Hugh Hewitt’s book Blog examines the history of the blog movement, but mainly focuses on the shift in power from the elite media establishment to independent bloggers.
Hewitt shows the great role bloggers play in keeping main line media from having monopoly rule over the American public.
This is not a how-to book, but does recommend some great political and news blogs that are more valuable than any newspaper or broadcast.
Time: 3:00 pm
Location: Springwood Cemetery, 410 N. Main St., Greenville, SC
Guest Speaker: TBA
Contact: Mark Evans, 864-232-1486(W), 864-235-6471(H)
Guest speaker Senator Danny Verdin and Camp Commander Jim Bouchillon
United Daughters of the Confederacy dignitaries laying wreaths on graves of Confederate soldiers.
A widow places flowers on the graves of Confederate soldiers.
Color Guard performs the canteen ceremony honoring Confederate soldiers and comrades.
“I was mortified this afternoon when I learned that the BJU campus store carried several books put out by the organization ‘Together for The Gospel.‘” – (that was my reaction several weeks ago after visiting the campus bookstore on an errand.)
The books were written and contributed to by men such as Mark Dever, Al Mohler, C.J. Mahaney, R.C. Sproul, John MacArthur, Ligon Duncan, and John Piper. This may come as a surprise to many others as well, but my main cause for shock is that I sat for 2.5 years a Bible student and preacher boy at BJU. During that time, I was taught vehemently from teachers, chapel speakers, and Dr. Bob Jones III that fundamentalists had no business dabbling with new evangelicals, Southern Baptists, charismatics and liberals, yet each of the authors / contributors I named are one or more of those labels.
My point is simple: what happened? What changed from the time I was student only about a year ago? I can still remember friday preacher boys meetings where we were warned against the very things I now have seen in the campus store, only 100 feet from Stratton Hall–where the preacher boys meetings took place.
There will be some who instantly write me off as a graduate “BJU-hater.” That could not be farther from the truth. I do hate the recent lean towards the left at BJU, but I love many of the faculty and staff who were excellent influences on my life. I do not hate the university. I could have went anywhere else if I hated it so badly. I have been at Bob Jones since the 3rd grade off and on through the academy and graduated in 2011. To make such an accusation against me is false and desperate.
It is because of the love I still have for the university that I am crying out. I will not sit by quietly and watch what the founder and previous generations fought so nobly against destroy it now.
I have cried out in the past, though not this blatantly, against the shift towards the liberal left and always with stiff resistance from professing believers. No one wants to hear this but I fear Bob Jones University will become another Princeton, Harvard or on a more local level–another Furman.
Where are the conservative faculty, alumni, board members, etc.? Are they even aware of the changes and the shift leftward going on? I pray they are unaware and not party to it.
It is so easy to rationalize compromise, especially As enrollment drops and conservative fundamentalist churches become fewer and fewer. The choice is simple: but money has a way of clouding the water and complicating things. I pray something will be done soon to reverse the last few years’ leaning towards the left.
Can people not see how far the school has gone in just a few years? The standards and principles have been lowered to address the economic problem of declining enrollment. I am pleading with anyone reading this who loves BJU and wants to see it endure as a strong fundamentalist refuge for young generations: please contact then and share your concern and beseech them to return to the ancient landmarks and stand strong; not give into the whims of a young generation bent on compromise and being accepted in the world.
It would be much easier to go along with the crowd and be silent, but I am choosing to break silence and hopefully awaken or inform those who just don’t realize what is going on.
Sincerely,
Ken Willis
After hearing so much about the book, I gave in at a bookstore and bought the hardback of “Killing Lincoln.”
I knew before hand that O’Reilly is a huge Lincoln fan and that he would most likely present Lincoln as the traditional hero of the slaves and savior of the Union. (All things I greatly take issue with, as do many historians and political analysts.)
The book’s thesis is based on the presuppositions that the South was fighting to maintain slavery, John Wilkes Booth was a border-line-insane, dejected actor who vented his rage over slavery’s end personally against Lincoln and that Abraham Lincoln was a great man bent on preserving the Union and focused on healing the split national gently as possible and reunification.
I completely disagree with the first, but am not surprised at all. It is a common misrepresentation that has been in place since the war ended by the left and central government historians. I am somewhat undecided on the second, though Booth was clearly unstable—though it is moderately understandable judged in his time’s context. He was dejected by his fiance, his father and enraged by the defeat of his beloved South. With the third presupposition, I am partly agreed. Lincoln did want the nation to heal peacefully and become one nation again, but his conduct in office and unconstitutional acts both initiated the war and gave both Northerners and Southerners alike to wish him dead. His violation of the Constitution was frequent, documented facts and cannot be ignored as if it never occurred. But I’m not here to teach history.
As far as style and flow, the book is amazing. I could not put it down. I normally struggle with mentally drifting off, but the text is so gripping and clear that I felt glued to it. I wish so badly that my college history readings had been that good. I enjoyed the book as much as any thriller film. Sadly, many students are exposed to history in History of Civilization and perceive all history classes to be incredibly boring, useless recitations of names and dates. This book takes a story-tellign approach.
