All right, put that aside. In my opinion, I think the scriptures are extremely clear concerning, and we've talked about this already, concerning about how seriously God values his word and how offensive it is to the Almighty for men to tamper with his word. And we've looked at very specific scriptures about that, and I think we're all familiar with those anyway. And the Lord, I believe, is equally clear that there will be consequences for those who engage in the practice of altering his word in any way. And remember, this all stemmed originally from the question posed by virtue of an article that was given to me concerning Revelation 20 in verse five, because so many have a struggle with the first resurrection and then the second resurrection. The dispensationalists imagine they've resolved the struggle and, oh yeah, that's easy, number one, number two. And yeah, okay, but your systematic theology and the rest of that is very problematic, so I think you have a problem, okay? But many people, I mean, I think the vast majority of Christians over 2,000 years acknowledge Revelation 20 is the hardest thing to systematize into the whole mosaic of eschatology. It's the most challenging aspect. So that's why there's been so many divisions, but there's also divisions because of bad theology that has ruined and destroyed eschatology. We understand that. But, you know, and so I thought I'd talk longer and more deeply on Revelation 20 verse 5, and I started to do that. But as I got to thinking about it, I said to myself, wait a minute, there's two fundamental issues here that undergird the proposition. The proposition being the first part of verse 5 needs to be removed from the Bible. And so that drove me to inspiration and preservation of God's Word. But it also, as I thought about it, I said, but even if I dare say more fundamental than that, kind of at the backdrop and joint at the hip to it, I suppose I could say, is the concept of the fear of God. The fear of God is such a big subject and such an extremely practical. People say, okay, we're afraid of God, so give me something practical. Well, that's about as brilliant an argument as saying, well, yeah, we believe in predestination, but we don't talk about it much because it isn't really very practical. It isn't practical? It isn't practical? So to me, I mean, the sovereignty of God is utterly practical, and the fear of God is right there with it. I mean, down-to-earth decisions that we make, that kind of practicality. The sovereignty of God and the fear of God is a guiding light to how we approach decision-making. So, you know, the fear of God, there is much to say on it, you know, when we're not done. But that's not the subject tonight, but I see this as connected. Should we take things out of the Bible? I mean, to me, at face value, that's a scary question, isn't it? Let's go to Psalm 12, by, you know, good people. We'll ask that question because the teaching's been pretty bad, and our new modern Bibles encourage that kind of thinking. And until we realize what's happened to us, we might not see the magnitude of these kind of contemplations. In Psalm 12 and verse six and seven, we read, and they're well-known words, the words of the Lord are pure words. as silver tried in a furnace of earth purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O Lord. Thou shalt preserve them from this generation forever." Okay. Now, there is a division of thought regarding these two verses. And the division of thought is this, whether or not the preserving of them, thou shalt keep them. Oh Lord, thou shalt preserve them. The question is, what are those descriptions modifying or who are they modifying? What shall God keep and preserve? Or is it, who shall God keep and preserve? And these are the two different trains of thought. Is this preservation being talked about? Does it refer to Verse seven, verse six, the words of the Lord are pure words, silver-tried in the furnace of earth, purified seven times, thou shalt keep them. Is it referring to verse six and the words of scripture? I mean, after all, that's the immediate antecedent. So he says the words of the Lord are pure words, as silver tried in the furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, those words of God. O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation. So when we see this preservation of verse seven, modifying the immediate antecedent of the word of God, then we've got a bold, blatant, in your face, declaration of scripture that the scriptures will be preserved in every generation, which we've seen that in other places. But it seems to me that the majority of commentators don't believe that's what's being stated here. The other view is that it's modifying the people spoken of in the verse before that one. Verse five, for the oppression of the poor, For the sighing of the needy, now will I arise, saith the Lord. I will set him in safety from him that puffeth at him." And they'll say, well, look, verse 5 is talking about the oppression of the poor and the sighing of the needy. And the Lord is going to take care of them. He's going to keep them in safety. He's going to