Is the Bible you have today, the absolute Word of God? Literalists, those who believe a person is to interpret every word of the Bible, exactly the way it is written, either ignore the fact or else are ignorant of the fact that words change meanings in a relatively short period of time. They are also elevating the work of a biased clerk translator, equating him/her and his work to the same level of validity and authenticity to that of a prophet. Add to that fact that the Bible has been translated thousands of times, you therefore have thousands of anonymous people on an equal footing with that of the prophets. In deed, a very naïve notion but those who agree with the literalists, read on and be prepared to concede John the Baptist was a homosexual for those are not my words but the translator's interpretation of Christ's words, who literalists have elevated to the same stature of Christ and the ancient prophets.

I have shown in "Was John the Baptist Homosexual" that either the word "malakos" was mistranslated equating it "homosexual" in 1 Corinthians 6:9,

1 Corinthians 6:9
9 ¶ Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind (malakos),"

while in the words of Christ's regarding John the Baptist, the word "malakos" was translated as "soft" in Matthew 11:8 and Luke 7:25,

Matthew 11:8
8 But what went ye out for to see? A man clothed in soft raiment? behold, they that wear soft [clothing] are in kings' houses.

Luke 7:25
25 But what went ye out for to see? A man clothed in soft raiment? Behold, they which are gorgeously apparelled (sic), and live delicately, are in kings' courts.

The fundamental literalists would die if they had to accept the translation of "malakos" in 1 Corinthians 6:9 as meaning "homosexual" equating it as the valid translation of the word "malakos" in all cases. In both instances, if they had to translate the word the same way, they would have to admit that either 1 Corinthians 6:9 says nothing about homosexuality or that Christ said that John the Baptist was a homosexual in Matthew 11:8 and Luke 7:25.

But, lets examine other passages. In Proverbs 30:5&6, we read,

Proverbs 30:5-6
5 Every word of God [is] pure: he [is] a shield unto them that put their trust in him.

6 Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.

In the Book of Revelations, the Apostle John on the Isle of Patmos received and wrote the Book of Revelations issuing the following warning,

Revelation 22:18-19
18 For I testify unto every man that heareth (sic) the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and [from] the things which are written in this book.

However, we know there are missing scripture. In the King James translation of the Bible, there are at least 15 Books referenced which do not exist. In the Catholic Bible, there are an additional 7 or 8 Books that aren't a part of the King James version. Did the Catholics add to the Scripture in the Bible or is the King James version missing 22 or 23 Books and the Catholic Bible missing 15 Books?

Is every word in the Bible translated correctly? What is really God's word? What did God really say in the following scriptures?

Isaiah 36:12

12 But Rabshakeh said, Hath my master sent me to thy master and to thee to speak these words? [hath he] not [sent me] to the men that sit upon the wall, that they may eat their own dung, and drink their own piss with you?

"That they may eat their own dung, and drink their own piss with you?" Is this pornographic?

2 Kings 18:27

27 But Rabshakeh said unto them, Hath my master sent me to thy master, and to thee, to speak these words? [hath he] not [sent me] to the men which sit on the wall, that they may eat their own dung, and drink their own piss with you?

"That they may eat their own dung, and drink their own piss with you?" Is this pornographic?

Deuteronomy 28:53

53 And thou shalt eat the fruit of thine own body, the flesh of thy sons and of thy daughters, which the LORD thy God hath given thee, in the siege, and in the straitness (sic), wherewith thine enemies shall distress thee:

"And thou shalt eat the fruit of thine own body, the flesh of thy sons and of thy daughters,...."

Deuteronomy 25:11-12

11 When men strive together one with another, and the wife of the one draweth near for to deliver her husband out of the hand of him that smiteth (sic) him, and putteth (sic) forth her hand, and taketh him by the secrets:

The word "secrets" means testicles or buttocks! She is to put forth her hand and took him by the balls (testicles) or ass! Really... then what? Sounds a little kinky!

 
Deuteronomy 23:1

1 ¶ He that is wounded in the stones, or hath his privy member cut off, shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD.

One who is ruptured in the testicles or has his penis cut off, can not enter into the congregation of the LORD. Does this condemn the person kicked in the testicles by a horse, to the same fate as the transsexual.

1 Samuel 5:9

9 And it was [so], that, after they had carried it about, the hand of the LORD was against the city with a very great destruction: and he smote the men of the city, both small and great, and they had emerods in their secret parts.

God smote the men of the city with hemorrhoids or bleeding piles

1 Samuel 6:4

4 Then said they, What [shall be] the trespass offering which we shall return to him? They answered, Five golden emerods, and five golden mice, [according to] the number of the lords of the Philistines: for one plague [was] on you all, and on your lords.

"The trespass offering" is "five golden (hemorrhoids) and five golden mice." Who is making golden images of hemorrhoids?

Malachi 2:3
3 Behold, I will corrupt your seed, and spread dung upon your faces, [even] the dung of your solemn feasts; and [one] shall take you away with it.

Sounds like a kinky sex trip of sadomasochistic bondage and disciple people!

I'm, personally, very happy Christ fulfilled the Law of Moses and gave us the Gospel of Jesus Christ. But there is a lot of people who, like the Jews, have nostalgia for the old Law and won't let Christ fulfilled the ancient Law of Moses or the words of the prophets! To those people I say, "You want the law! You have the law and you will be held accountable to it, not the Gospel of Jesus Christ!
 
 

Return to: Journals of Discourses

Return to: Literature Index Page

Return to: THE MILLENNIAL DISPENSATION's Home Page