The detail and information was excellent. I learned so much about events that normally only get a sentence or two. The greatest challenge to writing history is making it informative and interesting. This book is a home run. I had more fun reading this book than any before, even David McCullough’s 1776. (I never thought I’d say that.)
How much research Bill O’Reilly did for the book is unclear, as a historian co-authored the book, but nonetheless, I absolutely loved every second of it.
The final word I will say is that you don’t have to agree with Lincoln to enjoy the book. Just sit back and enjoy the ride.
Kenneth D. Willis
I have waited for over 7 years to write this article and to even discuss this issue in such detail in a public setting. I am not angry, hurt maybe, but not malicious or seeking “blog revenge.” That is not my attitude or motive. I believe this is a much needed contribution to the Authorized Version issue and that I have just as much right as any U.S. citizen, guaranteed freedom of speech, to make my experience and view known. I want this article to be taken in slowly and calmly. I want you to think and hard.
I am not here to prove the historical and textual superiority of the King James Version over all other English translations. Greater and much older men have done this much better than I could hope to. (I have a page full of such works at my blog homepage. “Authorized Version Resources.“) I am interested in observing the history of the University’s position on the version issue and honestly presenting a case that their statement and their practice are not unified.
The King James Version controversy is not brand new to Fundamentalism, but it is not historically that old either. The issue is quite pertinent to you and I as believers who claim to believe the Bible as the inerrant Word of God. Therefore this article is a profitable use of our reading time.
No true Christian doubts or denies the inspiration of the Bible. It is an impossible conflict for a believer. However, there are many who, regardless of their arguments otherwise, who have great exception with the preservation of the Bible. These two bold font words are separate terms entirely.
Please examine the article for its presentation of facts and chronology. I thought this was an interesting article and believe it worth a read.
I urge you to carefully read it and come to your own conclusions, as any historian or seeker of truth should do.
KW
This is an article from http://www.fmh-child.org/BJU.html .
Bob Jones University:
Leveled By An Earthquake?
“Lord God if this school out here [Bob Jones University] ever compromises, send an earthquake and shake these buildings into powder and dust. Don’t ever let it stand here and encumber the earth and curse it by robbing people of faith in the Word of God. Hear us in this prayer and keep us doing all the things we pray in the precious Name of the Lord Jesus Christ. Amen. (How Shall Ye Believe? – Bob Jones, Sr.)
http://www.fmh-child.org/audio/How_Shall_Ye_Believe_short.mp3
- Send An Earthquake -
(Download MP3)
***************************
Bob Jones, Sr. (1883–1968), an evangelist and contemporary of Billy Sunday, established Bob Jones College in 1927 near Panama City, Florida. In 1933 the college was moved to Cleveland, Tennessee, and finally to its present location in Greenville, South Carolina in 1947 where it became Bob Jones University (BJU).
Bob Jones University, a non-denominational Protestant university, is the largest private liberal arts university in the state of South Carolina. It has the reputation of being one of the most conservative religious schools in the United States.
In fact Bob Jones University requires the King James Version Bible (KJV) to be used in its services and classrooms, but it does not hold to the belief that the KJV is the only acceptable English translation of God’s Holy Word (AKA “King James Only”). BJU has taken the position that the KJV is a substantially accurate translation, but only the original manuscripts of the Bible written in Hebrew and Greek are infallible and inerrant.
Bob Jones, Jr., who served as BJU president from 1947 to 1971, called the “King James Only” position a “heresy” and “in a very definite sense, a blasphemy.”
So, that’s what “Jr.” had to say on the “King James Only” subject. But what did his dad (Bob Jones, Sr.) have to say asbout it?
Well, in order to answer that question let’s start off with an excerpt from one of Bob Jones, Sr.’s radio program messages entitled “How Shall Ye Believe”:
Now we are facing great peril more dangerous, more serious, than we’ve ever known. Now Bob Jones University has taken it’s stand for the Bible. That’s the fight today: the Word of God! That’s the battleground right now. Is the Bible the Word of God? It’s essential that every man believes that the Bible is the Word of God if he’s going to be a Christian. Bob Jones University says ‘yes’ and no man is a Christian that doesn’t believe it. He can talk as pious as he pleases. If he tears out the first leaf of the Bible, Jesus said, if you don’t believe earthly things how do you believe heavenly things. When you convince a young fellow that the Bible is wrong in any particulate, you’ve sold his soul down the river and you’ve sent him out on a career in this world that’s hopeless and dark.
Now listen. You put in your Bible a little statement: “Whatever this Bible says is so!” Write it in your Bible there. Put it on the filing. Underscore it for your children. You’ll be saved. A lot of these fellows are half-baked; they just don’t know. They know how to run an organization, but they just don’t know what the Word of God teaches. And you can’t know until you approach it with a spiritual understanding. Then if you believe what’s said about the heavenly things you’ll believe what’s said about the earthly things.
