Christianism logo image


from: Tertullian, A Historical and Literary Study, Timothy David Barnes, Assistant Professor of Classics, University College, Toronto, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1971.


"In both Rome and Gaul,...Christianity ["CHRISTIANITY" "IS NOT USED [does not occur] IN THE BIBLE" [see #18, 365-366, 372; etc.]] first took root among the Greek communities." [68].

"In dissecting an opponent's position, Tertullian [ c. 160 - c. 220] shows a consummate skill which can cause no small perplexity to the earnest and the philosophically minded. MARCION [c. 100 - c. 165 C.E.] [see 1168, 1171; etc.] DENIED THE HUMAN BIRTH OF THE CHRIST AS BEING RIDICULOUS AND ABSURD. On a superficial level, one might retort that Marcion made it easier to believe that Jupiter became a bull or a swan than that the Christ became truly man.2 More seriously, one could seek and discover God's purpose: to challenge conventional beliefs. Of course there was something shameful in Christ's passion. But which was the shameful element? Marcion professed to accept that Christ was crucified, but denied that he was born of Mary. But which was the greater indignity for God, to be born or to die? to be circumcised or executed? to be nursed or buried? If Marcion cannot accept Christ's birth, how can he accept that Christ endured insults and sufferings? Marcion wishes to destroy a shame which is necessary to faith. Foolish the belief may be, but it brings salvation. The Son of God was crucified: the Christian is not ashamed precisely because he ought to be. The Son of God died: it is credible because it is improbable. He was buried and rose again: that is certain because it is impossible.3

Tertullian's argument is often misunderstood and misinterpreted. He tends to be credited with the assertion 'credo quia absurdum', which he never used.4 [see #12, 259-260] And the passage is frequently invoked to prove his irrationality, or that he viewed religion as the realm of subjective and unreasoning emotion.5 If that was his true attitude, why did he ever descend to apparently rational argument?" [223].

"None could quarrel with his [Tertullian] description of Justin as philosopher and martyr. More significant is the phrase used of Irenaeus: 'omnium doctrinarum curiossimus explorator'. Irenaeus would not have approved.2 Tertullian had used a very similar phrase of the emperor Hadrian, in a brilliant and accurate epigram: 'omnium curiositatum explorator'.3 That hit off an important facet of the emperor's character--and of Tertullian's. With Justin and Irenaeus are yoked two other writers. Tertullian commends one Proculus for a virgin old age and Christian eloquence, and Miltiades for being an ecclesiastical sophist. The combination helps to define Tertullian. Proculus combined his [Tertullian] own moral and literary aspirations, and he [Tertullian] accorded Miltiades a designation which he [Tertullian] could more justly have claimed for himself: 'ecclesiarum sophista'." [232] [End of main text].

 PAGE 1167

from: A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs, A Reference Guide to More

Than 700 Topics Discussed by the Early Church Fathers, David W. Bercot, Editor, Hendrickson, 1998.
'Acquiring a Foundational Understanding

To accurately grasp what the early Christian said about a given topic it becomes important to have a basic understanding of three concepts:

(1) Marcion [c. 100 - c. 165 C.E.] and the Gnostics,

(2) the early Christian concept of the Logos, and

(3) the Scriptures of the early church.

Marcion and the Gnostics

Many early Christian writings were polemical works directed against the heretic Marcion or against various Gnostics.5 Both Marcion and the Gnostics taught that the earth and everything in it (including people) were created by a God they called the Demiurge. They regarded the Demiurge not as the God of the New Testament; rather, the Demiurge was thought to be more of a demigod, with certain imperfect traits. Gnostics sometimes portrayed him as an unmerciful, unloving, and vengeful God. On occasion they referred to him as the "just God" of the Old Testament in contrast with the "good God" of the New Testament.

Marcion and the Gnostics also taught an exaggerated view of the fall of man. They believed that all physical creation--including the physical body--was inherently flawed and incapable of salvation. Accordingly, they denied the resurrection of the body, as well as the efficacy of baptism and communion. Many taught that the Son of God did not really become man and that he did not really die on the cross. In their teaching, the Son only appeared to do so. These Gnostics (including a group called Docetists, from the Greek word dokeo, "seem, appear") are the persons whom John spoke of as the "antichrists," for they denied that Jesus had come in the flesh (2 John 7).


