The Miracle of The King James Bible

Uploaded by Loumademe on Aug 22, 2011

Observing the 400th anniversary of the original publication, Adam Nicolson retraces the steps that led to the creation of the most revered book written in the English language - The King James Version of The Holy Bible.

For Educational Purposes Only.

.

New English Translation of Bible Omits 'Jesus Christ,' 'Angel'

By Michael Gryboski , Christian Post Reporter

April 16, 2012|5:57 pm

• 

Photo: Thomas Nelson Publishing)

The Voice, a translation of the Bible into modern English released in March 2012.

A new translation of the Bible into English does not contain the name "Jesus Christ" nor the word "angel." It also prefers the word "emissary" over "apostle."

The Voice, a Bible that replaces "Jesus Christ" with terms like "Jesus the Anointed One," had its complete edition released by Thomas Nelson Publishing last month.

Frank Couch, Thomas Nelson's lead editor on the project, told The Christian Post that the purpose of The Voice was to make the Gospel message easier to understand for modern audiences.

"The Voice has not claimed to be more accurate than any other translation, rather it is more easily understood than any other translation," said Couch.

"When translators are limiting themselves to conveying the complete essence of a word from the Hebrew or the Greek with one English word they have difficulty bringing in the nuances held in the original language."

Because other translations have more literal renderings, Couch believed they are "why it has been necessary for commentators and preachers to spend so much time explaining what the words in the original language mean before the lay reader can understand fully a text of Scripture."

"Because we have a more expansive translating technique we can more fully develop the English translation and thus bring out the more difficult nuances found in the original language," he explained.

The scholars and authors who collaborated on the translation say their intention was to help readers "hear God speaking."

"One of the byproducts of the information age in the church has been its focus on biblical knowledge. Many Bibles reflect this, packed with informative notes, charts, and graphs. While there's nothing wrong with having a deep knowledge; a personal connection and deep relationship are far better," according to hearthevoice.com. "The Voice is focused on helping readers find (or rediscover) this connection with Him. Scripture is presented not as an academic document, but as an engaging story."

The idea for The Voice came in January 2004, when Thomas Nelson Publishing met with the Ecclesia Bible Society, whose leadership includes pastor Chris Seay of the Ecclesia Church in Houston, Texas. The project came in portions, with the complete New Testament according to The Voice being released in 2009.

The name comes from the Bible translation's rendering of the Greek Word logos in John 1:1. Although the typical English Bible translates logos to "Word," in this translation it is rendered "Voice." The first verse of John, which in the NIV reads "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God" becomes "Before time itself was measured, the Voice was speaking. The Voice was and is God."

A new video posted on the translation's Facebook further highlights that "The Voice offers an opportunity to hear afresh by telling the stories that have always been in the Bible in a beautiful and poetic way." It is written in screenplay format "so it's easy to follow or act out in a group."

Despite the approval of a major publisher like Thomas Nelson, which also sells other more established translations of the Bible, The Voice is not without its opponents, including many critical online reviews.

On the website "Life More Abundant," poster "Coralie" commented that the format of The Voice, which includes commentary in the body of the text, was a concern.

"The … effect of the inclusion of midstream commentary is the blurring of the line between inspired word and human opinion," wrote Coralie.

"My fear in our postmodern world is not that a new reader would take the commentary as the very word of God, but that he would read the words of God with the casual ease of another form of commentary."

The blog "Extreme Theology," an apologetics website, declared that The Voice was a "distorted version of the Bible."

"Unfortunately, not since the release of the Jehovah's Witnesses' New World Translation of the Greek Scriptures in 1950 has there been a bible published that so blatantly mangles and distorts God's Word in order to support a peculiar and aberrant theological agenda," reads a review on ET's site.

Source: http://www.christianpost.com/news/new-english-translation-of-bible-omits-jesus-christ-apostle-73325/#sGE4I3z2VMdshusR.99

Westcott and Hort

Chapter 8: Westcott and Hort

Brooke Foss Westcott (1825-1903) and Fenton John Anthony Hort (1828-1892) have been highly controversial figures in biblical history.

On one side, their supporters have heralded them as great men of God, having greatly advanced the search for the original Greek text.

On the other side, their opponents have leveled charges of heresy, infidelity, apostasy, and many others, claiming that they are guilty of wreaking great damage on the true text of Scripture.

I have no desire to "sling mud" nor a desire to hide facts.

I believe it is essential at this time that we examine what we know about these men and their theories concerning the text of the Bible.

I long sought for copies of the books about their lives. These are The Life and Letters of Brooke Foss Westeott, by his son, Arthur, and The Life and Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, written by his son.

After literally months of trying, I was able to acquire copies of them both for study. Most of the material in this section will be directly from these sources so as to prevent it from being secondhand.

We cannot blindly accept the finding of any scholar without investigating what his beliefs are concerning the Bible and its doctrines. Scholarship alone makes for an inadequate and dangerous authority, therefore we are forced to scrutinize these men's lives.

A Monumental Switch

Westcott and Hort were responsible for the greatest feat in textual criticism. They were responsible for replacing the Universal Text of the Authorized Version with the Local Text of Egypt and the Roman Catholic Church. Both Wescott and Hort were known to have resented the pre-eminence given to the Authorized Version and its underlying Greek Text. They had been deceived into believing that the Roman Catholic manuscripts, Vaticanus and Aleph, were better because they were "older." This they believed, even though Hort admitted that the Antiochian or Universal Text was equal in antiquity. "The fundamental text of the late extant Greek MSS generally is beyond all question identical with the dominant Antiochian or Graeco-Syrian Text of the second half of the Fourth Century."₈₅

Vicious Prejudice

In spite of the fact that the readings of the Universal Text were found to be as old, or older, Westcott and Hort still sought to dislodge it from its place of high standing in biblical history. Hort occasionally let his emotions show, "I had no idea till the last few weeks of the importance of text, having read so little Greek Testament, and dragged on with the villainous Textus Receptus ... Think of the vile Textus Receptus leaning entirely on late MSS; it is a blessing there are such early ones."₈₆

Westcott and Hort built their own Greek text based primarily on a few uncial MSS of the Local Text. It has been stated earlier that these perverted MSS do not even agree among themselves. The ironic thing is that Westcott and Hort knew this when they formed their text!

