Erasmus of Rotterdam


Here is a link to Bro. Bob Alexander’s website.  Specifically this link points to a series of mp3s that have to do with the topic of the King James Bible Controversy.


Obviously, I recommend the audio of Dr. Peter Ruckman.  But I also heartily recommend that you give a listen to the audio by BV Barlett about Erasmus of Rotterdam.


I fully believe that, along with the King James Translators, Erasmus is the fulfillment of Matt 23:34:

“Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:”

After listening, I think you will agree.


“God Loves Everyone”

This weekend, at a “funnymentalist” church in FL, we heard time after time the statement, “God loves everyone”.  Their tracts (which are sadly typical) all tell the sinner to recognize that God loves them.

Later, the song leader got up and said that he was thankful that “God loved him.”  I hope that you are not so brainwashed that you fail to see the problem here.  “God loves everyone” but I am so happy that he loves me?  Well, he supposedly loves everyone, so where’s the pressure coming from?

The clear way to answer this is to go to the Bible verses that say that God doesn’t love everyone.  We know that he “loved” everyone at Calvary by dying for them, but that verb tense matters.  All the cross references are in the past tense.  Proving that God does not love the world in the present tense. Today, God only loves men that come through Calvary to him.  Apart from that, he does not love them.  See John 3:36, Ps 5:5, Prov 6:16-19.

But to go a different direction, let me demonstrate the fallacy of thinking it’s good to make statements like “God loves everyone.”

Try to follow the logic:

To say that God loves everyone is the same as saying that God hates everyone.  Always remember the foundational truth that “You have to hate weeds in order to love flowers.”  If you say that you love weeds and flowers, you mean nothing.  Love involves some jealousy (SofS 8:6).  You cannot love flowers and weeds.  That is hate, because weeds kill flowers.

So let me end this article with some statements that are as absurd as “God loves everyone.”


Everyone is tall.

Everyone is smart.

Everyone is good looking.


I am trying to illustrate the law of opposites.  You cannot have love without hate.  You cannot have tall without short.  You cannot have fat without skinny.  You cannot have smart without dumb.  These general truths are never contradicted in the Bible and in fact, they are clearly upheld.  I am so thankful that God loves me (I John 4:10).  That means something because of who God is: he is an almighty, holy Creator whose name is Jehovah, who is jealous (Ex 20:5, 34:14).  He loves me, but he doesn’t love everyone.

As usual, more could be said.  For more info, see God is Love by Doctor Ruckman.

I Believe That the Bible Teaches More Than One Plan of Salvation (But Only One Today)


From 33 AD to today (assuming you are reading this before the Rapture of the church) a man is saved from hell by receiving Jesus Christ as his personal Saviour after he admits he is a sinner and that Christ died on the cross in his place and rose again three days later.  I don’t mean to make this complicated.  We usually just say that a man is saved by grace through faith.  After this a man is born again, given eternal life, is eternally secure, and will go home to heaven to be with Jesus Christ at death or the Rapture.  If a man believes anything else, he will go to hell and burn for forever.

That is good Bible doctrine.  A good Independent Baptist will agree with everything except the first line.  The average Independent Baptist church teaches that all men from Adam to the last man saved in the Millennium is saved “by grace through faith.”  Here, the Independent Baptists are dead wrong.

The only way to study the Bible is to use the system known as Dispensationalism.  Dispensationalism can mean many things but it is the God ordained method to keep the Bible from contradicting itself and it fulfills II Timothy 2:15.  This verse commands Christians to “study” and to “divide.”  Dispensationalism does this without changing one word in the Bible.  One problem that the average Independent Baptist will have is that this doctrine is not an inherently Baptist doctrine.  In fact, it mainly comes from John Nelson Darby and his group called the Plymouth Brethren.  Other Christians got a hold of these doctrines and methods and continued to study.  C.I. Scofield (Congregational and Presbyterian) and his buddies (Methodist, Reformed Episcopalian, Presbyterian, and Baptist) published their study Bible which seemed to push for a different way of salvation in the Old Testament.  Clarence Larkin explored to implications of the doctrine even further.  But Larkin was a Baptist.  Men (including “bad” Independent Baptists) who read his books, like Dr. Peter S. Ruckman, finally began to admit that the Bible taught that, outside of the Church Age, men were saved by grace, but works were involved.  Nevertheless, truth is truth; regardless of who came up with the idea and even if it does not make you a good Independent Baptist.  

Without being dispensational, a man will have to dump the crucial doctrine of eternal security.  Samson lost the Holy Spirit and then got it back.  Saul lost his salvation and then went to hell.  David sinned mightily and prayed that God would not take his spirit from him.  Finally, in the Tribulation (Time of Jacob’s Sorrows), if a man trusts Christ and then gets the Mark of the Beast, he goes to hell no matter what.  So, eternal security is not true in the OT and the Tribulation.  Clearly, salvation outside of the Church Age is different and a study on eternal security will prove that.  