It would be quite difficult to understand most of the early Christian writings without some appreciation of the meanings and significance of the Greek word logos, particularly as a title of Christ. Since our English translations usually translate logos as "Word" when this title is applied to the Son, English-speaking Christians usually fail to appreciate the term logos and its significance. The Moffatt version of the New Testament, however, often leaves logos untranslated when it is used as a title for the Son. For example, it renders John 1:1: "The Logos existed in the very beginning, the Logos was with God, the logos was divine." It translates Revelation 19:13 as follows: "He is clad in a robe dipped in blood (his name is called The Logos of God.)"

PAGE 1168

Moffat left the term logos untranslated because in Greek that term means far more than simply "word." Its range of meaning could include "reason," "rational principle," and even "mind." Early Christians use the term logos extensively when speaking about the Son of God. When John refers to the Son as being the Logos of God, the early Christians understood him to mean that the Son is the eternal Rational Principle of the Father, the Father's Counselor before all ages.6

The Early Christian Scriptures

To comprehend and appreciate what the early Christians have to say, a thorough knowledge and grasp of Scripture was indispensable. That is because the early Christians grounded all of their fundamental beliefs on Scripture. Nonetheless, a first reading of early Christian quotations from Scripture can be perplexing. Not infrequently, their citations do not read the same as do our modern Bibles. There are several reasons for this [always more, Christian apologies (excuses! (cover-ups!))]. First, when quoting from the Old Testament, the early Christians nearly always quoted from the Septuagint [which version?] [other Greek versions?] [see 1172, 1179-1181] (i.e., the Greek Old Testament, including the Apocrypha)--as did the apostles [including, the "Apostle Paul"]. In contrast, modern Old Testament translations are usually based on the Masoretic Text. Secondly, we must remember that the early Christians had no concordances, topical Bibles, study aids, computer Bibles, or even handy personal Bibles. As a result, the early Christians often had to quote Scriptures from memory, which meant they sometimes misquoted a [sic!] verse or two [sic!]. Furthermore, particularly in the case of the Latin writers, citations seem to have come from a version or text that differed slightly [?] from later versions or editions.' [x-xi].


"...contending with Marcion and Basilides [fl. 117 - 138 C.E.] that [the body of Christ] possessed no reality. Tertullian (c. 210, W), 3.546." [66].

[Example: "(c. 210, W), 3.546" = about the year 210, Western writer [E = Eastern writer], Ante-Nicene Fathers, volume 3, page 546].


"The doctrine taught by Cerinthus [fl. c. 100 C.E.] is this: that there will be an earthly reign of Christ. Since Cerinthus was himself a man devoted to the pleasures of the body, and completely carnal in his dispositions, he [Cerinthus (and since, millions more)] imagined that the kingdom would consist in THOSE KINDS OF GRATIFICATIONS ON WHICH HIS OWN HEART WAS SET [see #3, 57, 289.; etc.]. Dionysius of Alexandria (c. 262, E), 6.82." [91].


"Constantine [Emperor 306 (312) - 337 (280? - 337)] was directed in a dream to cause the heavenly sign to be outlined on the shields of his soldiers and so to proceed to battle. He did as he had been commanded. And he marked on their


PAGE 1169

shields the letter X, with a perpendicular line drawn through it and turned round at the top--being the monogram of Christ. Lactantius (c. 320, W), 7.318." [174].


"They thought His discourse was harsh and intolerable, for they thought that He had really and literally directed them to eat his flesh....His word is spirit and life. So He likewise called His flesh by the same description. Since the Word has become flesh, we should desire Him in order that we may have life. We should devour Him with the ear and feed on Him with our understanding. We should digest Him by faith. Tertullian (c. 210, W) 3.572." [259].

"Gods, Pagan"

"As you cannot deny that these deities of yours once were men, you have taken it on yourselves to assert that they were made gods after their deaths. Tertullian (c. 197, W), 3.27." [316]. [compare: Euhemerism (Euhemerus fl. 300 B.C.E.)]. [See: The Evolution of the Idea of God, Grant Allen, 1897].

