Adventist Online

Bible Scholar Loses Voice on the John Ankerberg TV Show
You can call it pure justice, a sign from God, or whatever you want, but eyebrows were sure raised recently during the tapings for Christian TV's The John Ankerberg Show.Ankerberg, a bitter opponent of the King James Bible, had wanted to do a series of TV programs in which the heads of the new version translation committees — the NIV, RSV, NASV, NKJV, etc.— would debate King James Bible advocates.

Afraid that the King James people would get the upper hand and win the debate, Ankerberg attempted to "stack the deck." He invited five new version scholars but only three King James advocates. Since Ankerberg is himself a fervent promoter of the NIV and other false versions, that made the odds six to three. But the three King James men — Dr. Joseph Chambers, Dr. Samuel Gipp, and Dr. Thomas Strouse, weren't deterred by the odds. They accepted John Ankerberg's invitation anyway so that they could get out their vital and important message — that the King James Bible is the only trustworthy, accurate, scholarly, and whole Bible available in the world!

The John Ankerberg programs are taped in advance in Chattanooga, Tennessee, and then shown later to a national TV audience. For the Bible version debate, eight shows were taped. However, on one of these shows, Ankerberg and the new Bible version people were forced to call an abrupt halt right in the midst of the taping.

It happened when Ankerberg asked Dr. Don Wilkins, of the New American Standard Version translation committee, a key question. Is it true, asked Ankerberg, as Gail Riplinger reported in her bestselling book, New Age Bible Versions, that a number of the scholars who worked on the new translation committees lost their voice as punishment by God?

As the TV cameras captured the moment, Dr. Wilkins opened his mouth to answer— and nothing came out! No sound! Wilkins kept trying to clear his throat, but he couldn't respond. Ankerberg and the other new version scholars were visibly startled. Finally, an embarrassed and frightened Wilkins was able to screech out in a cracking, almost inaudible manner, "I... I've... lost... my voice!"

A shocked John Ankerberg ordered the cameras to stop and back up, whereupon Dr. Joseph Chambers, a King James only advocate, politely protested. "The cameras should record exactly what happened here," Chambers insisted.

But Ankerberg was hearing none of it. After a brief delay, the TV cameras began to roll again, after the amazing segment of Dr. Wilkins losing his voice had conveniently been excised!

But our miraculous God wasn't through yet. Ankerberg had taped eight programs in all, but after broadcasting only two of them, he pulled the others off the air and refused to continue the series. When we called his office to ask why, we were pointedly told that it was because the series was a financial flop. When the first two of the eight programs aired, people did not send in enough contributions. In other words, Ankerberg claims that the series wasn't making enough money!

I watched one of the two programs that did air, however, and I believe there is another, quite different reason why Ankerberg and the false new version folks decided to pull the remainder. At one point, the new version "scholars" were clearly frustrated when Dr. Chambers asked them why, an astounding 46 times in the NIV, the title of "Master" for our Lord Jesus had been changed to "teacher!" Obviously, there is a vast difference between one who is our Master and one who is a mere "teacher."

Such poignant episodes as this make me doubt Ankerberg's rationale as to why he quickly jerked the remaining programs from the broadcast schedule. If, as he claims, Ankerberg pulled the series because he wasn't bringing in enough money, what does that tell us about his "ministry?" Is John Ankerberg in it only for the money? Is filthy lucre the sole measure for the programs he airs — or doesn't air? -FLASHPOINT: A Newsletter Ministry, October (Vol. 95-10) p.3



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bible Reading and Personal Outlook
Carol Eisenberg
November 10, 2001

For more than 1,000 years, the Bible has been the most widely read and circulated book in history, influencing the development of language, literature and culture.

Now, a Christian publishing house says it has scientific evidence that reading the Bible promotes a positive outlook.

According to a July study that the publisher commissioned from the Barna Research Group, an independent marketing research company in Southern California:

82 percent of regular Bible readers described themselves as "at peace," versus 58 percent of those who said they never read the Bible.

78 percent of regular Bible readers said they felt "happy" all or most of the time, versus 67 percent of nonreaders.

68 percent of regular Bible readers said they were "full of joy," versus 44 percent who said they never read the Bible.

The study was paid for by Tyndale House Publishers, a Carol Stream, Ill., company that sells Bibles as well as books related to Christian themes. "We had a reputable company do it," said spokeswoman Pamela Finch. "The results are absolutely credible."

Data supplied by Barna Research says the study was based on 1,004 television interviews conducted among a sample of adults selected to reflect the nation's regional and ethnic makeup, and had a sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points.

Particularly in the wake of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, Finch said the study suggests that Bible-reading should be a resource, no less than counseling or medication, in coping with anxiety and depression.

The study also found that 81 percent of regular Bible readers said they were satisfied with life in general, versus 63 percent of those who don't read the Bible. Ninety-four percent of regular Bible readers believe that life has a clear purpose and meaning, versus 76 percent of nonreaders. -Copyright (c) 2001, Newsday, Inc.
--------------------

This article originally appeared at:
http://www.newsday.com/features/religion/ny-onfaith2457636nov10.story

Views: 222

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

The King James Version was greatly tampered with at 1 John 5: 7. There is absolutely no good evidence for that verse to read the way it does in the KJV. There is not a single ancient Greek manuscript that has that verse, and even the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary admits that the original manuscript did not contain it.