Burgon exposed Dr. Hort's confession, "Even Hort had occasion to notice an instance of the concordia discourse." Commenting on the four places in Mark's gospel (14:30, 68, 72, a, b) where the cock's crowing is mentioned said, "The confusion of attestation introduced by these several cross currents of change is so great that of the seven principal MSS, Aleph, A, B, C, D, L, no two have the same text in all four places."₈₇

A Shocking Revelation

That these men should lend their influence to a family of MSS which have a history of attacking and diluting the major doctrines of the Bible, should not come as a surprise. Oddly enough, neither man believed that the Bible should be treated any differently than the writings of the lost histor-ians and philosophers!

Hort wrote, "For ourselves, we dare not introduce considerations which could not reasonably be applied to other ancient texts, supposing them to have documentary attestation of equal amount, variety and antiquity."₈₈

He also states, "In the New Testament, as in almost all prose writings which have been much copied, corruptions by interpolation are many times more numerous than corruptions by omission." (Emphasis mine.)₈₉

We must consider these things for a moment. How can God use men who do not believe that His Book is any different than Shakespeare, Plato, or Dickens? It is a fundamental belief that the Bible is different from all other writings. Why did these men not believe so?

Blatant Disbelief

Their skepticism does, in fact, go even deeper. They have both become famous for being able to deny scriptural truth and still be upheld by fundamental Christianity as biblical authorities! Both Westcott and Hort failed to accept the basic Bible doctrines which we hold so dear and vital to our fundamental faith.

Hort denies the reality of Eden: "I am inclined to think that no such state as 'Eden'(I mean the popular notion) ever existed, and that Adam's fall in no degree differed from the fall of each of his descendants, as Coleridge justly argues."₉₀

Furthermore, he took sides with the apostate authors of "Essays and Reviews."

Hort writes to Rev. Rowland Williams, October 21, 1858, "Further I agree with them [Authors of "Essays and Reviews"] in condemning many leading specific doctrines of the popular theology ... Evangelicals seem to me perverted rather than untrue. There are, I fear, still more serious differences between us on the subject of authority, and especially the authority of the Bible."₉₁

We must also confront Hort's disbelief that the Bible was infallible: "If you make a decided conviction of the absolute infallibility of the N.T. practically a sine qua non for co-operation, I fear I could not join you." He also stated:

"As I was writing the last words a note came from Westcott. He too mentions having had fears, which he now pronounces 'groundless,' on the strength of our last conversation, in which he discovered that I did 'recognize' 'Providente' in biblical writings. Most strongly I recognize it; but I am not prepared to say that it necessarily involves absolute infallibility. So I still await judgment."

And further commented to a colleague:

"But I am not able to go as far as you in asserting the absolute infallibility of a canonical writing."₉₂

Strange Bedfellows

Though unimpressed with the evangelicals of his day, Hort had great admiration for Charles Darwin! To his colleague, B.F. Westcott, he wrote excitedly: "...Have you read Darwin? How I should like to talk with you about it! In spite of difficulties, I am inclined to think it unanswerable. In any case it is a treat to read such a book."

And to John Ellerton he writes: "But the book which has most engaged me is Darwin. Whatever may be thought of it, it is a book that one is proud to be contemporary with ... My feeling is strong that the theory is unanswerable. If so, it opens up a new period."₉₃

Dr. Hort was also an adherent to the teaching of Samuel Taylor Coleridge. His son writes: "In undergraduate days, if not before, he came under the spell of Coleridge."₉₄

Coleridge was the college drop-out whose drug addiction is an historical fact. "The opium habit, begun earlier to deaden the pain of rheumatism, grew stronger. After vainly trying in Malta and Italy to break away from opium, Coleridge came back to England in 1806."₉₅

One of Coleridge's famous works is Aids to Reflection. "Its chief aim is to harmonize formal Christianity with Coleridge's variety of transcendental philosophy. He also did much to introduce Immanual Kant and other German philosophers to English readers."₉₆

This man, Coleridge, had a great influence on the two scholars from Cambridge.

Forsaking Colossians 2:8

Hort was also a lover of Greek philosophy. In writing to Mr. A. MacMillian, he stated: "You seem to make (Greek) philosophy worthless for those who have received the Christian revelation. To me, though in a hazy way, it seems full of precious truth of which I find nothing, and should be very much astonished and perplexed to find anything in revelation."₉₇

Lost in the Forest

In some cases Hort seemed to wander in the woods. In others he can only be described as utterly "lost in the forest." Take, for example, his views on fundamental Bible truths.

Hort's "Devil"

Concerning existence of a personal devil he wrote:

"The discussion which immediately precedes these four lines naturally leads to another enigma most intimately connected with that of everlasting penalties, namely that of the personality of the devil." It was Coleridge who some three years ago first raised any doubts in my mind on the subject - doubts which have never yet been at all set at rest, one way or the other. You yourself are very cautious in your language.

"Now if there be a devil, he cannot merely bear a corrupted and marred image of God; he must be wholly evil, his name evil, his every energy and act evil. Would it not be a violation of the divine attributes for the Word to be actively the support of such a nature as that?"₉₈

Hort's "Hell"

Rev. Hort also shrunk from the belief in a literal, eternal "hell."

"I think Maurice's letter to me sufficiently showed that we have no sure knowledge respecting the duration of future punishment, and that the word 'eternal' has a far higher meaning than the merely material one of excessively long duration; extinction always grates against my mind as something impossible."₉₉

"Certainly in my case it proceeds from no personal dread; when I have been living most godlessly, I have never been able to frighten myself with visions of a distant future, even while I 'held' the doctrine."₁₀₀

Hort's "Purgatory'

Although the idea of a literal devil and a literal hell found no place in Hort's educated mind, he was a very real believer in the fictious Roman Catholic doctrine of "purgatory." To Rev. John Ellerton he wrote in 1854:

"I agree with you in thinking it a pity that Maurice verbally repudiates purgatory, but I fully and unwaveringly agree with him in the three cardinal points of the controversy: (1) that eternity is independent of duration; (2) that the power of repentance is not limited to this life; (3) that it is not revealed whether or not all will ultimately repent. The modern denial of the second has, I suppose, had more to do with the despiritualizing of theology then almost anything that could be named."₁₀₁

Also while advising a young student he wrote:

"The idea of purgation, of cleansing as by fire, seems to me inseparable from what the Bible teaches us of the Divine chastisements; and, though little is directly said respecting the future state, it seems to me incredible that the Divine chastisements should in this respect change their character when this visible life is ended.