"That those are no gods whom the common people worship, is known from this: They were formerly kings. On account of their royal memory, they subsequently began to be adored by their people even in death. Later, temples were founded to them. Next, images were sculptured to retain the faces of the deceased by such likeness. Later, men sacrificed victims and celebrated festal days to give them honor. Finally, those rites became sacred to posterity--although at first they had been adopted as a consolation. Cyprian (c. 250, W), 5.465." [316-317].

"We can show that all those whom you represent to us as gods, and whom you call gods, were actually men. We can do this by quoting either Euhererus of Acragas [?]...or Nicanor the Cyprian [?]. Arnobius (c. 305, E), 6.486." [317].

"Jew, Jews"

'A Jew, however, will not admit that any prophet used the expression that the "Son of God" would come. For the term they use is that the "Christ of God" will come. Indeed, many times they ["Jews"] directly question us about the "Son of God," saying that no such Being exists or was ever the subject of prophecy. Origen (c. 248, E), 4.418.' [374].

"Although [the pagan] Celsus will not admit it, the Jews are nevertheless possessed of a wisdom superior not only to that of the multitude, but also to those who have the appearance of philosophers. Origen (c. 248, E), 4.562." [374].

"[The Jews] kill and punish us whenever they have the power, as you can well believe. For in the Jewish war that recently raged, Barchocheba, the leader of the Jewish revolt, gave orders that Christians alone should be led to cruel punishments. Justin Martyr (c. 160, E), 1.173." [374].

PAGE 1170


"The Marcionites are those whom the apostle John designated as antichrists, for they deny that Christ has come in the flesh....Now, the more firmly the antichrist Marcion had seized this assumption, the more prepared was he, of course, to reject the bodily substance of Christ. Tertullian (c. 207, W), 3.327." [420].

"In the scheme of Marcion,...the mystery of the Christian religion begins from the discipleship of Luke....On finding the Epistle of Paul to the Galatians (wherein Paul rebukes even apostles for not walking uprightly according to the truth of the gospel), Marcion labors very hard to destroy the character of those Gospels that are published as genuine. Tertullian (c. 207, W), 3.348." [421].

"This shows that at the very outset of Christ's ministry, Christ came not to destroy the Law and the Prophets, but rather to fulfill them. But Marcion has erased that passage as an interpolation. Tertullian (c. 207, W), 3.352, 353." [421].

[early reference to "interpolation" (commonly, forgery!)].

"New Testament"

"One...should take his stand against HISTORICAL FICTIONS [(surprise, to me) early reference, to the wording I used [see #1, 1; etc.]] and oppose them with the true and lofty evangelical message in which the agreement of the doctrines found in both the so-called Old Testament and in the so-called New appears so clearly and completely. Origen (c. 228, E), 9.348." [473].


"A full-term and regular birth takes place, as a general rule at the beginning of the tenth month....For my own part, I prefer viewing this measure of time in reference to God, as if implying that the ten months rather initiated man into the ten commandments. For the numerical estimate of the time needed to consummate our natural birth corresponds to the numerical classification of the rules of our regenerate life. But inasmuch as birth can also take place at the seventh month, I more readily recognize in this number...the honor of a numerical agreement with the sabbatical period. Tertullian (c. 210, W), 3.218." [478]. [See: 1088-1089].


The human race has progressed with a gradual growth of population. Some occupy different portions of the earth as natives....Others occupy certain regions through emigration, which they call "colonies." These are established for the purpose of throwing off excess population, disgorging into other places their overcrowded masses....WHAT MOST FREQUENTLY MEETS OUR EYES IS OUR TEEMING POPULATION. OUR NUMBERS ARE BURDENSOME TO THE WORLD, which can hardly supply us from its natural elements [Tertullian! An early Malthus]. Our wants grow more and more acute, and our complaints more bitter in all mouths, while Nature

PAGE 1171

fails in affording us her usual sustenance. In fact, pestilence, famine, wars, and earthquakes have to be regarded as a remedy for nations, as the means of pruning the abundance of the human race. Tertullian (c. 210, W), 3.210.' [492].


