timothy 6:10 to make it "a root" instead of "THE root."  You
will find a Modernist running to the Greek of Luke 17:20 to
prove everyone is a child of God.  You will find a Baptist
running to the Greek of Romans 8:1 in order to reinforce the
doctrine of eternal security.  You will find a Holiness
running to the Greek of Hebrews 6:1-6 to prove you can lose
it.  You will find a Catholic running to the Greek of James
5:16 to justify confession to a priest.  You will find a
Presbyterian running to the Greek of I Peter 5:1 to put in
the "presbyters."  And you will find a Jehovah Witness
messing with the Greek article in John 1:1 to prove that
Christ was not God.

      During the entire procedure all run heedlessly
along, ignoring the fact that what they are FINDING in the
Greek to rid themselves of the English MAY CROSS ANOTHER 100
VERSES IN THE SAME BIBLE.  But not knowing enough about what
the Bible actually says, each is busy riding his little
hobby-horse at break-neck speed through the Bible, stomping
and tearing the word of God to bits.  (The Baptist will
eliminate half of Romans 8:1 forgetting that 8:13 is in the
same chapter.  The Jehovah Witness will strain out the
article but leave it untranslated where it occurs in the
Greek {"THE Jesus"}.  The Presbyterian will get the
presbyters in and then eliminate the bishop in I Timothy 3.
The Catholic gets James 5:16, and in so doing, spits all over
I Timothy 2:5.  Finally, the Holiness seizes Hebrews 6 and
forgets to read the whole verse which says that he cannot be
saved TWICE!!  And on we go and where we stop, nobody knows.
But what is worse, NOBODY CARES.)

      Method No. 4.  PUBLISH REVISIONS IN SUCCESSION SO
PEOPLE WILL THINK THAT IT IS THE SAME BIBLE THAT IS BEING
PRESERVED.

      This trick is out-and-out, by far, the best method
to deceive the public and give them a "who cares" attitude
about the word of God.  It accomplishes in a few years what
centuries of theological debate could not.  By this method
you publish a series of REVISIONS wherein plainly discernible
CONTRADICTIONS can be found; then by making these revisions
appear to be OF THE SAME FAMILY OR SOURCE, you have
established the fact that the Bible DOES contradict itself
and therefore cannot be an infallible, God-breathed
authority.

      Anyone who has spent any time in investigating the actual texts
of the Douay-Rheims, the RV, the RSV, the ASV, and the New English
Bible, knows that they differ radically from the text of the
King James, A.V. 1611. But as from where these differences are
derived, and how they got there--that is a fog-bound scene. The
average reader takes for granted that it went something like this:

      Caedmon's version, Alfred, Aelfric (950), Wycliffe (1382),
Tyndale (1525), Coverdale (1535), Cranmer (1540), Great Bible (1539),
Geneva Bible (1560), Bishops Bible (1569), King James (1611), Douay
Version (1609), Revised Version (1885), American Standard (1901),
Revised Standard Version (1952), New English Bible (1958), etc.

      Now this looks very convincing. In case it failed to be
convincing, all the Sunday school literature publications have changed
the designation of the Bible from Authorized Version (A.V.) to King
James Version (KJV). This accomplishes a dual purpose; first, it
makes the A.V. have three letters so it will match RSV and ASV (so,
KJV); secondly, it eliminates that hated word "Authorized" by
simply striking it out of the designation. What we have now is no
longer an "AUTHORIZED version" (A.V.), but a "King James VERSION"
(KJV). In one master stroke the Bible corrupters rid themselves of the
despised authority. From the start their trouble was that they
resented what the Book said. Their motive was they wanted to get
rid of it because it said things they didn't like.

      Well, the mission is completed. They have done what they set out
to do. They got through the whole operation without once letting the
cat out of the bag. The "cat" was the fact that none of the
translations since 1884 are Bible translations. None are translated
from Bible manuscripts according to what Jesus Christ defined as the
Bible. Every one of them, without exception, is a translation of
manuscripts that contain the seven books that Jesus and Paul never
accepted as belonging to a Bible. To be as brutal as possible, we
will put it this way: "Every Bible on the market from 1884-1970 is
a Roman Catholic Bible that begins with the presumption that Jesus
Christ is not the final authority on what constitutes a Bible and what
doesn't."

