Walter Veith and the KJV issue.

[Reddogs]

Quote:

Reddogs, I'm not doubting anything you are putting out, but I have an ignorant question that has to do with "how do they get away with it?"

The bottom line is they did not get away with it. Why? Because they did not do much of what is alleged.

This issue of Biblical translation is complex and most people do not take the time to study it.

It is NOT appropriate to chose a translation based upon how it treats one's beliefs.

One should chose one's beliefs based upon a good translation of the Word of God, not the other way around.

The basic foundation for the "King James Only" school of thought is based upon the work of Wilkinson's book. That book is full of errors, as textual scholars agree. Thompson does a good job in his critique.

But, few will probably read it. They just won't take the time to look at the other side.

The arguments that have been presented here are full of half-truths and factual errors. Few people will actually study the subject to see where the truth is.

The bottom line is: Translations are a mixture of the human and the divine. God reaches people in the KJV as well as the NIV. It is the work of the Father of Lies to destroy faith in the various translations of God's Word.

If you want to know the truth, do not look to only one side. Read the other. Start with Thompson.

Then go back to basics and study the subject of the textual MSS and the subject of Biblical translation.

Its not that complex, even a 'plowboy' can see the changes if he so chooses to look, but then some choose not to.

Now as to why they did it, I could not put my finger on it but in my research came up with something interesting. If you look behind the scenes you find more, as we can see from their quotes and ideas that they were being influenced towards Catholic doctrine and traditions and since during this period there was a stirring of Jesuit or Catholic ideas in England and that Westcott and Hort became entangled with them. I cant find evidence for Hort but Westcott was deeply involved with John Newman. Lets take a look at who he is...

John Henry Newman, D.D., C.O. (21 February 1801 – 11 August 1890[2][3]), also referred to as Cardinal Newman and Blessed John Henry Newman, was an important figure in the religious history of England in the 19th century. He was known nationally by the mid-1830s.[4]

Originally an evangelical Oxford academic and priest in the Church of England, Newman was a leader in the Oxford Movement. This influential grouping of Anglicans wished to return the Church of England to many Catholic beliefs and forms of worship traditional in the medieval times to restore ritual expression. In 1845 Newman left the Church of England and was received into the Roman Catholic Church where he was eventually granted the rank of cardinal by Pope Leo XIII.....

Interesting to say the least, a Jesuit hiding in plain sight, seems possible.

[Gerr]

I think the best way to study the scriptures in depth is to compare several translations and comparing them with the original languages. So far I am very satisfied with the ESV as my main study Bible. But so far I find that there is probably no translation that will completely satisfy everyone; each one has some shortcomings.

[CoAspen]

The obvious that gets so often missed in these discussions, are we worshiping the author of the words/ideas/stories or the words themselves. Depending on the answer, the issue is there or not there. I have yet to hear of someone or know of someone who has lost their 'core values', what ever those may be, because of a certain translation of the Bible. It goes back to that relationship thing, with God or ........? I seem to remember something about the Holy Spirit being sent into the world. I also remember a certain group of individuals who spent daily time with Christ and still had a difficult time understanding. To 'blame' a translation for whatever seems a little 'short sighted' to me.

[Reddogs]

The obvious that gets so often missed in these discussions, are we worshiping the author of the words/ideas/stories or the words themselves. Depending on the answer, the issue is there or not there. I have yet to hear of someone or know of someone who has lost their 'core values', what ever those may be, because of a certain translation of the Bible. It goes back to that relationship thing, with God or ........? I seem to remember something about the Holy Spirit being sent into the world. I also remember a certain group of individuals who spent daily time with Christ and still had a difficult time understanding. To 'blame' a translation for whatever seems a little 'short sighted' to me.

Go talk to a Jehovah Witness and see what they have lost and if you look at their version you will see how it lines up with these modern versions as it takes out the deity of Christ purposely.

[Reddogs]

I think the best way to study the scriptures in depth is to compare several translations and comparing them with the original languages. So far I am very satisfied with the ESV as my main study Bible. But so far I find that there is probably no translation that will completely satisfy everyone; each one has some shortcomings.

For someone who knows their Bible and doctrines there is not much of a issue, but where did they learn it from, thinks about it. Most Christian and especially Protestant beliefs and doctrines come from the Majority Text, the corrupted Minority Text was used to change or take out core beliefs and could not be trusted when it came to doctrine.