[Addressed to Pagans:] On the other hand, what kind are your pictures? Diminutive, Pans, naked girls, drunken Satyrs, and phallic tokens--painted naked in pictures disgraceful for filthiness! More than this, you are not ashamed before the eyes of all to look at representations of all types of licentiousness that are portrayed in public places. Rather, you set them up and guard them with scrupulous care. You consecrate these pillars of shamelessness at home as though they were the images of your gods. We denounce not only the use of them, but the very sight and mention of them. Clement of Alexandria (c. 195, E), 2.189." [528].


"Further reasons for marriage that men allege for themselves arise from anxiety for posterity, and the bitter, bitter pleasure of children. To us [who does "us" represent?], this is idle. For why should we be eager to bear children, whom, when we have them, we desire to send before us [to glory]. For we are desirous, too, to be taken out of this most wicked world and to be received into the Lord's presence, which was the desire even of an apostle....Are we secure enough of our own salvation that we have leisure for children? Should we seek burdens for ourselves that are avoided [how? see following] even by the majority of the Gentiles? Tertullian (c. 205, W) 4.41." [537].

'By enjoining continence and restraining sexual desire [again, how?],... God has abolished the command, "Grow and multiply." ... For the extremity of the times has restrained [that command] which He had sent out. It ["the extremity of the times"] has taken back the indulgence that He ["God"] had granted. Tertullian (c. 212, W), 4.53.' [537].

'The extremity of the times has canceled the command, "Grow and multiply [superb recognition--and, action!]." For the apostle gives another command, "It remains that those who have wives so be as if they did not," because the time is short. Tertullian (c. 212, W), 4.64.' [537].


"That the understanding of their books might not be lacking, this also the Jews supplied to Ptolemy. For they gave him seventy-two interpreters....The same account is given by Aristeas. So the king left these works unlocked to all, in the Greek language. To this day, at the temple of Serapis, the libraries of Ptolemy are to be seen, with the identical Hebrew originals in them. The Jews, too, read them [apparently, "their books"] publicly. Tertullian (c. 197, W), 3.32." [608].

PAGE 1172

from: An Understandable History of the Bible, by Rev. Samuel C. Gipp, Th.D., 1994 (1990) (1987). [Note: "Must See!" A combination of sectarian zeal, scholarship, and, research. Fascinating! Amusing!]. [copy available from:].

'The Dreaded Happening

What the Roman Catholics had always dreaded had come to pass. The Word of God was translated from the true text into the clearest form of the common language, English. Protestants had long refuted and neutralized Roman Catholicism by the phrase, "The Bible says so." THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH HAD BEEN BUILT ON ABOUT 10% TWISTED SCRIPTURE AND 90% SUPERSTITION. Where men were ignorant, it could rule by playing on their fears. But, when the "ignorant and unlearned" people received Christ as personal Savior and clung faithfully to the King James Bible, they were not only immovable but could easily refute any heresy, be it Catholic or otherwise.' [99].


Another important step in subtlely removing the authority of the Authorized Version is to exalt the unreliable MSS of the Local Text of Egypt. This will be commented on later. Let it suffice for now to reveal the man who laid the groundwork for just such a move. His name was J.J. Griesbach (1745-1812).

Griesbach divided the extant MSS [Manuscripts] into three groups. One was called the "Constantinopolitan" family which is our Universal Text. The other two were known as "Western" and "Alexandrian."

As can be expected, Griesbach was not a Bible believer. In fact, he stated, "THE NEW TESTAMENT ABOUNDS IN MORE GLOSSES, ADDITIONS, AND INTERPOLATIONS PURPOSELY INTRODUCED THAN ANY OTHER BOOK."78 He was also antagonistic to any verse which taught the fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith. Whenever possible he devised means to cast doubt on such passages. He said, "the most suspicious reading of all, is the one that yields a sense favorable to the nourishment of piety (especially monastic piety). When there are many varient [variant] readings in one place, that reading which more than the others manifestly favors the dogmas of the orthodox is deservedly regarded as suspicious."79

It is strange indeed that Dr. Griesbach should expect orthodox Christians to manipulate the book which they truly believe to be from God, in order to teach Christianity more fervently. He never mentioned any apprehension that heretics might delete and alter doctrinal passages. What kind of scholarship is it that naturally suspects born-again Christians of an act bordering on sacrilege, but never doubts the integrity of infidels? Is this God's method? [An amusing paragraph!]