Oh Lord God help us in this day when so much disturbance, and people so upset all over the world, and all this agitation, and people don’t know where they are.No line of demarcation between folks that believe the Bible and folks that don’t believe the Bible. People say, “I believe this” or “I believe that” and “You don’t have to believe that”, and we’re trampling on the Word of God that’s forever settled in Heaven. Lord God keep Bob Jones University true. May we never surrender. Let what come may come. Lord God if this school out here ever compromises, send an earthquake and shake these buildings into powder and dust. Don’t ever let it stand here and encumber the earth and curse it by robbing people of faith in the Word of God. Hear us in this prayer and keep us doing all the things we pray in the precious Name of the Lord Jesus Christ. Amen. (How Shall Ye Believe?)http://www.fmh-child.org/audio/How_Shall_Ye_Believe.mp3
- How Shall Ye Believe -
(Download MP3)
So did you get the point of his message? Bob Jones, Sr. believed and preached that in order for anyone to become a real Christian they must believe “whatever the Bible says is so!” And as it applied to the religious institutions of higher learning such as BJU, Bob Jones Sr. adamantly proclaimed, “When you convince a young fellow that the Bible is wrong in any particulate, you’ve sold his soul down the river”… as in down the river to Hell! In fact we can pretty much sum up what Bob Jones, Sr. was preaching through the following Words of Jesus:
“Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.” (Matthew 23:15 KJV)
Now with that in mind, it shouldn’t be too awful hard to understand why Bob Jones, Sr. prayed his prayer of sudden destruction on BJU if it ever taught anything other than “whatever the Bible says is so!” – “Lord God if this school out here ever compromises, send an earthquake and shake these buildings into powder and dust.”
But moving right along, the following excerpt from Bob Jones, Sr.’s radio program message “What The Bible Say’s Is So” will help us to understand the position he took on Bible translations other than the KJV:
The Bible is a true accurate Book. Now I have most of the translations in my library, and I’ve checked them, and I’ve never checked one translation against another where there was any difference when it comes to the fundamentals of the Christian faith. They’re always as clear as day. Now there may be some kinds of little shade of meaning that might come out of the east, a little shade of meaning that might come out of the west that might not be exactly the same, see. Maybe a little different shade of meaning. But all the fundamental truths of the Bible are just as clear as day. Now what does the Bible say about that? The Bible says that “For ever thy word is settled in heaven.” Now that’s what God said. And God Almighty says in this Book if you take anything away from it He will take something away from you. If you add to it you’ll get some of the curses added to you. You better not tamper with that Bible. Woe be to the man that tampers with the Bible. The Bible claims to have come to us in the Words not which human wisdom teaches but which Divine Wisdom teaches. The very Words themselves, in the original language, are inspired – they’re chosen by the Holy Ghost. Now let’s get that clear, and there can’t be any misunderstanding.(What The Bible Say’s Is So)
http://www.fmh-child.org/audio/What_The_Bible_Says_Intro.mp3
- What The Bible Says (Intro) -
(Download MP3)http://www.fmh-child.org/audio/What_The_Bible_Says.mp3
- What The Bible Says -
(Download MP3)
According to “What The Bible Says Is So”, Bob Jones, Sr. believed that the various Bible translations were “accurate translations” from the original languages when it came to the “fundamentals of Christian faith”. However, we learn something entirely different from his radio program message “We Speak That We Do Know”:
These translators of the revised Bible that we have, left out ‘only begotten’ in John 3:16. That’s the Devil’s blow with the deity of Christ. That’s the Devil’s method of striking the deity of the Son of God. So He is the “only begotten” Son of God. (We Speak That We Do Know)
So what happened? Bob Jones, Sr. had a change of heart! He discovered that not all Bible translations were accurate translations when it came to the “fundamentals of Christian faith”. I mean, after all, Jesus being the only “begotten” Son of God is one of the major “fundamentals of Christian faith”:
“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten (G3439) Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” (John 3:16 KJV)
Only Begotten (G3439) [mon-og-en-ace] – From G3441 and G1096; only born, that is, sole: – only (begotten, child). (Strong’s Hebrew And Greek Dictionary)
When translated correctly, the Greek word “monogenes” (G3439) means “only begotten” or “only born”. Jesus was the second Person of the Godhead in Heaven – “the Word” – before He became “Flesh” on earth. Jesus was the only Son of God born/begotten through a Virgin Birth in order to take away the sin of the world:
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made… And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of theonly begotten (G3439) of the Father,) full of grace and truth.” (John 1:1-3, 14 KJV)
Jesus is God who became Man – the Messiah – in order to save a lost and dying world from the everlasting fires of Hell! However, many of the modern Bible translations have “revised” this doctrinal truth by deleting just one word – “begotten”. As Bob Jones, Sr. so accurately described it: “the Devil’s blow with the deity of Christ”! In fact here’s how just a few of them did it:
World English Bible (1901)
“For God so loved the world, that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish, but have eternal life.”Hebrew Names Version (Modification of Word English Bible)
“For God so loved the world, that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish, but have eternal life.”Weymouth New Testament (©1912)
“For so greatly did God love the world that He gave His only Son, that every one who trusts in Him may not perish but may have the Life of Ages.”Revised Standard Version (©1952)
“For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.”Bible in Basic English (©1965)
“For God had such love for the world that he gave his only Son, so that whoever has faith in him may not come to destruction but have eternal life.”Worldwide English (©1969)
“God loved the world so very, very much that he gave his only Son. Because he did that, everyone who believes in him will not lose his life, but will live for ever.”New International Version (©1984)
“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.”Good News Bible (©1992)
“For God loved the world so much that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not die but have eternal life.”God’s Word (©1995)
“God loved the world this way: He gave his only Son so that everyone who believes in him will not die but will have eternal life.”New International Reader’s Version (©1996)
“God loved the world so much that he gave his one and only Son. Anyone who believes in him will not die but will have eternal life.Holman Christian Study Bible (©1999)
“For God loved the world in this way: He gave His One and Only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish but have eternal life.”Today’s New International Version (©2001)
“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.”English Standard Version (©2001)
“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.”Message (©2002)
“This is how much God loved the world: He gave his Son, his one and only Son. And this is why: so that no one need be destroyed; by believing in him, anyone can have a whole and lasting life.”New Century Version (©2006)
“God loved the world so much that he gave his one and only Son so that whoever believes in him may not be lost, but have eternal life.”New Living Translation (©2007)
“For God loved the world so much that he gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.”International Standard Version (©2008)
“For this is how God loved the world: He gave his unique Son so that everyone who believes in him might not be lost but have eternal life.”