[Reddogs]

Just for the sake of proper perspective --- Re:

<< Textus Receptus is based on the vast majority (90%) of the 5000+ Greek manuscripts in existence. That is why it is also called the Majority Text. >>

Important words here, are, <<based on>>.

It is AS EQUALLY totally -- 100% -- impossible to compile a single Greek text from <<(90%) of the 5000+ Greek manuscripts in existence>> as from ALL <<the 5000+ Greek manuscripts in existence>>.

A 'critical Text' e.g. the Nestle Greek NT --- as is sometimes taken for granted --- is NOT <based on> just the '10% minority texts'.

The difference between a ‘Critical Text’ and the "Received Text" of Erasmus e.g., consists in the Critical Text taking as near as possible ALL manuscripts into consideration for compilation into a single Text, where the Received Text was limited to the at the time available manuscripts minus a few disapproved manuscripts (for whatever reasons).

Nestle's Critical Text at least and as can be seen in its introduction to the "Apparatus", 'disapproved' of no manuscripts for <basing> its compilation of a single Text on.

That is how I see it and which is the reason why I personally in some places / instances PREFER the Critical Text.

TRANSLATION of whichever 'Greek Text' is TOTALLY ANOTHER MATTER.

Yes, but when you have a version based on deleted and distorted text, is that better or worse. If you go to the Textus Receptus it is very hard to change the meaning with so many copies, with the thousand of Greek manuscripts in existence. This ensures the integrity of the words and meaning, but if you use the Egyptian/Minority Texts which is a few copies with gnostic influences and other corruptions, then you are looking for trouble.

As more and more modern Bible versions are picking this corrupted texts, they are based on Alexandrian text primarily from two sources-- the Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus from the 4th century and I have seen a third which also can be added to as a corrupted text with these two, the 1 Codex Alexandrinus from the 5th century .

The Vaticanus and Sinaiticus form a group of texts called the "Minority" Texts, and why, because the texts in agreement with them are very few in number. So lets look at these Manuscripts containing the corrupted Greek New Testament text, the Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus and 1 Codex Alexandrinus and see how they are connected.

Contents of Codex Vaticanus: “Vaticanus originally contained a complete copy of the Septuagint ("LXX") except for 1-4 Maccabees and the Prayer of Manasseh. Genesis 1:1 - 46:28a (31 leaves) and Psalm 105:27 - 137:6b (10 leaves) are lost and have been filled by a recent hand. 2 Kings 2:5-7, 10-13 are also lost due to a tear in one of the pages. The order of the Old Testament books is as follows: Genesis to 2 Chronicles as normal, 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras (which includes Nehemias), the Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Job, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Esther, Judith, Tobit, the minor prophets from Hosea to Malachi, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Baruch, Lamentations and the Epistle of Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Daniel.

The extant New Testament of Vaticanus contains the Gospels, Acts, the General Epistles, the Pauline Epistles and the Epistle to the Hebrews (up to Heb 9:14, &#954;&#945;&#952;&#945;[&#961;&#953;&#949;&#953;); thus it lacks 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon and Revelation. These missing pages were replaced by a 15th century minuscule supplement (no. 1957).

The Greek is written continuously with small neat writing, later retraced by an 11th century scribe. Punctuation is rare (accents and breathings have been added by a later hand) except for some blank spaces, diaeresis on initial iotas and upsilons, abbreviations of the nomina sacra and markings of OT citations.

The manuscript contains mysterious double dots (so called "umlauts") in the margin of the New Testament, which seem to mark places of textual uncertainty. There are 795 of these in the text and around another 40 that are uncertain.”

“Codex Vaticanus is one of the most important manuscripts for Textual criticism and is a leading member of the Alexandrian text-type. It was heavily used by Westcott and Hort in their edition of the Greek New Testament (1881).”

We see the Septuagint ("LXX") which is a based on the Alexandrian text.

Then on Codex Sinaiticus: “Codex Sinaiticus was found by Constantin von Tischendorf on his third visit to the Monastery of Saint Catherine, on Mount Sinai in Egypt, in 1859. The first two trips had yielded parts of the Old Testament, some found in a basket of manuscript pieces, which Tischendorf was told by a librarian that "they were rubbish which was to be destroyed by burning it in the ovens of the monastery".[2] The emperor Alexander II of Russia sent him to search for manuscripts, which he was convinced were still to be found in the Sinai monastery. In May 1975 during restoration work, the monks of St. Catherine's monastery at Sinai discovered a room under the St. George chapel which contained many parchment fragments. Among these fragments, twelve missing leaves from the Sinaiticus Old Testament were found.