Whatever it was that possessed [sic] Griesbach to suspect Christians of such criminal [sic] acts also possessed two of this followers. Hill explains:

PAGE 1173

"WESTCOTT AND HORT PROFESSED TO 'VENERATE' THE NAME OF GRIESBACH ABOVE THAT OF EVERY OTHER TEXTUAL CRITIC OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. Like Griesbach they believed that the orthodox Christian scribes had altered the New Testament manuscripts in the interest of orthodoxy [amusing sentence]...."' [109-111].

'Westcott and Hort

Chapter 8

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 Westcott, 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 [this clause, a sophistic entree], therefore we are forced to scrutinize these men's lives [compare: Inquisitions].' [116-117].

'Strange Bedfellows

Though unimpressed with the evangelicals of his day, Hort had great admiration for Charles Darwin [1809 - 1882]! 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."' [121].

PAGE 1174

'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 both countries 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 of 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 every 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'

[126-128]. [See: 1142].

"Problems with Westcott"

'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....' [132].

PAGE 1175


"It can be safely said that if Westcott and Hort were not two Jesuit priests acting on secret orders from the Vatican, that two Jesuit priests acting under such orders could not have done a better job of overthrowing the authority of God's true Bible and establishing the pro-Roman Catholic text of Alexandria, Egypt!" [167].

'The King James Apocrypha

Another one of the assaults on the Authorized Version is that the early editions contained the Apocrypha between the Old and New Testaments. In defense, we shall list the seven reasons why the Apocrypha was NOT considered inspired by the Authorized Version translators.

"The reasons assigned for not admitting the Apocryphal books into the Canon, or list, of inspired Scriptures are briefly the following:
1. Not one of them is in the Hebrew language, which was alone [?] used by the inspired historians and poets of the Old Testament.

2. Not one of the writers lays any claim to inspiration.

3. These books were never acknowledged as sacred Scriptures by the Jewish church and, therefore, never sanctioned by our Lord.

4. They were not allowed among the sacred books, during the first four centuries of the Christian church.

5. They contain fabulous statements, and statements which contradict not only the canonical Scriptures, but themselves; as when, in the two books of Maccabees, Antiochus Epiphanes is made to die three different deaths in as many places.

6. It includes doctrines in variance with the Bible, such as prayers for the dead and sinless perfection.

7. It teaches immoral practices, such as lying, suicide, assassination, and magical incarnation.

For these and other reasons the Apocryphal books, which are all in Greek, except one which is extant only in Latin, are valuable only as "ancient documents, illustrative of the manners, language, opinions, and history of the East [applies also, in part, to the Old Testament, and, New Testament]."251

We see then that the King James translators did not accept the books of the Apocrypha as inspired by God.' [203-204]. [More decisions, by men, for "God" (themselves!) (see 1159)].

PAGE 1176

Chapter 10"


'We have taken a careful look at the true enemy of the Word of God, the Roman Catholic Church. In so doing, we have examined Rome's efforts and goals concerning the overthrow of the God-honored Universal Text. We have seen that in the past, this organization ["Roman Catholic Church"] has been ruthless in her attempt to exterminate both Christians and their Bible. We can be confident that her goals have not changed.

'We have looked into the lives of the two men ["Westcott and Hort"] who were primarily responsible for the successful overthrow of the universal Text in textual criticism, and have discovered that they were not the "godly conservative scholars" which many brethren claim they were.' [219-220].

'There is no Bible that exalts Jesus Christ any higher than the Authorized Version. THERE IS NO BIBLE THAT HAS EVER BEEN MORE BLESSED BY GOD THAN THE AUTHORIZED ["KING JAMES BIBLE" (see 1178)] VERSION. There is no Bible which is more hated by Satan and the Roman Catholic Church than the Authorized Version. There is no Bible which is more clearly translated nor is any easier to read than the Authorized Version. There is no Bible which teaches doctrine more clearly than the Authorised Version.