preserve them. He's going to protect them from the wicked. And you can be sure if he says he's going to do that, you can be sure he'll do that because it says, And this is the division of thought. amongst commentators. And it seems like most commentators say it's referring to verse 5 and the needy and the poor. It's not referring to the words of the Bible in verse 6, even though that's the immediate antecedent. And they have their arguments that they go through. And I thought about, well, we could take a long time and go through the arguments in detail, and that would be profitable. But in a sense, I mean, I thought, no, why not do it? But in another sense, well, I take lots of sidetracks sometimes. Well, it's not necessary at this point, and we could do it another time if we wanted to. It's not necessary to do that. And I say that because Either way, we still got the truth of these words that come out here, whether this is referring to the people or the words in scripture. We read, thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation forever. So God is gonna preserve his people. I do believe one of the ways that God preserves his people is by preserving his word, because as we saw last week, and there are verses that talk about that, our salvation, our growth, our continuance, our strengthening, our guidance, all comes through God's word, and without it, we can't have any of it. And we looked at a bunch of verses that said that. So I'm not sure it's necessary to hammer this out and to go into all that detail. I don't think, in one sense, it's necessary. God's words are pure words. Anyone going to challenge that? They are unadulterated. They're not commingled with error. It's hard for me to think that God would inspire them and not allow any error to enter into them by those penning them, only for him to lose those words so that we don't have them, or we don't know what they are for sure, and we can have arguments and debates, and the doctrines are gonna hang on it. It's just hard for me to believe, reading the Bible and about God's sovereignty, we've made this point, the guy would just let that all slip through his fingers when we see how important his word is, not just to him, but to us, according to his word. And we've seen before that his words and his truth and the thoughts of his heart are to every generation. Every generation will know the thoughts of his heart. Well, how's that gonna be? Through mystical experiences? No, through his word, okay? And that word is not to be tampered with by men. And we know that and we've seen that in scripture and we're gonna look at it again. it's dangerous to tamper with God's word. And I referenced it, but we didn't really look at it and contemplate it. Go to Deuteronomy chapter four. Deuteronomy chapter four. God's word is not to be tampered with. Now, if God's declaring that, that sounds like, well, you better not. What does that imply? If you do, the Lord's going to do something about it, which means he's going to preserve it. Deuteronomy 4 and verse 1 and 2. Now, therefore, hearken, O Israel, unto the statutes and unto the judgments which I teach you. Now, those would be the laws of Moses given to him by God, which makes it the law of God, right? Now therefore hearken, O Israel, unto the statutes and unto the judgments which I teach you. For to do them, that ye may live and go and possess the land which the Lord God of your fathers giveth you, ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it. You take away nothing, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God, which I command you." Now, it's built right into the structure of the old covenant law. You don't touch anything. You don't add anything. You don't subtract anything. That means God's concerned with that. That means he's making it his business. Well, he made it his business then, but not now. He made it his business for the witness of the law, but not for the New Testament and the witness of the work of Christ. And the doctrine of Christ given in the epistles, this, the Lord lets it through his fingers, but he wouldn't let the mosaic law slip through his fingers, but I guess with the New Testament he did. Okay, if you're thinking that way and you tell me you believe in God, in the God of scripture, either I think you're lying or you haven't read much of the Bible yet. I don't know how you can come to that conclusion, even without reading any verses on it. I mean, if you believe what you're gonna read about God, well, if you're gonna believe this, would God let his word go away? No, he's gonna deal with those who try and make it go away, though. Go to Proverbs chapter 30. Because this isn't just stated in one place. Proverbs 30. And verse five and six. Well, yeah, verse five and six. Every word of God is pure. He is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Now notice, every word of God is pure. It's not alloyed with any foreign metal. He is a shield unto them that put their trust in him, which means they're putting their trust in his word, which is pure. If they trust him, they're going to trust his word. And then we're told, add thou not unto his words. Now they're not saying don't negate or contradict his words, which would be true, but don't add to them. Well, what if I add proper and good thoughts? Don't. You can add proper and good thoughts as your commentary and musings, but you don't add them to the word. