Category Archives: Bible

Protestant Bibles Could No Longer Be Distributed

More food for thought considering Rome’s involvement in producing modern, critical-text translations of the Bible:

Nino Lo Bello, The Vatican Empire, “The Lateran Treaty V:”

The 1929 treaty was actually a unity of three separate agreements: the Lateran Pact, which provided for the creation of the new State of Vatican City; the Financial Convention, which granted payments to the Church for the loss of its temporal powers; and the Concordat, which gave the Vatican powers and privileges to administer its own special affairs…

The Concordat also stipulated that Protestant Bibles could no longer be distributed in Italy, that evangelical meetings in private homes were forbidden, and that Catholicism was to be Italy’s official religion. Furthermore, religious teaching was to be extended into state schools and religion made a compulsory subject at the primary and secondary levels; Church-related educational institutions were to receive preferences over similar lay or state institutions. Finally, February 11 was named a national holiday to commemorate the signing of the treaty.

Read more:

A Jesuit on the Committee

Dr. Ken Matto, “Did Rome Give Us The Bible?:”

Let us bring the Greek manuscripts to today. The Hort and Westcott manuscripts are found today in the United Bible Societies Greek New Testament, the latest being the fourth revision and the Nestle Aland Novum Testamentum Graece which has had 27 revisions. Both of these underlie all the modern versions which means they are derivatives of the Roman Catholic manuscripts of Hort and Westcott.

On the editorial committees of each one is a man named Carlo Montini. Carlo Montini is a Jesuit Cardinal. This means that not only are the manuscripts Roman Catholic, there was even a Roman Catholic Jesuit on the Greek committees of both the Nestle-Aland and the United Bible Societies. This means that Rome has been heavily involved in the modern version movement since these manuscripts underlie all the modern versions.

Source and read more:

Bible Burning in the United States

Jehoiakim Burns the Word of God (Bible Card)

Jehoiakim Burns the Word of God

(Follow link below to see the original photograph accompanying this article)

Dowling’s History of Romanism:

“The following account of this sacrilegious outrage is from an official statement of facts, signed by four respectable citizens appointed as a committee for that purpose.

“‘About the middle of October, a Mr. Telmont, a missionary of the Jesuits, with one or more associates, came to Corbeau in this town, where the Catholic Church is located, and as they say in their own account given of their visit, ‘by the direction of the bishop of Montreal.’ On their arrival they commenced protracted meeting, which lasted several weeks, and great numbers of Catholics from this and the other towns of the county attended day after day. After the meeting had progressed several days, and the way was prepared for it, an order was issued requiring all who had bibles or testaments, to bring them in to the priest, or lay them at the feet of the missionaries. The requirement was generally complied with, and day after day bibles and testaments were carried in; and after a sufficient number was collected, they were burned. By the confession of Telmont, as appears from the affidavit of S. Hubbell, there were several burnings, but only one in public. On the 27th day of October, as given in testimony at the public meeting held there, Telmont, who was a prominent man in all the movements, brought out from the house of the resident priest, which is near the church, as many bibles as he could carry in his arms at three times, and placed them in a pile, in the open yard, and then set fire to them and burned them to ashes. This was done in open day, and in the presence of many spectators

“In the affidavit of S. Hubbell, Esq., above alluded to, who is a respectable lawyer of the place, it is stated that the President of the Bible Society, in company with Mr. Hubbell, waited upon the priests, and requested that inasmuch as the bibles had been given by benevolent societies, they should be returned to the donors and not destroyed; to which the Jesuit priest, perhaps with less cunning than usually belongs to his order, coolly replied, that ‘they had burned all they had received, and intended to burn all they could get.”

See the entire original:

Rome’s Attack Predated the Enlightenment

Jerusalem Blade:

Where, in the post-Reformation centuries, does heterodoxy originate? With the relinquishing of the doctrine of the Bible’s inspiration by God, and then in a cascading loss of faith in biblical infallibility / inerrancy, or, on the other hand, with a rationalistic approach to textual studies, or from other factors, and possibly a combination of these and many others? Or, as you surmise, it primarily comes from the fountainhead of Enlightenment philosophy?

Rome did indeed seek to undermine the Reformation’s dependence on the Scripture alone, and through them by faith alone in Christ alone. They sought to execute this work of undermining by bringing forth variants from other manuscripts in the Vatican library that the Reformers eschewed as being unreliable, and also by seeking to attack their Hebrew Scriptures over the issue of the vowel points. For the Catholics their Tradition was above the Bible, and the church had – they said – given birth to the Bible. The Reformer’s view of the authority of God’s word in the Bible was a lethal attack on the very foundations of Rome.

I think Rome’s attack on the texts predated the full bloom of the Enlightenment by perhaps a little less than a century. Richard Simon (1638-1712), a Catholic scholar, is considered by Metzger as perhaps the father of textual criticism – highly critical of the Bible (OT & New) in the vein of Metzger. But then John Mill (1645-1708) brought Enlightenment / rationalistic thought to bear upon the Bible, and he is considered one of the very first textual critics in the modern sense of the term. So yes, the spirit of the age – the philosophy of the Enlightenment – in which reason was held to be the primary source and legitimacy for authority, was the immediate genesis of the heterodoxy that would come to fruition in the church in centuries to follow.