"I do not hold it contradictory to the Article to think that the condemned doctrine has not been wholly injurious, inasmuch as it has kept alive some sort of belief in a great and important truth."₁₀₂

Thus we see that Dr. Hort's opinions were certainly not inhibited by orthodoxy. Yet his wayward ways do not end here. For, as his own writings display, Dr. Hort fell short in several other fundamental areas.

Hort's "Atonement"

There was also his rejection of Christ's atoning death for the sins of all mankind.

"The fact is, I do not see how God's justice can be satisfied without every man's suffering in his own person the full penalty for his sins."₁₀₃

In fact, Hort considered the teachings of Christ's atonement as heresy!

"Certainly nothing can be more unscriptural than the modern limiting of Christ's bearing our sins and sufferings to His death; but indeed that is only one aspect of an almost universal heresy."₁₀₄

The fact is, that Hort believed Satan more worthy of accepting Christ's payment for sins than God.

"I confess I have no repugnance to the primitive doctrine of a ransom paid to Satan, though neither am I prepared to give full assent to it. But I can see no other possible form in which the doctrine of a ransom is at all tenable; anything is better than the notion of a ransom paid to the Father."₁₀₅

Hort's "Baptism"

Dr. Hort also believed that the Roman Catholic teaching of "baptismal regeneration" was more correct than the "evangelical" teaching.

"...at the same time in language stating that we maintain 'Baptismal Regeneration' as the most important of doctrines ... the pure 'Romish' view seems to me nearer, and more likely to lead to, the truth than the Evangelical."₁₀₆

He also states that, "Baptism assures us that we are children of God, members of Christ and His body, and heirs of the heavenly kingdom."₁₀₇

In fact, Hort's heretical view of baptism probably cost his own son his eternal soul, as we find Hort assuring his eldest son, Arthur, that his infant baptism was his salvation:

"You were not only born into the world of men. You were also born of Christian parents in a Christian land. While yet an infant you were claimed for God by being made in Baptism an unconscious member of His Church, the great Divine Society which has lived on unceasingly from the Apostles' time till now. You have been surrounded by Christian influences; taught to lift up your eyes to the Father in heaven as your own Father; to feel yourself in a wonderful sense a member or part of Christ, united to Him by strange invisible bonds; to know that you have as your birthright a share in the kingdom of heaven."₁₀₈

Hort's Twisted Belief

Along with Hort's unregenerated misconceptions of basic Bible truths, there were his quirkish and sometimes quackish personal beliefs.

One such example is his hatred for democracy, as he asserts in a letter to Rev. Westcott dated April 28, 1865:

"...I dare not prophesy about America, but I cannot say that I see much as yet to soften my deep hatred of democracy in all its forms."₁₀₉

In fact, Hort's hope, during the years of the American Civil War, was that the South would win. This desire was fostered by the hope that such a victory would destroy bothcountries to eliminate America's threat to England's domination of the world. His own words betray this in a letter which he wrote to Rev. John Ellerton in September of 1862:

"I care more for England and for Europe than for America, how much more than for all the niggers in the world! And I contend that the highest morality requires me to do so. Some thirty years ago Niebuhr wrote to this effect: 'Whatever people may say to the contrary, the American empire is standing menace to the whole civilization of Europe and sooner or later one or the other must perish.' Every year has, I think, brought fresh proof of the entire truth of these words. American doctrine (only too well echoed from Europe itself, though felt to be at variance with the institutions of Europe) destroys the root of everything vitally precious which man has by painful growth been learning from the earliest times till now, and tends only to reduce us to the gorilla state. The American empire seems to me mainly an embodiment of American doctrine, its leading principle being lawless force. Surely, if ever Babylon or Rome were rightly cursed it cannot be wrong to desire and pray from the bottom of one's heart that the American Union may be shivered to pieces.

"I do not for a moment forget what slavery is, or the frightful effects which Olmsted has shown it to be producing on white society in the South; but I hate it much more for its influence on the whites than on the niggers themselves. The refusal of education to them is abominable; how far they are capable of being ennobled by it is not clear. As yet everywhere (not in slavery only) they have surely shown themselves only as an immeasurably inferior race, just human and no more, their religion frothy and sensuous, their highest virtues, those of a good Newfoundland dog."₁₁₀

Hort also had no respect for prominent Americans, be they politician or preacher. Concerning President Abraham Lincoln he wrote: "I cannot see that he has shown any special virtues or statesmanlike capacities."₁₁₁ The great preacher D.L. Moody impressed him as follows:

"Think of my going with Gray yesterday afternoon to hear 'Moody and Sankey' at the Haymarket. I am very glad to have been, but should not care to go again. All was much as I expected, except that the music was inferior, and altogether Sankey did not leave a favourable impression. Moody had great sincerity, earnestness, and good sense, with some American humour which he mostly keeps under restraint, but in matter is quite conventional and commonplace. Much the most remarkable thing is the congregation or rather audience."₁₁₂

Hort's distaste for America may not be solely attributed to patriotism as much as to a tainting of his thinking by a touch of Communism. These facts are brought out in his continued correspondence with Rev. John Ellerton, circa 1850:

"I have pretty well made up my mind to devote my three or four years up here to the study of this subject of Communism."₁₁₃

"I can only say that it was through the region of pure politics that I myself approach Communism."₁₁₄

"To be without responsibility, to be in no degree our 'brother's keeper,' would be the heaviest curse imaginable."₁₁₅

"Surely every man is meant to be God's steward of every blessing and 'talent' (power, wealth, influence, station, birth, etc. etc.) which He gives him, for the benefit of his neighbours."₁₁₆

Also suspect is Hort's delving into the supernatural along with his good friend, Brooke Foss Westcott, and others in what was called the 'Ghostly Guild' (more on this later).