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar. Jesus, God's concerned. with people doing that. That means something to me. And then probably most famously for most Christians, Revelation 22. I just wanted you to see, we find this at the beginning of the Bible, Moses, in the middle of the Bible, Proverbs, and then Revelation 22, the very end of the Bible. So it's at the bookends and it's in the middle. That's all I wanted you to see. And it's the same thing. Revelation 22, verse 18, 18 and 19. For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book. And honestly, I think he's talking about the book of Revelation, not the whole Bible, but I think the principle applies to the whole Bible because of what we've read in the other parts of the Bible. But in the immediate context, he's talking about this book of Revelation. For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book. If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book. You say, well, people have done that. Have they had the plagues applied to them? Well, I'll just say this. They either have or they will. Because this is true. It may be happening now. We don't know anything about it. But that's true. Those are kind of scary words and verse 19 and if any man shall take away From the words of the book of this prophecy now you see you've got the adders Womans Jehovah's Witness They'll add things and change things and Okay, but then you got the subtractors. Well, though that basically a modern Bibles. They're the the taker away errs and They're the ones who remove, though they're very good at that. And if any man shall take away from the words of this, of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away, by the way, the book of this prophecy, Revelation. And what was the subject that got this started? Should the first part of Revelation 20 verse five be removed? We've got a specific designation. Don't do it. If any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life and out of the holy city. Now, I remember doing a little sermon or series on the book of life. And there's the book of life and there's the book of life. There's the book of life recording the elect. And then there's the book of life that records the living. Not necessarily the elect, but the living. And there's a couple of different ways to look at that. And maybe he's gonna take their name out of the Book of the Living, okay, but then what does it say after that? And out of the Holy City. So when you're talking about removing them from the Holy City, taking them away out of the New Jerusalem, well, that is to show not saved, not converted. Because the elect will not be removed from the New Jerusalem. So we're talking about salvation issue here. It seems to me that ultimately, if you reason this out with the whole text of scripture, you're talking about reprobation. Because Christians don't lose their salvation. So if they're being removed from the Book of Life in the Holy City, I remember when we were talking about the Book of Life and blotting names out of the Book of Life, that all names are written in the Book of Life and they're blotted out due to unbelief, rebellion, and sin. And they're not written because Christ died and effectually paid for their sins because we believe in limited atonement because that necessarily has to be true if we believe in the fullness of the atonement of the work of Christ. However, their names are removed from the book of life and out of the holy city. So there's a scary thing. And in the end, that has to mean reprobation. You're cut off and without hope. And from the things which are written in this book. So there's a very severe warning here for those that would tamper with the word of God. And don't forget what Jesus said in Matthew 5. Jesus very plainly, very straightforwardly spoke In similar lines, but using different language, we can go there, Matthew 5. I like the reinforcing with the visual. Modern churches, you know, They're telling you what it says or it's on the wall. It's always good to look at it in your Bible and familiarize yourself with it and see with your eyes. But in Matthew 5, 17 and 18, think not I am come to destroy the law, all the prophets. I'm not come to destroy, but to fulfill. Verily I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law till all be fulfilled. And of what value, and I've made this point before already, of what value is such a bold statement made by Jesus if the jots and the tittles of the scriptures and all that Jesus had said has been put into question? He says, For verily I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the Lord till all be fulfilled. That can't happen. The scriptures cannot be compromised. That includes the law and includes the words of Jesus. Not one jot or one tittle. Now let me show you something. Go to Mark 16. You can't tamper with God's word. Now it's a simple principle, but Mark 16. And let's see. Starting at verse nine. Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils. And she went and told them that had been with him as they mourned and wept. And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not. After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked and went into the country, the two on the road to Emmaus. And when they went and told it unto the residue, neither believed they them. Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at me, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart. because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen. Because he did say, I'll rise again, you know, go into Jerusalem, I'll meet you. But they weren't believing the witnesses. And he said unto them, go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth not shall be damned. And these signs shall follow them that believe. In my name shall they cast out devils. Which we see that recorded in the scripture. They shall speak with new tongues. We see that recorded in the scripture. They shall take up serpents. If they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them. We've seen that with the apostle Paul. And they shall lay hands on the sick. And they shall recover, recorded in scripture. So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven and sat at the right hand of God. And they went forth and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them and confirming the word with signs following. Amen. Now, everything I just read has been kicked out of modern Bible. Every word. I just read. That's what they're telling you. So I just wanted to read the Reformation Study Bible, edited by R.C. Sproul. And let me go to Mark 16. And all the Reforms say, oh, no, no, Pastor Gallagher, don't you, don't you rag on R.C. Sproul. I'm not ragging on R.C. Sproul. I'm just ragging on what he did with his Bible. I mean, he said a lot of good things. This is not one of the good things he did. So in Mark 16, when we come to Mark 16, oh, let me get there. So we come to Mark 16. I'm reading in verse 8. I'm reading from the ESV. Sorry, sorry. Try and forget it after I do it. That's the end of verse 8. Now, before you come to verse 9, In the middle of the column, it's a two-column Bible, okay? So it's a two-column Bible, and I just, chapter 16, I just read down to verse eight. Now, verse nine is down here, and there's something in the middle. Oh, is there an extra verse? No, this is not a verse. It's a title to introduce the next section of the chapter. And this is what it reads, and it's all in capitals and in brackets. Some of the earliest manuscripts do not include 16 verses nine through 20. You have to read that before you get to the next sentence. And then when you get to the next sentence, verse nine is in the column, but there's a bracket. And the bracket goes to the end of the chapter. And what we're saying is everything in this bracket is not found in the earliest manuscripts. We want you to know that it's really probably shouldn't be there. That's the message. Verses 9 through 20. It's gone. Well, it isn't gone, it's there, but they're saying don't pay attention to it. You might as well remove it. Cowards. That's your conviction. And if you don't have a conviction about it, what are you doing that for? There's no fear of God before their eyes. If they mean that, then they ought to just take it right out of there. God help them if they do, but that's what they've done. If that doesn't belong there, and you say you know that, then what'd you put it there for? You've added, you say, well, we say it isn't there, but you're suggesting maybe you could take it. You see what they're doing? Now that's just a heading. Get the brackets, so the heading, that's strike one. Putting the brackets around the whole text, that's strike two. Say, is there a strike three? Yes, there is. It's called a footnote. And there's a footnote here. Say so. Just like the Schofield Reference Bible, the Reformed Study Bible has all the opinions of men. And so we've got the top two-thirds of the page of the Bible, the bottom third is a line across there, and this is what you're supposed to understand. And look, a Reformed Bible commentary is gonna be a lot better commentary than Schofield. I'm not questioning that. However, what'd they do it his way for? Write your commentaries. Don't put it in the Bible. And you know what? I have to say the same thing about Geneva. Shouldn't have done it. But it says, when it interrupts the Word of God and says, some of the earliest manuscripts do not include 16, nine through 20, then, and that's in brackets, and then outside the bracket, footnote number one. Well, let me read footnote number one before you begin to read verse nine. And this is what footnote number one says. Chapter 16 says in bold print, nine through 20. Now listen to this. It's a paragraph. Scholars differ regarding whether these verses were originally part of this gospel. Some important early Greek manuscripts lack these verses. Other manuscripts have verses nine through 20, parentheses, known as the longer ending, end of parentheses. And still