What does it mean to have the fear of God?

For the unbeliever, the fear of God is the fear of the judgment of God and eternal death, which is eternal separation from God (Luke 12:5; Hebrews 10:31). For the believer, the fear of God is something much different. The believer’s fear is reverence of God. Hebrews 12:28-29 is a good description of this: “Therefore, since we are receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken, let us be thankful, and so worship God acceptably with reverence and awe, for our ’God is a consuming fire.’” This reverence and awe is exactly what the fear of God means for Christians. This is the motivating factor for us to surrender to the Creator of the Universe.

Proverbs 1:7 declares, “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge.” Until we understand who God is and develop a reverential fear of Him, we cannot have true wisdom. True wisdom comes only from understanding who God is and that He is holy, just, and righteous. Deuteronomy 10:12, 20-21 records, “And now, O Israel, what does the LORD your God ask of you but to fear the LORD your God, to walk in all his ways, to love him, to serve the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul. Fear the LORD your God and serve him. Hold fast to him and take your oaths in his name. He is your praise; he is your God, who performed for you those great and awesome wonders you saw with your own eyes.” The fear of God is the basis for our walking in His ways, serving Him, and, yes, loving Him.

Some redefine the fear of God for believers to “respecting” Him. While respect is definitely included in the concept of fearing God, there is more to it than that. A biblical fear of God, for the believer, includes understanding how much God hates sin and fearing His judgment on sin—even in the life of a believer. Hebrews 12:5-11 describes God’s discipline of the believer. While it is done in love (Hebrews 12:6), it is still a fearful thing. As children, the fear of discipline from our parents no doubt prevented some evil actions. The same should be true in our relationship with God. We should fear His discipline, and therefore seek to live our lives in such a way that pleases Him.

Believers are not to be scared of God. We have no reason to be scared of Him. We have His promise that nothing can separate us from His love (Romans 8:38-39). We have His promise that He will never leave us or forsake us (Hebrews 13:5). Fearing God means having such a reverence for Him that it has a great impact on the way we live our lives. The fear of God is respecting Him, obeying Him, submitting to His discipline, and worshiping Him in awe.

https://www.gotquestions.org/fear-God.html

A Call to Persevere

 Jude

17 But, dear friends, remember what the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ foretold. 18 They said to you, “In the last times there will be scoffers who will follow their own ungodly desires.” 19 These are the people who divide you, who follow mere natural instincts and do not have the Spirit.

20 But you, dear friends, by building yourselves up in your most holy faith and praying in the Holy Spirit, 21 keep yourselves in God’s love as you wait for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to bring you to eternal life.

22 Be merciful to those who doubt; 23 save others by snatching them from the fire; to others show mercy, mixed with fear—hating even the clothing stained by corrupted flesh.

Doxology

24 To him who is able to keep you from stumbling and to present you before his glorious presence without fault and with great joy— 25 to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen.

Charles Shit has NPD

What is NPD?

Narcissistic personality disorder [NPD] . . . is a mental condition in which people have an inflated sense of their own importance, a deep need for excessive attention and admiration, troubled relationships, and a lack of empathy for others. But behind this mask of extreme confidence lies a fragile self-esteem that's vulnerable to the slightest criticism.

Why do I say Charles Shit has NPD? Because he started the lawsuit!

Look at him, he looks innocent. Hid his hands after he threw the stone on others. He kept his mustard well in the morning, he trimmed it and then went to sue Christian brothers. Such a dangerous pastor in BPC.

You better watch out, one day he may turn his back unto you too.

Outwardly, he is gentle, but he is like a snake, poisonous, dangerous, quiet, carnal. Immature tends to create his own “little church” within the larger church. Indeed, if he could get away with it, he would operate in a totally autocratic fashion, with heavy, top-down leadership.

He is very selfish, he has his own agenda. We will see that motive in his ministry in another few years' time.

Yes, toxic leaders are the distinct minority of Christian leaders. But they can do harm to the cause of Christ disproportionate to their numbers. And they can get away with their behavior for years because they often have a charismatic and charming personalities. Charming like a snake.

Watch out!

Warning to Charles Seet

1 Corinthians 6:7-9

7 The very fact that you have lawsuits among you means you have been completely defeated already. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be cheated? 8 Instead, you yourselves cheat and do wrong, and you do this to your brothers and sisters. 9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? 

