New Book on 1 John 5:7!

Well, it's finally out. My new book on 1 John 5:7 is finally now out in print! Order a copy today! --> http://oddinterviews.com/1-john-57-kjv-textual-series-book/  [I apologize that the link is down. If you want a copy of the book, please shoot me an email at: j.alvarez4Jesus@gmail.com. I will get the link back up as soon as possible.]

Does 1 John 5:7 belong in your Bible? Bible teachers, scholars, and text-critics all agree that it shouldn’t be in your Bible. But what do the facts say? In this short book, the facts about this controversial scripture are laid out for any layperson to see and judge for himself as to whether or not 1 John 5:7 belongs in the Bible as found in the A.V. 1611.

“It’s the best evidence I’ve seen so far [for 1 John 5:7], compiled in a simple way.” ~ David W. Daniels (Chick Publications)

How The King James Bible Defines "Sunrise" and "Sunset"

“And it shall come to pass IN THAT DAY, saith the Lord GOD, that I WILL CAUSE THE SUN TO GO DOWN AT NOON, and I will darken the earth in the clear day:” (Amos 8:9 KJV).

This is a clear reference to the Day of the Lord, which is recorded in Matthew 24 and Revelation 6, where the sun and moon are darkened and the stars fall down from heaven. But notice that here in Amos 8:9, the sun is said to GO DOWN, but in Revelation 6:12 (covering the same event), “the sun became black as sackcloth of hair” while it was still in the sky. This demonstrates that when the Bible talks about the sun “going down” or “rising” or “going up” or “setting”, etc., it isn’t literal for the sun changing in elevation, it is defined by the King James Bible itself as merely being darkened from your view, as it will be darkened in the second rapture. On top of that, when the sun is darkened, the Bible is clear that it will come not by the sun itself running out of light, but by a dark cloud covering the face of it from the whole earth, “And when I shall put thee out, I will cover the heaven, and make the stars thereof dark; I will cover the sun with a cloud, and the moon shall not give her light.” (Ezekiel 32:7). So when the King James Bible talks about sunrise, sunset, etc., it is all a metaphor for the sun being darkened by something obscuring it, like a cloud.

““AS THE MOURNING OF AN ONLY SON” (vs. 10) clearly marks the passage for Zechariah 12:10 (“AS ONE MOURNETH FOR HIS ONLY SON” ), and the context of both passages is the Second Advent. Furthermore, what follows (Amos 8:11–12) is so clearly a reference to events beyond A.D. 1900 that only a Bible-rejecting Fundamentalist could join hands with a postmillennial Modernist in rejecting the truth of the matter. And although Isaiah 3:24 (JUDAH, not Israel) and Jeremiah 6:26 (JUDAH, not Israel) were preludes or “overtures” to the great drama of Daniel’s Seventieth Week, neither of them bring Amos 8:7–10 to the great fulfillment of “THAT DAY” (vs. 9). In the Tribulation sunlight does go “slap out” (Rev. 6:12) exactly as it did down in Egypt (Exod. 10:22–23), and the earth is darkened on a “clear day” exactly as was done in Egypt (see Rev. 16:10) under the ministry of Moses. The earthquake will come (Rev. 16:18) as prophesied here (vs. 8), and the land will be inundated (Dan. 9:26) with a literal flood (Rev. 12:15), exactly as the Nile inundates Egypt (Ezek. 29), while the remnant (Matt. 24:16) run for their lives (Rev. 12:6).”
(Dr. Peter S. Ruckman, The Book of the Minor Prophets, Amos Chapter 8).

The Error of Reformed Covenant Theology: The Covenant of Grace

In Reformed Covenant Theology, it realizes that God made a covenant of works with Adam back in the garden of Eden.

“The first covenant made with man was a covenant of works, wherein life was promised to Adam; and in him to his posterity, upon condition of perfect and personal obedience.” ~ Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter 7, Section 2.

This is true, the Bible says, “And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.” (Genesis 2:16-17).

But here’s where the Reformed theologians mess up: they see the covenant God made with Adam after he sinned, and they claim that God’s covenant to Adam was salvation by grace through faith without works in the blood of Christ.

“Man, by his fall, having made himself incapable of life by that covenant, the Lord was pleased to make a second, commonly called the covenant of grace; wherein He freely offers unto sinners life and salvation by Jesus Christ; requiring of them faith in Him, that they may be saved, and promising to give unto all those that are ordained unto eternal life His Holy Spirit, to make them willing, and able to believe.” ~ Ibid, Section 3.

Now, it is true that God made a covenant (or agreement) with Adam after he sinned. But it is NOT true that this covenant included salvation by grace through faith without works in the finished work of Christ on the cross. Here’s what this Adamic Covenant (which we are still under as children of Adam) includes:

“And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return. And Adam called his wife’s name Eve; because she was the mother of all living. Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them.” (Genesis 3:14-21).

There is nothing about salvation by grace through faith there. There is a prophecy of Jesus, but it’s a very vague prophecy and doesn’t imply anything about the blood atonement or eternal salvation. Just that the seed of the woman would take vengeance on the serpent.

This basic error is the cornerstone of Reformed Theology. This is where the doctrine that salvation has always been the same comes from: Reformed Covenant Theology, because it places salvation by grace alone right when Adam sins and for all time. This is how the doctrine of replacement theology in Protestant-Catholicism was developed: because if everyone since Adam has been under the same one covenant to “God’s people”, and since God’s people under this covenant was Israel, and since we are under this covenant now, we must be the new Israel. Misidentifying the covenants and not rightly dividing them is the source of much heresy and error.