And with that in mind, it’s now time to uncover some of the details of this “revised” Bible that Bob Jones, Sr. so adamantly opposed. Because you see the “Revised Version” of 1881 was the first official attempt to update (pervert) the “(Authorized) King James Version Bible” in a major way… but there were many others to follow! In fact there were actually six (6) “revised” translations “begotten/born” from that original 1981 abomination called the “Revised Version”:
“Revised Version” And It’s Derivatives
| Abbreviation | Name | Date |
| RV | (British) Revised Version | 1881-1885 |
| ASV | American Standard Version | 1901 |
| RSV | Revised Standard Version | 1952 |
| NASB | New American Standard Bible | 1971, 1995 |
| NRSV | New Revised Standard Version | 1989 |
| ESV | English Standard Version | 2001 |
| WEB | World English Bible | In progress |
So which one was it? Which one of those “revised” Bibles did Bob Jones, Sr. discover to be the blasphemous mis-translation of God’s Holy Word?
Well, the facts are as follows:
1.) Bob Jones, Sr. recorded his radio program messages from 1927 until 1962. The message “We Speak That We Do Know”, in which he criticized the “revised” Bible, was one of those radio program messages. Because of the time limitations, the “revised” Bible had to be the “RV”, “ASV”, or “RSV”.
2.) The “Revised Version” and the “American Standard Version” both included “begotten” in their translation of John 3:16: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have eternal life.” (RV) “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have eternal life.” (ASV)
3.) The “Revised Standard Version” of 1952 did not include “begotten” in it’s translation of John 3:16: “For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.” (RSV)
4.) Following the 1952 publication of the“Revised Standard Version”, large numbers of fundamentalists and evangelicals accused the translators of deliberately tampering with the Scriptures in order to deny the doctrine of the Virgin Birth of Jesus. This “RSV” controversy helped reignite the “King James Only” movement within the Independent Baptist and Pentecostal churches. The “King James Only” movement was initially formed in protest to the “RV” and “ASV” publications, but remained low-key due to the versions’ lack of popularity.
So with those four (4) facts in mind, it is abundantly obvious that Bob Jones, Sr. joined hands with his “fundamental/evangelical” Brothers in Christ to protest the “Revised Standard Version” and it’s demonic ability to “convince a young fellow that the Bible is wrong in any particulate”.
But that’s only the beginning! There’s much more to this story! And the following from “Wikipedia” will help us get started:
The Revised Version (or English Revised Version) of the Bible is a late 19th-century British revision of the King James Version of 1611. It was the first and remains the only officially authorized and recognized revision of the King James Bible. The work was entrusted to over 50 scholars from various denominations in Britain. American scholars were invited to cooperate, by correspondence. The New Testament was published in 1881, the Old Testament in 1885, and the Apocrypha in 1895. The best known of the translation committee members were Brooke Foss Westcott and Fenton John Anthony Hort…
You see it was “in the beginning” of these “revised” Bibles that the infamous team of “Westcott and Hort” were involved – infecting God’s Holy Word with their deadly satanic spirit. In fact what better proof of their evil spirit than a few verses from the 1881 “Westcott-Hort Greek New Testament” from which so many perverted versions of God’s Holy Word have been created. And in order to make this as simple as possible, we’ll use the “Texus Receptus Greek New Testament” 
from which the King James Version of the Bible was translated as a comparison (note: the red text in the “Texus Receptus Greek New Testament” denotes the Greek text that’s missing in the “Westcott-Hort Greek New Testament”):
Now for all those who don’t read Greek, the following is what the comparison looks like in English (note: the red text in the “KJV” denotes the text that’s missing in the “RV”, “ASV”, “RSV”, “NASB”, “NRSV”, “ESV”, and “WEB” [the last three are not shown for brevity]):
John 16:16
King James Version: A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again, a little while, and ye shall see me, because I go to the Father.