I love the Lord Jesus Christ. I love His Book. I am thankful for His graciousness in giving me a perfect Bible in English. To show my appreciation, I intend to read it, believe it, learn it, memorize it, promote it, defend it, love it, keep it, and most of all, be in subjection to God's authority through it. In appreciation, I will not change it--not a colon or a comma, not even an italicized word, not a chapter, nor a verse marking. Nor will I condemn the parts I do not understand. I will not "correct" the parts I do not like. I will exalt Jesus Christ and give His Book any benefit of the doubt. I will not worry about "what the Greek says" but will accept the "English" God has given me. It is a spiritual Book. God's Hand is on it. I need no more. No other version comes close to it nor ever will. There is no reason that it should be replaced, for it is every word of God preserved in English and placed in my hand. It is up to me to place it in my heart.

As the very great man of God, Lester Roloff, once said, "The Bible--we don't need to rewrite it, we need to reread it!"


PAGE 1177

What more can be said about this grand Book than what it says about itself?

Psalms 12:6, 7 says, "The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.

Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever."

THANK YOU, LORD, FOR YOUR PERFECT BIBLE, THE AUTHORIZED KING JAMES BIBLE.' [221-222] [End of text]. [See (King James I): #24, 528-530; Appendix II, 698].

"About the Author

Dr. Gipp, a former Pastor, is an Evangelist, teacher, author and Bible Conference speaker. He has the unique ability to digest large amounts of information and then present it in an analytical, understandable, format.

His humorous, informative and forceful preaching style make him popular with all ages and keeps him in demand as a Revivalist and Bible Conference speaker." [back cover]. [See: 1179-1181; etc.].

PAGE 1178

from: American Bible Society, New! 68­Page Catalog, Over 100 Items Under $5.00, Tools for Spiritual Growth, 1999­2000 Scripture and Ministry Resource Catalog. [See:].

"Contemporary English Version, Today's English Version, New King James Version, New Revised Standard Version, New American Standard Bible, New International Version and New Jerusalem Bible Editions of Testaments and Bibles are not available for commercial resale. [Fiction! Updated!]

A Note to Our Roman Catholic Readers: Look for the Imprimatur symbol [symbol not reproducible] throughout this catalog as your indication that these materials carry the official Imprimatur for Catholic readers." ["3"].

"A Letter from the


With challenge comes change. In this 1999­2000 edition of the American Bible Society's Annual Catalog, we offer many new selections. Particularly noteworthy are the two new Jubilee Bibles. These special editions present the story of the African American experience and the fulfillment of God's promise

[the "promise", in part--SLAVERY! (see 1142, 1143-1144; etc.)]...."

[5] [Eugene B. Habecker].

"3. King James Version

Leather Bound Jubilee Bible

The classic King James Version of the Bible is, historically, the Bible of the Black church in America. It explores the history of African American culture and highlights the presence of Africans in the Bible as well as the history of the Black church and its influence on the Black family. This beautifully leather bound edition may well become a family heirloom as well as a treasure trove of information. Each copy comes individually gift boxed, has gilded-edge pages with a silk ribbon marker. The black bounded leather cover is gold stamped. 1756 p. (6 x 9-in.)


$49.95 single copy

$44.95 in case of 12 ($539.40)". [5].

[Interesting! The book ("King James Version of the Bible") of their ["African American culture"] enslavers! (see 1142, 1143-1144; etc.)].

[See (King James I): #24, 528-530; Appendix II, 698]. [See: 1142, 1175 (Hort)].

PAGE 1179

from: The Cairo Geniza, Paul E. Kahle, Second Edition, Praeger, 1960 (c1959).

"Earlier Texts of the Greek Bible

The different forms of earlier texts of the Greek Bible are of great interest to us. Traces of them can be found mainly in four kinds of sources:

1. In the so-called 'recensions' of the Christian 'Septuagint' [see 1172, 1181], indicated by Jerome [c. 340 - 420] and recognized as of importance by Paul de Lagarde [1827 - 1891]. The chief value of these 'recensions' is that they give us some material for the history of the Greek Bible in the various provinces of the Church and are of great help in classifying the MSS [Manuscripts] of the Greek Bible....