Debunking a Wesley FB Meme Against OSAS

There is the following meme (originally written by Methodist founder John Wesley) going around the internet spreading the heresy that once saved, a man can become unsaved:

“They tell us that no virgin’s lamp can go out;”
This is a reference to the parable of the wise and foolish virgins:

“Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom. And five of them were wise, and five were foolish. They that were foolish took their lamps, and took no oil with them: But the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps. While the bridegroom tarried, they all slumbered and slept. And at midnight there was a cry made, Behold, the bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him. Then all those virgins arose, and trimmed their lamps. And the foolish said unto the wise, Give us of your oil; for our lamps are gone out. But the wise answered, saying, Not so; lest there be not enough for us and you: but go ye rather to them that sell, and buy for yourselves. And while they went to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage: and the door was shut. Afterward came also the other virgins, saying, Lord, Lord, open to us. But he answered and said, Verily I say unto you, I know you not. Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh.” (Matthew 25:1-13).

This is a parable about “the kingdom of heaven”. The Kingdom of Heaven is the future Millennial Kingdom of Jerusalem according to scripture, “And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven.“ (Matthew 8:11). The kingdom of heaven is a geographical location you have to travel to in order to sit down in it. It is NOT a reference to eternal salvation, it is a geographical kingdom in the future when Jesus rules and reigns from Jerusalem, “Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King.“ (Matthew 5:35). On top of that, this passage is doctrinally in the old testament, before the new testament began with the death of the testator (Jesus Christ), “And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance. For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.” (Hebrews 9:15-17). So, it’s not for the church at all, it’s for Jews under the law of Moses. And on top of even THAT, notice these are TEN VIRGINS (not ONE virgin as the church is, Ephesians 5:31-32), and notice that none of these virgins actually marry the bridegroom. The wise virgins go “with him to the marriage”, but they don’t marry him. These virgins are representing Jewish people in the Tribulation. The Jews who are wise are those who endure to the end to be with Jesus in the “kingdom of heaven”. The Jews who aren’t wise are those who don’t endure to the end, but take the mark of the beast and don’t enter into the “kingdom of heaven”. This has nothing to do with the church.

“no promising harvest be choked with thorns;”
This is a reference to Matthew 13:7, part of the parable of the four soils, where seed is thrown to four different soils, “And some fell among thorns; and the thorns sprung up, and choked them:“. Once again, this parable is about the Millennial Kingdom, not eternal salvation, “He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.” (Matthew 13:11). The seed is called “the word of the kingdom” in verse 19. It is NOT the gospel of grace for today, but the proclamation to Jews under the law of Moses that their kingdom was at hand. It is before the new testament began, before the death of Christ, and is for Jews in the Tribulation getting ready for the Millennial Kingdom right after it. Here is the explanation of the thorny soil, “He also that received seed among the thorns is he that heareth the word; and the care of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, choke the word, and he becometh unfruitful.” (Matthew 13:22). In the Tribulation, this will come in the form of the mark of the beast. You will not be able to buy or sell without it, and so the deceitfulness of riches will destroy all those who take it even after believing the word. But we’re not Jews under Moses in the Tribulation period. That’s not for us.

“no holy garment can ever be defiled (Rev. 3:4)”
“Thou hast a few names even in Sardis which have not defiled their garments; and they shall walk with me in white: for they are worthy.“ (Revelation 3:4). Something John Wesley didn’t note is that Revelation (which was NOT written by Paul, the apostle of the Gentiles, Romans 11:13) is written to Jews, and as such switches back and forth between Christian Jews today in the Church Age and Tribulation Jews tomorrow in the Tribulation Age. Here is one obvious example of this:

Revelation 1:5, “And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,”. Here, Jesus himself washed us from our sins in his blood. Jesus washes us.
Revelation 7:14, “And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.“ Here, tribulation saints wash themselves in Christ’s blood and make their garments white. This is a clear contradiction from Revelation 1:5. Which is it? Did Jesus wash us, or do we wash ourselves? The only solution to this problem is if we accept the fact that Revelation (being written to Jews by the apostle John) switches back and forth between Christian Jews today, and Tribulation Jews tomorrow. Christians today are washed with Christ’s blood, and Tribulation saints will need to do works to wash themselves with Christ’s blood in the Tribulation.

In fact, the answer to this objection is in those scriptures we just touched. Since Christ washes us with His own blood as Christians (not as “they which came out of great tribulation”), our garments are already washed by Christ Himself. They can never be defiled, when it is God Almighty who has made us clean with His own blood. To say our garments can be defiled is to say that God’s blood can be made unholy by our actions. That’s blasphemous. Our garments are forever clean because God Himself has washed us. Revelation 3:4 is describing people who like in 7:14 are washing themselves with Christ’s blood with their own works in the Tribulation.

“no branch in Christ can ever be cut off from unfruitfulness;”
Now, Wesley is referring to John 15:5-6, “I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing. If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.” Jesus is giving his disciples an image of the (then future) body of Christ for the Church Age. We abide in Christ as branches in a vine. But here, Wesley made a huge mistake, for he thought these burned branches were “in Christ”. But Jesus himself said these branches “abode NOT in me”. They weren’t “in Christ”, they weren’t connected to Christ at all! These are branches that were not even part of the vine here! These are lost men who are burned, not “fallen away Christians”. God later revealed to the apostle Paul that not only are we branches to a vine, we are bone of Christ’s bone and flesh of Christ’s flesh. Christ is not going to amputate his own body, “For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.” (Ephesians 5:30).

“no pardon can ever be forfeited,”
Here, Wesley is referring to another parable in the book of Matthew:

“Therefore is the kingdom of heaven likened unto a certain king, which would take account of his servants. And when he had begun to reckon, one was brought unto him, which owed him ten thousand talents. But forasmuch as he had not to pay, his lord commanded him to be sold, and his wife, and children, and all that he had, and payment to be made. The servant therefore fell down, and worshipped him, saying, Lord, have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. Then the lord of that servant was moved with compassion, and loosed him, and forgave him the debt. But the same servant went out, and found one of his fellowservants, which owed him an hundred pence: and he laid hands on him, and took him by the throat, saying, Pay me that thou owest. And his fellowservant fell down at his feet, and besought him, saying, Have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. And he would not: but went and cast him into prison, till he should pay the debt. So when his fellowservants saw what was done, they were very sorry, and came and told unto their lord all that was done. Then his lord, after that he had called him, said unto him, O thou wicked servant, I forgave thee all that debt, because thou desiredst me: Shouldest not thou also have had compassion on thy fellowservant, even as I had pity on thee? And his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was due unto him. So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their trespasses.“ (Matthew 18:23-35).

