On Eagles' Wings Pt 340 — Don Courville

Well, we welcome you to on eagles wings today. I'd like to start off with second Thessalonians chapter 3 verse 1. Finally my finally brethren pray for us that the word of the Lord may have free course and be glorified Even as it is with you and that we may be delivered from unreasonable and wicked men for all men have not faith.

But the Lord is faithful who? Shall establish you and keep you from evil heavenly father. We thank you for the assurance of your word. We thank you for the comfort that it gives us. We thank you for the Savior who shed his blood for us was crucified Buried and rose again, and it's coming again.

We pray for those listening that they would truly be born again as you said in the word You must be born again father. Thank you that you give us hope and you give us life. You say that he that has the Son has life and we pray that all listening would know Jesus as their Savior if they don't that they would repent of their sins and trust him as Their Savior.

The Command to Preach and Preserve Sound Doctrine

We thank you for this time. We commit it to you now in Jesus name Amen. We're going to do a little interesting thing today sharing with you the testimony of a man that was well known is still well known because of his involvement with the Actually, I guess it was the New American Standard version the version that I used for a long time and I think you will find this very interesting as we go through this and We need to remember that the Lord said that we're to preach the word be instant in season and out of Season reprove rebuke exhort with all long-suffering and doctrine.

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers having itching ears and They listen to this and they shall turn away their ears from the truth and shall be turned unto fables.

Dr. Loxton’s Involvement with the New American Standard Version

Okay today we have from the New American Standard version to the King James Version a testimony of a committee member of the New American Standard Version and As we're trying to make contact with different Leaders around the country and get their testimony on different things.

Here's one from dr. Franklin Loxton he lived from 1907 to 1987 he passed away about 10 years ago, and he was a respected Evangelical pastor and a popular Bible conference speaker. During the 40s and the 50s in the 50s Loxton was invited by his businessman friend Franklin Dewey Lachman to prepare a feasibly Feasibility study which led to the production of the New American Standard Version.

He also helped interview some of the men who served as translators for this version. He wrote the foreword which appears in the New American Standard Version as we see in the following Testimony in the latter years of his life Loxton publicly renounced his association with the modern versions and stood Unhesitatingly for the King James Bible.

Loxton’s Renunciation of the New American Standard Version

In a letter dated June 9th 1997 Loxton wrote when Questions began to reach me pertaining to the New American Standard Version at first. I was quite offended. However in attempting to answer I began to sense that something was not right about the New American Standard Version.

Upon event investigation. I wrote my very dear friend. Mr. Lachman explaining that I was forced to renounce attachment to the New American Standard Version I Can say that the project was produced by thoroughly sincere men who had the best of intentions the product haver is Grievous to my heart and helps to complicate matters in these already troublesome Troublesome times end of quote.

Loxton moved to Largo, Florida in his senior years and died there August 13th 1987. Now the following message Dr. Loxton delivered at a speaking engagement regarding the New American Standard Version.

Dennis you want to share with us a little bit about that?

Why Loxton Defended the Authorized Version

Two questions were handed me tonight, which if I could answer them would take care of almost all the other questions. Number one. Please tell us why we should use the authorized version and why the New American Standard is not a good version and the background from Which it came.

Number two, what is your opinion of the 1881 1901 and other? Variations of the Bible in relation to the authorized version. May I point out to you very specifically? Not that you do not know but to stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance.

We are in the end time and this end time is characterized by a falling away. And of course that is apostasy. That is the meaning of the word falling away from truth and When there is a falling away from truth Concurrently there's always confusion because they are sort of Siamese twins.

The devil is too wise to try to destroy the Bible. He knows he can't he can't destroy the Word of God. But he can do a lot of things to try to supplant it or to corrupt it in the minds and hearts of God's people.

Adding to or Subtracting from Scripture

Now he can only do it in one of two ways. Either by adding to the scriptures or by subtracting from the scriptures and you mark it down in your little red book. He's too wise to add to. Because those who have been in the word for a long time would say wait a minute.

This is not in the Bible. So he subtracts from it. The deletions are absolutely frightening. For instance, there are in the revisions of 1881 and 1901. So we were told 5337 deletions subtract subtractions if you please and here's the way it is done.

It is done so subtly that very few would discover it for instance in the New American Standard. We are told that 16 times the word Christ is gone when you're reading through you perhaps wouldn't miss any of them some you might and 10 or 12 times the word Lord is gone.

For instance if you were in a church when the pastor is speaking on the words of the Lord Jesus in the temptation. Get thee behind me Satan. If you have a New American Standard, you wouldn't even find it.