others have a shorter ending, parentheses, roughly one verse long, end of parentheses. A few manuscripts have both the shorter ending and the longer ending. Because of these differences, some scholars believe that verses 9 through 20 were added later and not written by Mark. On the other hand, the verses are cited by writers from the late 2nd century and are found in the overwhelming majority of existing Greek manuscripts of the Gospel of Mark. For other scholars, these facts establish the authenticity of the passage. So what's all this mean? It means, well, you got this, you got that, you got this, you got that. So you can believe this, you can believe that. So it's all up in the air. So you put all this there to confuse people and say, well, I guess we really don't know. That's where they leave you. But if you don't bother to read the footnote, you kind of left, you know, a lot of modern Bibles will say the earliest and best manuscripts, and then they're putting the nail in their own coffin. they're declaring the answer. These guys are just trying to, they put it in brackets and says the earliest manuscript do not include this, but then they put an apology, it's not even an apology, it's a well, but there's some good reasons that they don't include it, but there are some people, and truth is, these verses that we say in the earliest manuscripts, you can find them in writings that are older, than the Greek manuscripts that back the Alexandrian older texts. They say you can find these words written going back to the second century, like in the writings of church fathers. Well, what do these guys make up these words? You're admitting that this passage, which you're putting brackets on, is recorded all the way back to the second century, where your new Bibles that have older manuscripts go back to the fourth century. So those quotations are older than what you're using, and you're discounting them. I know maybe it was in commentaries, a sermon by somebody, and he's quoting Mark, and he quotes these verses that are in King James Bible. Well, doesn't that tell you something? If you're gonna say older is better, why don't you, what are they doing? I mean, to me, it's just. It's up for grabs, you decide. And that's kind of the society. We're democracy. Just choose the Bible that you like, that makes you feel the most comfortable. Let me put this away. Wait a minute. Clean off my Bible. Now, we know that no original autographs exist of any books of the Bible. There's no, you know, what Paul actually penned or Moses or anybody like that. There's none that exists anywhere in the face of the earth. There's no original autographs that exist and they'd be too old to be able to exist, it would seem. So either, and we've talked about this, either God, seems like God has either kept his word or he hasn't. How has he done it? And to me, I can only see two perspectives, and this is kind of a review thought, but there's two perspectives. The first perspective is he did so, and this would be my view, the view that Christians have taken for so long, he did so through divine providence. God preserved his word because the original autographs would be copied and copied and copied until they were worn out. So they couldn't protect them. It was just gonna happen. So that's why you needed faithful scribes. You needed a lot of them. So many that they'd be worn out when people are, you know, trying to carefully turn the pages and be careful with them. They'd still get worn out. How many times they get used? Well, probably a whole bunch of times to wear them out like that. So how did God preserve his word? My contention would be through divine providence. Because he said he would. And it's important to him and he made it his business. And don't you mess with it. And he used the priesthood of the believer. So they were written down with care. Now maybe there were some scribes who didn't care, okay. But the majority would, and God would use them. And what the truth would be would be seen in those copies. And through providence and the priesthood of the believer, and through hundreds and thousands of scribes, from all over the world, from different cultures, using different manuscripts that they had available to them to copy from, you can lay them all out and say, Okay, this guy made this mistake, this guy made that mistake, 10 guys here made a similar mistake, so maybe the, but then we've got, you know, over 5,000 that didn't make that mistake. Well, I think we know who's in error. And that's, God preserved it through his providence and the priesthood of the believer. And this is the foundation upon which we talk about the preservation of God's word through the majority text, the Byzantine text, the King James being the Texas Receptus. which all come from the Byzantine majority text, that kind of thing. And so we can compare and we know, is the priesthood of the believer in divine intervention in Providence? That makes sense that God would preserve it that way. But there's only one other theory. I mean, if there's a third theory, I don't know about it. But the only other theory, and I've handed this to you already in