Article for Charles Seet to read in 2022

Courting Trouble

To understand 1 Corinthians 6 it is necessary to understand some basic characteristics of the judicial process in a Roman colony. It appears that by the mid-first century a.d. trial by jury was reserved mainly for criminal proceedings, and even then there might be exceptions.¹ Trials would be handled by some sort of judge, perhaps one of the colony’s duoviri, but it is possible that an aedile like Erastus might handle a case that arose out of some conflict or problem in the macellum (the meat market) or the marketplace.² The earliest and most famous of Roman courts was the “extortion” court, “the need for which became acute as Roman governors … discovered the possibilities of enriching themselves at the expense of the provincials.… Many of the great cases of the late republic and early empire were heard before this court.”³

There was a three-stage judicial process for civil cases. First, the plaintiff would appear before one of the city’s magistrates requesting a suit. If the magistrate agreed that there were grounds for a suit the defendant would be summoned by the plaintiff to court. The factual details of the case would be discussed and debated and a formula (statement of the factual details that both parties agreed on) arrived at. The trial would be based on what was in the formula. Second, the magistrate would then asssign a judge, agreeable to both parties, to the case and pass along to him the formula. Finally, the case would be heard by the judge and the sentence passed, but it was the plaintiff’s responsibility to see that the judgment was carried out by the defendant. This process could drag on for some time and could be aborted at various points, for example if the defendant refused to come to court in the first place and the magistrate was not inclined to use force. Going to court could be a very expensive proposition. Tacitus tells us that a lawyer in a.d. 47 could command a fee of as much as 10,000 sesterces (Ann. 11.5–7). The annual salary for a duovir’s clerk in a Roman colony in Spain was only 1200 sesterces.⁴

A number of forces in Roman society affected the adminstration of justice.⁵ Social status and rank vis-à-vis one’s opponent were major determining factors. While “the situation of the weaker plaintiff improved with the end of the Republic and the coming of the Empire,” the system remained heavily weighted in favor of people of higher status.⁶ From at least the time of Augustus certain people—fathers, patrons, magistrates, and men of standing—were basically immune from prosecution for fraud by some kinds of other people—children, freedmen, private citizens, and men of low rank. Only if a lower status person had a powerful patron was there a likelihood that he or she could bring a successful suit against someone higher up the social ladder.⁷

Another factor in civil cases was the lawyer. If he was a good rhetorician, highly skilled in forensic rhetoric, one had a chance, even if social standing stacked the odds otherwise. In courts the art of persuasion became much more than a mere exercise in public oratory. People packed many trials to hear the great orators of the day.

Nevertheless, the Roman judicial system was pervaded by “improper influences” and this “made equality before the law unattainable” or virtually so.⁸ Citizens were less likely to be arrested, beaten, and imprisoned than foreigners. “The principal criterion of legal privilege in the eyes of the Romans was dignitas or honor derived from power, style of life, and wealth.”⁹ To the wealthy, well-born, and well-connected went the chief rewards of the legal system, along with many of the other benefits available in society. There was a strongly aristocratic bias to the whole culture. Justice during the empire was far from blind and was often looking over its shoulder.

The importance of this for 1 Corinthians 6 is that at the very least one or both of the Christians going to court were probably well-to-do and hoping to exploit the judicial system to their advantage.¹⁰ As in ch. 5 we find further hints here that Paul’s chief troubles in Corinth were caused by well-to-do members of the ekklēsia.

Chapter 6 has been traditionally divided into two parts, the first on a case in a pagan court involving differences between two Christians (vv. 1–11) and the second on another case of sexual immorality (after the one in ch. 5), in this instance a man going to prostitutes (vv. 12–20). It is often doubted that the case in 6:1–11 is directly connected to the incest case addressed in ch. 5, since it has to do with fraud (v. 7) and thus is likely a property matter. But since marriage often was a property matter, there may be a close connection.

There are close links between 6:12–20 and what follows in ch. 7. Paul is trying to establish both a Christian view of the importance of the human body in the order of redemption and the practical implications of an eschatological worldview for present sexual conduct. He continues to address his audience’s view of human sexuality and their aberrant theology of salvation in ch. 7.¹¹

Both cases discussed in ch. 6 deal with a serious breach of community and an ensuing bad witness to the world. Paul argues that by taking disputes to a pagan court and by fulfilling one’s sexual drives outside the body of Christ one is violating Christian community and Christian witness. He uses several sarcastic rhetorical questions, not detailed arguments, to express himself here. Especially sarcastic is the question whether there is not one sophos (wise person) among the Corinthian Christians who could judge the matter (v. 5), in view of their claims about being wise. All these rhetorical questions are meant to shame the Corinthians into seeing their real moral condition and to deflate their unwarranted pride. This letter would be read before the whole congregation and would be a humiliating public shaming.

