Matthew 27:9-10 reads,
"Then was fulfilled what had been said through Jeremiah the prophet, 'And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the value of a man with a price on his head, a price set by some of the Israelites, and they paid it out for the potter's field just as the Lord had commanded me."
The incontrovertible fact is there is no such passage in Jeremiah.
To assume the Bible contains all of what God revealed to man and word for words as God revealed it to man is extremely naive. It is saying man was able to preserve, collect and compile into one volume, everything that God revealed to man. That naive claim limits God's power and contradicts God's word that He CREATED ALL man, and LOVES ALL man UNCONDITIONALLY. That doctrine claims that God only cared for a small portion of Abraham's descendants. That naive claim says that God did not and still does not care about the millions of people living in the Orient, the millions of people living in India or Pakistan, the millions of Arabs in the middle east who are the brothers and cousins of the Israelis. Instead, these people believe that God chose only a small band of twelve brothers through whom to communicate His will to mankind and hoped to hell everyone else heard about it. Sure, I can imagine God thinking, "Well, if not, no biggy!" These people contradict the very essence of God.
Where is the original Bible from which these literalists their information and proof? The fact is, no one has a copy of the original bible! The Bible was translated thousands of times by thousands of people and flunkies who had their own agenda.
[Case in point: King Constantine's contribution to Christianity. King Constantine was the Nobel Prize winner who astutely pronounced, after being jilted by his berdache, "It is a scientific fact that homosexuality causes earthquakes." Constantinople, the capital of Christianity for a couple centuries until about 600 A.D., after Muhammad had studied Catholic Christianity in Constantinople, he greatly like the city. Shortly thereafter, after receiving his first revelation and founding Islam, Constantinople was conquered by the Muslim Turks who wanted to conquer Catholic Christianity. Constantinople is today called Istanbul, Turkey. Christianity then rapidly moved to Rome, Italy (built on seven hills) which was the Great Babylon of that era, (see Rev. 17:9)]
Catholics have an additional 7 or 12 more texts to their bible than
other Christians. Are they guilty of "adding to the Bible" or are Protestants
guilty of taking away from the Bible. The fact is, not even the Catholics
are missing some scriptures. There are about 10 texts referenced in the
Bible which even the Catholics do not have! Strange! Especially in view
of the fact that most Christians believe the Bible is the "infallible Word
of God," why does the majority of Christendom lack, a minimum of at least
twenty books?
If Christendom had everything that God ever said, the Christian World would know definitively, the answers to many many questions and man would not have to live by faith. That was The Son of the Morning's, Lucifer's or Satan's Plan for which there was a war in heaven. Satan and about one-third of our brothers and sisters, in the spirit, were cast out of heaven and condemned to be fallen angles of Stan, and the deceivers of this man!
For the literalists who believe the Bible is the infallible word of God, the King James Version also shows,
Zechariah 11:9
9 Then said I, I will not feed you: that that (sic) dieth (sic), let it die; and that that (Sic) is to be cut off, let it be cut off; and let the rest eat every one the flesh of another.
However, The New American Standard Version says,
Zechariah 11:9
Then I said, "I will not pasture you. What is to die, let it die, and what is to be annihilated, let it be annihilated; and let those who are left eat one another's (sic) flesh."
We'll ignore the cannibalism! Are the literalists saying that the
double pronoun, "that that" is currently grammatically correct or was grammatically
correct when revealed? If it was never grammatically correct in any language,
are the literalists saying that God was telling man that it should be so
or are they saying God was wrong? Did man record what God said wrong? Better
still, are they willing to admit that man, the translator, goofed? Even
if only a very innocent mistake, which other scriptures are the literalists
admitting were botched by some, albeit well meaning but incompetent clerk?
Or was it even the result of a clerk? Wasn't it the most learned people
of that day?
The compilers of the New American Standard Version apparently found some documentation somewhere that says God did not say, "'that that' dieth, let it die," but rather according to the NASV He -- or was it he -- said, "What is to die, let it die." Which version are we to believe? The NASV the KJV? You can't have two different versions be "the infallible Word of God." What did God actually say?
The King James Version first published in 1611, wasn't even the first English translation. The First Calvin English Translation was published in 1578. However, we don't have the Calvin Bible. For some reason it and the text the translators worked from are lost. Instead, we now have seven of nine English versions, (The Tyndale published in 1526 - lost), (The Calvin English Translation published in 1578 - lost) The King James Version published in 1611, The Daby Version published in 1890, The Young Literal Version published in 1898, The New American Standard Version published 1901, The Revised Standard Version published in 1952 and The New International Version published in 1973. Additionally, in how many languages is the Bible translated? They all have a different twist to the same scripture. Are they equally "The Literal Word of God?" If not, which version is the revealed word of God's?
Even The Young Literal Version is different? Since it is supposed to be the "literal version." Why, how and what was their source? Regarding Zechariah 11:9, The Young Literal Version says,
Zechariah 11:9
And I say, `I do not feed you, the dying, let die; and the cut off, let be cut off; and the remaining ones, let each eat the flesh of its neighbour (sic).'
Are the literalists saying the Young Literal Version is the right
version? In the New American Version it says,
"...and let those who are left eat one another's (sic) flesh,"
but in The Young Literal Version, it says,
"...and the remaining ones, let each eat the flesh of its neighbour (sic)."
I won't nit pick over the difference in meaning between "those who
are left" and "and the remaining ones," for all practical purposes, they
mean the same thing, however, I don't know for sure but logic tells me
there is at least a difference in the taste between one's "neighbour (sic)"
and anyone else's or "another's (sic) flesh" depending on who you are,
how you were raised, on what succulent morsels you were feed or where you
live. That's not even contesting the meaning of the scripture nor the applicability
to today's world and situations.
Apparently, God is not the same yesterday, today and forever because if we are to believe The Young Literal Translation, God said,
`...I do not feed you,'
however, in the KJV Matthew 6:25
25 ¶ Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment?
The undeniable, incontrovertible fact is, when one is dealing with
man, nothing is perfect. That's as it should be and according to the plan
of God. If it were perfect and absolute, faith would not be required. There
would be no opinion, educated and off-the-wall theories nor hypotheses.
We would have the absolute truth for the asking and their would be no need
of the Holy Ghost. God's messenger would simply say, "Thus saith the Lord
God..." and that would end all discussion, debate and participation. There
would be no need take responsibility for our own actions as long as we
did what we were told because we would just be following orders. If you
rebelled against the order, you'd get so many months or years in reeducation
therapy. Like the communists, most would neither grow maturely, emotionally,
mentally or spiritually.
It is not so much the knowledge of the truth that is so vital and important,
and don't misunderstand, knowledge of the truth is very vitally important,
but even more important is what we do with our knowledge and the good or
harm we bring or cause our brothers and sisters in the process. Remember,
God will never say, "This is what you must do...," "This is the way you
must believe...," "This is what you must do." That was the Plan of Satan!
We chose the Plan of God, that's why we are here on earth! Satan and his
cohorts can't stand it!
David R.W. Wadsworth
Servant of the Most High God
El Santuario Escondido
10387 Tioga Lake Drive
Escondido, CA 92029-5405
(760) 743-5293
drww@themillennialdispensation.org
Return to: Journals of Discourses