This is a parable in the old testament (before the death of the testator, Hebrews 9:16), about “the kingdom of heaven”, or the Millennial Kingdom. Jesus (as the king of the servants in this parable) is giving this parable for Jews in the Tribulation who want to enter into the kingdom. They must forgive others of sin, otherwise they will be rejected from the kingdom. It has nothing to do with the Church.

“and no name blotted out of God’s book!”
Now, he’s referring to Revelation 3:5, “He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.” Revelation 3:5 is connected to Revelation 3:4, which we saw earlier was directed to Tribulation saints who are washing themselves with the blood of Christ. We as Christians are washed by Jesus Himself!

“They insist that no salt can ever lose its savor;”
Now, Wesley is referring to Matthew 5:13, “Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men.“ Wesley forgot about the context. Jesus is preaching a sermon to Jews in the old testament, and look what it’s about, “Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.“ (Matthew 5:3). This whole sermon in Matthew 5 is about the Millennial Kingdom. It is not directed at the church, it is directed to Jews in the Tribulation for the Millennial Kingdom. To prove it, look at verse 9, “Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.” But Christians aren’t waiting to become the children of God, WE ALREADY ARE HIS CHILDREN!, “For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.” (Romans 8:14). Matthew 5 isn’t for Christians at all, it’s for Jews in the Tribulation who will only become the children of God when the Tribulation Age ends and the Kingdom comes in. Likewise, the salt of the earth in the same sermon is not referring to Christians, but to Tribulation Jews.

“nobody can ever “receive the grace of God in vain”;”
Now Wesley is just making things up. No scripture in the King James Bible has the phrase “receive the grace of God in vain”. He’s not quoting scripture.

“”bury his talents””
Same here. That exact phrase appears nowhere in the King James Bible.

“”neglect such great salvation””
Same here. That exact phrase appears nowhere in the King James Bible. Wesley is not quoting scripture.

“trifle away “a day of grace””
Same here. That exact phrase appears nowhere in the King James Bible.

“”look back” after putting his hand to the gospel plow”
Almost same here. That exact phrase does appear in the Bible, but not in reference to any “gospel plow”. If Wesley is going to misquote the scriptures, there’s no point in bothering to refute what he’s referring to. We know what his intentions are here, and they are to twist the scriptures, even to their wording!

“Nobody can “grieve the Spirit” till He is “quenced”, and strives no more”
Same here, no reference to the exact phrase “grieve the Spirit” is in the Bible. Wesley is just referring to some passage, but doesn’t have the decency to even quote it correctly, because he isn’t concerned about getting the scriptures right. He’s concerned about twisting them into his theology.

“nor “deny the Lord that bought them”;”
Same here, no reference to this exact phrase in the King James Bible.

“nor “bring upon themselves swift destruction.””
Finally! A correct scripture quotation! “But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.“ (2 Peter 2:1). 1 and 2 Peter is writing to Jews (1 Peter 2:12). Because of this, 2 Peter can switch back and forth between Christian Jews in the Church Age and Tribulation Jews in the Tribulation Age. Since Paul (writing to GENTILES in the Church Age), said a redeemed Christian can never be lost all throughout Ephesians 1, 2 Peter 2:1 is not to Christians, it is to Tribulation Jews.

“Nobody can ever get so lukewarm that Jesus will spew them out of His mouth.”
Here, Wesley is referring to Revelation 3:16, “So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.“ Well, according to Paul in Ephesians 1, we are sealed until the rapture happens. Revelation, as we have seen earlier is written to Jews, and can at times be talking to Tribulation Jews in the future. This applies to Revelation 3:16, it is for Tribulation saints, not Church Age saints. On top of that, we aren’t some foreign substance in Christ’s stomach or mouth, we are bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh (Ephesians 5:30)!

“They use reams of paper to argue...”
All of this is in reference to Calvinists, who aren’t exactly Biblical either. We won’t waste time defending another group that is wrong as well. And that concludes this ridiculous nonsense from John Wesley (founder of the Methodists) that you can lose your salvation.

But we didn’t even need to go through all these scriptures to prove Wesley was wrong. We just needed to hold fast to “the sincere milk of the word” (1 Peter 2:2) to see past this heresy. You see, all we had to do was look at God has promised to Christians in John 3:16. (Read the context of verse 15 and notice it’s about salvation for after the cross!) John 3:16 says all those who believe in Christ “HAVE EVERLASTING LIFE”. If we current have EVERLASTING life, then we will never die! If you can lose “everlasting life”, then it really wasn’t “everlasting” to begin with. Everlasting life means your life is everlasting, and will never end no matter what! John 3:16 is enough to refute every argument ever compiled by man against the precious truth of eternal security.

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.“ (John 3:16).

How To Study The Bible | Rightly Dividing Scripture

Debunking a Stupid Attack on Anti-Church-Building Bible Believers: YouTube

There is a common attack made by church building idolaters (which are not just church attenders) on those of us who reject church buildings because they are unscriptural: "But, but, you're on YouTube/Facebook/etc. and that's not in the Bible either!" To lay this attack to the dust where it belongs, a little scripture needs to be reviewed, "And how I kept back nothing that was profitable unto you, but have shewed you, and have TAUGHT YOU PUBLICKLY, and from house to house," (Acts 20:20 KJB). When the apostle Paul taught believers, sometimes he did it PUBLICKLY (in public). Therefore, preaching to believers PUBLICLY is scripturally allowed. Well, YouTube, Facebook, etc. are merely websites whereby someone can PUBLICLY communicate a message for an intended audience. In brother Bryan Denlinger's case, for example (who is absolutely despised by most Baptists), he is preaching PUBLICLY through YouTube to Christians. That fits the bill of Acts 20:20. Thus, any saved man who teaches God's word to Christians through a PUBLIC website like YouTube or another online service has a SCRIPTURAL MINISTRY. YouTube, Vimeo, Facebook, etc. is NO EXCUSE for you to continue pretending a church building is scriptural. It's not.