The point in v. 1 could be that Gentile courts are inherently unrighteous. Dio Chrysostom, commenting on Roman Corinth about a.d. 100, says that there were “lawyers innumerable perverting justice” there, and refers to young men declaiming forensic pieces in the courtyard next to the Temple of Poseidon during the Isthmian games, hoping to drum up business (8.9).¹² K. Wengst has stressed that in view of the experiences listed in his tribulation catalogs (1 Cor. 4:9ff.; 2 Cor. 11:23ff.), Paul had little reason to trust Roman justice and that this passage should be read in that light.¹³

But Paul’s sweeping dismissal of the practice of law does not amount to an attack on the law as such, and his statement that it would be better to suffer wrong (v. 7) “presupposes the recognition of law.” “Going to law here is itself regarded as doing injustice and robbing one’s adversary. That injustice and robbery thus appear in the garb of law … makes it clear why Paul can describe the judges as unjust.”¹⁴ Paul believes that Christians, like Jews before them, should settle all disputes among themselves on their own. He does not deal here with the case of a Christian and a non-Christian entangled in legal matters.

In both this and the next case, Paul provides the wider Christian perspective by bringing in eschatological matters. In the first case, he brings in the fact that on judgment day believers will judge the outside world and even angels (vv. 2f.); in the second case, he refers to the future resurrection, which shows the value that God has placed on human bodies (v. 14). The Corinthians’ problems arose not just from bad ethics or bad social values but from bad theology, which affected all worldly affairs and matters including sexual and legal matters. They had an inadequate if not non-existent future eschatology, or at least future eschatology was not shaping their values and decision making. Paul’s point in vv. 2f. is that if they are going to go on and judge the world, then surely they can handle an ordinary mundane matter now on their own.

Some have identified “the despised” (or “the least esteemed”) in v. 4 as Christians,¹⁵ in which case Paul is showing his contempt for the litigators, or possibly he wants to invert the secular pyramid by putting the least esteemed of the congregation on top as judges. But if the word in question really means “despised,” then this view seems unlikely. It is more likely that the ekklēsia in this verse is the secular assembly, not the Christian congregation.¹⁶ Men oun (“no, rather,” “therefore”) in the first clause must be given its due weight, so that v. 4 answers to v. 3.¹⁷ In v. 4, then, Paul asks rhetorically whether resorting to a pagan court does not amount to appointing outsiders ill-suited to the task to judge among Christians.

Paul is clear in v. 7 that going to pagan court already amounts to moral failure. He asks the plaintiff, in words probably drawing on the Jesus tradition, would it not be better to be defrauded? In v. 8 he addresses the one who did the defrauding and reminds him that people who behave in this manner will not inherit God’s dominion when it finally comes.^[1]

 

---

¹ Jesus’ case might have been such an exception since Pilate, not the Sanhedrin, was in the end the one who decided it.

² Cf. J. K. Chow, Patronage and Power: A Study of Social Networks in Corinth (Sheffield: JSOT, 1992), p. 80.

³ G. A. Kennedy, The Art of Rhetoric in the Roman World 300 b.c. to a.d. 300 (Princeton: Princeton University, 1972), pp. 11f.

Ann Annales

⁴ Cf. Chow, Patronage and Power, p. 76.

⁵ See P. Garnsey, Social Status and Legal Privilege in the Roman Empire (Oxford: Clarendon, 1970), pp. 183ff.

⁶ Ibid., p. 192, cf. p. 217: “The possibility of suits brought by men of comparatively humble origin and position against men of rank cannot be ruled out; but they are unlikely to have been a frequent occurrence.”

⁷ It is better to speak of social status or level and not social class, since the modern notion of class does not really suit the situation in the Roman Empire. There was nothing quite equivalent to our middle class. The three basic distinctions were between citizen and foreigner, honestiores and humiliores, and freeborn and slave. Depending on which distinction was being used, one could be higher or lower. For example, a freeborn person could be poor, whereas a freedman or freedwoman could be rich, and this was of great importance in a city in which one bought one’s way into society, public office, and sometimes even justice. Furthermore, some honestiores did not have citizenship while some humiliores did. See A. Clarke, Secular and Christian Leadership in Corinth (dissertation, Cambridge, 1991), pp. 26ff.