Von Tischendorf reached the monastery on January 31; but his inquiries appeared to be fruitless. On February 4, he had resolved to return home without having gained his object.

On the afternoon of this day I was taking a walk with the steward of the convent in the neighbourhood, and as we returned, towards sunset, he begged me to take some refreshment with him in his cell. Scarcely had he entered the room, when, resuming our former subject of conversation, he said: "And I, too, have read a Septuagint"--i.e. a copy of the Greek translation made by the Seventy. And so saying, he took down from the corner of the room a bulky kind of volume, wrapped up in a red cloth, and laid it before me. I unrolled the cover, and discovered, to my great surprise, not only those very fragments which, fifteen years before, I had taken out of the basket, but also other parts of the Old Testament, the New Testament complete, and, in addition, the Epistle of Barnabas and a part of the Pastor of Hermas.[3]

After some negotiations, he obtained possession of this precious fragment, and conveyed it to Emperor Alexander, who fully appreciated its importance, and caused it to be published as nearly as possible in facsimile, so as to exhibit correctly the ancient handwriting. However, the tsar sent 9000 roubles to the monastery as a compensation.

Regarding Tischendorf's role in the transfer to Saint Petersburg, there are several views. Although when parts of Genesis and Book of Numbers were later found in the binding of other books, they were amicably sent to Tischendorf, the Codex is currently regarded by the monastery as having been stolen, a view hotly contested by several scholars in Europe. In a more neutral spirit, New Testament scholar Bruce Metzger writes: "Certain aspects of the negotiations leading to the transfer of the codex to the Czar's possession are open to an interpretation that reflects adversely on Tischendorf's candour and good faith with the monks at St. Catherine's. For a recent account intended to exculpate him of blame, see Erhard Lauch's article 'Nichts gegen Tischendorf' in Bekenntnis zur Kirche: Festgabe für Ernst Sommerlath zum 70. Geburtstag (Berlin, c. 1961); for an account that includes a hitherto unknown receipt given by Tischendorf to the authorities at the monastery promising to return the manuscript from St. Petersburg 'to the Holy Confraternity of Sinai at its earliest request'.

Notice again the the Septuagint ("LXX") of the Alexandrian text comes into the picture.

Codex Alexandrinus- “The Codex Alexandrinus (London, British Library, MS Royal 1. D. V-VIII; Gregory-Aland no. A or 02) is a 5th century manuscript of the Greek Bible, containing the majority of the Septuagint and the New Testament. Along with the Codex Sinaiticus and the Codex Vaticanus, it is one of the earliest and most complete manuscripts of the Bible. It derives its name from Alexandria where it resided for a number of years before given to the British in the 17th century.”

(From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Alexandrinus).

Notice Codex Alexandrinus is from the 5th century again HUNDREDS of years after the disappearance of Jesus (PBUH) and again Codex Alexandrinus is ALL in Greek, Jesus (PBUH) did NOT speak Greek, Jesus (PBUH) spoke the language of ARAMAIC.

Contents of Codex Alexandrinus: “The text in the codex is written in two columns in uncial script, with between 46 and 52 lines per column and 20 to 25 letters per line. The beginning lines of each book are written in red ink and sections within the book are marked by a larger letter set into the margin. Words are written continuously in a large square uncial hand with no accents and only some breathings (possibly added by a later editor).

It contains a complete copy of the LXX, including the deuterocanonical books 3 and 4 Maccabees, Psalm 151 and the 14 Odes. The "Epistle to Marcellinus" attributed to Saint Athanasius and the Eusibian summary of the Psalms are inserted before the Book of Psalms.

The codex also contains all of the books of the New Testament, in addition to 1 Clement (lacking 57:7-63) and the homily known as 2 Clement (up to 12:5a).

There is also an appendix marked in the index, which lists the Psalms of Solomon, and probably contained more apocryphal/pseudepigraphical books but has been torn off. The pages containing these books have also been lost.