Another Gospel (TRAILER)

Koosha Las Vegas: Jesuitical Muslim PsyOp

There is a group of professing Christians who street preach in Las Vegas. They used to be called “Koosha Las Vegas” (which is still their popular name), but now call themselves “Jesus Is God” (which is more generic). After examining the Koosha group’s actions and beliefs, what I found was unsettling to say the least.

Last year, the Koosha group entered into a Roman Catholic Church during Mass and shouted to the people that the Catholic Church was evil and wicked.


While the Roman Catholic Church is evil and wicked, there are absolutely no grounds in scripture to enter a pagan house and preach to it (in this case, church buildings). What they did was used by the mainstream Jesuitical News Media to portray Bible Believing anti-Catholic Christians as terrorists.

The story was reported on KTNV, a news station controlled directly by ABC News. For proof of this, just look at their logo.

ABC News, of course, is controlled by The Walt Disney Company, which is further controlled by the Motion Picture Association of America, which is at top controlled by openly Catholic Chris Dodd. At the top, KTNV is a Jesuit-Catholic News Station serving the pope and his black pope. What should we expect from a Catholic controlled news station to do regarding Bible Believing Christians who are against the vile papacy? Answer: the absolute demonization of such people. The way to do this is by sending Catholic infiltrators to appear as hateful and dangerous “Bible Believers” so as to demonize all of us. This is precisely the case with the Koosha group. KTNV reported that these street preachers were seen as “terrorists”.

Parishioners we talked to say they were initially scared because of the recent climate of terrorism, and the group makes clear many members are Muslims turned Christian.

 Channel 13 Action News Crime & Safety Expert Randy Sutton...says, in light of recent terror attacks, every person in the church had a very good reason to be concerned. (Source: Protesters disturb Mass at Catholic churches in Las Vegas).

But how do I know that these “ex-Muslims” (which Islam was created by Catholics according to Alberto Rivera) are Catholic plants and not genuine Bible Believers? Simple: their doctrine. Their doctrine reveals that they are in fact closet Muslims controlled by the papacy who are purposefully making anti-Catholic Christians look like terrorists. Once the lost world sees Bible Believing anti-Catholic Christians as terrorists, it will seek to suppress us. All of this is in preparation for the coming Catholic kingdom of the antichrist.

But, to the Koosha group’s doctrine... The Koosha group has a number of YouTube videos of their street preaching. One of their videos has a member of their group stating (at minute 14:00), “So, when you are saved, you are not always saved. That’s a lie from the Satan. Some people think, I used to think too before the beginning, you’re saved, you’re always saved. When you’re saved, you’re not always saved. When you’re saved, you’re not always saved. The Bible talks about it, too many times, you can lose your salvation, and the devil is going to attack you seven times worse. So don’t act like you’re always saved. The enemy is behind the wall, the Satan is behind the wall, to hunt your soul, to destroy your soul, to send your soul with him to hell for the rest of eternity. Give your life to Jesus Christ before it’s too late, and stay holy through the end of your life so you can see the kingdom of heaven. Repent! Follow Christ to the end! Don’t let the devil destroy you after you’re saved. God bless you, praise Jesus.”

That, folks, is simply a lie. A Satanic lie. The King James Bible clearly teaches that those under the present dispensation of Grace (Ephesians 3:2) are sealed by the Holy Spirit and will continue to be sealed until the rapture happens, “And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.” (Ephesians 4:30). The Koosha group is spreading heresy. It doesn’t come from the Bible. Where then, did they get this doctrine from? From the Roman Catholic Catechism, “therefore without faith no one has ever attained justification, nor will anyone obtain eternal life ‘But he who endures to the end.’”

By searching briefly through their videos (especially this one), the Koosha group believes that we are in Daniel’s 70th week, one must turn from their sins to be saved (Jonah 3:10 debunks this lie), church buildings are holy places, Christians can miraculously heal people and cast out devils, the King James Bible alone is not God’s perfect word, and many other heresies. All of which comes from Roman Catholicism, not the Bible.

The fact that this “Christian” group is spreading Catholic dogma is strong evidence that they are Catholic controlled Muslims who are trying to make anti-Catholic Bible Believers look like terrorists. To those not easily deceived by the Jesuit News Media, Bible Believers are not terrorists! We believe the King James Bible, “If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men.” (Romans 12:18). The KJV is not a terrorist book and those who believe it and are against the Roman Catholic system are not terrorists.

AHA Catholic Infiltrators Exposed! Part 1: Terra Harris

AHA Parroting Catholic Catechism!

Claiming Joe Schimmel's $10,000 Rapture Challenge

“We offer $10,000 to those holding to a pre-tribulation rapture, if they could produce just one verse or passage that states that Jesus will rapture the church before the tribulation.”

This is what you would call a scam. The question itself is a loaded question with faulty built-in assumptions (e.g. one verse or passage, the tribulation). But even with the loaded question designed to make people lose no matter what they present, I can still navigate through it to win the $10,000 (if Joe is honest enough to relinquish it). First, we must agree on two facts. First, the antichrist comes at the beginning of “the tribulation”. Thankfully, Mr. Schimmel agrees with this, “The white horse rider in Revelation 6:1-2 is symbolic of the Antichrist counterfeiting Christ and inaugurating the tribulation period.” It follows that to produce one verse or passage stating the rapture comes before “the tribulation” is equivalent to producing one verse or passage stating the rapture comes before the antichrist. This makes sense. It makes no sense for us to be raptured before the antichrist but after “the tribulation”. Thus, to show a scripture which places the rapture before the antichrist will prove the rapture comes before “the tribulation”, which would qualify for the $10,000 challenge. This is the procedure I will take. The second fact we must agree on is that we as the body of Christ are "the temple of God" (1 Corinthians 3:16). Thankfully, Mr. Schimmel agrees with this as well.