Let me ask this, if Noah had not built the ark, would he have gone to heaven when he died?  Of course he would not.  Without the ark, Noah would have died and gone to hell.  Is building an ark a work?  Of course.  Therefore, works were part of Noah’s salvation.  Remember: this is Genesis, not 2016.  This has nothing to do with how to get to heaven today.  You would have to wrest the text to make it seem like Noah was saved apart from works.  

Along the same lines, look at Abraham.  Most Independent Baptists are keen to bring him up as an example of salvation always being by grace through faith.  They quote Romans 4:3 which is a reference to Genesis 15:6.  Paul is saying (why I say it like this will be explained later) that Abraham’s salvation is like ours in how he obtained imputed righteousness.  He obtained this by faith.  But what, I ask, was his faith in?  Read Genesis 15 to find out.  It says that Abraham is going to have a son and his descendants will be like the stars of heaven.  NOTHING is said about Christ dying for him or rising from the grave.  His faith was not in the Gospel at all.  If a man in 2016 believes that God will give him a son and that his descendants will be like the stars of heaven, he will not get any righteousness.  They are completely different situations.

But there is more.  When you get to the book of James, you see that Abraham was not JUSTIFIED in Genesis 15.  And when he was, it was not by faith.  James 2:21 says that Abraham was justified by works in Genesis 22.  More than a dozen years after he had been imputed righteousness by faith (albeit in something besides the Gospel), Abraham is justified by works.  This is not like the salvation of a Christian at all.  When a sinner trusts Jesus Christ and believes the Gospel, he is imputed righteousness and justified (Romans 4:24,25) at that exact instant.  There is no time lapse in between.  There was with Abraham.  Many Independent Baptists will try and say that the justification of Abraham in James 2 is just “proving that you are what you say you are before men.”  In this case, it would mean Abraham proving that he was a “Friend of God.”  But then look at the example of Rahab in vs 25.  Would anyone be so foolish as to think that Rahab PROVED she was a harlot by protecting the Hebrew spies?  Any interpretation of the text must take both examples into account.  But the average Independent Baptist just pretends that Abraham, Rahab, and our salvation were all the same.  This does not work.  Abraham and Rahab had faith involved in their salvation, but it was not a faith in any way, shape, or form like our faith in Jesus Christ and the Gospel.

In the Tribulation or the Time of Jacob’s Sorrows, salvation will also be different that in the Church Age.  As already stated, if man in the Tribulation takes the Mark of the Beast, he goes to hell, regardless of his faith in Jesus Christ.  In the books of Hebrews through Revelation, God shows that men need faith and works to get to heaven.  This doctrine is clearly stated in James 2.  Most will run to Hebrews 11 to teach about faith as opposed to works, but this chapter teaches nothing of the sort.  Noah, Abraham, Moses, etc. had faith and they used it to do works.  This matches Tribulation salvation completely.  In the book of Revelation, faith and works are clearly shown in 12:17 and 14:12.  Differences about between salvation in the Church Age and salvation in the Tribulation, but that will not stop most Independent Baptists from believing that salvation has always been the same.  

A final example of the different ways of salvation is the disciples in the Gospels.  These men were called by the Lord Jesus Christ to minister.  They were hand selected preachers.  Yet according to the doctrine of most Independent Baptists, they were not even saved.  Look at Mark 16.  Jesus Christ had risen in verse 9.  The disciples had already been preaching for a number of years, but in verse 11 and again in verse 13, they do not believe that Jesus has risen from the dead.  Folks, that is the Gospel (I Cor 15:3,4).  According to Paul’s epistles, they are not saved and are on their way to hell.  The only way to handle this is to recognize the truth that they had been saved according to another way of salvation.  It is hard to tell exactly when the Gospel, as preached by Paul, came into full effect, but by Acts 8 the Ethiopian eunuch is believing it.  Having said that, all would agree that is in full effect now, but to put that on the men before Acts 8 is to end up with God-called apostles who are lost and going to hell.  That is the foolishness that you get into, when you try and read NT Church Age doctrine all through the Bible, as most Independent Baptists are wont to do.

We live in a day and age when the Independent Baptists are falling away to many perverse doctrines.  One of the main heresies is that the church is going into the Tribulation.  One way to prove this wrong is to show that there is a faith and works setup in the Tribulation.  This stands in direct contrast to our salvation in the Church which is by grace through faith.  But the average Independent Baptist will not allow this, though the Bible clearly shows it.  It is crazy how the rejection of one clear doctrine leads to the acceptance of more and more heretical doctrine.  This will become more and more prevalent in the Independent Baptist churches until the day that Jesus Christ calls all the saved home; before the Tribulation.

I believe the King James Bible is the final authority in all matters of faith and practice.  


This matter has been discussed so thoroughly by men like Dr. Peter S. Ruckman, Sam Gipp, William Grady, Gail Riplinger, and Kyle Stephens that it seems the argument would be finished.  Nevertheless, some items should be highlighted.  The average Independent Baptist church will give a cheap profession to believe the King James, but when pressed, they will retreat to the foolish profession of a belief in the Textus Receptus (TR) for their final authority.  Or as it was given to me by email, “both were preserved and (we) use both.”  There are many reasons that this is a faulty position.