"Westcott, Gorham, C.B., Scott, Benson, Bradshaw, Luard, etc., and I have started a society for the investigation of ghosts and all supernatural appearances and effects, being all disposed to believe that such things really exist, and ought to be discriminated from hoaxes and mere subjective delusions; we shall be happy to obtain any good accounts well authenticated with names. Westcott is drawing up a schedule of questions. Cope calls us the 'Cock and Bull Club;' our own temporary name is the 'Ghostly Guild.' "₁₁₇

Then again, it is possible that the learned doctor was influenced by more than mere philosophy, as we see in his description of a hotel in the Alps where he often vacationed:

"Pontresina, Hotel Krone; homely, but very clean and comfortable; ... beer excellent."₁₁₈

It is not an amazing thing that any one man could hold to so many unscriptural and ungodly beliefs. It is amazing that such a man could be exalted by Bible believing preachers and professors to a point of authority higher than the King James Bible! Dr. Hort was a truly great Greek scholar, yet a great intellect does not make one an authority over the Bible when they themselves do not even claim to believe it! Albert Einstein was a man of great intellect, but he rejected Scripture, and so where he speaks on the subject of Scripture he is not to be accepted as authoritative. Possessing a great mind or great ability does not guarantee being a great spiritual leader. Dr. Hort was a scholar, but his scholarship alone is no reason to accept his theories concerning Bible truth.

If fundamental pastors of today enlisted the services of an evangelist and found that this evangelist had beliefs paralleling those of Fenton John Anthony Hort, I believe that the pastor would cancel the meeting. Strangely through, when a pastor discovers such to be true about Dr. Hort, he excuses him as "a great Greek scholar" and presents his Authorized Version to him to be maliciously dissected and then discarded as Dr. Hort sets himself down in the seat of authority which the Bible once held. Here again I must assert that most often this is done with childlike faith on the part of the pastor, due to the education he received while in seminary. The seminary is not really guilty either, for they have simply and unsuspectingly accepted the authority of two men raised under the influence of a campaign by the Jesuits to re-Romanize England. Wilkenson reports that Hort had been influenced by these Roman Catholic forces: "Dr. Hort tell us that the writings of Simon had a large share in the movement to discredit the Textus Receptus class of MSS and Bibles." ₁₁₉

Problems with Westcott

Unfortunately for the "new Bible" supporters, Dr. Westcott's credentials are evenmore anti-biblical. Westcott did not believe that Genesis 1-3 should be taken literally. He also thought that "Moses" and "David" were poetic characters whom Jesus Christ referred to by name only because the common people accepted them as authentic. Westcott states:

"No one now, I suppose, holds that the first three chapters of Genesis, for example, give a literal history - I could never understand how anyone reading them with open eyes could think they did - yet they disclose to us a Gospel. So it is probably elsewhere. Are we not going through a trial in regard to the use of popular language on literary subjects like that through which we went, not without sad losses in regard to the use of popular language on physical subjects? If you feel now that it was, to speak humanly, necessary that the Lord should speak of the 'sun rising,' it was no less necessary that he would use the names 'Moses' and 'David' as His contemporaries used them. There was no critical question at issue. (Poetry is, I think, a thousand times more true than History; this is a private parenthesis for myself alone.)" ₁₂₀

He also said "David" is not a chronological but a spiritual person. ₁₂₁

That the first three chapter of Genesis are all allegory has been believed by liberals and modernists for years. Do today's fundamentalists realize that those modernists' beliefs were nurtures in the heart of this Bible critic?

Westcott was also a doubter of the biblical account of miracles: "I never read an account of a miracle but I seem instinctively to feel its improbability, and discover somewhat of evidence in the account of it." ₁₂₂ If a great fundamental preacher of our day were to make this statement, he would be called apostate, but what then of Westcott?

Westcott believed that the second coming of Jesus Christ was not a physical coming but a spiritual coming: "As far as I can remember, I said very shortly what I hold to be the 'Lord's coming' in my little book on the Historic Faith. I hold very strongly that the Fall of Jerusalem was the coming which first fulfilled the Lord's words; and, as there have been other comings, I cannot doubt that He is 'coming' to us now." ₁₂₃

Westcott's "Heaven"

Wait! This fundamental doctrine is not the last one to be denied by Bishop Westcott, for he believed Heaven to be a state and not a literal place. Note the following quotations from Bishop Westcott: "No doubt the language of the Rubric is unguarded, but it saves us from the error of connecting the Presence of Christ's glorified humanity with place; 'heaven is a state and not a place.'" ₁₂₄

"Yet the unseen is the largest part of life. Heaven lies about us now in infancy alone; and by swift, silent pauses for thought, for recollection, for aspiration, we cannot only keep fresh the influence of that diviner atmosphere, but breathe it more habitually." ₁₂₅

"We may reasonably hope, by patient, resolute, faithful, united endeavour to find heaven about us here, the glory of our earthly life." ₁₂₆

Westcott's "Newmanism"

Dr. Westcott was also deeply devoted to John Newman, the Roman Catholic defector who took 150 Church of England clergymen with him when he made the change. Those of his disciples who did not make the physical change to Rome, made the spiritual change to Romanism, though many, like Westcott, never admitted it.

In writing to his futue wife in 1852, Westcott wrote: "Today I have again taken up 'Tracts for the Times' and Dr. Newman. Don't tell me that he will do me harm. At least today he will, has done me good, and had you been here I should have asked you to read his solemn words to me. My purchase has already amply repaid me. I think I shall choose a volume for one of my Christmas companions." ₁₂₇

This was written after Newman had defected to Rome!

Wilkenson adds, "By voice and pen, the teaching of Newman changed in the minds of many their attitude toward the Bible. Stanley shows us that the allegorizing of German theology, under whose influence Newman and the leaders of the movement were, was Origen's method of allegorizing. Newman contended that God never intended the Bible to teach doctrines."

Westcott also resented criticism of the Essays and Reviews. Upon hearing the Bishop of Manchester deride the apostate authors of these heretical essays, Westcott wrote, "But his language about the Essays and Reviews roused my indignation beyond expression." ₁₂₈

These are the convictions of a man greatly responsible for the destruction of Christian faith in the Greek Text of the Authorized Version. Place Mr. Westcott next to any present fundamental preacher or educator, and he would be judged a modernist, liberal and heretic. In spite of his outstanding ability in Greek, a man of his convictions would not be welcome on the campus of any truly Christian college in America. This is not an overstatement, nor is it malicious. The Christian colleges of today hold very high standards and simply would not settle for a man of such apostate conviction, no matter how great his ability to teach a given subject.

• Continue Westcott and Hort
• Table of Contents

Source

Note: Highlights added for emphasis.