Due to damage and lost folios, various passages are missing or have defects:

Lacking: 1 Sam 12:18-14:9 (1 leaf); Ps 49:19-79:10 (9 leaves); Matt 1:1-25:6 (26 leaves); John 6:50-8:52 (2 leaves); 2 Cor 4:13-12:6 (3 leaves)

Damaged: Gen 14:14-17, 15:1-5, 15:16-19, 16:6-9 (lower portion of torn leaf lost)

Defects due to torn leaves: Gen 1:20-25, 1:29-2:3, Lev 8:6,7,16; Sirach 50:21f, 51:5

There are 773 vellum folios (630 in the Old Testament and 143 in the New Testament). The manuscript measures 12.6 by 10.4 inches. Most of the folios were originally gathered into quires of 8 leaves each. However, in modern times it was rebound into quires of 6 leaves each. The only decorations in the manuscript are decorative tailpieces at the end of each book (see illustration). It also shows a tendency to increase the size of the first letter of each sentence.”

Again as in the 2 previous Oldest Greek manuscripts notice all the errors, and addition and subtraction of numerous books. Codex Alexandrius contain the “Epistle of Marcellinus” and in it’s Corrupted New Testament it contents parts of books called “1 Clement” and “2 Clement”.

All 3 are based on the same corrupted text and the source hidden so Christians who already knew the corruption of the Alexandrian manuscripts would be fooled, but the true text of the Textus Receptus unveils the false corrupted one, their subterfuge notwithstanding, but we must see with eyes that see and understand what happened.

(These two texts do not even agree with one another

[Reddogs]

Westcott and Hort made their Greek New Testament text version based on the Minority Text which of course included Vaticanus and the Sinaiticus. Since then another revision was created called the Nestle/Aland which was also based on the Minority Text. Nearly all of the new translations of the Bible are based upon one of these two Greek New Testaments and not the Textus Receptus. That means that the newer versions are based on 3-4 manuscripts or basically less than 5% of the manuscripts in stark contrast to more than 90% on the Textus Receptus or Majority Text. So you have to ask yourself, who would use text that is based on clearly corrupted manuscripts rather than one that has been tried and true and was the basis or at the center of the Reformation as it was the true text of Textus Receptus that the Waldensians brought to many of the Reformers that allowed their eyes to be opened and changed the course of church history.

Now lets look at the other side of the coin, as the corrupted Alexandrian text was allowed to creep into the church and led to the spread of a new theology which divided the church, confused even true followers, and is with us to this day as we see in the Jehovah Witnesses and others.

Arius, parish priest of the church of Alexandria, picked up and promulgated a doctrine to the world which changed or diminished the deity of Christ, which at that time caused a huge controversy in the Christian church that a general council was called at Nicaea, by the emperor Constantine in A.D. 325, to consider and rule upon its teaching. Arius maintained "that the Son was totally and essentially distinct from the Father; that He was the first and noblest of those beings whom the Father had created out of nothing, the instrument by whose subordinate operation the Almighty Father formed the universe, and therefore inferior to the Father, both in nature and dignity." This opinion was condemned by the council, which decreed that Christ was of one and the same substance with the Father. For ages it continued to agitate the Christian world, as the Arians spread the false teaching of Arianism among the people of the Roman Empire and beyond. We can look at the changes and deletions of the Alexandrian text and its derivatives and see the results in this view held by Arians, it almost destroyed the faith of Christian believers.

And yet here we are today, with the same text in the NIV and other new versions, and Christians pick it up and don't understand what it is......as the old saying goes..

"Those who do not read history are doomed to repeat it. Those who fail to learn from the mistakes of their predecessors are destined to repeat them."

[Reddogs]

Now some people say, but I like the new versions because they are so simple to read. Well, I came across a Adventist.org site on choosing a Bible translation that gave the following engaging explanation for "What Should We Use?"

"Clearly, there are substantial differences between the different translations. The old saying that one Bible is as good as another simply does not hold true. With this in mind, it is my belief that Christians are best off using an essentially literal translation, particularly for in-depth study and public reading. Since all Scripture is inspired by God (2 Tim. 3:16), we should seek to read translations that reflect the Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek words to the greatest degree possible. Jesus Himself said, “not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law” (Matt. 5:18, ESV), and we should be cautious about translations that alter the inspired Word of God.

Another reason for concern is that, in cases where there is more than one possible meaning of a biblical text, Christians reading dynamic equivalent translations or free paraphrases are frequently given only the translators’ interpretation. Here’s an example from Mark 9:24:

“Immediately the father of the child cried out and said, ‘I believe; help my unbelief!” (ESV).

“Immediately the boy’s father cried out and said, ‘I do believe; help my unbelief’” (NASB).