previous sermons, is that God hasn't kept his word for just about 1,500 to 1,800 years, depending on how you look at it. But now we're getting closer to getting it back, that which was marred back in 3 of 400 AD. And through archaeological discoveries and through the scholarship of modern intellectuals, We are beginning to learn, and we're learning more and more every day, of what was really in that Bible. And these modern intellectuals that make this their business, they have devoted themselves to coming up with new manuscripts, which means most of these liberal higher critics have financial skin in the game. Because those that come up with them, well, there's value to that baby. And over, well over 90% of the existing manuscripts from the majority of Byzantine texts, that makes up what's out there and available. And less, far less than 10% are these new modern older and better texts, the Alexandrian texts. And so in 1 Thessalonians chapter 2, 1 Thessalonians chapter 2, verse 13, Paul writes, for this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because when ye received the word of God, which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men. Well, we're being told that's what some of it is now. You received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God. which effectually worketh also in you that believe. That word of God effectually, productively by God's design, works in God's people to mature them and to reveal to them his will and his knowledge and his truth. He does so for every generation, which means we can have that word because he's preserved it. Now, what I wanted to really do tonight was to read And I don't like, you know, I don't, I'll do it sometimes. And I know it isn't the best thing because of the weakness of human flesh to do too much reading. What I'll do is I'll just read enough to, I've got too much to read, but I'll just read enough to fill in the time here and give you an idea of what other men have said about this subject. And the first person I want to quote from is Spurgeon. This is Charles Haddon Spurgeon, the Prince of Baptist Preachers, commenting on textual criticism. And let's read what he says. Well, it's written, right? Spurgeon says, believe in the inspiration of scripture and believe it in the most intense sense. Remember, Spurgeon was around when they were making these discoveries. And when they, Westcott and Haught, were pretty much responsible for that revised standard version that came out, and they came out with their Greek text, like the year after the revised standard version. I mean, they had it before, they were working on it for like eight or 10 years, but the revised standard version came out from that, and then right after the revised standard version was printed, then they came out for publication, their new Greek text, which was based on Roman Catholic wastebasket material. And this is what Spurgeon says, believe in the inspiration of scripture and believe it in the most intense sense. You will not believe in a truer and fuller inspiration than really exists. No one is likely to err in that direction, even if error be possible. If you adopt theories which pair off a portion here and deny authority to a passage there, you will at last have no inspiration left worthy of the name. Well, I just read verses nine through 20 in Mark, and they just, the whole thing should go. Spurgeon's saying you do that with just one, you're gonna have nothing left. Now he's saying this before all these versions are coming out. Although, I'm not sure the year, I should have looked up the year of this. It may have come out, this may be his sermon from 1885, so the revised version and Westcott and Haught may have just come out, if that's the case. Anyway, he continues, he says, if this book be not infallible, where shall we find infallibility? We have given up the Pope, for he has blundered often and terribly. We shall not set up instead of him a horde of little Popelings fresh from college. Are these correctors of Scripture infallible? Solid question. Is it certain that our Bibles are not right, but that the critics must be so? The old silver is to be depreciated, but the German silver, now he's referring to the German intellectuals and higher critics where the liberalism was coming from. The old, you know, the old German silver, you know, but the, no, the old English silver, that's something you can depend on. But the German silver, he says, which is put in its place is to be taken at the value of gold. RSV, gold, King James. Nothing no more. Striplings fresh from reading the last new novel correct the notions of their fathers who are men of weight and character. Doctrines which produced the godliest generation that ever lived on the face of the earth are scouted as sheer folly. Nothing is so obnoxious to these creatures as that which has the smell of Puritanism upon it. Oh, how these new Bible people hate the Puritans, is what he's saying. Every little man's nose goes up celestially towards the heavens at the very sound of the word Puritan. Though if the Puritans were here again, They would not dare treat them thus cavalierly. For if