Revised Version: A little while, and ye behold me no more; and again a little while, and ye shall see me.
American Standard Version: A little while, and ye behold me no more; and again a little while, and ye shall see me.
Revised Standard Version: “A little while, and you will see me no more; again a little while, and you will see me.”
New American Standard Bible: “A little while, and you will no longer see Me; and again a little while, and you will see Me.”
Ephesians 3:9
King James Version: And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:
Revised Version: and to make all men see what is the dispensation of the mystery which from all ages hath been hid in God who created all things;
American Standard Version: and to make all men see what is the dispensation of the mystery which for ages hath been hid in God who created all things;
Revised Standard Version: and to make all men see what is the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God who created all things;
New American Standard Bible: and to bring to light what is the administration of the mystery which for ages has been hidden in God who created all things;
1 John 5:6-8
King James Version: This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.
Revised Version: This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not with the water only, but with the water and with the blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is the truth. For there are three who bear witness, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and the three agree in one.
American Standard Version: This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not with the water only, but with the water and with the blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is the truth. For there are three who bear witness, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and the three agree in one.
Revised Standard Version: This is he who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ, not with the water only but with the water and the blood. And the Spirit is the witness, because the Spirit is the truth. There are three witnesses, the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree.
New American Standard Bible: This is the One who came by water and blood, Jesus Christ; not with the water only, but with the water and with the blood. It is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. For there are three that testify: the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement. ”:
So, with that in mind, let’s get back to what Bob Jones, Sr. had to say about those “other translations”:
The Bible is a true accurate Book. Now I have most of the translations in my library, and I’ve checked them, and I’ve never checked one translation against another where there was any difference when it comes to the fundamentals of the Christian faith. (What The Bible Say’s Is So)
That was what Bob Jones, Sr. had to say on the “other Bible translations” until he read the “Revised Standard Version” with it’s mis-translation of the Greek word “monogenes” (G3439) in John 3:16:
These translators of the revised Bible that we have, left out ‘only begotten’ in John 3:16. That’s the Devil’s blow with the deity of Christ. That’s the Devil’s method of striking the deity of the Son of God. (We Speak That We Do Know)
Now the Greek word “monogenes” was included in the “Westcott-Hort Grrek New Testament”… however, it was mis-translated in the “Revised Standard Version” in order to take away from the deity of Christ. So, if Bob Jones, Sr. got up in arms about the missing “begotten” word in the “Revised Standard Version”, what do you think he had to say about all the missing “Words of God” in John 16:16, Ephesians 3:9, and 1 John 5:6-8 that substantiate the Godhead (Father, Son, and Holy Ghost)?
Well, it’s quite obvious that Bob Jones, Sr. would have never endorsed the “Westcott-Hort Grrek New Testament” as being “God’s Word” from the “original manuscripts”. No way! But yet we find the following truth about BJU from their pre 1986 publication “Position of the Bible Department of Bob Jones University on the Scripture”:
The dominating concern for all Bible-related courses, from English Bible to Theology and Ethics, in Bob Jones University is what the Bible teaches. This is of paramount importance to us because we believe in the verbal inspiration and absolute inerrancy of the Bible. We believe, as Fundamentalists have always believed, that this inspiration refers to the original manuscripts. “The record for whose inspiration we contend is the original record — the autographs or parchments of Moses, David, Daniel, Matthew, Peter, or Paul as the case may be and not any particular translation or translations of them whatever” (The Fundamentals, “Inspiration of the Bible,” p. 127).
When we teach the content of the Bible, we naturally study a passage in the Greek Testament. To aid the students in understanding that passage, we will take to class the King James Bible, which often gives an exact rendering of the Greek. Sometimes we will consult some other conservative translation, such as the American Standard Version of 1901 or the New American Standard Bible (not the liberal R[evised] S[tandard] V[ersion]), which at times gives the most accurate rendering of the Greek… Because we believe in the inspiration of the original manuscripts of the Old and New Testaments, it is important that we have a Greek Testament that will be as close to the readings of the original as possible. Through the carelessness of scribes who copied manuscripts, many varying readings have crept into them. But God in His providence has preserved for us the original reading through the large number of manuscripts in existence that witness to the text of the New Testament. Today there are two Greek texts available. One is the Received Text, edited by [a] Roman Catholic scholar, Erasmus, in the sixteenth century and based on manuscripts of the late Middle Ages. It is often called the “Byzantine” or the “majority text.” The other is the Greek Testament, edited by Westcott and Hort in the nineteenth century and based upon the manuscripts of the fourth century, usually called the “Alexandrian text.” The King James Version was based upon the “Received Text”; the American Standard Version was based upon the text of Westcott and Hort. We do not believe that either of these texts is “liberal” or “conservative.” (Read the entire positional statement.)
