Chapter 17
                                  Which Bible
                                      III

    Which bible?  At one point in my life, I was an active member of a
fundamental independent church.  I won't mention the denomination, as that
really doesn't matter.  During this time, the preacher had a series on the
theme 'which bible'.  He presented a lot of verses to support his belief that
the King James version was the only version and all other versions were
perversions.  Central to his discussions were the arguments of and between
Ruckman and Dollar.  Also, cited were 'God Only Wrote One Bible' by Jasper
James Ray, and 'The Revision Revised' by D. J. W.  Burgon, which was in answer
to the Greek text and theories of Westcott and Hort.  He attacked the 'oldest
manuscripts' ( in the preacher's words the Alexandrus, Vaticanus and the
Sinaiticus ) as being invented in the Vatican by 'atheists'.  Among those he
labled as such, were Origen, Westcott and Hort.  The series ran over six
weeks, and his unanswered claims were very convincing.  In the emotion of the
sermons, I became convinced and a strong defender of the King James version
and a detractor of other versions, but not totally a Ruckmanite.
    Less than a year after this, we had to move to another town and return to
one of our previous churches, less militant but of the same denomination.
This church was in the process of a pastor search, and the ultimately
successful candidate had offered to meet privately with members of the
congregation to answer questions.  My wife and I accepted his offer, and posed
several questions to him.  One of them was, how he stood on which bible.  His
response was that he preferred the King James version.  All his answers fit
the mold that we were looking to fill, so we voted for him.  Immediately after
being voted in, his next three Sunday evening sermons were aimed at the
militant ideas that he had led us to believe he supported.  He even stated
that he could lead someone to the Lord with the Douay version of the bible!
In our pharasean state we left the church for other pastures.
    At our next church, the pastor preached heart attitude.  He tolerated our

                                                       135
_______________________________________________________________________________

militance.  We were continuing to attempt to set anyone straight who saw fit
to use any corrupted version, that is to say any version other than King
James.  One day at a Christian book store, I was attempting to set the owner
straight, when I noticed the combination of hurt and anger in her eyes.  This
bothered me, and the image of the hurt that I had caused began to haunt me.
And then the light came on.
    In Genesis 3:1 it says "Now the serpent was more subtil than any of the
beasts of the field...".  How deceptive can Satan be?  Very!  It appeared to
me that very early in the development of the written record that we have,
which we call the Bible, Satan whispered to the scribes and copyists.  These
whisperings made each copy slightly different.  Then he sat back and left the
rest up to man, to lose sight of the main purpose of the gospel while
quibbling over semantics, interpretations and styles.  My dilemma now became,
again, which Bible?  Even in more tolerant churches that allowed NIV, KJV,
NKJV, ERV, ASV, NEB, RSV, NASV, etc., they still drew a line.  This line fell
more along the lines of accepted canon.  What is canon but a decision by men
on what should be accepted as the inspired word of God that was meant for
congregational use, in use at the time of the decision, with all other either
not extant or determined by those men to be frivolous in one way or another.
But this line was drawn by men.  Could they have been misdirected by Satan in
the same way, causing further divisions?  As you might have already seen I am
talking about, among other things, the inclusion or lack of inclusion of the
apocryhal writings, which are included in the 1609 Douay version at Rheims,
but not accepted by the people of Israel or most Protestants.  Again a broad
gulf lies between each, and yet the Holy Spirit can and will be an excellent
bridge between each.  If only we could listen to a passage of scripture which
is common, I believe, in all versions: Proverbs 3:5-6 says, "Trust in the Lord
with all thine heart; and lean not on thine own understanding.  In all thy
ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths.".  If we would only
?prayerfully enter each study, I am satisfied that God is faithful and true and

                                                             136
________________________________________________________________________________
Home