This development of textual criticism according to rationalistic principles – as opposed to the faith principles of the Reformers – would naturally result in views antagonistic to the Reformation churches’ stand on divine inspiration and God’s providential preservation of the Scriptures.

Source and read more:, Comment 6

A Torpedo in the Hold: Roman Catholic Involvement in the Text-Critical Industry

Jerusalem Blade from the Puritan Board:

Now we get to a different aspect of the matter. One that is not often brought into the discussion. E.R., to answer you directly, No, I do not charge or insinuate “non-KJV users with Roman Catholic tendencies”! However—and it’s a big “however”—many Reformed folks may simply be unaware of Roman Catholic involvement in the text-critical industry.

For instance, it does not inspire confidence in Reformed persons that the publishers of the Critical Text, the United Bible Societies, unabashedly serve the Vatican and the Pope, of whom UBS General Secretary Michael Perreau said,

“Pope Francis embodies several ‘first ever’ aspects: he’s the first Jesuit pope, the first Latin American pope, and the first to choose St Francis of Assisi as the patron of his papacy. He combines modesty, not least in his lifestyle, with fervent engagement for the poor, and traditional Catholic theology with courageous advocacy for human rights.

“He is a man of the universal church with an ecumenical spirit and he is a pastor, who knows the reality of ‘simple’ people. The new Pope is a truly biblical person whose faith and actions are deeply rooted in the Bible and inspired by the Word of God.”

“As a long-time friend of the Bible Societies Pope Francis knows that our raison d’être is the call to collaborate in the incarnation of our Christian faith,” says Mr Perreau. “We assure Pope Francis of our renewed availability to serve the Catholic Church in her endeavours to make the Word of God the centre of new evangelisation.”

And further, the Nestle-Aland Greek NT 27th Ed. page 45 clearly states that,

The text shared by these two editions was adopted internationally by Bible Societies, and following an agreement between the Vatican and the United Bible Societies it has served as the basis for new translations and for revisions made under their supervision. This marks a significant step with regard to interconfessional relationships. It should naturally be understood that this text is a working text (in the sense of the century-long Nestle tradition): it is not to be considered as definitive, but as a stimulus to further efforts toward defining and verifying the text of the New Testament. For many reasons, however, the present edition has not been deemed an appropriate occasion for introducing textual changes. [Emphasis added]​

Source document:

Nestle-Aland Greek NT 27th Ed[​IMG] by Steve R., on Flickr

What amazes me is that good Reformed souls can fall for the Roman assault on Sola Scriptura through their prize MSS (the “Queen of the Uncials” Vaticanus is called), which is the main exemplar and basis of the Greek Critical Text, throwing into disarray the defense of the Reformation. Is it not evident? The textual conflicts among the Reformed—indeed, the entire Protestant camp—derive from the Catholic assault against Sola Scriptura via the variant-laden manuscripts they have for a long while, to this very day, promoted as the superior “neutral” text, or the superior eclectic text. Their agenda? Furthering “interconfessional relationships… under their [the Vatican’s] supervision”. What am I saying? That, in large measure, Rome has defeated the Reformation’s stand. The loss of the Reformation’s Bibles in lieu of the plethora of Critical Text Bibles—which foment the discord and confusion we see here even in this very thread—has weakened the faith in a sure and reliable word of God.

I’m not making this stuff up. If the UBS-Papal union and collaboration does not convince you, I don’t know what will. Yes, some good and scholarly men (and women) believe the CT the superior text despite the Roman connection; well and good. It remains that Rome’s agenda has succeeded: the doctrine of Sola Scriptura as the Reformation’s foundation has been destroyed. We are in disarray.

Oh, it may seem we are thriving, and individual churches (and individual souls) may seem to be so, for the time, but the Reformation ship has taken a torpedo in the hold, and the leak cannot be mended.

Some may decry what has happened, and call for folks to return to the Reformation’s textual standard, but the hole is too big. The lifeboats of local churches remain. May God our Shepherd (to change metaphors) guide us to Celestial City, using skilled and godly pastors who with wisdom take His direction.

I believe, as an amillennial proponent, that the eschaton draws near, with the preliminary judgments, catastrophes, and apostatizing, and then the global turning against the saints before His return. How long? I do not know.

This is why I hold up the Reformation Bibles: a sure word of God is our strength, and the standard of the Spirit of the LORD when the enemy comes in like a flood (Isa 59:19-21).

Source:, Comment 10

Falsifying the Text

Two people interrupted while reading the "forbidden book" (t Wellcome V0048174

Larry Brigden on Rome’s current support for the Critical Text and the United Bible Societies:

“Whenever in the past Rome could not ‘altogether prevent the Holy Scriptures from being translated and circulated, she has made no scruple of falsifying the text’.[2]  Hence, the use of the corrupt Critical Text by the United Bible Societies is consistent with Rome’s purposes, and she will consequently lend support to such a work.  On the other hand, if the Received Text were to be used, Rome would doubtless take a different view.”