.

Hegelian Dialectics and Conspiracy

Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel

Photo (Courtesy) http://jspivey.wikispaces.com/Georg+Wilhelm+Friedrich+Hegel+Monica

As I speak tonight, try to relate what I say to your observation of our own country, and our Western (once Christian) allies. As we examine the philosophy behind national and international affairs, we discover it has a common purpose and source in every major nation, with the exception of perhaps China.

At first sight, militant national power appears to be the major force in history; but if there is a power which can bring nations into military conflict, it is a superior power. Is there such a power, and where, if anywhere, is it located?

There is a relationship between Finance, Centralization, and World Hegemony. Until the outbreak of the First World War, money appeared to be a mere mechanism. But the arrangements made to finance the war reveal that the money system was in fact the vehicle of a POLICY, and that that policy was the CENTRALIZATION of power leading progressively to World Government. Prior to the outbreak of war, Great Britain was the CENTRE (but not the BEING) of world financial control; with the war, financial control was transferred to New York and from there used to dismantle the British Empire which, by reason of British traditions and the Anglo-Saxon character, had been the great barrier to World Dominion by those operating through the world financial system. The fall of the British Empire was a FINANCIAL accomplishment, not a military one. But the terms of 'peace' imposed on 'victorious' Britain are those which might have been expected following military DEFEAT.

But the Power which emerged into the open in this century had its birth long before that. It was incubated (but not conceived) in the Secret Societies of Europe, appeared briefly in the French Revolution, and spread to Britain in the form of Fabianism, and to America in the form of various Socialist societies. Following the first phase of the war, it openly took over Russia, and since has visibly spread as International Communism until it has taken over the greater part of the globe.

Current history, which looks episodic, is in fact the culminating stages of a very long-term policy moving internationally, but visible only in the long perspective of time.

What we think we see is often an illusion intentionally presented, like the conjuror who would have you to believe he holds an orange in his right hand, when it is actually in his left hand. Citizens of the world, whether their sympathies are left-wing or right-wing, monarchist or republican, have been used as pawns in their game of Hegelian psychology by the hidden hand that rules.

In reality, the orange is in neither left nor right hand. The Hegelian dialectic process is the notion that conflict creates history. (See brain2.htm "Brainwash").

From this axiom it follows that controlled conflict can create a predetermined history. For example when the Trilateral Commission discusses 'managed conflict', as it does extensively in its literature, it implies the managed use of conflict for long run predetermined ends - not for the mere random exercise of manipulative control to solve a problem.

The dialectic takes this Trilateral 'managed conflict' process one step further. In Hegelian terms, an existing force (the thesis) generates a counterforce (the antithesis). Conflict between the two forces results in the forming of a synthesis. Then the process starts all over again: Thesis vs. antithesis results in synthesis.

It's like two companies with undisclosed common stockholding submitting competitive tenders for a project on a site for which their stockholder has different plans altogether. Whatever the outcome, the stockholder is in beneficial control.

Here are some illustrations of the Hegelian Dialectic process:-

The Globalist Elite

| |

Thesis Antithesis

| |

Marxist Russia Nazi Germany

| Conflict of |

| World War II |

1917 Bolshevik Revolution 1933 Hitler's accession to power

USA Constructs and subsidizes USA constructs and subsidizes

Soviet Union 1920 -- present National Socialism

| |

Profit

|

Synthesis

|

Post World War II United Nations, a step towards New World Order

__________________________________________

Since World War II:-

The Globalist Elite

| |

Thesis Antithesis

| |

Marxist Russia Capitalist West

| (no longer Free Enterprise)

| Conflict of |

| Cold War |

USA Constructs and subsidizes USA constructs and subsidizes

Soviet Union | Germany, Japan, Israel, Foreign

| Aid, Korea, Vietnam, etc.

| |

Profit

|

Synthesis

|

Detente, Glasnost, Perestroika, destruction of the Berlin Wall

and supposed collapse of Soviet Union. One step closer to NWO.

__________________________________________

At the present day:-

The Globalist Elite

| |

Thesis Antithesis

| |

Communist China USA and/or CIS (Russia)

| Conflict |

| |

West see Russia as under threat from China and unite with CIS

| |

Profit

|

Synthesis

|

New World Order

__________________________________________

In our adversarial 'two' party politics:-

The Globalist Elite

| |

Thesis Antithesis

| |

Aust. Liberal Party Aust. Labor Party

or or

(US. Republican Party) (US. Democratic Party)

| Conflict of |

| general election |

Multimillion dollar borrowing of campaign funds

| |

Profit

|

Synthesis

|

Australia becomes a Republic so that new Constitution permits

usurpation of States' sovereignty and National Sovereignty

surrendered for Asian regionalization in NWO.

__________________________________________

In recent Sydney news:-

The Globalist Elite

| |

Thesis Antithesis

| |

NSW State Government Aborigine activists in Redfern

| Developers/financiers

| Conflict of street |

| violence and arson |

Desire to evict and resettle Free relocation of Aboriginie

Aboriginie residents outside tenants to brand new homes.

Metropolitan Sydney prior to Profit from redevelopment of

2000 Olympic Games. Beautify site and subsequent sale of

and redevelop as commercial slums transformed to luxury

or inner-city apartments for inner-city apartments, shopping

wealthy Chinese with a view and commercial complex whilst

to huge increase in rates. retaining some ownership.

| |

Profit

|

Synthesis

|

A FURTHER step towards the destruction of Australia's once

homogeneous society with development of largest Asian Colony

to date in the heart of Sydney.

__________________________________________

In the religious world of AD325:-

Satan

|

Constantine and Rome

| |

Thesis Antithesis

| |

Athanasius Arius

| Conflict of |

| theology |

Trinitarianism Unitarianism

| |

Conflict of human reasoning

culminating in First Nicea Council

|

Profit

|

Synthesis

|

Recognition of carnal reasoning against Christian faith and

its institutionalization under State patronage and control.

Eventual outlawing of Christian faith and the persecution of

true saints by the false church until today, true Christianity

is accounted heresy and ridiculed by most Bible students.

