Before some here were even born a man by the name of W. Carl Ketcherside had authored a book entitled The Twisted Scriptures. The reason for this overview of that book is because many of the things which he stated some 30 years ago are entering the Church once again. For all practical purposes, what he stated were only old denominational views that he had simply repackaged. In this lesson I want to simply hit the highlights of the book or we might say the really dangerous statements that he contends are true.

1. 'The result is that many of the words we read in our translations of the scriptures no longer convey to the popular mind the ideas with which they were originally invested. It is not an exaggeration to say that almost every word in the English versions of the Bible has been hammered and pummeled by theological and ecclesiastical usage until it no longer communicates the will of God as at the beginning.' (p. 19) 'The word of God is unchanging. It is recorded in heaven but not necessarily in English.' (p. 89)

Points to Note: A. Jesus had complete confidence in the translations of the Scriptures which existed in His day. Jesus never undermined people's confidence in the Scriptures, rather He exhorted them to read the translations that existed and study them (John 5:39, 45-47; Luke 16:31; Matthew 22:29). B. The apostles had the same high view of the Scriptures (even though these were copies and translations of the originals) (Acts 13:27; 17:2,11; 2 Timothy 3:15-17). Let us be impressed that the writings which were able to lead one to salvation, were translations and copies of the originals. C. If another language, such as English, can't adequate present the truth found in the original Greek or Hebrew, then why didn't God forbid the use of translations? D. Rather, the great commission endorses and infers that translations must exist, if the gospel is to be preached to every person (Mark 16:15). E. What the above argument tries to accomplish is to undermine our confidence in the Bible, so that a line of fellowship can never be drawn on what the text says (since the text is unreliable). In contrast, Jesus and the apostles established truth on the basis of what the text said (Matthew 4:4,7,10 'For it is written'; 22:32,35-40. And false teachers in every generation have used all sorts of arguments to try to get the spotlight of Scripture off what they are saying or doing (2 Peter 2:10 'and despise authority.') F. Compare Ketcherside's view of Scripture, with the views held by righteous individuals in the past (Psalm 19:7-11; 119:97-104; Ezra 7:10; Nehemiah 8:1-8 'And they read from the book, from the law of God, translating to give the sense so that they understood the reading.') G. As with most promoters of error, such men and women aren't consistent. In one breath they claim that all English translations are hopelessly corrupted, in another breath, they expect people to understand their exegesis of a passage. Or, all the texts of Scripture have been hopelessly corrupted, except their favorite texts! H. The above argument also smacks of an intellectual elitism, that only those who are fluent in the original Hebrew or Greek can adequately understand God's message. That the Bible can only be understood by the 'clergy' or the 'scholars'. Brethren, don't let people intimidate you! Every Christian has immediate access to the best scholarship in the world, concerning the original languages, when they pick up and read any standard translation. An English translation is simply a product of the most diligent research into the thousands of ancient manuscripts which exist and the original Greek or Hebrew. 47 experts worked on the King James Version. When time came for a revision, 65 British scholars devoted their time, a band of American scholars were invited to join the task, and in 1901 the American Standard Version was printed.

1. 'God made men so that as long as they are in the flesh they will be divergent in opinions. We can no more all think alike than we can look alike.' (p. 72) 'Being human, there is only one type of unity possible for us, that is unity in diversity.' (p. 24)

Points To Note: A. I am learning that lack of faith in the power of God, is what often triggers false doctrine. These are the same people who argue that people in remote parts of the earth are not accountable to the gospel or don't have to be baptized to be saved. They don't believe that God can find honest and good hearts, or that God an providentially get the truth to someone who is looking for it (2 Peter 2:5-9; Acts 8:26ff; 10:1-2; 16:14; 18:10 '..for I have many people in this city.') B. Like the Sadducees they understand neither the Scriptures nor the power of God (Matthew 22:29). C. Ketcherside, and all like him are saying, 'God can't give a revelation that all can understand alike…God couldn't create the human race with the ability to perceive the truthfulness of something, when they heard it.' D. Rather, I believe that God is able (2 Peter 2:9 'then the Lord knows how'; Luke 1:37); and He invested the time to speak and have that revelation recorded, precisely because He knew that all could understand it alike-despite our imperfections (Hebrews 1:1-2). The very fact that the Word of God is to be preached to sinners proves that human imperfection and even human rebellion is not an insurmountable barrier between any man or woman and the truth. 5. Consistently, Jesus and the apostles made it clear that the only thing that stands between one and the truth, is their attitude towards truth (Luke 8:15 'these are the ones who have heard the word in an honest and good heart'; John 7:17 'If any man is willing to do His will, he shall know of the teaching….'; Acts 17:11; 2 Thessalonians 2:10-12). F. Once again, the above argument is abandoned once such men and women start teaching their slant of the Scriptures. When Ketcherside wrote, he expected that people, from all backgrounds could understand what he was saying. False teachers typically resent the idea that people who misunderstand the Bible do so from ulterior motives, and yet they assign evil motives to the people who can't accept what they write in their books! Such people argue that we can't all understand the Bible alike (even if we are honest), but any person who is honest will accept what they are saying! And those who don't are simply bound to tradition, too stubborn to change, and so on.