Now, without any further ado, here’s the “one verse or passage”:
“1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.
7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:”
(2 Thessalonians 2:1-8 King James Bible).

You say, “What??? I thought this was a post-trib verse.” And you’d be wrong. Here’s why. The passage states in verse 1 that it is “by” the rapture of the church that “the day of Christ” is NOT “at hand”. Read it carefully. In other words, because of the rapture, the day of Christ is not at hand. This is the plain and obvious meaning of the text. But you say, “But ‘by’ is incorrectly translated. It should be ‘with regard to’ (NASB) or ‘concerning’ (NIV). This is saying that concerning the rapture, it (the day of Christ) is not at hand.” But remember, the challenge made no specification of to which Bible I should quote out of. The challenge was simply for “one verse or passage”. It did not clarify that this scripture should come from certain Bibles and not others. So this objection is invalidated by the vagueness of the challenge. For, if I were to produce “one verse or passage”, I could produce it out of any Bible I’d want to (since none in particular is specified). And plus, it’s not like I’m quoting an absolute perversion like The Message by Eugene Peterson. I’m quoting from the King James Bible, a literal translation. And the KJV’s translation is fully justified by the NASB Exhaustive Concordance which defines the underlying Greek word, “ὑπέρ” as, “for the sake of”. For the sake of the rapture, the day of Christ is not at hand. Because of the rapture, the day of Christ is not at hand. “By” the rapture, the day of Christ is not at hand. The obvious implication is that the reason the day of Christ is not at hand is because the rapture will happen before the day of Christ. There is something that must come before it (the rapture), thus it (the day of Christ) is not imminent. But that’s not my proof of the pre-trib rapture. That’s simply to deflect the expected objection that this passage cannot be teaching a pre-trib rapture, so as to ignore the proof which I shall give.

Now, on to the proof. In verse 7, Paul states that “now ye know what withholdeth” the antichrist from coming. The “now” implies that because of what Paul just told the Thessalonians, they “now” knew what was holding back the antichrist from coming (and consequently, “the tribulation”). What did Paul just say which reveals the identity of the one who is restraining the antichrist? Paul just said that the antichrist is supposed to sit “in the temple of God” proclaiming himself to be God. It is because of this, that we can know who the restrainer is. What is the temple of God for today according to Paul? Well, it was already agreed from the beginning (see above) that we as Christians are the temple of God, “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?” (1 Corinthians 3:16). If then we are the temple of God and the antichrist is prophecied to sit in the temple of God, then if we are around to see the antichrist, the antichrist must sit physically inside of all believers. Since we are the temple of God, the antichrist must sit inside of all of us to fulfil prophecy. That obviously is not going to happen. One man cannot physically merge himself inside every single believer in the world! It is this obvious absurdity that Paul relies upon here. Because the antichrist must sit in the temple of God, “now” we know who is restraining the antichrist. It must be the church, the body of Christ. For, as long as we are around as the temple of God, the antichrist cannot fulfil the prophecy to sit in the temple of God. It is this which prevents the antichrist from coming.

But what if the Jews rebuild another temple? Wouldn’t that be “the temple of God”? The answer is that as long as we are around as the temple of God, if another temple of God were built, there wouldn’t be one temple of God, but two temples of God — the church and the rebuilt Jewish temple. But the antichrist is promised to sit not just in A temple of God, but THE temple of God (implying only one temple). The antichrist cannot sit in THE temple of God as long as we are around. The church, all Christians, is the restrainer of the antichrist according to Paul.

Now, for the finale. Paul states that the restrainer, “he who now letteth”, will continue to restrain the antichrist in this way, “will let”. But, the restrainer will restrain, “until he be taken out of the way.” The body of Christ will continue to restrain the antichrist by being the temple of God, until it is taken out of the way. When is the body of Christ TAKEN away? In the rapture! So then we will restrain the antichrist until we are raptured. What happens NEXT (verse 8)? “And then shall that Wicked be revealed”, the antichrist will come on the scene. This means that we will be raptured, “taken” away, before the antichrist is “revealed”. A pre-trib rapture can be easily concluded with Paul’s pre-antichrist rapture in 2 Thessalonians 2.

To summarise the proof, Paul states in verses 1 and 2 that because of the rapture, the day of Christ is not at hand. This means the rapture must be before the day of Christ. In verse 4, Paul states that the antichrist must sit in the temple of God (which temple are we), and that because of that fact, we can now know who restrains the antichrist. Since we are the temple of God, and the antichrist cannot sit inside of all of us physically, we (the church) in verse 6 are restraining the antichrist from coming. In verse 7, the church (which is restraining the antichrist) will do so until it is taken away in the rapture. After the church is raptured, the antichrist will come on the scene in verse 8. Since the antichrist inaugurates “the tribulation”, and since we will be taken away (raptured) before the antichrist, we will be raptured before “the tribulation”. And that, my friends, is “just one verse or passage that states that Jesus will rapture the church before the tribulation.” Which means that I win the $10,000!

"The Atheist Delusion" Critical Review

Well, I decided to watch Ray Comfort’s latest film, “The Atheist Delusion” to find out if it did what it claims to do — convert atheists to theism in a few minutes. What I found instead is an unbiblical and temporary change in these atheists to unsaved theists, the use of Satanic material, and the preaching of a false gospel.

Fools And Science

In this film, Ray attempts to give atheists scientific proof of God. He does this by going to the magnificent testimony of creation. He provides in the film certain statistics which make it impossible for a creator not to exist. But there’s a problem with this. The Bible teaches that atheists are fools, “(To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David.) The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.” (Psalm 14:1). The Bible says of the fool, that he hates knowledge and wisdom, “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction.” (Proverbs 1:7). “How long, ye simple ones, will ye love simplicity? and the scorners delight in their scorning, and fools hate knowledge?” (Proverbs 1:22).