__________________________________________

In the religious world of Papal Rome:-

Satan

|

The Globalist Elite

| |

Thesis Antithesis

| |

Roman Catholicism Protestantism

| Conflict of |

| theology |

Counter Reformation Reformation

Great harlot Prostitute daughters

Vatican II World Council of Churches

End of Gentile Dispensation

Beast unites with Image to the Beast

Incarnation of Pope Apostasy

| |

Profit

|

Synthesis

|

Union of churches to stop Communism and rule New World Order

__________________________________________

In his novel "Connings by", Disraeli wrote "the world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes".

Woodrow Wilson said, "Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of somebody, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it".

Now for our text. In Matthew 16:6, Jesus said, "Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees".

This is another illustration of Hegelian dialectics or logical argument. In other words, the mark of the beast: wisdom against faith.

Here were two denominations each inspired by Satan, whose purpose was to contest the Laws and Ordinances of the Old Testament. One was the THESIS, the other its ANTITHESIS. Neither could agree on the Word or recognize It manifested before them. The SYNTHESIS through the apostasy of both parties was their own damnation through rejection and crucifixion of Messiah. Even their high priest declared, "His blood be upon us and upon our people". And It has been ever since.

The synthesis sought by the Establishment is called the New World Order. Without CONTROLLED conflict, this New World Order will not come about. RANDOM individual actions of persons in society would not lead to this synthesis, it is ARTIFICIAL, therefore it has to be created. And this is being done with the calculated, MANAGED, use of conflict. And all the while this synthesis is being sought, there is no profit in playing the involved parties against one another. (Hence World War I was postponed three times until the pawns were in their predetermined places). This also explains why the International bankers backed the Nazis, the Soviet Union, North Korea, North Vietnam, etc., against the United States. The 'conflict' built profits while pushing the world ever closer to One World Government.

The Establishment is ruled by elite, secret societies. Their operations must be seen and explained in terms of the Hegelian dialectic process. Their operations cannot be explained in terms of any other philosophy; therefore they cannot be described as "right" or "left", Marxist or Capitalist. However, one group is secular, and another is religious. The religious force is the Roman Catholic church. We are familiar with their place in history and in prophecy. Our teaching will consider the secular group and its objectives which is ALL of these and NONE of these.

In Hegelian philosophy the conflict of political 'right' and political 'left', or thesis and antithesis in Hegelian terms, is essential to the forward movement of history and historical change itself. Conflict between thesis and antithesis brings about a synthesis or new historical situation.

Our descriptive world history in the West and Marxist countries consists only of description and analysis within a political framework of 'right' or 'left'. For example, historical work published in the West looks at communism and socialism either through the eyes of financial capitalism, or Marxism. While historical work published in Russia looks at the West only through Marxist eyes. However, there is another frame of historical analysis that has never been utilized. This would employ a framework of Hegelian logic, to determine if the elites who control the State use the dialectic process to create a predetermined historical synthesis.

The current world situation was deliberately created by elitist power more or less by manipulation of 'right' and 'left' elements. Over the past 100 years or so they've developed both right and left elements to bring about a NWO. Right-left situations have been deliberately created and then placed in conflict mode to bring about a synthesis.

Since the rise of Kant (who stressed reason and experience) in German philosophy, we can identify two conflicting systems of philosophy; and therefore two opposing ideas of the State, society and culture.

In the U.S., the British Commonwealth and France, philosophy is based on the individual and the rights of the individual. Whereas in Germany from the time of Kant, through Fichte and Hegel up to 1945, basic philosophy has been universal brotherhood, rejection of individualism, and general opposition to Western classical liberal thought in almost all of its aspects. German idealism was the philosophical basis for the work of Karl Marx and the LEFT Hegelians, as well as Bismarck, Hitler and the RIGHT Hegelians. The paradox is that Hegel gave a theoretical basis not only to the most conservative of German movements, but also to most of the revolutionary movements of the 19th century. Both Marx and Hitler have their philosophical roots in Hegel.

From the Hegelian system of political thought, alien to most of us in the West, stem such absurdities as the State seen as the "March of God through history", that the State is also God, and the only duty of a citizen is to serve God by serving the State, that the State is Absolute Reason and citizens can only find freedom by worship and utter obedience to the State. Other Hegelian absurdities have thoroughly penetrated our education system. But that is for another topic.

From this system of Hegelian philosophy comes the historical dialectic, "that all historical events emerge from a conflict between opposing forces." These emerging events are above and different from the conflicting events. Any idea or implementation of an idea may be seen as THESIS. This thesis will encourage emergence of opposing forces, known as ANTITHESIS. The final outcome will be NEITHER thesis nor antithesis, but a SYNTHESIS of the two forces in conflict.

In DAS KAPITAL, Marx posed capitalism as thesis and communism as antithesis. What has been completely ignored by historians, including Marxists, is that any clash between these forces cannot lead to a society which is either capitalist or communist but must lead to a society characterized by a SYNTHESIS of the two conflicting forces. The clash of opposites must in the Hegelian system, bring about a society neither capitalist nor communist. Moreover, in the Hegelian scheme of events, this new synthesis will reflect the concept of the State as God, and the individual as totally subordinate to an all powerful State. This was the thought we encountered in "Hubris".

The function of a Parliament or a Congress is for Hegelians, psychology. Merely to allow individuals to feel that their opinions have some value, and to allow a government to take advantage of whatever wisdom the 'peasant' may accidentally demonstrate. This is so obvious in Australian politics today. As Hegel puts it:

"By virtue of this participation, subjective liberty and conceit, with their general opinion, (individuals) can show themselves palpably efficacious and enjoy the satisfaction of feeling themselves to count for something."

War, the organized conflict of nations for Hegelians, is only the visible outcome of the clash between ideas. Following the outbreak of war in 1939, Social Creditor C.H. Douglas said, "The international money marketeers care no more for the immolation of the peoples of a continent that for the death of a sparrow"; and "unfortunately the world is in the grasp of theorists to whom misery and death of millions is a grain of sand beside the working out of their designs". As John Dewey, the Hegelian darling of the modern educational system, puts it:

"War is the most effective preacher of the vanity of all merely finite interests, it puts an end to that selfish egoism of the individual by which he would claim his life and his property as his own or as his family's."

Above all, the Hegelian doctrine is the divine right of States rather than the divine right of kings. The State for Hegel and Hegelians is God on earth:

"The march of God in history is the cause of the existence of states, their foundation is the power of Reason realizing itself as will. Every state, whatever it be, participates in the Divine essence. The State is not the work of human art, only Reason could produce it."