First, there is more than one version of the Textus Receptus.  That would lead to the position that there are multiple final authorities which is a contradiction of terms.  “Multiple final authorities” is the same as saying NO final authority.  This elementary logic clearly demonstrates the error of saying we “use both” the KJB and the TR.  Having said that, the typical Independent Baptist is either lying or uneducated because there are multiple versions of the TR.  Each of these men, Erasmus, Stephanus, Beza, Elzivir, Colinaeus, and Scrivener, wrote multiple versions of the TR themselves, pushing the total number of TR versions to around 20.  Which version do you mean when you say, “I believe the TR.”?  The version is never named.  Always remember that the differences between the editions of the TR are greater than any supposed differences between the so-called editions of the King James Bible.  

Second, the TR-only crowd never addressed the Old Testament (OT).  By definition the TR is only the New Testament, so the question would be, “Point to the inspired OT.”  Again, this issue is never addressed.  When I am asked the question, I point to the English King James OT that is on the table in front of me.  The average Independent Baptist cannot.  I believe that the issue is an issue of ignorance.  Some will point to the Hebrew OT printed with the TR by the Trinitarian Bible Society.  But this will not do.  As good as that text is, there are errors in it.  

Let me give an example.  Clearly, most people have not dealt with the Jews out of their OT because if they would have taken them to one of the greatest messianic prophecies in the OT, Psalm 22:16, they would have seen the discrepancy between the truth (KJB) and the corrupted manuscripts of the Hebrew OT.  The KJB states, “they pierced my hands and my feet.”  The Hebrew reads, “like a lion, my hands and feet.”  What nonsense!  It is an independent clause without the necessary verb.  This demonstrates that as careful as the Jews have been when they took care of the OT (as compared to the treatment of the devil’s scribes with the Alexandrian NT), they were not above changing the text to remove prophecies of Jesus Christ’s crucifixion.  This example should suffice.  But these issues are never discussed by the average Independent Baptist who just wants to leave “well enough” alone and just tell people that they believe the TR.

Third, there are  differences between the KJB and the TR in the New Testament (NT) as well.  These issues have been thoroughly dissected by many authors over the years so a few examples should suffice.  In Acts 12:4, the TR says “Passover” but the KJB says “Easter.”  Easter is correct.  In Acts 19:37, the TR says “robbers of temples” but the KJV says “robbers of churches.”  The KJB is correct.  Add in the differences in the book of Revelation and you have a whole heap of times that the King James and the TR differ.  Most “Baaaptists” have two final authorities, the King James Bible and the TR.  This issue is one where a Bible Believer and an independent Baptist should just part ways.

Fourth, the issue of translation is never discussed.  None would dispute the fact that there are NO speakers of Koine Greek alive today.  This is the language in which the NT was written.  So how do we know what the words mean?  The average Christian (Independent Baptist included) will go to a source like a Strong’s or Young’s concordance of the Bible.  But where did they get their definitions?  These got their definitions from sources outside of Koine Greek often from the Attic Greek of the Greek Philosophers.  These are the men that Paul called “too superstitious” in Acts 17, but apparently they can be a trusted source for finding out what our Bible REALLY means.  And even if those definitions are correct, in a sense, how could they know how it fit in the translation grammatically?  Definitions of words change depending on how they are used in a sentence.  For example:  I LIKE to be tall vs I felt LIKE I was tall.  These differences can make translating very complex.  In these situations, dictionaries can be very little help.  The translators of the King James had a huge advantage over any translator today.  These men were a generation or two removed from the fall of Constantinople in 1453.  From this last bastion of what is called Medieval or Byzantine Greek, came scholars fluent in a language much closer to Koine Greek than Attic.  These scholars fled throughout western and northern Europe and taught their considerable familiarity with the language of the Greek NT to the men who would teach the men who translated the KJB.  This expertise cannot be matched today and was definitely not matched by men like Strong or Young.  To go back to their definitions is to go back to the definitions of queers like Socrates and Fascists like Plato.

Hopefully, these reasons will open the reader up to, at least, considering that the King James Bible is God’s final authority for the years 1611 to today and that it is the fulfillment of the Biblical verses Psalm 12:6,7, Isaiah 34:16, Matthew 24:35, and II Timothy 3:16, etc.  It is a sad fact that the average Independent Baptist church in your town believes that man can sit in judgement on the word of God and believes there are errors in it.  A final example will suffice.  In my town there are really 2 Independent Baptist churches of any significance.  When you walk out of the auditorium of one, you will see a sign behind the secretary’s desk that says something to this effect, “Love suffers long and is kind…”  This is a perversion of I Cor 13:4 and anyone familiar with the chapter (I know this EXCLUDES 97% of all Christians) knows God is talking about “charity” and not the mongrelized “love” of perverted Americans.  They are supposedly “Bible Believers” and “King James Only,”  but somewhere along the line, they have compromised.  God help them (Rev 22:18,19).