      Now there it is; choke on it. The facts are all present. Matthew
23:35 and Luke 24:44 settle the matter conclusively before the word
"catholic" is coined by believer or unbeliever. It is settled in the
New Testament contrary to the teachings of the Council of Trent, and
no amount of questioning authorship, canonicity, original Greek, or
correct versions will ever alter a fact in the matter. Vaticanus and
Sinaiticus (the two Greek texts chosen by all the translators since
1884) are heretical documents palmed off as authoritative, and they
are no more a "Bible" than "Aesop's Fables" or the "Tales of
Canterbury." The fact that the new translations do not publish all
their Greek manuscripts is only a testimony to their shameful
hypocrisy. Both manuscripts they use as the final say-so in matters of
textual criticism contain the Apocrypha, and if that weren't enough,
Sinaiticus contains the "Epistle of Barnabas" and the "Shepherd of
Hermas." Bible? Not on your life.

      The ASV and RSV are not continuations of a Bible-translating
line. They are direct break-offs from the Bible line after 200
years of underground work in the critical editions (Fell, 1677;
Wetstein, 1751; Walton, 1657; Scholtz, 1830; Griesbach, 1774;
Lachmann, 1842; Tregelles, 1857, etc.)

      During the great missionary and evangelistic age when
Whitefield, Luther, Zinzendorf, Wesley, Moody, Finney, Torrey, and Sam
Jones were preaching, the corrupters went underground to continue
their crusade begun at the time of Christ--the crusade to destroy the
authority of the word of God. When the RV (1884-5), the ASV (1901),
and the RSV (1952) appeared, they appeared as heralds of a "new age"
of Bible enlightenment and understanding. They appeared in their self-
appointed robes of righteousness as "easier to understand," "more
accurate readings," "true to the original language," and "based on
scientific research in more ancient manuscripts"; and not once
do they reveal their true identity which would cause their sales to
drop by the thousand. This true identity is the identity of Irenaeus,
Eusebius, Augustine, Constantine, Jerome, Origen and company, who set
out hundreds of years ago to destroy the authority of the word
of God and incorporate into scripture seven books which Jesus Christ
purposely omitted. With a little leaven in, the whole lump can be
leavened, and the old mother of harlots (Rev. 17:1-4) is found busy at
her work in Matthew 13:33 leavening the whole lump with false doctrine
(Matt. 16:12) until it is fit for nothing but pig's food.

      The truth of the matter is the ASV, RV, and RSV are not
"versions" of the Bible. They are from two Greek manuscripts called
"B" and "Aleph" which were probably written in Italy (see Westcott and
Hort remarks) on vellum sheets which contain all seven anti-Christian
books plus the "Shepherd of Hermas" and the "Epistle of Barnabas."
They are not "Bibles."

      One cannot evalute the deceptiveness of this tremendous hoax
until one picks up a book like the one by H.G. Herklots. Mr. Herklots
(bless his little heart) is advertised as "a graduate of Cambridge
University...six years in Canada as Prof. of Exegetical
Theology...Canon of St. John's Cathedral and later Director of
Religious Education at the Diocese of Sheffield."

      With a background like this, Mr. Herklots writes a book entitled
"How Our Bible Came to Us," and then produces photostats of
Vaticanus and Sinaiticus as BIBLE manuscripts. Think of it! "How OUR
Bible...." Who is the "OUR," old buddy? It isn't any Bible-believer
that ever believed what Jesus said about the contents of a "Bible"!
"OUR BIBLE" has nothing to do with "Bel and the Dragon," "Tobit,"
"Judith," or "Hermas"! How could a man with the background Herklots
has be so brainwashed that he would think our Bible is connected
with this kind of nonsense? Shouldn't a man be a little more careful
before he goes around saying "OUR"? Who is "OUR"?

      It doesn't include Jesus Christ. He fixed the canon at Genesis
to 2Chronicles with three divisions.

      It isn't Paul. He never quotes any of the seven books, and would
quote secular literature before he would make any reference to
them.