⁸ Garnsey, Social Status, p. 207.

⁹ Ibid., p. 279.

¹⁰ Cicero (Pro Caecina 73) complains that three things hinder justice from being done in the provinces east of Rome: gratia, potentia, and pecunia, that is, “excessive favor,” power or great resources, and money, that is, bribery.

¹¹ Many Corinthian Christians apparently thought that salvation did not involve the body.

¹² If one also considers the analogy with Jesus’ parable in Luke 18, it is believable that Paul may have been referring to judges in Corinth. Unlike B. W. Winter, “Civil Litigation in Secular Corinth and the Church,” NTS 37 (1991), pp. 559–72, I doubt that Paul’s reference is to juries, since small civil claims did not usually call for a jury. The plural “the unrighteous ones” does not require a reference to a jury, since Paul is generalizing here.

¹³ K. Wengst, Pax Romana and the Peace of Jesus Christ (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987), pp. 76f.

¹⁴ Ibid. This assessment does not conflict with what Paul says in Romans 13 since there he speaks of the divinely ordained and intended function of government, not of some particular practice of it, and he is not referring to Christians making use of the judicial system but of actions initiated by the authorities.

¹⁵ Winter, “Civil Litigation,” p. 570.

¹⁶ It is possible that en tȩ̄ ekklēsia̧ means “of the assembly” so that Paul’s complaint is about making pagans judges of the Christian ekklēsia. In any case, if Paul could call secular judges “unrighteous” (v. 1), he could equally well call them “despised.”

¹⁷ J. B. Lightfoot, Notes on the Epistles of Saint Paul (Winona Lake: Alpha, reprint), p. 213.

^[1] Witherington, Ben, III. 1995. Conflict and Community in Corinth: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.

Ecclesiastes 12:12

 Ecclesiastes 12:12

Be warned, my son, of anything in addition to them. Of making many books there is no end, and much study wearies the body.

12:12 This verse in the NIV appears to warn the reader against the study of any teachings beyond the true (canonical?) wisdom, but this would be reading too much into the Hebrew text. A more probable translation is: “Beyond all this, my son, be advised: Of making many books there is no end.” The contrast is not between the study of canonical versus noncanonical wisdom but between failure to appreciate wisdom on the one hand and excessive zeal for study on the other.

Garrett, Duane A. 1993. Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs. Vol. 14. The New American Commentary. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.

PS: If you would keep looking for answers in many other books, you would wear yourself out. STAY AWAY FROM BOOKS WRITTEN BY FALSE TEACHERS!

Ecclesiastes 12

 12 Remember^b your Creator

in the days of your youth,

before the days of trouble^c come

and the years approach when you will say,

“I find no pleasure in them”—

² before the sun and the light

and the moon and the stars grow dark,

and the clouds return after the rain;

³ when the keepers of the house tremble,

and the strong men stoop,

when the grinders cease because they are few,

and those looking through the windows grow dim;

⁴ when the doors to the street are closed

and the sound of grinding fades;

when people rise up at the sound of birds,

but all their songs grow faint;^d

⁵ when people are afraid of heights

and of dangers in the streets;

when the almond tree blossoms

and the grasshopper drags itself along

and desire no longer is stirred.

Then people go to their eternal home^e

and mourners^f go about the streets.

⁶ Remember him—before the silver cord is severed,

and the golden bowl is broken;

before the pitcher is shattered at the spring,

and the wheel broken at the well,

⁷ and the dust returns^g to the ground it came from,

and the spirit returns to God^h who gave it.ⁱ

⁸ “Meaningless! Meaningless!” says the Teacher.^a j

“Everything is meaningless!^k”

The Conclusion of the Matter

⁹ Not only was the Teacher wise, but he also imparted knowledge to the people. He pondered and searched out and set in order many proverbs.^{l 10} The Teacher^m searched to find just the right words, and what he wrote was upright and true.ⁿ

¹¹ The words of the wise are like goads, their collected sayings like firmly embedded nails^o—given by one shepherd.^{b 12} Be warned, my son, of anything in addition to them.