For Hegel the individual is nothing, the individual has no rights, morality consists solely in following a leader.

Compare this to the spirit and letter of the Australian Constitution: "WHEREAS the people" grant the State some powers and reserve all others to the people. Whilst it recognizes no State denomination, it places the Christian God as its Head, unlike Hegel's "the State is God on earth." To elitists like The Order in the USA, The Group in the UK, Illuminati in Germany, and the Politburo in Russia, the State is supreme, and a self-appointed elite running the State acts as God on earth.

Manipulation of 'left' and 'right' in domestic USA, where Wall Street supports both Republicans and Democrats, as their Australian associates support Liberal and Labor, is duplicated in the international field where 'left' and 'right' political structures are artificially constructed and collapsed in the drive for a one-world synthesis. In fact, 'left' and 'right' are two controlled factions of the Illuminati.

Textbooks present war and revolution as more or less accidental results of conflicting forces. The decay of political negotiations into physical conflict comes about, according to these books, after valiant efforts to avoid war. Unfortunately, this is nonsense. War is always a deliberate creative act by individuals.

The Tribunals that investigated Nazi war criminals were careful to censor any records of Western Assistance to Hitler. And Western textbooks on Soviet economic development omit any description of the economic and financial aid given to the 1917 Revolution and subsequent economic development by Western firms and banks.

Revolution is always recorded as a spontaneous event by the politically or economically deprived against an autocratic state. Western textbooks never reveal the evidence that revolutions need finance; and the source of the finance in many cases traces back to Wall Street.

Of course our Western history is every bit as distorted, censored, and largely useless as that of Hitler's Germany, the Soviet Union or Communist China. No Western foundation will award grants to investigate their own benefactors. Few Western scholars can survive by researching such theses, and publishing houses daring to accept such manuscripts suffer intimidation or even violence from the Establishment. The recent trials of David Irving with his erstwhile publisher bears this out.

Like the true revelation of God's Word, largely unrecorded history tells a story contrary to what we've been taught to regard as truth. A story of the deliberate creation of war, the knowing finance of revolution to change governments, and the use of conflict to create a New World Order.

We will explore thesis and antithesis in the development and construction of the Soviet Union (thesis) and Hitler's Germany (antithesis). We will also explore the continuation of this dialectic conflict into the last few decades, specifically in China today and show that the purpose is to create a new synthesis, a New World Order along Hegelian lines where the State is Absolute and the individual can find freedom only in blind obedience to the State.

Something we have to do is to break an almost universal mindset, that Communists and Capitalists are bitter enemies. This Marxist axiom is a false statement and for a century has fooled academics and investigators alike. The key to understanding modern history is that elitists had as close working relations with both Marxists and Nazis as they have with Marxists and Capitalists.

After World War II the world stage was changed. After 1945 it became the Soviet Union on one side versus the United States on the other. The first dialectical clash led to the formation of the United Nations, an elementary step on the road to world government. The second dialectical clash led to the Trilateral Commission and REGIONAL groups, like Oceania, Eurasia and Eastasia from "1984," and more subtly to efforts for a merger of the United States and the Soviet Union. Definitely Orwellian! Various stooges 'fronting' for the faceless elite agitate for a new Constitution that will enable them to usurp Australia's sovereignty and absorb us into an Asian Bloc, ruled from Beijing or Tokyo.

Western Christian civilization, whose domain was very nearly the world, had expanded without notable recession until in 1914. In 1917 it began a retreat that has since been uninterrupted (Matthew 24:7-8). Huge amounts of Western property, much of it in land, factories and mines, has been stolen by revolutionaries, or abandoned by Western owners. Political and strategic losses are of more lasting and fundamental importance. But it is not politically correct to criticize its demise today.

World history since 1917 reflects an application of Hegelian dialectics. Russia was taken over by mainly Askenazi Jews from the East End of New York who established Socialism, later called Communism. This Revolution was planned by international financiers and financed by Wall Street. Indeed Woodrow Wilson sent US troops who took over and held the Siberian Railroad from 1918 to impede the transport of grain and raw materials to Germany, and so far as possible prevent commerce, until the Soviets were sufficiently established to take over. US troops remained until 1920.

Thus we see governments need censorship to classify certain files for thirty or fifty years after events, to protect the living from charges of treason, and to conceal the past intrigues and long term goals of the hidden elite who call the shots.

Soviet Russia's first Five Year Plan was devised by Detroit-based Albert Kahn, Inc., and Russia's industry financed by Wall Street. Thus was the THESIS: Communism, established.

But the MARXIST version of the Hegelian dialectic poses financial CAPITALISM as thesis, and Marxist revolution as antithesis. An obvious puzzle in this Marxian statement is the nature of the SYNTHESIS presumed to evolve out of the clash of these OPPOSITES. It cannot be Communism!

Lenin's statement that the State will wither away at the synthesis stage is nonsensical. In fact, as all contemporary Marxist states testify, in practice, the State becomes all powerful. The immediate task of "the revolution" is to convey all power to the State, and modern Marxist states operate under a constant paranoia that power may indeed pass away from the hands of the State into the hands of the people.

If MARXISM is posed as the thesis and NATIONAL SOCIALISM as antithesis, then the most likely SYNTHESIS becomes a Hegelian NEW WORLD ORDER, a synthesis evolving out of the clash of Marxism and national socialism. Moreover, in THIS statement those who FINANCE and MANAGE the clash of opposites can REMAIN in control of the synthesis.

The elite have artificially encouraged and developed BOTH revolutionary Marxism and national socialism while retaining some control over the nature and degree of the conflict, therefore it is able to determine the evolution and nature of the New World Order.

Out of war and revolution come opportunities for profit by corporations under the control and influence of these elites. In the two World Wars, the Korean and Vietnamese Wars, there are numerous examples of American banks and corporations trading with the enemy.

The antithesis, National Socialism, is no more. The Cold War is over, so we're taught the thesis of Russian Communism is also dead. This leaves the once Christian now Capitalist West. Since we are 'friends', the West now finances Russia at government level, increasing profits and reducing risks for the international bankers.

To prevent history coming to its end (he says tongue in cheek) the elite introduced a new dialectic process. World War II was the culmination of the dialectic process created in the 1920s and 1930s. The clash between 'left' and 'right', the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany, led to creation of a synthesis - the UN, and a start towards regional groupings in NATO, the Common Market, UNESCO, Warsaw Pact, SEATO, CIS, then the Trilateral Commission. A start towards New World Order.