These essentially literal translations preserve the father’s somewhat confusing statement basically as he said it. When the father said, “I believe; help my unbelief,” did he mean that he wanted Jesus to help him overcome his unbelief or was he affirming that he already believed and wanted even more faith? We don’t know for sure, but it’s something we need to grapple with when we read the text. However, notice how dynamic equivalent translations and free paraphrases deal with this verse.

“Immediately the boy’s father exclaimed, “I do believe; helps me overcome my unbelief!” (NIV).

“Right away the boy’s father shouted, ‘I do have faith! Please help me to have even more’” (CEV).

“The father cried out, ‘Teacher, I do believe, but please help me overcome my unbelief! Please give me the kind of faith I need!’” (Clear Word).

The wording provided by these translations is so different because they present varying interpretations of what the father really meant to say. When the translator does the hard work of interpreting challenging passages, individual Christians are deprived of the opportunity to think for themselves. The reality is that Christians should expect to wrestle with difficult Bible passages since this is an important part of spiritual growth..."

http://www.adventist.org/pt/espiritualid...le-translation/

Very interesting to say the least..........

[Gregory Matthews]

Gerhard said:

Quote:

It seems you accept the above in good faith.

No. I do not.

I agree with it. That is quite different from saying that I accept it in good faith.

[Reddogs]

Originally Posted By: Reddogs

when you have a version based on deleted and distorted text, is that better or worse.

No compilation or 'Text' is <<based on deleted and distorted text>> ---<text> for 'manuscripts' I assume.

YOU DO HAVE HOWEVER scarcely if at all, today still, <<a version>> or 'translation' which not ITSELF contains <<deleted and distorted text>> 'translation'!

To Distort is ":to change the natural, normal, or original shape, appearance, or sound of (something) in a way that is usually not attractive or pleasing

: to change (something) so that it is no longer true or accurate

" and when they take out the deity of Christ and delete text which show core beliefs and doctrines, it 'distorts' and makes their version by definition no longer true and not attractive or pleasing to say the least.

[CoAspen]

Quote:

I seem to remember something about the Holy Spirit being sent into the world. I also remember a certain group of individuals who spent daily time with Christ and still had a difficult time understanding. To 'blame' a translation for whatever seems a little 'short sighted' to me.

Same comment, I am not a JW.

[Reddogs]

Quote:

I seem to remember something about the Holy Spirit being sent into the world. I also remember a certain group of individuals who spent daily time with Christ and still had a difficult time understanding. To 'blame' a translation for whatever seems a little 'short sighted' to me.

Same comment, I am not a JW.

Its not a translation, it is the same distortion they used all the way back to Alexandria with their corruption which we see the results of today, and now another generation is being subjected to it.

[Stan]

It would be wise to read the preface that the translators wrote regarding the KJV. Even they would not agree with Veith.

[Reddogs]

Where does Dr Veith fit in, please?

I posted this before but will give you the link to one of his videos on this issue...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNv-zzpIwBs

[Reddogs]

It would be wise to read the preface that the translators wrote regarding the KJV. Even they would not agree with Veith.

,

Stan, with all due respect your prejudices and presuppositions are showing. Please give us something of substance, something we can study and everyone see for themselves the truth of the matter. As you can see most of what I put down is not Walter Veith, and to dismiss the issue or him with such a post, is unfair to say the least. IMHO...

[Gregory Matthews]

Gerhard said:

Quote:

. . . the Roman Catholic Church today controls not only the translation but the whole industry of translation, printing and spreading of the Bible.

* * * * *

What Bible Society is there today that the Roman Catholic Church does not dominate and control? I can think of only the Trinitarian Bible Society – the only Bible Society where one can still obtain a Received Text.

3, Simultaneous with the sudden appearance of Bible Societies and Pentecostals, translations and spreading of the Bible sky-rocketed.

* * * *

. . . the Catholic Church besides its open and official participation and collaboration since 1955, through exactly its secret agency the Jesuits has unobtrusively and secretly infiltrated Bible societies and determined Bible translations ever since. It has even infiltrated the very bastion of Calvinism and the Pope’s own men were directly involved in – of all translations – the Nuwe Afrikaanse Bybel!

I will only say: Interesting!

[Johann]

http://www.thejerichoroad.com/home/category/walter-veith

This website seems to be closed.

[Johann]

Samuelle Bacchiocchi was great at selling his own books.

[phkrause]

I'd say they all are good at that!