Of making many books there is no end, and much study wearies the body.^p

¹³ Now all has been heard;

here is the conclusion of the matter:

Fear God^q and keep his commandments,^r

for this is the duty of all mankind.^s

¹⁴ For God will bring every deed into judgment,^t

including every hidden thing,^u

whether it is good or evil. ^[1]

 

---

^b Ecc 11:8

^c See 2 Sa 19:35

^d Jer 25:10

^e See Job 10:21

^f Jer 9:17; Am 5:16

^g See Ge 2:7; See Ps 146:4

^h Ecc 3:21

ⁱ See Job 20:8

^a Or the leader of the assembly; also in verses 9 and 10

^j Ecc 1:1

^k See Ecc 1:2

^l 1 Ki 4:32

^m See Ecc 1:1

ⁿ Pr 22:20–21

^o See Ezr 9:8; See Job 6:25

^b Or Shepherd

^p See Ecc 1:18

^q See Ex 20:20; See 1 Sa 12:24; See Job 23:15; See Ps 19:9

^r See Dt 4:2

^s See Dt 4:6; See Job 37:24

^t See Job 19:29; See Ecc 3:17

^u See Job 34:21; See Ps 19:12; Jer 16:17; 23:24

^[1] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

Txxe Life Bible Presbyterian Church's Christmas Joy

We have a super-joy this Christmas Day.

We have joy because we have found a perfect Bible in the end. HOHOHO...

We have the perfect Word of God in our hands.

We are rejoicing because we have the Perfect Greek Bible underlying the English King James Bible.

We have joy because we are separatists, separated from the unfaithful brothers and sisters in Christ.

We have joy because we are faithful to the end. 

We have “WOW...WOW...WOW” in our lives because we are born again. Once save always saved.

We have joy because we are better in Greek and Hebrew. Shalom.

We have joy because we are wiser than others. We stick to the KJV, not NIV. HOHOHO...

We have a lot of joy to share with the dark worldwide.

We have such wonderful joy this Christmas Day.

Merry Christmas

To all brethren who preach Christ,

Christmas Greetings.

A new year's wish. Stop the war among ourselves, start the war on the evil dark world, there is a dark world within us. We are at war with our own lusts and pride. We are fighting our old self. We have to crucify our old self to the cross, then we will be resurrected with Jesus Christ.

May the Holy Spirit remain in us.

No one knows everything.

No one knows everything, except God.

No one has all the answers, except God.

We have to learn from one another.

Fundamentalist an angry man?

Christian Fundamentalism makes a lot of angry men and women.

A lot of Christian Fundamentalists are angry men.

Why?

They fight with Roman Catholics, then they fight with Reformed theologians, then they fight with Charismatics, they fight with Evangelical, they fight with Pentecostal churches, they fight with Liberals and modernist, they fight with their wives, they fight with brothers in Christ, they fight with their sons and daughters, they fight among fundamentalists, they fight among themselves, they fight day in day out, they called themselves the spiritual militants, 21st. Century Reformers, in the end, too fight with Lord Jesus Christ.

That is why a lot of Christian Fundamentalists are angry men. They are fighters without peace.

One of them whom I knew, hung his son upside down, and bitten him with his belt! His son did not forgive this old fundamentalist forever! And the old man died in regrets. A lot of people said he is a good old fundamentalist. 

Many of these fundamentalists are cruel and cold blood! What they want is to win an argument!

How the Gospel Takes Root in ‘Crazy Rich’ Singapore

 Raman: On the surface, Singapore looks like a nation that is well “Christianized,” with more than 800 churches in a small island (278 square miles) of 5.8 million people. But while Christianity here can appear robust and strong—with several high-profile megachurches that have gained international fame and recognition—much of it is theologically weak and shallow. Many churches preach heavily moralistic sermons or, on the other hand, proclaim “hyper-grace,” subtly (if not overtly) proclaiming the prosperity gospel. There is a great need in Singapore for more theological depth.

The whole article can be seen at:gospel-takes-root-crazy-rich-singapore/

Fallacy of once saved always saved.

Some theologians taught their students in their Bible Colleges, once saved always saved. 

This is the right doctrine of salvation.

But there is a fallacy about this doctrine.

Since they thought that they are saved with eternal security. It is not wrong to sin.

What kind of sin?

Attacking brethren in Christ. Attacking, persecuting brethren in Christ until they are frustrated, is okay because they will not lose their salvation. If they lose their salvation, they are not chosen in the beginning. They have the tendency to test and tempt people to fall away from their faith. This is the fallacy.