Puritans did fight, they were soon known as Ironsides, and their leader could hardly be called a fool, even by those who stigmatized him as a tyrant. Cromwell and they that were with him were not all weak-minded persons, surely? He asked with a question mark. Tough talk, saying they're not around to counter you, is what he's saying. He says, strange that these are allotted to the skies by the very, I think this is a misprint. It says, by the very men who deride their true successes. That doesn't make sense. I think this should read, strange that these are allotted to the skies by the very same men who deride their true successes. Believers in the same faith. But where shall infallibility be found? Quote, the depth saith, it is not in me. In other words, where is their fallibility? Anybody with depth will say, well, infallibility is not with me. Yet those who have no depth at all would have us imagine that it is in them. Westcott and Haunt, you know. Or else by perpetual change, they hope to hit upon it. Are we now to believe that infallibility is with learned men? Now, Farmer Smith, when you have read your Bible and have enjoyed its precious promises, you will have tomorrow morning to go down the street to ask the scholarly men at the Parthenage whether this portion of the scripture belongs to the inspired part of the Word, or whether it is of dubious authority. It will be well for you to know whether it was written by the Isaiah or whether it was by the second of the two Obadiahs. It's your modern thinking. They don't know who the authors are anymore. There's a bunch of them. All possibility of certainty is transferred from the spiritual man, Pharma, to a class of persons whose scholarship is pretentious, but who do not even pretend to spirituality, because mostly they're apostates. We shall gradually be so bedouted and be criticized that only a few of the most profound will know what is Bible and what is not, and they will dictate to all the rest of us. I have no more faith in their mercy than in their accuracy. I like that. He continues, they will rob us of all that we hold most dear, and glory in the cruel deed. This same reign of terror, see he's describing that Bible, that ESV Bible, as a reign of terror. This same reign of terror shall not endure, for we still believe that God revealeth himself rather to babes than to the wise and prudent. And we are fully assured that our own old English version of the scriptures, he's talking about the King James. I mean, he's an Englishman, right? Our old English version of the scriptures is sufficient for plain men. Oh no, might they be saying, no, it's so complicated and hard. We have to be a college graduate to be able to understand the King James Bible. I don't know, this person didn't seem to think so. He says, our own old English version of the scriptures is sufficient for plain men for all purposes of life, salvation, and godliness. We do not despise learning, but we will never say of culture or criticism, these be thy gods, O Israel. No. Now, I've got one more quote. I'm just going to stop with Spurgeon. I got other ones to read, but they're not going to be tonight. But I get this other quote from Spurgeon. Now, this is a sermon. I think it's the same one as that one. I'm not sure. I should have wrote that down. But this is from a sermon 3303 in the Spurgeon repertoire from May 14, 1885. And this is what he says. But oh, it's nice to have a guest preacher. And by the way, next Sunday night, guest preacher. Guest preacher, next Sunday night. We got one right here. Well, he's filling in just a little bit of my time here. Spurgeon says, but oh, how should we love the book? And how should we stand up for it and guard it jealously? Since God has guarded it so well. Now we don't believe he has. Let every man of God be like Solomon's valiant men of Israel, who watched about the bed of the king, each man with his sword upon his thigh, because of fear in the night. For there is much fear just now for the truth of God. I mean, of course, to us poor puny beings there is danger. There's no fear in the great heart of the eternal. There is no fear as to the accomplishment of his purposes, for he is strong in power, and not one faileth. What our fathers preserved with their blood, we will preserve with our lives. That which bore them to a martyr's death, singing as they went, we will not consent to throw away, talking about questioning the Bible and what belongs in it and that new movement that was rising up. That which bore them to a mart of death, singing as they went, we will not consent to throw away. If any man has another gospel, let him keep it. I am satisfied with mine. If any man has found another Bible, let him read it. I am satisfied with my mother's old Bible, the Bible of my ancestors. If discoveries are to be made concerning a new way of salvation of men, Let them make them who care to do so. The old way has saved me, and the old way has saved multitudes of others. Therein shall I abide, God helping me, come what may. And so will you, my brethren, and together we will rejoice that God preserves his book and continues to give his Holy Spirit