Atheists do not want scientific evidence for God (contrary to what they might claim). They are fools who don’t want to know the science for God. They are not atheists because they reasoned their way into atheism, but because they gave up reason altogether. Therefore, giving an atheist scientific evidence for God is not going to be effective because atheists don’t want evidence for God. Ray was flat out wrong for trying to convince atheists with science.

The Foolishness of God

But what else are we supposed to do? Preach the Lord Jesus Christ to these atheists? Won’t they find that as foolishness, since they don’t believe in God? What use would it do? The Bible gives a startling answer, “For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.” (1 Corinthians 1:18). No matter how much scientific evidence you can throw at someone, a man being God in the flesh who rose from the dead will always seem foolish to unbelievers. But God wants us to do that anyways, “For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.” (1 Corinthians 1:21). Even if our gospel message seems foolish to an atheist, we should still preach it. Why? Because it has power in itself to convict a lost man to put His faith in Christ, “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.” (Romans 1:16). Instead of trying to convince a fool of wisdom, we should preach the gospel, which has power.

Temporary Theism

In the film, Ray uses a set of “stump questions”. These are questions posed against the impossibility of the big bang and atheism. They usually stump the average atheist, since he is not equipped with an excuse to dismiss these questions. As a result, in the film, some atheists “become” theists. But remember, atheists are fools according to scripture. Thus, the evidence didn’t really convince them, it merely stumped them. They will remain stumped until they go home to quickly Google up a good excuse to dismiss the stump question. In fact, when Ray interviewed a professional atheist (Lawrence Krauss), instead of being stumped, he came up with ridiculous answers. Why? Because he isn’t interested in facts, but in remaining in his foolishness. And it is those same excuses the average atheist will hold dearly to when he learns them after being stumped by a good question. The atheists in this film who changed their minds about atheism will certainly revert back to atheism, “As a dog returneth to his vomit, so a fool returneth to his folly.” (Proverbs 26:11).

Not Made In God’s Image

In the film, Ray Comfort told atheists that they were made in God’s image. That is simply a lie. Man was originally made in God’s own image, “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.” (Genesis 1:27). But after man sinned, all of mankind since then have been born in the image of sinful Adam, “And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:” (Genesis 5:3). The sinful image of Adam is the image of God marred from sin. Atheists are not made in the image of God.

Satanic NKJV

In the film, Ray quoted from the Satanic New King James Version (1984). The New King James Version is a harborer of heresy, as seen in its translation of Jeremiah 8:8, “How can you say, ‘We are wise, And the law of the LORD is with us’? Look, the false pen of the scribe certainly works falsehood.” The subject of this verse is the copying of the scriptures by the scribes. The NKJV plainly teaches that the scribes worked “falsehood” by falsely copying the scriptures (“the law of the LORD”). In other words, the Bible was changed and is no longer the word of God, but the word of man. This is heresy. Why Ray would choose to preach from this Satanic Heretical Bible is anyone’s guess.

Lordship Salvation

Ray Comfort then promoted his Satanic Lordship Salvation. This is the false message that in order for someone to be saved, they must first turn from all their sins (stop sinning) to be saved. This is distinctive in all his films and videos. Instead of salvation coming from stopping sin, it comes by faith alone in Christ (Ephesians 2:8-9).

Conclusion

“The Atheist Delusion” is Ray’s delusion of convincing atheists of the truth with science, and the preaching of Satanic Bibles and a false gospel. Don’t share it or like it.

Calvinism's Strange Connections To Roman Catholicism | Part 4: Paul Washer

Paul Washer is a strong Calvinist who gives talks at various conferences. One of those conferences was in a Roman Catholic Monastery. Here’s the story:

Paul Washer came to speak at a Coram Deo Conference in 2013, with the topic, “The Gospel To The Center”. He apparently thought, “Holy Cross Monastery”, a Catholic pagan building was a good spot to discuss what he considers the true gospel. And he wasn’t there because he secretly infiltrated the conference to preach to lost Catholics. He was there as an invited guest speaker, showing that Coram Deo was okay to have him there. And the Holy Cross Monastery was apparently okay to have Coram Deo there. There can only be one conclusion to this: the Roman Catholics at that Monastery was just fine having Paul Washer as a speaker there. Strange, isn’t it?

But it gets weirder. Through this conference, Paul Washer helped to join Coram Deo with Heart Cry Ministries. Which means Heart Cry is working together with a group that is approved by Catholics to speak in their monasteries.

Calvinism's Strange Connections To Roman Catholicism | Part 3: State of Grace

The image below is a quote from one of Calvin’s sermons on Ephesians.

It was Calvin’s attempt to give an answer to, “how do we know if we are of the elect?” Of course, the Biblical answer that was the response here by Calvin is, “if we believe in Christ, we are the elect”. That is because we first come to Christ for salvation, and then we are placed into Christ as the elect.

But, elsewhere, John Calvin gave a surprisingly different answer — one that lines up with Roman Catholicism. Calvin states in his Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book 2, Chapter 5, Section 3, “...Therefore, while WE ALL LABOUR naturally under the same disease, THOSE ONLY RECOVER HEALTH to whom THE LORD IS PLEASED to put forth his healing hand. THE OTHERS whom, in just JUDGMENT, he passes over, pine and rot away TILL THEY ARE CONSUMED. And this is the only reason WHY SOME PERSEVERE TO THE END, and OTHERS, AFTER BEGINNING THEIR COURSE, FALL AWAY. Perseverance is the gift of God, which he does not lavish promiscuously on all, but imparts to whom he pleases. If it is asked how the difference arises—WHY SOME STEADILY PERSEVERE, and OTHERS PROVE DEFICIENT in steadfastness, we can give NO OTHER REASON than that THE LORD, by his mighty power, STRENGTHENS AND SUSTAINS THE FORMER, so that they perish not, WHILE HE DOES NOT FURNISH the same assistance to THE LATTER, but LEAVES THEM to be monuments of instability.”