It is okay to fight among themselves. The division in the church is not a sin. Since we are saved, so it is not wrong to create false doctrines. They are saved once so will always be saved. It is all right to sue one another in civil court. It is all right to bear false witness to their neighbors. It is okay to attack churches, it is okay to become extremist, it is okay to become militants, it is okay to become heretics since once saved always saved. 

They have this fallacy, since we are saved, it is all right to be cruel and cold blood to brethren and sisters. They are thinking that those who are saved are all strong like iron and steel, so they push the limit until some weaker brethren stumble by their cruel evil-doing and until these weaker brethren fell down. This is the fallacy of once saved always saved. They said it is not their fault, it is because those who fell away were not saved at all from the beginning. So, it is okay to create questions and doubt in those who are reading NIV. Attacking evangelical churches is okay.

These theologians are still thinking they are born-again Christians. 

I am amazed by this so-called once saved always saved fallacy, in giving license to these theologians to persecute Christians. 

They said those who are saved are always saved, they will stand to the end, those who fail, they are not born again, they are not been chosen by God from the beginning.

John Sung was a “charismatic”

 John Sung’s ministry demonstrates the power of the Holy Spirit to bring physical healing and deliverance from evil spirits. In that sense, Sung was a “charismatic,” though he did not accept Pentecostal theology or an emphasis on spiritual gifts and supernatural events. On the contrary, Sung taught that true conversion will lead to a life filled by the Holy Spirit, who will gradually conform Christians into the moral likeness of Christ. Though God worked countless miracles through John Sung, Sung always emphasized love more than power, holiness more than miracles. Copied from https://www.globalchinacenter.org/analysis/the-life-and-ministry-of-john-sung

One thing we must take note, John Sung did not want to see us overemphasize Charismatic gifts or on rites. 

Copied from his daily: The Diary of John Sung

The Ordination Service of Vernon Quek

 

Ordination Service of Pastor David Weng

 

DAVID WENG 

PASTOR

David received his Bachelor’s degree from Far Eastern Bible College, Singapore (Bachelor of Theology, 2000) and two Masters degrees from Pensacola Theological Seminary, Florida, USA (Master of Arts in Bible Exposition, 2004 and Master of Divinity, 2006).

God has given him a wonderful helpmeet and three beautiful children, Elizabeth, Joshua, and Caleb. We welcome you to worship with us this Sunday. If you have any questions, please don’t hesitate to ask. pastor@providencebpchurch.org 

https://www.facebook.com/watch/live/?ref=watch_permalink&v=624118695674480

http://providencebpchurch.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/2021-12-19-Providence-Bible-Presbyterian-Church-Bulletin-English.pdf?fbclid=IwAR1WPR8WSP0Lr0fC_7aryDPYy3PdPRhYWAtc7rP_gTYG32nIYkZVQlPh7vs

SUNDAY, DECEMBER 19, 2021 AT 12:30 PM – 2:30 PM UTC+08

Ordination Service of Pastor David Weng

My appeal to the false teachers

Friends, I have written many letters to those false teachers, they are not happy with all these letters. They hated me.

I appeal to you, false teachers, to stop provoking young people to hate fellow Christian. Stop all attacks on Christian Churches. Stop instigating young people to follow your wrong way of doing things. 

Stop all attacks in your Journal, Bulletin, Sunday Sermon, Bible Study, talks, and Bible College lectures.

After all, this is your choice. You have to decide. If you want to continue to become false teachers, go ahead. There are consequences ahead of you. In 13 years, I have given my time to warn you, I have seen dangers coming ahead of you, I appeal to you to turn away from the wrong path, repent, return to the flock, unite, and not separate from one another. 

I encourage you, the false teachers, to bend your knees while you are reading the Bible, asking God to forgive you, peradventure God may open your eyes to see the suffering Christ. May God have mercy unto you.

Encouragement from these false teachers

These false teachers in FEBC and some Bible Presbyterian Churches like to provoke young people. They are good at encouraging young men and women!

What did they provoke and encourage?

They provoke young people to attack pastors and leaders in the same denomination, in Bible Presbyterian Church. 

Young people were instigated to attack.

The false teachers instigated these young people to attack Christian who is reading NIV, attacking those churches which are using drums in their worship, attacking fellows believers who do not agree with these false teachers. Attacking Christians who are not Reformed and Fundamental. 

These false teachers are wolves in sheep clothing encouraging and provoking their students to think critically against other Christians.

These false teachers in another time and another place, in the Sunday Worship, when they are at the pulpit, will preach publicly that they are provoking and encouraging others to love and unto good work. They are king cobra with double tongues.