[Johann]

You will recall Benjamin Franklin telling a lady he met of an evet. She didn't believe him because she had not seen it mentioned in the paper. So Franklin went straight home and put it in his paper.

Next time he saw her she said it must be the truth because she saw it in the paper.

Is this how we verify the truth?

[phkrause]

You will recall Benjamin Franklin telling a lady he met of an evet. She didn't believe him because she had not seen it mentioned in the paper. So Franklin went straight home and put it in his paper.

I think I was at another street at the time, and didn't hear that! LOL

[Woody]

Quote:

http://www.thejerichoroad.com/home/category/walter-veith

For those who do not know, Dr. Walter Veith is a middle-aged, white South African with a Ph.d in zoology, an atheist converted to Christianity who came out of South Africa’s racist apartheid regime. He was ordained in South Africa to the ministry of the Seventh-day Adventist church.

In the past, Dr. Veith was particularly known for his lectures on Creationism and health related issues, however, his current work focuses on promoting the most common conspiracy theories, ones found on thousands of web sites, in fringe publications, radio programs, late night cable televsion, and on the lucrative lecture circuit.

Among other things, Dr. Veith also teaches, contrary to Seventh-day Adventist belief, the superiority of the King James version of the Bible over other more modern versions and appears to believe more modern translations are part of the devil’s conspiracy to mislead humanity.

Dr. Veith’s most popular video on YouTube, one that has received over 80,000 views to date (!), is a clip claiming Saddam Hussein has been dead since 1999 and that the man by that name who was hung for crimes against humanity was a body double. Should you watch the clip, ask yourself if what Dr. Veith offers is real proof. What real evidence does he have to support his assertion? And if he does not offer sound proof, why is he doing this?

Dr. Veith also believes President George Bush and the CIA are responsible for planning and executing the destruction of the World Trade Centre towers in New York City. This is only one of many evil conspiracies he sees among world leaders. (see his New World Order videos).

This, according to Veith, is the outcome of President Bush and all the major world leaders being under the direct control of secret societies, particularly the Free Masons and the Jesuit order of the Catholic Church. Dr. Veith believes there is a conspiracy between Islam and the Catholic church to rule the world. He teaches that Mormons are also part of this secret conspiracy, one he is determined to expose.

However, it is not clear to me why he thinks his work is different than all of the secular conspiracy theorist he freely uses to “prove” his conjectures.

Dr. Veith sees the signs, symbols, and secret handshakes of secret societies all around us, permeating society and controlling minds. He believes these secret societies, inspired by the devil, are attempting to establish a New World order in which they have absolute control over the political and financial decisions of everyone.

Dr. Veith believes the Christian Alpha Course, because it has the word “alpha” in it’s name, is evil, since alpha brain waves, which we all have, are some how being used in a hypnotic way to control other human beings. I’m not exactly sure how this works out, but Dr. Veith seems to think this is happening. I suppose this would not apply to the Greek alphabet or any other letter system with the prefix of alpha. (see the Strange Fire video).

What I find more disturbing in Dr. Veith’s work is his twisting and misinterpretation of Bible prophecies to fit his scheme of conspiracy theories. This is undermining the faith of others who are sincerely trying to understand what God has said about events in the last days. Perhaps this, in the end, will prove the most serious consequence of his work in the name of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

I also find it odd and spiritually suspect that Dr. Veith spends all of his public time exposing what he imagines are the secret, sinful acts of others. I can’t help but wonder if Dr. Veith himself has a few secrets. I wonder because I’ve seen or heard nothing about his own current struggles with sin in his life. Perhaps that is all a thing of the past. Could his supposedly deep insights into the evil working of others be the result of his having reached perfection himself? To speak so often and so freely about evil outside himself suggest a belief that little resides within. Who better then to judge the world and expose it for what it is?

I’ve noticed this same tendency in the lives of Veith’s followers, the ones I have met personally or heard from. They have precious few specific confessions to make. Though I know of sins they are presently struggling with, they exercise a remarkable freedom in criticism of their church, fellow members, or the pastor. Odd, they never feel so free in talking about their own shortcomings. Not a peep is heard in prayer meetings or worship service when opportunities to put wrongs right are given. Not a single personal peccadillo is revealed. They might make the rash general reference to being a sinner, but much of the dirt others see in them is neatly swept under the rug. I believe Jesus called it hypocrisy.