This is summed up by Calvinist R.C. Sproul as, “So the old axiom in Reformed theology about the perseverance of the saints is this: If you have it—that is, if you have genuine faith and are in a state of saving grace—you will never lose it. If you lose it, you never had it.”

This means that the only consistent way to know if you are of the elect in Calvinism is not if you currently believe in Jesus Christ (since you can fall away, and thus prove yourself to have never been saved). The only consistent assurance of salvation in Calvinism is if you persevere in your faith in Christ till your death. If you persevere for 50 years, and then fall away in the last year of your life, Calvinism considers you lost and have never been saved. Thus, you must die with faith, before you can know you are saved.

The Roman Catholic Church teaches a very similar doctrine. The Catechism of the Catholic Church Part 1, Section 2, Chapter 3, Article 12, Number 1023 states, “Those who DIE IN GOD’S GRACE and friendship and are perfectly purified LIVE FOR EVER WITH CHRIST. They are like God for ever, for they “see him as he is,” face to face...” The Catholic Church teaches that you must die in a state of grace to receive salvation. This is very similar with the Calvinist doctrine that you must die in a state of grace to KNOW you have already received salvation. Thus, assurance is impossible for the consistent and living Calvinist.

What does scripture give of assurance? The moment we trust in Jesus Christ, we have absolute assurance of salvation. John 3:16, “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that WHOSOEVER BELIEVETH IN HIM should not perish, but HAVE EVERLASTING LIFE.” If we believe on Christ, we know we are saved. Of course, God grants us out of His mercy extra signs and proofs we can look to for assurance of salvation (e.g. fruit, 2 Cor. 5:17), but we don’t have to die in a state of grace to know we are saved.

Rome Rules Calvary Chapel Churches

The first Calvary Chapel Church established was Calvary Chapel Costa Mesa. The lead pastor was the late Chuck Smith. Chuck Smith was openly ecumenical, and stated, “Catholics are basically Christians too”.

Chuck Smith put an image of a down-left facing dove in his church building.

Source: http://www.calvarychapelcostamesa.com/visit/

It is this very image that Ex-Jesuit Alberto Rivera testified that is a Jesuit Catholic symbol (The Force, page 24).

This means that the ecumenical Chuck Smith was under the control of the Jesuit order. He was a mere puppet of the papacy in promoting ecumenical unity.

But here’s the interesting part: no church can just call themselves Calvary Chapel. The name “Calvary Chapel” is a trademarked name, owned by Chuck Smith’s Calvary Chapel Costa Mesa. Just go here, and do a basic search for "Calvary Chapel" (without quotes). Click on the "LIVE" one (not the "DEAD" one).

This means that in order for a church to be called “Calvary Chapel”, it must have the permission of Calvary Chapel Costa Mesa. This means that if Calvary Chapel Costa Mesa wants a certain Calvary Chapel church to change its doctrines, either that church will change it’s doctrines to keep the name “Calvary Chapel”, or they will abandon the system altogether and be forced to adopt a different name. This means thus, that all churches that currently have the name “Calvary Chapel” are controlled by Chuck Smith’s church. In other words, all Calvary Chapel Churches are under the control of a church founded by a Jesuit puppet who promoted ecumenicism.

But what about the current pastor of Calvary Chapel Costa Mesa? Did he change the ecumenical focus? Here’s a video of the current Senior Pastor Brian Brodersen, teaching the exact same ecumenical unity Chuck Smith taught.

Calvary Chapel Costa Mesa was founded by a Jesuit puppet who promoted ecumenicism, is continued to be controlled by an ecumenical pastor, and controls all Calvary Chapel churches. This means all Calvary Chapel churches belong to Rome. If you are in such a church, please confront the pastor about it. If he refuses to give up ecumenicism and break thus with the Calvary Chapel denomination, then leave.

Calvinism's Strange Connections To Roman Catholicism | Part 2: Modern Bible Versions And "Sovereign"

In the last post on Calvinism, I showed proof that all modern "Protestant" versions (i.e. those based on the Nestle-Aland Greek text) are basically Catholic Bibles without the Apocrypha (except the ESV -- it has an edition that includes it from Oxford Press). With that in mind, it's very interesting to note how the big Calvinist buzzword, "sovereign" is not found anywhere in the King James Bible. But it is found HUNDREDS of times in the modern Vatican Versions.

Question for my Calvinist friends: Will you side with the KJB, or with the Vatican promoted modern versions?

Btw, the above word search includes wildcards.

Calvinism's Strange Connections To Roman Catholicism | Part 1 - J.I. Packer

J.I. Packer is an author virtually all Calvinists have heard of. He wrote a famous treatise attempting to reconcile evangelism with Calvinism (well, he didn’t use those exact words, he actually instead portrayed it as an “antinomy”, but you get the point). His book is called “Evangelism And The Sovereignty Of God”.

But just who is J.I. Packer? In his book, he quotes not out of the King James Bible, but out of the Vatican’s own English Standard Version.

The ESV is, of course, based on the Nestle-Aland 27th Greek text. The same Greek text made under the approval and supervision of the Vatican.

That makes the ESV a Vatican Version. And J.I. Packer uses it to defend his Calvinism.

But to make matters worse, Packer describes himself openly as an “ecumenical” Anglican.

And to seal the deal, J.I. Packer signed his name in endorsement on a 1994 document called “Evangelicals & Catholics Together” outlining the heresy that Roman Catholics are our brothers and sisters in Christ.

This document was cosigned with names such as Pat Robertson, and openly Jesuit Bishop Carlos Sevilla.