2. In quotations from the Greek Old Testament which are found in the New Testament and in other writings from the first two centuries B.C., in so far as they do not conform with the Christian standard [?] text.

3. In older translations made from the Greek Bible....

4. In the remains of the Hexapla. This great work of Origen [c. 185 - c. 254] is mostly valued only in so far as it gives an indication of alterations in the text of the Greek Bible in accordance with the authoritative [?] Hebrew text. The different versions collected here have, however, their own importance. We have seen that the version adapted to the authoritative text by Theodotion ["prob. 2nd cent." (Ox. Dict. C.C.)] differed from the version which became, as 'Septuagint', the standard [?] text of the Church. Some earlier material may be preserved also in new translations, such as Aquila and Symmachus. Translations of the Bible were hardly made without reference to already existing texts.

Of greater importance are, however, the ANONYMOUS VERSIONS which were discovered and registered by Origen. Here we have real [?] Jewish texts, not influenced by the Christian standard [?] text.

It was difficult to value this material rightly on the basis of the scattered remains of the Hexapla. The Milan palimpsest discovered by Giovanni Mercati has preserved nearly 150 complete verses of the Psalms in five columns: the Hebrew text written in Greek characters, Aquila, Symmachus, Septuagint, and Quinta. The edition of these valuable fragments, prepared by Cardinal Mercati, will make possible their careful examination. It is certain that a new era in the study of the Hexapla will begin with the publication of these texts.2 But the whole problem of the Septuagint will be greatly affected. The task which the Septuagint presents to scholars is not the 'reconstruction' of an imaginary 'Urtext' [see 1181] nor the discovery of it, but a careful collection and investigation of all the remains and traces of EARLIER VERSIONS OF THE GREEK BIBLE which differed from the Christian standard [?] text." [261, 262, 264].

PAGE 1180

from: The First Bible of the Church, A Plea for the Septuagint, Mogens Müller, Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, Supplement Series 206, Copenhagen International Seminar 1, 1996.


In connection with the preparations for the new Danish Bible translation (authorized in 1992), my interest in the problems concerning the shape of the Jewish Bible in New Testament times was awakened. The obvious difficulty is of course that MOST NEW TESTAMENT AUTHORS SEEM TO HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO QUOTE THE OLD TESTAMENT CORRECTLY, insofar as we identify the Old Testament with the Hebrew Bible. However, USUALLY THEY USED THE OLD GREEK TRANSLATION, THE SEPTUAGINT, WHICH WAS PRODUCED IN THE THIRD AND SECOND CENTURIES BCE. What makes us so certain today that it is the Hebrew text that represents the Old Testament in a Christian context? What caused the displacement of the Septuagint? If it was that the Hebrew text was judged to be the Ur-text [see 1180], this is no longer so certain as it used to be. TODAY IT IS AN OPEN QUESTION WHETHER THE SEPTUAGINT SHOULD BE REINSTALLED AS THE OLD TESTAMENT OF THE CHURCH." ["7"]. [See (Septuagint): 1169, 1172, 1180].

[Note: "The Greek of the Septuagint is essentially the Koine" (Encyc. of Religion, 1987, vol. 2, 166) (as, reportedly, is the Greek of the New Testament)].


The Text of the Greek Bible, A Students Handbook, Frederic G. Kenyon, Late Director and Principal Librarian of the British Museum, Duckworth, 1937.

The Septuagint and Modern Study, Sidney Jellicoe, Oxford, 1968.

The Text of the Septuagint, Its Corruptions and Their Emendation, by the late Peter Walters, Edited by D.W. Gooding, Cambridge, 1973.

Studies in the Septuagint: Origins, Recensions, and Interpretations, Selected Essays with a Prolegomenon by Sidney Jellicoe, KTAV, c1974.

"Library of Biblical Studies

edited by Harry M. Orlinsky Professor of Bible

Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion

New York City"

Wolf in the Sheepfold  The Bible as a Problem for Christianity, Robert P. Carroll, SPCK, 1991.

PAGE 1181