[2] T.H. Horne and W.E. Painter, Popery, the Enemy and Falsifier of the Scripture (London, England: William Edward Painter, 1844), p. 4.

Bridgen backs up this latter statement with the fact that Rome has never published any Bible translated from the Masoretic and Received texts.

Source: Trinitarian Bible Society, Quarterly Record Issue Number: 620 – July to September 2017, 186th Annual Report for the year ending 31 December 2016, pages 41-42.

The Majority Text Has Always Been The Text of the Church

The Identity of the New Testament Text II by Wilbur N. Pickering, ThM PhD, Chapter 5:

840703_53305433In his book Aland’s discussion of the transmission of the NT text is permeated with the assumption that the Byzantine text was a secondary development that progressively contaminated the pure Egyptian (“Alexandrian”) text. But the chief “Alexandrian” witnesses, B, A (except e) and À (The Text, p. 107), are in constant and significant disagreement among themselves; so much so that there is no objective way of reconstructing an archetype. 150 years earlier the picture is the same; P45, P66 and P75 are quite dissimilar and do not reflect a single tradition. In A.D. 200 “there was no king in [Egypt]; everyone did what was right in his own eyes,” or so it would seem. But what if we were to entertain the hypothesis that the Byzantine tradition is the oldest and that the “Western” and “Alexandrian” MSS represent varying perturbations on the fringes of the main transmissional stream? Would this not make better sense of the surviving evidence? Then there would have been no “Western” or “Egyptian” archetypes, just various sources of contamination that acted in such a random fashion that each extant “Western” or “Egyptian” MS has a different ‘mosaic’. In contrast, there would indeed be a “Byzantine” archetype, which would reflect the original. In fact, virtually perfect exemplars exist in our day, as illustrated by 1841 for the pauline corpus and 424 for the general epistles.

Aland seems to grant that down through the centuries of church history the Byzantine text was regarded as “the text of the church”, and he traces the beginning of this state of affairs to Lucian.[49] He makes repeated mention of a “school of/at Antioch” and of Asia Minor. All of this is very interesting, because in his book he agrees with Adolf Harnack that “about 180 the greatest concentration of churches was in Asia Minor and along the Aegean coast of Greece”.[50] This is the area where Greek was the mother tongue and where Greek continued to be used. It is also the area that started out with most of the Autographs. But Aland continues: “Even around A.D. 325 the scene was still largely unchanged. Asia Minor continued to be the heartland of the Church.” “The heartland of the Church”—so who else would be in a better position to identify the correct text of the New Testament? Who could ‘sell’ a fabricated text in Asia Minor in the early fourth century? I submit that the Byzantine text dominated the transmissional history because the churches in Asia Minor vouched for it. And they did so, from the very beginning, because they knew it was the true text, having received it from the Apostles. The Majority Text is what it is just because it has always been the Text of the Church.

Read more:

Read the whole book here:

Would You Burn Your Bible?

Regeneration, Repentance and Reformation:

840703_53305433Margaret Pierrone, a martyr of the sixteenth century, resided in the village of Cambray…

She was accused by a wicked female servant, to the Jesuits, because she had not been for many years at the mass, and had kept in her house a Bible, the reading of which was her whole delight. The magistrates being informed of it, caused her to be apprehended…

Read more:

Rome on the Bible

Via James Japan:

1128054_83020496BANNEDI like to expose the enemy with his own words.

(Rev.) Dr. Cahill declared that “he would rather the Catholic should read the worst books of immorality than the Protestant Bible-that forgery of God’s Word, that slander of Christ.” – (Roman Catholic Tablet, December 17, 1853, p. 804).

“Do you allow your flock to read the Bible at all?” said a writer in the Contemporary Review to a friend of his, a parish priest. “No, sir, I do not; you forget that I am a physician, not a poisoner of souls.” -Contemporary Review April, 1894, p. 576.

“The doctrines of the Catholic Church are entirely independent of Holy Scripture.” Familiar Explanation of Catholic Doctrine, Rev. M. Muller, p.151.

Read more:

Problems with the NKJV

The Sound of an Alarm:

This is a synopsis of a sermon preached in Newtownabbey Free Presbyterian Church in March 2010
 New King James Version (1982)2 Corinthians 2 v 17: For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ. 

One of the many strategies that the devil employs against the Lord and His truth is his attempt to corrupt the Word of God. It has always been the devil’s desire to corrupt God’s truth. When he tempted Eve we see that strategy in operation:
[1] He first cast ‘doubt’ on the Word of God: Yea hath God said Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? Genesis 3:1;
[2] Next he ‘contradicted’ the Word of God: Ye shall not surely die, v4;
[3] He then ‘denied’ the Word of God: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil, v5.

The devil has never left off that mode of operating against the truth of God. Sadly, when viewed from a purely human perspective it has to be acknowledged that his strategy seems quite successful. A corrupt Bible can do a great deal of harm and there are many of them about today!