Surely these false teachers and false pastors' mouths are full of rubbish. One of the false teachers is Clement "the leper living in the tabernacle." Surely God is at the doorstep, may he have the fear of the Lord and stop instigating young people to sin.

English Bible Translations in the Twentieth Century

English Bible Translations in the Twentieth Century. At the turn of the century, Adolf Deissmann, using study of the papyri from Egypt, persuaded scholars that the NT was in the common language (the Koine) of the first century, giving impetus to an effort to present the Bible in the language of the twentieth century. Accompanying this development was the rise of archaeological discovery that gave new manuscripts of both the OT and NT. The Cairo Genizah collection of Hebrew manuscripts was found at the end of the last century, and the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1947. Perhaps 25 Greek manuscripts of the NT could have been used in 1611. Now over 5,400 are known. More of the Uncial manuscripts (309) were available to 20th century translators. The papyrus manuscripts (115), most found in 20th twentieth century, are the oldest extant sources for the NT text. Wider knowledge of the nature of the biblical and related languages has been gained, making for more accurate definitions. New scholarly grammars, dictionaries, and anthologies of texts grew out of these developments. Besides these matters is the simple fact that the English language continually changes so that what is understandable at one period becomes less so at a later one.

Translation theory became a factor in Bible translation in the last half of the 20th century. The extremes are paraphrase and a “wooden” word-for-word literalism. Between the extremes, one choice is “formal equivalence,” where the objective is to find a formal equivalent for the words of the text being translated. Supporters of this method suggest that it is necessary in order for the reader to know what Scripture says, and some see theological implications that, if the words of Scripture are the words of God, they should not be modified in translation more than is unavoidable. All translations may involve some interpretation, but interpretation is not the work of the translator. Another choice is “dynamic equivalence,” where the priority is to communicate effectively the thoughts of the text being translated. Supporters of this view suggest that translation should communicate with the reader as effectively as the original did with its readers, and that translating “meaning for meaning” is necessary to accomplish this. Most of the previous translations were formal equivalence, including the King James, American Standard, and Revised Standard. Several recent translations fall into each category. Notably, the New English Bible (NEB, 1961) and its revision, the Revised English Bible (REB, 1989), the New International Version (NIV, 1978), the Good News Bible (GNB, 1976), the Jerusalem Bible (JB, 1966), and its thorough revision, the New Jerusalem Bible (NJB, 1985), and the New Living Translation (NLT, 1996) are dynamic equivalence. The New American Standard Bible (NASB, 1971) and its significant revision, the New American Standard Bible, Updated Edition (NASU, 1995), the King James II (KJ II, 1971), the New King James Version (NKJV, 1982), and the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV, 1989) are formal equivalence.

The first half of the 20th century saw a spate of translations which abandoned the effort to revise the KJV and attempted to reflect new trends, each from its own viewpoint. They had a limited vogue in some circles while being criticized in others. Some were works of groups while others were prepared by one person; none seriously threatened the dominance of the KJV.

The Revised Standard Version, with its NT ready in 1946 and the complete Bible in 1952, bore the brunt of criticism of modern translations because it was the first serious challenge after 1901 to the long dominance of the KJV. It retained the Old English forms in liturgical and poetic passages, as well as using Old English pronouns when deity is addressed. Eventually an edition was issued with modifications to make it acceptable for use by Greek Orthodox and Roman Catholics which is called the “Common Bible.”

The New Revised Standard Version appeared in 1989. Chaired by Bruce Metzger, the translators sought to preserve all that is best in the English Bible and to make the language as accurate and clear as possible. Significantly different from the RSV, the NRSV removed archaic pronouns and is both dignified and lucid. It is sanctioned for public and private reading by the National Council of Churches.

The British have prepared the New English Bible (1970) which represents certain trends in British biblical scholarship. The American reader will see differences between British English and American English. A revision, the Revised English Bible (1989), is strongly oriented to dynamic equivalence in translation and retains many British colloquialisms, as did its predecessor.

Roman Catholics issued the Jerusalem Bible, which with its notes is used both in and out of Catholic circles. In 1985, a thorough revision, the New Jerusalem Bible, was published. Even more fluid and readable than its predecessor, it is widely used. Of more widespread influence is the New American Bible (1970) which was used in preparing the English version of the liturgy of the Roman church. While making some concessions, its notes support Catholic doctrine.