      It couldn't be the King James translators. They left the
apocrypha out of the Old Testament. It couldn't be Wesley, Whitefield,
Moody, Sunday, Torrey, Jones, Finney, Smith, rainerd, Carey, Judson,
Goforth, Livingstone, Taylor, or any of the soul-winners of the 18th
and 19th centuries, for they all used the A.V. 1611 or the Textus
Receptus from which it was taken. Who is that phantasmal "our"?
Don't include me.

      "Our" Bible is not the ASV, RSV, and RV. These "bibles" are the
products of Bible corrupters who had a prejudice against the A.V.
because of what it said--for example, Revelation 17 and 18.
Their motive was not to produce a better Bible, otherwise they
would have stuck to manuscripts that contained what Jesus said was the
Bible. Their motive was to destroy the authority of the Bible that
Jesus recognized, and elevate themselves and their versions (which are
not "Bibles") to the seat of authority. The proof is in the pudding,
friend. Why change it if you already understand it--and YOU DO
UNDERSTAND Revelation 17, don't you? Yes, that is the trouble; you
DO understand it. You just don't like it.

      Bible translating, then, ends with the King James Bible (AV).
Translation of spurious manuscripts to do away with the Bible
does continue down to this present time with a "bible"-a-month
coming off the presses, but none of these "bibles" has anything to do
with inspired literature. God knows what He revealed, and how He wrote
it, and whom He used to write it, and when it was written, and why it
was written. You may fool a gullible bunch of suckers who are trying
to get ecumenical bait off a trot-line, but you will not fool God, and
you cannot force God to approve and bless something that He never
intended to approve, tolerate, promote, or bless.

      You see now why this book began with a discussion of Matthew
23:35 and Luke 24:44. These two verses, which deal with the earthly
ministry of the Lord Jesus, give the Bible-believer a fair and
advanced warning on how to spot a Bible-corrupter. They can be spotted
by their desire to elevate an outside authority to equal authority
with the word of God. The first move they made to do this was to
incorporate into the Old Testament seven books of man-made
trash.

      To conclude our thesis, the decline of Biblical Christianity is
due to the lack of faith that people place in the word of God as a
final authority. This lack of faith is due to the fact that the Bible
has been so abused and perverted byits handlers that the average man
no longer believes that it is sacred or holy. These handlers are men
who have corrupted the word of God by two methods: one, by changing
the AV to bring it in line with the pre-reformation text of apostate
Roman Catholicism (this is the text of Vaticanus used by Westcott and
Hort and the ASV), or two, by constantly revising the Bible till 50
Bibles appear that contradict each other.

      Either way, the public in general, and preachers in specific,
have at last become deaf to the warnings and exhortations in the
Bible, and have tuned their ears to the pitch of science and Rome.
With such an orientation, the Bible passes among the millions from
generation to generation unnoticed. There it lies on the dime-store
counter of nearly every nation in the world--$1.00 or less per copy.
Within its covers is found a prophecy so blood-curdling and shocking
that if the populace knew of it, they would rise in arms to overthrow
the religious tyrant. But long, long ago, the scholars completed their
disastrous and hypocritical work of undermining the Book's authority.
In vain it warns; in vain it threatens. It lies as mute evidence to
God's eternal power that heaven and earth shall pass away, but His
word shall not. It lies like a soundless time-bomb ticking away the
hours until the end-time when it will fulfill itself in all the
vengeance and wrath that only a Holy God can muster.

      Witness the Book! It lies on your table now with folded cover,
and I believe I see a little dust settling there. Can it be? Dusty or
sparkling, there it lies, and between its ancient covers you will find
66 books: 39 in the old, 27 in the new. The 66th book lies just as
silent and as undisturbing as the other 65, yet between its first
line, "The Revelation of Jesus Christ" (Rev. 1:1), and its last
line, "Amen," there is disclosed the most terrifying and
consequential subject ever revealed to man--The Mark of the Beast.

      Take heed how you read and what you believe. With the decline
of Biblical Christianity, perhaps your name will be found among
the list of those who set their hearts on corrupting the word of God
because it conflicted with their traditions and opinions. I hope you
are not among that number. If you are in that number, then this study
will be in vain, for you also will be found in the ranks of that
strange and terrifying figure who has a Number, a Name, a Sign, and
a Mark; and he is not the Lord's Christ (Luke 2:26). He is a
Christ of another lineage and another "gospel." He is the author of
all Bible corruptions, and the Father of all Bible corrupters.