Amazing… wouldn’t you say? For Bob Jones University to consider the American Standard Version and the New American Standard Bible to be “conservative translations” and the Revised Standard Version to be a “liberal translation” is nothing but outright “heresy” to say the least! They are all “revised” Bibles – products of “Westcott and Hort” – and nothing less that an “abomination” in the Eyes of God! But yet the following “Statement about Bible Translations” is what you’ll find on the BJU Web site as of the 29th of October 2010:
[http://www.bju.edu/welcome/who-we-are/translation-position.php] (this is still the University’s position as of 02/06/2012.)
So, what’s going on? Who was the scallywag that propped open the Bob Jones University back door and allowed Satan to come in with his perverted Bibles?
Well, it all goes back to Bob Jones, Jr. who took the reins from Bob Jones, Sr. and served as the BJU president from 1947 to 1971. I mean, after all, it was “Jr.” who called the “King James Only” position a “heresy” and “in a very definite sense, a blasphemy.”
And with all that in mind, the following question needs to be asked:
“When will the Lord God Almighty answer Bob Jones, Sr.’s prayer? When will He send that earthquake to shake the Bob Jones University buildings into powder and dust?”
Position of the Bible Department of Bob Jones University on the Scripture
- Bob Jones University Bible Department – Stewart Custer, Marshall Neal -
[http://www.wholesomewords.org/bjubible.html]The dominating concern for all Bible-related courses, from English Bible to Theology and Ethics, in Bob Jones University is what the Bible teaches. This is of paramount importance to us because we believe in the verbal inspiration and absolute inerrancy of the Bible. We believe, as Fundamentalists have always believed, that this inspiration refers to the original manuscripts. “The record for whose inspiration we contend is the original record — the autographs or parchments of Moses, David, Daniel, Matthew, Peter, or Paul as the case may be and not any particular translation or translations of them whatever” (The Fundamentals, “Inspiration of the Bible,” p. 127).
When we teach the content of the Bible, we naturally study a passage in the Greek Testament. To aid the students in understanding that passage, we will take to class the King James Bible, which often gives an exact rendering of the Greek. Sometimes we will consult some other conservative translation, such as the American Standard Version of 1901 or the New American Standard Bible (not the liberal R[evised] S[tandard] V[ersion]), which at times gives the most accurate rendering of the Greek. We are always trying to help the students grasp the exact meaning of the original Greek text. There are a few passages in which the delicate shades of meaning in the Greek are missed by all English translations, in which cases we must explain from the Greek text itself those fine shades of meaning. We would not use a liberal paraphrase in class except as an illustration of a mistranslation, which we would at once correct by a true translation. We have no sympathy with any version of the Bible that is not faithful to the Greek text.
Because we believe in the inspiration of the original manuscripts of the Old and New Testaments, it is important that we have a Greek Testament that will be as close to the readings of the original as possible. Through the carelessness of scribes who copied manuscripts, many varying readings have crept into them. But God in His providence has preserved for us the original reading through the large number of manuscripts in existence that witness to the text of the New Testament. Today there are two Greek texts available. One is the Received Text, edited by [a] Roman Catholic scholar, Erasmus, in the sixteenth century and based on manuscripts of the late Middle Ages. It is often called the “Byzantine” or the “majority text.” The other is the Greek Testament, edited by Westcott and Hort in the nineteenth century and based upon the manuscripts of the fourth century, usually called the “Alexandrian text.” The King James Version was based upon the “Received Text”; the American Standard Version was based upon the text of Westcott and Hort. We do not believe that either of these texts is “liberal” or “conservative.” Not only Erasmus but also Westcott and Hort were seeking to present a close copy of the original text. We are interested in which one is closer to the original text of the New Testament.
Because (1) the Alexandrian manuscripts are much older and closer to the time the originals were written, (2) a careful comparison of these manuscripts with those of the Middle Ages has convinced us that a more accurate and careful job of copying was done by the Alexandrian scribes, and (3) Erasmus had to work in haste and with limited resources, it is our conviction that these Alexandrian manuscripts, which were not known to Erasmus, are, as a rule, the more accurate manuscripts to follow. Therefore, along with the great majority of conservative scholars, we believe that the text based upon the Alexandrian manuscripts is, as a whole, superior to the text based upon manuscripts of the Middle Ages.
The portion of the New Testament that has any substantial variation between the various manuscripts is only about one word in a thousand. These variations in no way change the teaching of the New Testament on any doctrine. Therefore, we consider this not an issue of modernism versus conservatism but a matter of individual judgment on the part of Fundamental Christians. Christians should be free to choose and use either of these texts and still work together in harmony to teach and preach the Word of God to those who are without it.
Source: Bob Jones University. “Position of the Bible Department of Bob Jones University on the Scripture” (mimeograph). Office of the President, no date. Printed in Standing Without Apology: The History of Bob Jones University by Daniel L. Turner. Greenville, S.C.: Bob Jones University Press, c1997. Appendix D., p. 322-323.In addition, “…both the Chancellor and the President issued statements to clarify the school’s position.” p. 244. And “in keeping with the University’s commitment to balance, it is interesting to note that among the Bob Jones University graduate school Bible faculty, there are some who hold to the superiority of the Majority Text and others who hold to the Westcott and Hort Alexandrian Text. None of the Bible faculty accepts the Textus Receptus of Erasmus as superior to either the Majority or Alexandrian texts.” p. 245.