It's not even in there and there are so many such deletions. Nevertheless when there is an omission that might be observed they put in the margin quote not in the oldest manuscripts. But they don't tell you what those oldest manuscripts are.

What oldest what oldest manuscripts or they say quote not in the best manuscripts? Well, what are the best manuscripts? They don't tell you you see how subtle that is the average man sees a little note in the margin which says not in the better manuscripts and He takes for granted they are scholars and they must know and then he goes on.

That's how easily one can be deceived. Now Rome is a custodian of the critical text. There are two copies of those Bibles in existence a and B the Codex Sinaiticus and the Codex Vaticanus and Where are they they are in the custodial care of Rome?

Now almost all of our revisions of recent years in particular came through that stream and that necessitates this comment there is the false and the true streams of manuscripts and Either our manuscripts come through the false stream or they come through the approved stream of manuscripts.

So, what do you do. I don't argue with them anymore, I'm not going to argue with them any of them I'm just going to ask on what manuscript or manuscripts is this version based and If it's based upon a manuscript that came down through this Roman stream, I don't want anything to do with it.

In case you just tuned in you're listening to on eagles wings and we're giving the testimony of Dr. Franklin Loxton who was Instrumental in the New American Standard Version will continue on with his testimony.

Erasmus and the Textus Receptus

You say how can we know? Well when God was ready to tell the world through a converted monk that the just shall live by faith. He raised up a man and I'm sure that God raised him up. Couldn't be otherwise by the name of Erasmus.

Erasmus has said by those who seem to know Scholars we have to take the word for something that he was the wisest man this side of Solomon that ever lived. It was said that he could do ten days work in one day.

Brilliant, I Forgot how many languages he spoke. They say he was at home in 18 of or 20 different languages as easy as we can move around in the English language. He knew the manuscripts that were available and he brought about a Greek text now.

He was so brilliant that the Pope offered him that is to keep him I suppose from doing this Greek text offered him the position of a cardinal. Which is a high-ranking position for those in the Catholic Church.

But how could you speak against a man claiming that he is a Roman when he turned down the the offer of a Carla? Cardinalship and campaigned against monasticism against the liturgy of the Catholic Church and was detested by the Catholic people and not only that but listen to this do.

You know one of the reasons the Jesuits came into being under Loyola their main project was to supplant the Erasmus text to get it out of the way somehow. Just undermine it and this is their pledge. You can go to the library and get this directly if you care.

They said in order to supplant the Erasmus text will send our men to Protestant seminaries. Protestant Bible schools will get them into teaching positions in seminaries and will get them into pulpits of churches.

To do what the whole aim? Around the world is to destroy the Erasmus text and the authorized version. Of course came from the Erasmus text folks. Are you listening to what we're saying? I'll continue on with his testimony.

The Claimed Accuracy of the Authorized Version

I think I mentioned the other night. Since there is so much concern about these versions and paraphrases and so on. It is a marvelous opportunity for the devil to get in his strokes, you know through through computerized procedures.

They have tried to determine the accuracy right down the line. You have lists of those in various books. The authorized version is right at the top friends. You can say the authorized version is absolutely correct.

How correct? 100 correct because biblical correctness is Predicated upon doctrinal accuracy and not one Enemy of this book of God has ever proved a wrong doctrine in the authorized version. You've never heard of doctrine in the authorized version.

You've never heard of anyone's intellect being thwarted because he believed this authorized version. Have you and you never will you never heard of anyone? Anytime going astray who embraced the precepts of the authorized version and you never will I tell you I used to laugh With others when a person would try to slander the intelligence perhaps of some who say well if the authorized version was good enough.

For Paul, it's good enough for me. You get a lot of ha ha. Say that perhaps is true. If this is the Word of God and Paul had the Word of God. Then things equal to the same thing are equal to each other.

We have the book that Paul had it's true there could be and perhaps should be some few corrections of words that are Archaic and a few places where it could read just a little more freely. When I say corrected I mean just some of the archaic words such as he who lets will let until he be taken out of the way.

Archaic Language and Jeremiah’s Rebuke

Now we don't use the word that way. But you can find out what it means by taking just a moment to look it up. Back in Jeremiah 4 22, we read my people are stoutish. There wouldn't be two people in the congregation that would know what that means.

But I like it because when I looked it up I found that it had more meaning than any other word you could put there. It means thick-headed. God says I can't get through to you because you are thick-headed and maybe he wants it to stay there if a person Looks it up.