World War II left the Elite with the necessity to create a new dialectical situation to promote MORE conflict to achieve a higher level synthesis.

The source of this process may be found in US National Security Memorandum No. 68 of 1950 which opened up the road for Western technology to build a more advanced Soviet Union - which it did in the 1960s and 1970s with computerized space-age technology. In true Hegelian tradition it simultaneously argued for massive expansion of US defenses - on grounds of a future Soviet threat. (Which would not have been possible without the transfer of Western technology). Thus the internationalists profited from Soviet and US purchases.

The principal devices used to control the dialectic process in the past two decades have been (a) information, (b) debt and (c) technology. These have become diluted over time. They don't work as well today as they did in the 1950s.

By and large, control of INFORMATION has been successful because the intellectual world is still locked into a phony verbal battle between 'left' and 'right', whereas the real struggle is the battle between individual freedom and the encroaching power of the absolute State. The Soviet Union, with its tight censorship, presents a strictly Marxist ('left') orientation to its citizens. The enemy is always the 'fascist' United States. The West is a little more complicated but not much more so. Whereas financial power is used to control politics, information is used to control human perceptions.

Brethren, to the elites, we're 'human cattle' participating in a double blind laboratory experiment. By God's Grace, the elect can't be deceived on the revealed Word of God, which, as a sharp two-edged sword, divides asunder these deceptions.

In the West the choice is basically between a controlled 'left-oriented' information, and a controlled 'right-oriented' information. The conflict between the two CONTROLLED groups keeps an apparent informational conflict alive. Unwelcome facts that fall into either camp are conveniently forgotten. Books that fall into either camp can be effectively neutralized because they will incur the wrath of both 'right' and 'left'. The faster the cattle run, the faster the treadmill takes them to nowhere.

Any publication which points up the fallacy of the Left-Right dichotomy is ignored . . . and citizens keep trooping down to the polling booths in the belief they have a 'choice'. Witness Australian elections. The Labor and Liberal Parties frankly admit their policies are common.

The second control mechanism is DEBT. We all understand that. If Marxist countries have to import technology, they need to earn or borrow Western currencies to pay for it. Loans have to be repaid. So to some extent, debtors are under control of creditors, unless they default. And therein lies the weakness.

The third control mechanism is TECHNOLOGY. If technology to advance to more efficient production levels has to be imported, then the recipient is always kept away from the 'state of the art'. The weakness for the elite is that military technology does not require a market system.

The dialectic plan therefore misfired for several reasons. Firstly, the informational blackouts were not as successful as they expected. Control of Time and Newsweek gave them dominance over weekly news summaries. The TV networks have been able to orchestrate viewers reactions - to some extent - by propaganda in movies. (For example, when I went to the giant IMAX movie theatre, I noticed propaganda for the 'Greenhouse' HOAX had been subtly included in the narrative). But the elite were unable to restrict individuals and relatively small non-academic groups, almost always outside Universities (whose curricula they control) from exploring obvious inconsistencies in Establishment propaganda. These groups, often mistakenly termed 'left' or 'right,' are outside the manipulated left-right spectrum.

Secondly, the debt weapon was over-used. Communist countries are now saturated with debt to Western bankers.

Thirdly, while technology is still a useful weapon, there are distinct stirrings among independent analysts of the danger posed for the Western world by building enemies.

We've spent 50 years arming our enemies, and developing their industries with our technology. And under the LIMA Agreement, have transferred our manufacturing infrastructure offshore. Last year China purchased the whole of New Zealand's forests "in perpetuity" for US$80 million donated by Australia. No wonder our Aborigines are caught up in Communist ideas when we give money to foreign nations who consider us "barbarians," and to others, who have the Northern half of our continent colored green and labeled "South Irian" in their school atlases and on military maps.

Brother Branham said the West was trying to buy her friends, and when we can no longer afford to bribe them we will discover they are our enemies (This Day This Scripture, 16:132; Influences, 7:40; Genesis 3:15).

Even without interference by the international bankers the consequences are alarming, both for America and for the Western world. The West has a brief opportunity between the decline of Russia and the rise of China. Europe has wasted most of the present decade by pursuing the dangerous IRRELEVANCE of the single currency. (No doubt a ploy of her fairweather banking friends). America has wasted it on a shallow prosperity; even the recovery hasn't greatly strengthened the US economy. Neither Europe nor America is prepared for the global competition of the next century. For America, the progressive shift of wealth and power to Asia will be humiliating, and perhaps destabilizing.

Consequently, in today's world we can identify two facts in construction of a new dialectic. First, cautious reinforcement of the Marxian arm - for example: Marxist Angola got a green light, Marxist Grenada got a red light.

Second, the construction of a completely new arm, that of Communist China, itself Marxist, but with conflict potential for the Soviet Union. Major efforts are in progress, only partly revealed in the press, to create a new superpower in conflict mode with the Soviet Union. This is the new antithesis, replacing Nazi Germany.

American involvement in China began with Wall Street's intervention into Dr. Sun Yat Sen's revolution of 1911. During World War II the US helped the Chinese Communists into power. The decision to build Communist China as a new arm of the dialectic was made under Richard Nixon and executed by Henry Kissinger and George Bush.

By the turn of the century, Communist China will be a "superpower" built by American technology and skill, presumably for conflict with Russia. What then is left for the USA but an 'accommodation' with the CIS to set up a world government.

"And the sixth angel poured out his vial upon the great river Euphrates; and the water thereof was dried up, that the way of the kings of the East might be prepared" (Revelation 16:12). The drawing-away of the Holy Spirit from apostatising Western (once Christian) civilization gradually diminished our invisible barrier and defence of faith in the Word. Thus the pagan ways of the kings of the East were entertained and adopted in place of faith. Foreign aid, intermarriage, immigration and preferential tariffs began. We have since transferred our manufacturing industries to these strange people. With no manufacturing we have unemployment and no self-reliance in the event of hostilities. Furthermore, we fall further under obligation to the foreign bankers.

The Hegelian dialectic is being employed to secure and sustain absolute world power and authority to an elite. We have fallen into a Hegelian trap and don't know it. bb970219.htm

Source