The KJV is a beautiful translation and one of my favorites, but the fact is that it was based on only a handful of fairly late manuscripts, none of which date before the 9th century AD.

The NASB, the NIV, and the NRSV give that verse the way the original read: "There are three witnesses."

The passage is absent from every known Greek manuscript except four, and these contain the passage in what appears to be a translation from a late recension of the Latin Vulgate. The four manuscripts are ms. 61, a sixteenth century manuscript formerly at Oxford, now at Dublin; manuscript 88, a twelfth century manuscript at Naples, which has the passage written in the margin by a modern hand; manuscript 629, a fourteenth or fifteenth century manuscript in the Vatican; and manuscript 635, an eleventh century manuscript which has the passage written in the margin by a seventeenth century hand.

The passage is not quoted by any of the Greek Fathers, who, had they known it, would most certainly have employed it in the Trinitarian controversies. Its first appearance in Greek is in a Greek version of the Acts of the Lateran Council of 1215.
Trying to promote a liberal version based upon one text is pure speculation. textual evidence does not support more than one word in the KJV. However, the KJV is based on the recieved text and represents the best version we have.
Satan has attacked the Bible in these new liberal versions in recent years and in most cases the words agree with liberal doctrines that do not represent the Word of God.
Those who love God's truth will do their best to rightly represent that truth.
I will dispute "greatly tampered with" even if the text does not belong there, it still agrees with the rest of the Bible. (KJV) You cannot say that about the hundreds of doctrinal changes in the NIV, as well as the endless omissions.
Detractors of the KJV never have any substantial solid evidence against it, only things that are of little value. No one is saying the KJV is perfect, but it is so much better than all the others, that there is no contest.
The online AKJV seems like a good version. To my knowledgs it has no doctrinal changes, and I do use it. It is the same as the KJV with only the archaic language changed. I've yet to see a word change that changes meaning.
Those who really care about truth, will get rid of liberal, false Bible versions..God has His hand over the KJV.
All versions have pros and cons. Different versions are needed for different uses.
i have to say the NIV is not a good version, and it leaves out texts and the KJV is the closer to the original translation of the bible, the KJV is the autherized version, the others i have to say are perversions. If people want to understand the word better they can get a concordance and ask for the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
I agree the KJV is the best, satan attacks through the liberal versions, but what about this statement, am I reading this correctly?

This [his NIV] shows the great error that is so prevalent today in some orthodox Protestant circles, namely the error that regernation depends upon faith . . . and that in order to be born again man must first accept Jesus as Savior.

I'm not so sure this is an error. We must be born again, acceptance includes confession of sin and repentance, which may not come all at once as John 3 says regarding the wind as the Holy Spirit. So one could first accept Him as saviour, then at some point, complete all the conditions form salvation. faith does apply:

Rom 5:1 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:
Gabriel, I am not surprised at the comment you just made. To be expected on account of your liberal views.

The modern translations were adapted to fit the "ecumenical" spirit to bring all people under the one universal catholic church.
Gabriel, you say you and your family left that church long time ago. There are many among us who have left that church a long time ago but have not left catholicism entirely. I really think you need to sink the shaft deeper into the truth. You need to study the Word with the Testimonies like never before.

How much do you know about the "ecumenical" movement?
You never heard about the "ecumenical" movement! You see what I mean Gabriel! Unless you have been an adventist for only a very short time, there is no excuse for you not knowing about the "ecumenical" movement. This movement is permeating all the churches today, Catholic and so-called Protestants, including our own, to bring all churches together under one head, the pope of Rome!

To all intents and purposes, the "ecumenical" movement is an effort to bring all the churches of Christendom together, that in order to reach the unity for which Christ prayed, the churches must forget about their differences and unite on what they agree on. In other words, the ecumenical movement is "a strong and growing sentiment in favor of a union based upon common points of doctrines. To secure such a union, the discussion of subjects upon which all were not agreed, however important they might be from a Bible standpoint, must necessarily be waived." The Great Controversy,444.

"When the leading churches of the United States, uniting upon such points of doctrine as are held by them in common, shall l influence the State to enforce their decrees and to sustain their institutions, then Protestant America will have formed an image to the Roman hierarchy, and the infliction of civil penalties upon dissenters will inevitably result." Ibid,445.

As I said, this movement is well advanced.

If you own The Great Controversy, please read pages 444,445.

sky
Thats a very good couple of pages you posted there Sky from Great Controversy. Thanks for that. I wont be trading my KJV Bible in anytime soon. And for everyone else, if you haven't heard of the "ecumenical" movement then please look into it. Its real and its happening everyday. Just watch the news if the Devil has you to busy to read the Bible and SOP. The Devil isn't hiding what hes doing. Its pretty obvious.
Thanks Josh! Its refreshing to see eye to eye! Isaiah 52:8.

sky :)
it's much more than just "taste." liberal versions make a serious departure from the real Word of God. Do we want to know the truth that saves us, or do we want to read and believe fables?

RSS

Site Sponsors

 

Adventist Single?
Meet other Single
Adventists here:
Join Free


USA members:

Support AO by
using this link:
Amazon.com

 

© 2019   Created by Clark P.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service