He gets a better understanding of it. Then if another word were put in there to change it. There there are places where I believe the Spirit of God led the translators of the authorized version you read their biographies.

They were mighty men of God spent as much as five hours daily in prayer and some of them knew twenty. Some languages and it was before modernism fill the air and before their attention was diverted by so many other things television and so on.

The Authorized Version and Modern Translations

Actually after I've listened in so many places to all these arguments and I've listened to the scholars and sat with the translators to Be honest with you. I haven't found anything seriously wrong anywhere with the authorized version really Really just a couple of archaic words that are not in usage today.

Well, they could be changed. I personally don't think that thousand that these should be changed God's thoughts or above our thoughts higher than our thoughts and these words are Expression of his thoughts and I like to see it a little different here and there from men's ways and men's thoughts.

Actually, I don't think there's anything wrong with this the authorized version and has been tested for Almost 400 years. Actually, he said at this time 362 years back when he's still alive. Are you ready to throw it overboard because the scholars have come along and said well now this is better reads better.

You can understand it better I mean to tell you with all their self justification of the new easier to read versions people know less and less about God's Word.

The 1881 Revision and the Westcott-Hort Text

In the 1881 English revised version to begin with the revisers for the 1881 weren't to be revisers. They weren't to bring out a new book. They were revisers to bring some of the words up to date because the language had changed.

They were to be revisers, but the fact is and believe me this can't be refuted. There wasn't enough in the authorized version to revise to make it worth the while to cater to the ego of the scholars. But nevertheless they didn't have enough to revise.

So what are they going to do? Well two brilliant Cambridge scholars by the name of dr. Hort and dr Westcott had been collaborating on a new Greek text built on the Codex Sinaiticus Sinaiticus and the Codex Vaticanus which they believed were the very best manuscripts held by Rome.

So they said to the committee when they saw there wasn't enough to revise. I don't know if they said these exact words, but they said We would suggest that we bring about a new version and they had those men pledged themselves to Secrecy that they wouldn't tell anybody about the text they were using until after the book was out.

Afraid I guess that they would be curbed that the King of England or somebody would prevent them. Twice British royalty refused to have anything to do with the 1881 revision. But at any rate it was deception to begin with their own text hadn't been hadn't even been published yet.

Hadn't stood the scrutiny of the public so the 1881 was built upon that and the only fundamentalist who stayed on the board was dr. Schreiber and Before he died he felt he had to break his promise to this group of men.

And he let the world know that they took advantage after advantage in the text. That's where we've gotten the number of something like five thousand three hundred and thirty seven deletions. That was his count and he said every time I raised some objection I was voted down and they took liberties with God's Word.

He was right there at almost every meeting and he revealed that to the world before he died. Now the 1901 American Standard Version within ten years. They started communicating with spiritual leaders on this side of the water to work with them on another printing called the 1901 edition.

Feeling I suppose that if the Americans cooperated that they would have a wider sales range and Immediately that they discovered that the 1901 was not trustworthy and it didn't go very long until it died out.

In all of my pastorates, I can only remember one person who ever owned one of those 1901 American Standard Bibles.

Loxton’s Personal Crisis over the New American Standard Version

In case you just tuned in this broadcast. We're reading a short message given by dr Frank Logsdon who was instrumental in the translation of the new American Standard Version back in 1956 to 57. Mr. F. Dewey Lachman of the Lachman Foundation Contacted me.

Dr. Logsdon said well, he discovered that the copyright on the American Standard Version of 1901 Was just as loose as a fumbled ball on a football field. Nobody wanted it. The publishers didn't want it.

It didn't get anywhere. Mr. Lachman got in touch with me and said would you and Ann come out and spend some weeks with us and we'll work on A feasibility report. I can pick up the copyright to the 1901 if it seems advisable.

Well up to that time I thought the Westcott and Hort was the text. You were intelligent if you believe the Westcott and Hort. Some of the finest people in the world believed in that Greek text the finest leaders that we have today.

You'd be surprised if I told you you wouldn't believe it. They haven't gone into it just as I haven't gone into it. They're just talk taking it for granted at any rate. We went out and started on a feasibility report and I encouraged him to go ahead with it.

I'm afraid I'm in trouble with the Lord because I encouraged him to go ahead with it. We laid the groundwork. I wrote the format. I helped to interview some of the translators. I sat with the translators.

I wrote the preference when you see the preference to the new American Standard. Those are my words and I never really looked at it. I just took it for granted that it was done as we started it. You know until some of my friends across the country began to learn that I had some part in it.