It’s obvious J.I. Packer is working to get Evangelicals and Catholics together, in preparation for the coming antichrist — the pope of Rome (Daniel 9:26 KJB). Could Calvinism play a part in his goal? Absolutely. Here’s why: Calvinism goes hand in hand with Lordship Salvation. Lordship Salvation is the teaching that we must turn from all of our sin (stop sinning) for everlasting life. That is obviously works for salvation (Jonah 3:10). But, Calvinism “solves” this problem by having someone be saved before they do those good works for salvation. Thus, the argument goes from the Lordship camp, we can do these good works for forgiveness because we are already saved by grace (Ephesians 2:8) before we do those works (which are unto salvation). Calvinism prepares the road for a works salvation message that can be easily molded into the works-based system of Roman Catholicism.

Bill Bright's Contrived Statistic

Over and over again, I've seen this statistic: Only 2% of Christians share their faith on a regular basis. And yet, I never have seen the actual data for such a statistic. Every website and book that makes that statistic refers to it being made by Dr. Bill Bright. But even then, most websites don't give any citation to where Dr. Bright said that. Although, I did find a book that did give a citation. It cites The Coming Revival for the support of this statistic. In that book, Dr. Bright made this statement on page 65:

"According to numerous surveys, 50 percent of the hundred million who attend church each Sunday have no assurance of their salvation. And 95 percent are not familiar with the person and ministry of the Holy Spirit. Only two percent of believers in America regularly share their faith in Christ with others." (emphasis added).

This is the origin of this commonly cited statistic. Yet, in the book, absolutely no footnotes or citations are given to back up any of these statements. Dr. Bright either made them up on the spot, or simply repeated rumors that he heard.

So what is the truth on this matter? The number of professing Christians who share their faith on a regular basis is more like 14%, not 2%, according to a LifeWay Poll. This is still, no doubt, a very low number of Christians who share their faith on a regular basis. But the contrived statistic by Dr. Bill Bright, and parroted by nearly everybody is simply flat out wrong with nothing to back it up.

The Textus Receptus -- The True Majority Text

As a King James Bible Believer, I kept hearing the statistic that the Textus Receptus underlying the King James Bible was the Majority Text (i.e. the Majority of Greek manuscripts supported it), and that the Westcott-Hort text is a minority text. While I could see visible evidence of the latter, I couldn’t find any documentation for the former claim. It seemed to me to be just a rumor that nobody had looked into. Other KJB Believers agreed with me on that.

BUT, I recently found the evidence I was looking for. While browsing one of these websites promoting this claim, I decided to look over again the sources for it: The Four-Fold Superiority of the King James Bible by D.A. Waite. I found this webpage version of that book with the same statistics. It further directed me to Forever Settled by Dr. Jack Moorman. I found an online copy of that book and read it carefully. I finally found my answer: this is no rumor, this is fact. Dr. Moorman basically surveyed old and new books written against the Textus Receptus. These various books written by various authors and scholars, who certainly had access to all the Greek manuscripts and their readings, were specifically about the differences between the Alexandrian text and the Byzantine text (as expressed by the Textus Receptus). They were collations of non-Byzantine texts that read against the Textus Receptus. The rest presumably are pro-Byzantine texts lining up with the Textus Receptus. Dr. Moorman counted all the manuscripts these anti-KJB authors could find and published his results in his book. Then, D.A. Waite decided to make a statistics chart to see how much percentage wise of manuscripts lined up with the Textus Receptus. It turns out (as shown below), that over 99% of the Greek manuscripts in existence are pro-Byzantine and pro-Textus Receptus. The rest (less that 1%) lined up with the Alexandrian Westcott-Hort Greek text. Dr. Moorman in his book admitted that the exact numbers are not written in stone, and that there were undoubtably a few Alexandrian manuscripts not mentioned as being Alexandrian by all the scholars he researched, but those differences would be minor. They wouldn’t change the overall picture of 99% to 1% in favor of the Textus Receptus. The Textus Receptus being the majority text doesn’t mean that all it’s particular and unique readings are supported by the majority of manuscripts, but that the text type as a whole was supported by the majority of Greek manuscripts.

Archaic Words In The KJB (Part 6)

16. Assay
Hebrews 11:29 KJB says, “By faith they passed through the Red sea as by dry land: which the Egyptians assaying to do were drowned.” This is referring to Moses and the Israelites escaping the Egyptians in the Exodus. Exodus 14:23 describes the Egyptians in this event, “And the Egyptians pursued, and went in after them to the midst of the sea, even all Pharaoh’s horses, his chariots, and his horsemen.” Of course, they “were drowned”. The clear implication of Hebrews 11:29 is that whereas Moses and the Israelites actually passed through the Red sea, the Egyptians tried to (in following after them) as well, but were drowned. Thus, the KJB’s definition of “assay” is to try or to attempt. This is exactly what it means in English. The 1828 Webster Dictionary defines “assay” as, “To attempt, try or endeavor.” This word is so archaic, it’s found even in The Message Bible (2002) in Proverbs 17:3.

17. Assupim
Actually, the Interactive Bible.ca spelled it wrong. It’s actually spelled “Asuppim” with one “s” and two “p”’s. 1 Chronicles 26:15 KJB reads, “To Obededom southward; and to his sons the house of Asuppim.” It’s pretty obvious “Asuppim” is a name. The house of Asuppim is the house that belongs to the man or family that went by the name “Asuppim”. It’s pretty hard to update a name, since names are not archaic. No dictionary is needed to define a name here. And it happens to be so archaic that it’s found in the modern Orthodox Jewish Bible (2011) in 1 Chronicles 26:15.

18. Asswage
Job 16:6 KJB tells us, “Though I speak, my grief is not asswaged: and though I forbear, what am I eased?” This verse has a parallel structure in it (the first part is like the last part) that defines “asswaged” as “eased”. The KJB thus defines “asswage” as to calm or to ease. This is confirmed by the 1828 Webster Dictionary which defines “asswage” as “assuage”, which itself is defined as, “To soften, in a figurative sense; to allay, mitigate, ease or lessen, as pain or grief; to appease or pacify, as passion or tumult. In strictness, it signifies rather to moderate, than to quiet, tranquilize or reduce to perfect peace or ease.” It’s not an old word, for even The Conservative Bible (2010) retains it in Job 16:6.