(Should you, the reader, wonder about my own confessions or accuse me of hypocrisy, as more than one has, my archive category, “Self Exams” or “Meditations” will be a place to start. I openly confess here that hypocrisy has been one of my more grievous sins.)

Many Christians, including some Seventh-day Adventist ministers, believe that Dr. Veith is doing a wonderful work of warning the world about the conspiracies of evil that surround us. Though this surprises me personally, I suppose some of our members and pastors believe this is the work Jesus commissioned his disciples to do and that there are many examples in the Bible of Jesus preaching in this way. I have not been able to find any, but they must be there or else these sincere souls would not support Dr. Veith’s conspiracy theories.

I know, as a Seventh-day Adventist minister, that the Seventh-day Adventist church does not teach or approve of conspiracy theories. Nor does it advocate the King James Version of the Bible as the only trusted translation.

The Biblical Research Institute, an officially appointed theological research group of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, has found it necessary to refute Dr. Veith’s research in this area. (BRI Newsletter article).These facts can easily be gathered from our official public statements as well as the wide majority practice within our churches. Only the smallest minority of members worldwide, a group that does not represent the church as a whole, share the conspiracy theories of Dr. Veith.

(For more on our belief regarding Bible versions, here is a paper on the subject.)

The consistent practice of administrators, pastors, bible workers, elders, deacons, and other members from around the world show that Dr. Veith’s representations of the Seventh-day Adventist faith is very different from our own.

From Texas, Pastor Bill Cork comments, “His videos reveal that he has uncritically appropriated a wide variety of conspiracy theories and sources, which he has strung together on the flimsiest of associations (as noted under Alpha, above). Everyone is a freemason, these are controlled by the Jesuits, who also created the Mormons. He rehashes every 9-11, Kennedy assassination, and Oklahoma City bombing conspiracy theory. He consistently says he is giving sources, but his sources are mainly just other conspiracy sites.” -From Bill Cork’s blog, A Twitch Upon The Thread.

Dr. Veith is speaking and teaching in the name of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, therefore, you must ask yourself, is this what I believe and is it what I want others to believe about my faith?

I am saddened by the fact that some of our members are being misled by Dr. Veith and that some non-members are wrongly assuming he represents our faith. I received an early morning call from an irate member in Scotland, who had recently returned from the Veith meetings in the Netherlands and had come across my blog. He assured me he and others would be sending their tithe to Dr. Veith. Comments made on this blog are in a similar vein. From the comments and emails I have received, from members and fellow pastors, it is clear enough to me that Veith is having a significant negative and divisive influence in some of our local churches.

One local elder from Colorado (U.S.) has emailed me, telling of the divisive influence Veith has had in his church. How many others are having to spend time they could use in better ways, trying to counteract the distorted teachings of this misguided man?

I know of fellow pastors in the U.K. who are facing similiar division among their members. I have heard of them in Finland, the Netherlands, Germany, South Africa, and the United States.

If you as a church leader are not familiar with these issues, then I would hope you take the time to study them until we are able to give an answer to those who ask. There is a moral obligation resting on all who are called to teach the gospel of Christ. Are you willing to speak out, to say the things you have been saying privately about Dr. Veith’s misrepresentations of your faith? Are you a pastor or church administrator who has hesitated to take appropriate action under the guidelines of our church manual? Will you now challenge Dr. Veith’s insubordinate behaviour in circumventing the service request policies for ordained ministers? Will you be clear with the church at large where you stand on Veith’s conspiracy theories and other odd teachings? If you have been wondering about the timeliness of speaking out, I would suggest that time has come.

[Woody]

Originally Posted By: Woody

http://www.thejerichoroad.com/home/category/walter-veith

This website seems to be closed.

I'm sorry. I thought it was working when I posted this. But see the above post for the content.

[Kevin H]

A thing about the conspiracy theories... there is too much out in the open that is scary enough. And the conspiracy theories tend to have both what is open, what is plausible mixed with speculation and things that are implausible to make people think that the stuff in the open are just a part of the conspiracy nonsense and throw the baby out with the bathwater.

I was looking at a book on conspiracy theories and they had a section showing that Seventh-day Adventist church founders the Whites were a part of the illuminati looking at say their tombstone and other things that they did as things that only people in the illuminati do.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

I was looking at a book on conspiracy theories and they had a section showing that Seventh-day Adventist church founders the Whites were a part of the illuminati looking at say their tombstone and other things that they did as things that only people in the illuminati do.

lol...yep, that evil obelisk marking the White family graves..