Although no date is given for the above document, it was published by “The Flaming Torch” in 1985, indicating that it was written in 1985 or before. This document was also included as an attachment to a letter written by Thurmon Wisdom, dated October 4, 1989. ”:
END OF ARTICLE
As I noted in a parenthetical in the article, the University’s position has not changed since 1927. May I ask why so many churches, Christian leaders and institutions raised concerns at BJU and its Bible faculty over the Authorized Version issue? Well, any decent reading over the issue will clarify that many have and still believe BJU is favoring other versions and even chaffing at the KJV. However, please note that BJU maintains there campus translation is the Authorized KJV.
I am a History graduate from BJU, but started in Bible and then Pastoral Studies. I spent months in Bible classes and preacher boys’ sessions. Not to mention all the chapels, fall, spring and summer I sat through. I came into BJU having heard all about the past clashes with Pensacola and pro KJV groups. I honestly thought it was not a huge issue and I would not encounter it while a student. Not so. From my first Doctrines class, I was confronted by the reality that the issue was very much alive and was a one-sided one.
I was surprised to hear that in the Freshman English classes, the students were not even allowed to write about the issue for a paper topic. I understand not wanting students to argue with the University about rules and policies through a paper, but even mentioning the issue? that BJU says they support? I was disturbed. Banning an issue is certainly no solution. There is one thing in this life that I have never allowed a teacher, preacher or anyone for that matter to teach me, and that is to stop thinking. When you stop thinking, you are finished as an individual. When you let others think for you, you may soon end up in a state of blindly following someone or something, or worse. Their “banning” the subject made me think harder on it, and be more alert in Bible classes.
In Doctrines, I was exposed to the reality that the University Bible Department is not as enthusiastic about the KJV as their web statement suggests. In fact, I found that the students are encouraged to read the commentaries of Wescott and Hort. And that the KJV is not as reliable and accurate as we were taught at home and in church. The push for Wescott and Hort’s Alexandrian text was obvious, as was the slander and criticism against the KJV.
It seems every time the opportunity presented itself, someone, whether a teacher or preacher, slants were made against the KJV and the undertone was, “it would be so much easier if we could just use another version.”
By the time I graduated, I was completely out of patience with it, but am not one to cause strife. I kept it mostly to myself, having only a small number of friends who cared or much less agreed. I had to sit in class, chapel or whatever and sadly give in to the reality that years of having that pounded into them, most students have swallowed it or simply–as is the case with most–do not care to study the issue out for themselves.
So after all this writing and reading, why would BJU maintain that their class room and chapel standard are the KJV, whiles simultaneously slamming it every chance presented? This is common knowledge, not really a bombshell of news by any means. But again, WHY? Why the discrepancy in statement and practice?
I can’t answer that. All I can do is review the facts and allow you to reach your own conclusion.
1. BJU originally did not have the position on Bible versions they do now.
2. Sometime between Bob Sr.’s death and Bob Jr.s role as president, there was a change in philosophy.
3. The statement on Bible Versions and what actually happens are not the same.
Regardless of the reason for the differences in policy and practice, does it really matter anymore? The reality is that those of us who hold a Textus Receptus position–a term I have found many college students do not even understand–are fighting an uphill battle outnumbered 10-1. Churches in Greenville, the belt buckle of the proverbial ”Bible Belt” have gradually switched to new versions and many more would love to do so, only holding back due to the large majority of elderly church members who would never allow it.
What are we to do? Pray. Pray that God would spare this generation by raising up men and women to search the truth for themselves and stand firmly and not follow the crowd. Majorities often rule, but following the majority is historically a dangerous game. Oh well, many reading this are already against me.
I honestly prefer not to write about things like this. I love peace and quite and can’t handle stress very well. It is very tempting just to hold in my beliefs and play dead. But I believe we are bound to our conscience and to the testament of Scripture and history to fight for the truth. Opposition is sure to come, but that is alright. We ought not seek opposition and be as gracious as possible, but we must stand for the truth. God expects no less.
I hope this article sheds some light and stimulates some thought. It has been something I’ve wanted to talk about for a long time, but have held in. I hope you will think on it at least.