The Jewish community has produced the New Jewish Publication Society translation Tanakh (1962–1982). This translation follows the Masoretic Text for the most part, is very readable, and is among the best translations of the Hebrew Bible.

The Living Bible (1971, LB), by Kenneth N. Taylor, is a paraphrase of the Bible, based on the American Standard Version (1901, ASV). Extremely popular in its early years, but of uneven quality, it has been much criticized. Dr. Taylor freely admits that it is not a substitute for Bible translations. Its successor is a dynamic equivalence translation from the original languages, The New Living Translation (1996, NLT), with a dual goal of reliability and readability. The NLT is the product of a large group of transdenominational scholars and leans toward inclusive language.

Those who prefer literal translation found their representatives in the New American Standard Bible (NASB) prepared by the Lockman Foundation (1971). An attempt to give the ASV new life, this effort removes many archaisms from the ASV; it reflects different judgments on textual questions from the ASV, and it places words not represented in the original text but added by the translators for clarity in italics, as did the King James Version. The NASB was significantly revised in the New American Standard Bible, Updated Edition (1995, NASU). Archaic pronouns are removed and readability is greatly enhanced without sacrificing accuracy. The NASU removes many of the common objections to the NASB and is without competitors as the most accurate English translation of the Bible. An effort to preserve as much of the old as possible is the New King James Bible (1982). This is a “halfway house” for those who know that something needs to replace the KJV but who are not willing to have a translation which represents the current state of knowledge and uses current language.

An effort to meet the needs of those who have English as a second language or those who have a limited knowledge of English is Today’s English Version (TEV), also known as the Good News Bible (1976). Recasting of language, consolidation of statements, and paraphrasing have all been employed in the effort to make the message simple enough to be grasped by the reader.

The New International Version was issued in 1978 by the International Bible Society from a cooperative project in which more than 110 scholars representing 34 religious groups participated. Abandoning any effort to revise the KJV line of Bibles, the NIV is a new translation aiming at accuracy, clarity, and dignity. It attempts to steer a middle course between literalness and paraphrase while attaining a contemporary style for the English reader but does not always succeed, leaning heavily toward dynamic equivalence and containing many colloquialisms.

The NT of a new translation, the Holman Christian Standard Bible, was published in 2000. The OT is due in 2004. This translation strives for “optimal equivalence,” using formal equivalence except when a formal equivalent cannot be easily understood, in those cases leaning toward a dynamic equivalent. Translated from the critical texts of the OT and NT, it is lucid, dignified, faithful to God’s word, and accurate. Wide distribution indicates it is quite popular. The HCSB answers many of the common objections to formal equivalence translations.

The ESV, English Standard Version, is essentially a literal translation published in 2001. It emphasizes “word-for-word correspondence” but also readability. It is designed for personal reading and in-depth study as well as Scripture memorization and public worship.

Eugene Peterson has completed his translation of The Message (2002). It is a contemporary language paraphrase designed to express a personal message to the reader. It is an outgrowth of his work as a pastor. It is not designed to replace the more literal translations but is for the new believer and those who need a more modern slant to enhance their understanding.

Jack P. Lewis and Charles W. Draper

Charles W. Draper with Lewis Jack P., “Bible Translations,” ed. Chad Brand et al., Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary (Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers, 2003), 214–216.

The Bible’s Preservation

A ninth reason for believing the Bible to be the Word of God is its extraordinary preservation down through the centuries of Old Testament and church history. Today, after the Bible has been translated in part or whole into hundreds of languages, some with multiple versions, and after millions of copies of the sacred text have been printed and distributed, it would be a nearly impossible feat to destroy the Bible. But these conditions did not always prevail.

Until the time of the Reformation the biblical text was preserved by the laborious and time-consuming process of copying it over and over again by hand, at first onto papyrus sheets and then onto parchments. Throughout much of this time the Bible was an object of extreme hatred by many in authority. They tried to stamp it out. In the early days of the church, Celsus, Porphyry and Lucian tried to destroy it by arguments. Later the emperors Diocletian and Julian tried to destroy it by force. At several points it was actually a capital offense to possess a copy of parts of Holy Writ. Yet the text survived.

If the Bible had been only the thoughts and work of human beings, it would have been eliminated long ago in the face of such opposition, as other books have been. But it has endured, fulfilling the words of Jesus, who said, “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away” (Mt. 24:35).

James Montgomery Boice, Foundations of the Christian Faith: A Comprehensive & Readable Theology (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1986), 63–64.