They started saying what about this and what about that? Dr. David Otis Fuller in Grand Rapids, Michigan, I've known him for 35 years and he would say Frank. What about this? You had a part in it. What about this?

What about that? And at first I thought now, wait a minute. Let's don't go overboard. Let's don't be too critical. You know how you justify yourself the last minute, but I finally got to the place where I said and am I in trouble?

I can't refute these arguments. It's wrong. It's terribly wrong. It's frighteningly wrong and what am I going to do about it? Well, I went through some real soul-searching for about four months and I sat down and wrote one of the most Difficult letters of my life.

I think I wrote to my friend Dewey and I said Dewey. I Don't want to add to your problems, but I can no longer ignore These criticisms I'm hearing and I can't refute them. The only thing I can do and dear brother I haven't a thing against you and I can witness at the judgment of Christ and before men wherever I go that you were 100 sincere.

He wasn't schooled in language or anything. This is in quotes. He was just a businessman he did it for money and he did it conscientiously. He wanted it absolutely right and he thought it was right. I guess nobody pointed out some of these things to him I must under God renounce every attachment to the new American standard.

Six Criticisms of Multiple Bible Translations

I tell you dear people somebody is going to have to stand. If you must stand against everyone else stand. Don't get obnoxious. Don't argue. There's no sense in arguing. But nevertheless, that's where the new American stands in connection with the authorized version.

I Just dotted jotted down what these versions translations and paraphrases are doing consider this. Number one. They cause widespread confusion. Because everywhere we go people say what do you think about this?

And what do you think of that? Well, what do you what do young people think when they hear all of that? Number two. These versions they discourage me discourage memorization. Who's going to memorize when each one has a different Bible a different translation?

Number three they obviate the use of a concordance. Where are you going to find a concordance for the good news for modern man and all these others? You aren't going to find one. We're going to have to have a concordance for everyone.

You're going to have to have a lot of concordances. Number four they provide opportunity for perverting the truth. There are all these translations and versions each one trying to get a little different slant from the others.

They must make it different because if it isn't different why have a new version? It makes a marvelous opportunity for the devil to slip in his perverting influence. Number five. These many translations make teaching of the Bible difficult and I'm finding that more and more as I go around the country.

I mentioned this thing the other night. How could a mathematics professor or instructor teach a certain problem in a class if the class had six or eight different textbooks? How about that? How could you do it?

Number six they elicit profitless argumentation. Because everywhere we go they say this one is more accurate which one is more accurate how do you know. And this is not a reflection against those saying it because I would have done this a few years ago and.

Standing on the Word of God

Then including concluding on Dr. Lockston's testimony and by the way, you can get this off the internet he said. As I said to you a couple of minutes ago You don't need to defend yourself and you don't need to defend God's Word don't defend it.

You don't need to defend it. You don't need to apologize for it. Just say well. Did this version or this translation come down through the Roman stream? If so, count me out. Whatever you say about Erasmus and Tyndale.

That's what I want. And besides this we've had the authorized version for 362 years it's been tested it as no other piece of literature has ever been tested word by word. Syllable by syllable and think even until this moment.

No one has ever found any wrong doctrine in it. And that's the main thing he that wills to do the will of God shall know the doctrine. Well time is up. Let's be people of the book. It took my mother to heaven and my dad my grandfather my grandmother.

It was Moody's book. It was Livingston's book. Jc. Studd gave up his fortune to take this book to Africa and I don't feel ashamed to carry it the rest of my journey. It's God's book our father. We thank thee and praise thee for thy word.

Scripture’s Inspiration and the Holiness of the Book

Help us to love it and preach it and teach it and tell everybody we can the good news through thy word in Jesus name. Amen. Dr. Frank Loxton his testimony my friends the Word of God says all scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine for reproof for correction for instruction in righteousness.

That the man of God may be perfect thoroughly furnished unto all good works. If you have an unholy book, it'll produce an unholy people. You have a holy book. You read it you obey it heed it. It will produce God in us.

Well until next time we trust that God I continue to work in your life. Gets you a book that says King James on it. That's the Word of God. The enemy is working to deceive us. Let's humble ourself if we've been deceived and Let's receive that which God has given to us which the martyrs paid with a high price.

Oh God have mercy upon us as believers to turn away from your word God. Would you turn us back to your word Lord? Help us not to defend some corrupt book that's come down from Rome all the way down to origin the figment of some man's imagination.

Spread on by demons doctrines of demons. Oh Lord help us. We pray for revival in your church today in Jesus name. Amen.