1. 'A man may hold a view as to the perseverance of the saints (once-saved-always-saved), the manner of the resurrection, or the second coming of our Lord, and he may prove to be as wrong as one could be, but he cannot be debarred from citizenry in the kingdom of heaven by the other subjects, any more than one can be disenfranchised in the United States because he disagrees with the government space program or the approach to oversees help.' (p. 46)

Points To Note: A. Notice at what level he places the teachings found in the Bible. Basically, he places them on the same level as opinions over whether how much money should be invested in the space program. B. Sounds like he places all the teaching done by the apostles in the category of things you can believe, but they aren't mandatory. C. Jesus had a completely different view of what would be revealed through the apostles (John 16:13 'all truth'; 12:47-48 'my sayings'; Matthew 10:40). The apostles didn't believe that what they wrote was 'optional' (1 Corinthians 14:38 'if anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized'; 1 Timothy 6:3; 2 Timothy 3:10 'But you followed my teaching….'; 2 Thess. 3:6). D. It is interesting that Ketcherside throws in the person who is wrong about the second coming or the resurrection. Paul encountered people who were wrong about the resurrection, and considered them as men who are undermining the faith of God's people (2 Timothy 2:15-18 '…men who have gone astray from the truth saying that the resurrection has already taken place, and thus they upset the faith of some'.) It also seems very clear that the apostle Paul had disenfranchised such men (consider 1 Timothy 1:20/1 Corinthians 5:5,11-13).

1. 'The common fallacy assumes that all of the apostolic epistles are part of the gospel of Christ and any exposition of the doctrine contained in these letters is preaching the gospel.' (p. 51) 'What were the constituent factors of the gospel? There were seven of these as follows: the life, death, burial, resurrection, ascension, coronation and glorification of Jesus of Nazareth.' (p. 58)

Points To Note: A. Actually, this is an old denominational way of viewing the New Testament. We all have to agree on the facts of the gospel (which is narrowly defined as only being 5 or so things), but we can disagree on all other doctrines. B. The above theory encounters serious problems when we realize that Jesus and the apostles attached the word 'gospel' to many doctrines. (1) The kingdom of God/Church (Matt. 4:23). Question: When Jesus preached the gospel, was He only talking about His death, burial, resurrection and ascension??? Rather, I find Jesus talking to His disciples privately about such things (Matthew 16:21 'From that time Jesus Christ began to show His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem, and suffer many things from elders….and be killed, and be raised up on the third day.' When Jesus delivered the Sermon on the Mount, was He preaching the gospel of the kingdom? (Matthew 4:17,23; 5:1) (2) What is recorded in the gospels (Matt. 26:13). (3) The plan of salvation (Mark 16:16), including baptism for remission of sins. (4) The future judgment (Romans 2:16). (5) Correct view of the law of Moses (Galatians 1:6; 2:5). (6) The correct view of eternal life, our hope (Colossians 1:5; 23). (7) And back to that resurrection question again. So one's view of the resurrection is inconsequential? In 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 , Paul mentions the gospel that he preached, and under the category of 'gospel' he includes the truth concerning the resurrection of the dead and the coming judgment (1 Corinthians 15:12-19). Also note that Ketcherside's seven things that we must believe, are not the same as Paul's essentials for unity (Ephesians 4:4-6).

1. 'I have no perfect brothers. They are all brothers in error…Some are in error on some things, some on other things…none are free from error.' (p. 174)

Points To Note: A. It is one thing to say that we are imperfect or that we all sin (1 John 1:8-10), it is quite another to say that we are all persisting in some sin (1 John 3:6). The same verse that says we all sin, also contends that sin must be repented of to be forgiven (1 John 1:9). B. Jesus didn't have the above attitude. He looked at seven congregations, and found two without any error (Revelation 2:8-11; 3:7-13). C. In addition, the congregations which were tolerating error, were not comforted by the fact that 'all are in error' (2:16). D. Finally, even these congregations in error, were not in error on 100 things, but only one or two things (2:14,20). E. It is also interesting to note that people who make the above contention apply it to all doctrinal issues, except the one which they are presently writing a book about. 'Everyone is in error on some point….but I know I am not in error on this point!'

1. 'No honest opinion, no sincerely held doctrinal view, can ever be made the ground for rejection of one of God's children.' (p. 12) 'No man will be saved who deliberately rebels against any doctrinal truth which he understands and apprehends. No one will be lost because of merely mistaken views or human ability to grasp all of these doctrinal truths..If one is right about Jesus he may be wrong about a lot of things and still be saved.' (pp. 67-68)

Points to Note: 1. The above kind-of-sounds-good, until you realize what he has just said. Re-read the above section and you will find that he is saying nothing more than 'just as long as you are sincere, it doesn't matter what you believe.' 2. I am impressed that Jesus and the apostles never made the above argument. Rather, they argue that if a man truly is sincere, then he will accept the truth (John 7:17; Matthew 7:21; John 14:15; 2 Thess. 2:10-12). 3. In the New Testament I never find this supposed category of someone who is sincere, and they continue to persist in error after they encounter the truth. 4. In fact, Paul taught that the person who hears the truth, and yet rejects it, is no longer sincere (Acts 13:46). 5. And once again, we encounter a tremendous amount of insincerity in this argument. Liberalism assumes that if someone teaching something contrary to the 'conservative' view, they are sincere, but if someone attacks the 'new view' they are obviously, insincere and are only trying to cause problems. Jesus warned, that false teachers will seem to be sincere (Matthew 7:15).