Sincerely,
Kenneth Willis
Battle of Stalingrad ends,1943
Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo is signed, 1848
VIETNAM WARFirst U.S. Air Force plane crashes in South Vietnam., 1962
WORLD WAR IZeppelin crashes into North Sea, 1916
WORLD WAR IIQuisling becomes prime minister of puppet regime in Norway, 1942
I heard, read a lot of Christians talk about racism lately and how the South is so un-Christlike for being racist. Well, I’m not denying it exists, but let’s not forget where it came from in this country. Before works like Uncle Tom’s Cabin and abolitionist propaganda (they were actually some of the worst racists as they only wanted to end slavery to ship ex-slaves back to Africa…Lincoln proposed to send them to Liberia) the whites and blacks of the South got along just fine. They cared about one another and worked together. Of course there were cases of cruelty and abuse, but overwhelmingly that is a false stereotype. The Northern abolitionists and reconstructionalists caused most of what we know as racism in the South. My great great great grandparents loved their black neighbors and servants and treated them like family. Only when groups like the CRM and the NAACP came along did the history get rewritten and racism was inflamed. Never apologize for being a white Southerner. While on the topic, blacks were integrated in the U.S. army during Vietnam, but were integrated in the CSA army in 1860. Hmm. In the US army of 1860, blacks could not eat, sleep or mingle with white soldiers, received less food, less pay, buried in separate cemeteries. In the CSA army, blacks fought side by side with whites, ate with them, slept with them, and got the same pay and were buried with them. Who’s the racists really? ENOUGH of this apologizing for something that was stirred up by the liberal left.
One final note: This Sunday at 3:00pm, at the Old Presbyterian Church of Pickens, SC, the Sons of Confederate Veterans, Order of the Confederate Rose and Daughters of the Confederacy will be honoring a black CSA veteran AT THE REQUEST OF HIS BLACK DESCENDANTS. He was a slave, dearly loved by his white family; he went off to war with his master, refused to leave and died serving the family and was buried side by side with them. I challenge anyone who can’t believe or understand why a Black man would raise arms against Mr. Lincoln’s army and fight for the South to come and see for yourself.
The sad reality is that the NAACP won’t come. What they would witness would defy their dogma and their efforts to tear us apart.
William Sumner (1668 – ?) Arrived in Virginia by 1691. Left England soon after Protestants oust James II and install William and Mary as co-rulers.
Joseph Sumner Sr. (1761 – December 1827) Revolutionary War, Patriot Forces, Knight’s roster, pg. 369. Uncle of the Revolutionary War Gen. Jethro Sumner Jr.
Mary Kight (1770 – 1840) married 1787.
Joseph Sumner Jr. (September 25, 2793 – June 14, 1880)
Mahala Smith Sumner (October 11, 1799 – March 30, 1882) married April 1813.
Daniel S. Sumner (October 28, 1828 – ?)
Martha Monk Sumner (February 20, 1835 – ?)
Marion Houston Sumner (November 2, 1855 – July 11, 1919)
Mary Harris Sumner (November 28, 1859 – March 31, 1930)
Samuel B. McDonald (Ocotber 9, 1861 – January 28, 1943)
Civil Elizabeth Sumner (November 28, 1878 – March 9, 1908)
Homer Howell Willis (July 28, 1905 – May 1985)
Nanny Bernice McDonald Willis (July 31, 1905 -December 26, 1985) married February 24, 1926
William Joseph Willis (December 11, 1926 – February 16, 1991)
Francis Geneva Stewart Willis (March 5, 1933 – ) married March 28
Joseph Stewart Willis (January 20, 1963 – )
Dianna Sue Dover Willis (May 24, 1963 – )
Kenneth Daniel Willis (February 26, 1989 – )
William Bradley Willis (January 11, 1992 – )
Phillip Hunter Willis (March 28, 1998 – )
Benjamin Willis (1658 – May 12, 1696) born in Davenshire, England.
Susanna Whitman Willis
Benjamin Willis II (1696 – 1779)
Mary Leonard Willis – married in 1719, Bridgewater, MD
Benjamin Willis III (1725 – 1785) Revolutionary War Vet, Pvt., Warrenton, NC Continental Line, 84 months service.
unknown (? – 1780)
Benjamin Willis IV (1750 – 1824)
Sarah Willis (? – 1790)
Benjamin Willis V (1774 – 1860)
Blansett Morrison Willis (1775 – 1835) Came from Scotland as a 15-year-old. Was scalped and murdered during an Indian raid on the Willis home in 1835 near Dakota, GA, where she is buried along with her daughter and granddaughter who were also murdered in the raid.
Benjamin Willis VI (1810 – May 4, 1882)
Sarah “Sallie Sumner” Willis (February 27, 1816 – 1861) married December 5, 1833
Joseph Willis (December 2, 1846 – October 14, 1921) C.S.A. Postal Service
Rachel Land Willis
William Cleveland Willis (November 2, 1884 – November 1, 1974)
Dolly Mae Horsley Willis (November 29, 1886 – August 12, 1924)
Homer Howell Willis (July 28, 1905 – May 1985)
Nanny Bernice McDonald Willis (July 31, 1905 -December 26, 1985) married February 24, 1926
William Joseph Willis (December 11, 1926 – February 16, 1991)
Francis Geneva Stewart Willis (March 5, 1933 – ) married March 28
Joseph Stewart Willis (January 20, 1963 – )
Dianna Sue Dover Willis (May 24, 1963 – )
Kenneth Daniel Willis (February 26, 1989 – )
William Bradley Willis (January 11, 1992 – )
Phillip Hunter Willis (March 28, 1998 – )