with it. God will uphold the truth that is in this book. And the men that hold that truth shall be upheld, quote, forever, O Lord, thy word is settled in heaven, end quote. And similar eternal settlements are made for all whose hope is fixed on that word. And then a little bit later, he gets into the downgrade controversy and the higher critics, and this is what Spurgeon says, and we'll close with this. I always deprecate. Now that just sounds so negative, right out of the gate. I always deprecate. Well, see, this is just not loving. But this is what Spurgeon says, I always deprecate the spirit which tries to tamper with the word of God. I admire them who have sufficient knowledge of the ancient manuscripts of the scriptures to tell us as nearly as they can ascertain them. What were the original Hebrew and Greek words? But I dearly deplore that kind of spirit after the style of a destructive parrot seeks to tear the scriptures to pieces and to rob the children of God of their priceless possession. Why, even a solitary divine precept is so precious that if all the saints in the world were burnt at one stake For the defense of it, it would be well worth the Holocaust. If the whole of us went to prison and to death for the preservation of a single sentence of scripture, we should be fully justified in making such a sacrifice. Who talks like that now? We're too smart to talk that way. We're too suspicious of God's sovereignty to talk that way. We're too doubtful that he preserved his word for the children of our generation to talk that way. But maybe someday we'll have an even more accurate understanding of it. Hopefully, maybe. See, brethren, when I came to the knowledge of the sovereignty of God, Changed the way I thought about a lot of things. Predestination is not, because predestination is just part of the portrait of God's sovereignty and all-consuming power and knowledge. But all of it, the general thing and the detail of predestination, it gives you a lens through which you're gonna see the universe. And it's a lens through which you see the preservation of the word of God. It's the lens through which Job can survive what he went through. It's the lens through which Stephen can stand there as he's being stoned to death and pray for his persecutors. There's something there. They want us to lose it. And we can feel smug about how smug we are. And how foolish and ignorant people like myself am in our simplicity of thinking that all this could be true, that God really preserved it. Because all the best scholarship says no. Well, I had intended to read commentaries from two other well-known men about this whole controversy that would be nice to read. I can read them next time, which I don't think we'll be doing that next Sunday night. I guess I'll be back after I get back from vacation after that. But I'll be here next week. But, you know, it's this issue isolates us. Not from everyone, but just almost everyone. They rolled their eyes. We're country bumpkins. We're naive. Now, we're not King James-only Rockmanites, that kind of thing. And I said, there's nothing wrong with updating the language of the King James Bible. But who are you going to get to do it? It's like saying, let's have a convention, make some constitutional amendments. Well, maybe some constitutional amendments can be useful, but if you're going to go into that mode of opening up to the changing of the Constitution, I'm scared because I don't trust them. It's the way that it is. And I don't think this Bible is so difficult. We can't care enough to look up a word we don't understand and then conquer our ignorance as English-speaking people who are Christians and devotees of God's word. Is that too much to ask? Let's bow our heads in prayer. Heavenly Father, we delight in thy word. It has fed our souls. It has brought us salvation. Through that word, we have gained the knowledge of Christ and the depths of the gospel. We have learned of the mystery of Christ, the Israel of God. We've even learned through that word that the promises of Christ concerning his coming can be trusted and are fateful and they are true. His words were plain. He would come in that generation before all the people then living would pass away. John said that he was writing about things that would shortly come to pass and that's how he described book of Revelation that he wrote in the modern Christian community won't believe those words and yet they have those same words in their modern Bibles and they still won't believe them. The issue isn't the Bibles translation. The issue is a matter of the heart and the defection of faith in Thee and in Thy Word. Father, preserve our knowledge and understanding, preserve our faith, and may the faith of Christ be known by many, that true, experimental, Spirit-generated faith that comes through the new birth. Without it, men are practicing a religion, but they don't know Thee. Open the eyes of many to the knowledge of Christ. Save them, bring them joy, happiness, peace, contentedness. May there be a simplicity of heart that comes from a greatness of faith in Thee. And we pray all these things in Jesus' name. Amen.