---

Welcome! This is a new blog dedicated to an ongoing study, which is too big for one book but still relatively unexplored. The "King James Controversy" rages on in the wake of Metzger's death and hundreds of modern translations, but the controversy is better called, the "Which Bible" controversy, for it asks the eminent question, "Did God Keep and Preserve His Perfect Word? " ---and if He did, which translation represents the perfect, inerrant, infallible Word, perserved across centuries? Thousands of websites and blogs already deal with this topic including one of my own at kjv.atspace.com, but this blog is focusing on a subsection of the countless studies. The questions to be explored in this blog include
I. What Happened to the transmission of Bible Texts/Translations During the years prior to , during and just after the Shoah?
II. Was there a purposeful 'de-judification of the Scriptures by the Third Reich?
III. Did Nazi Ideology, Philosophy, Myth and 'Mysticism' bear the same roots which sought to change Bible texts to dissension or at least 'unseat' the Jews role in God's sovereignty?
IV. Is there evidence which can be documented that a real dissension exists in modern texts?
V. Who was Kittel and cohorts who were behind the Biblia Hebraica, and what changes were made?
VI. What controversy surrounds the mid 1800's 'Discovery' of the 'new' Greek and Hebrew texts at Mt. Athos and elsewhere, and did the 'renaissance ' of occultic and new age thought share a 'de-judification' process which has influenced not only modern bible translations, but also other more secular viewpoints and philosophies also?
VII. What practical applications can research provide, what implications are there for usage in the Church and in belief in general?
VIII. What doctrines are influenced, and what are the firm teachings regarding New Testament commands of our responsibility and relationship with the Jews who do not believe Yeshua, or Christ is Messiah?
This blog will continue with various thoughts, ideas and findings , although not necessarily in consecutive and sequential order. Guest columnists will be welcome to share views though not anonymously except under extreme conditions. Submissions may be made to shoaheducation@gmail.com, and all copyrights for outside guest columns will remain with the author who submits.
Below are the beginning two studies previously published at thoughtsandnews.blogspot.com (now Seditionact.blogspot.com) and at kjv.atspace.com as well as the online Journal for Church and Genocide: An Evangelical Approach:
PLEASE NOTE: THESE STUDIES HAVE GRAPHS READING 'WORD' COUNT, BUT THE MORE CORRECT TERM IS 'VERSE' COUNT, A SLIGHT COMPROMISE TO ENSURE CONSISTENCY OF ACCURACY OF SEARCH ENGINES USED FOR ONLINE BIBLE TEXTS. WORD COUNTS MAY BE SLIGHTLY HIGHER THAN VERSE COUNTS DUES TO INCLUSION OF A REPEATED WORD IN A SINGLE VERSE, BUT ARE NEVER LOWER. VERSE COUNT WITH VARYING SEARCH ENGINES AFFORDED THE MOST ACCURATE COMPARISON POSSIBLE AND IS NOT SKEWED ACROSS TRANSLATIONS.
NOTE: THOUGHTS AND NEWS NOW LOCATED IN MANITOWOC, WISCONSIN
While the general public may not discern much between Bible translations, fundamental Christians and Jews have been concerned with the issue for some centuries.
The issue is not as easy as which Bible one prefers, for readability, or charts or footnotes, as it is often mistaken, but which Bible in existence today is the real Bible, the one handed down from the Apostles and early Christians in the first century.
Likewise, it is not an exclusively Christian Concern, as the Jews for several thousand years have been the keepers of the Word, and their Torah in the 'Ben Chayim' text [Hebrew text] is the same as our first five books of the Bible or 'Pentateuch', and matches almost exactly the Hebrew in the KJV, translated off the same texts. The question raised here is towards one particular point of difference: are the Jews treated differently in the different translations? The answer is an astounding yes, but before examining the evidence, a little background is necessary.
The Controversy which has been debated for some time even to the point of dividing 'camps' and churches, is whether the King James Bible, or the A.V. 1611 is the same or equivalent to the 'new' Bibles, of which there are now hundreds. At first glance, many think there are no differences, but scholars even on opposite sides would not reasonly agree that there are none.
The history of the transmission of the 'Bible' is complex and sometimes confusing, partly because there is more than one line of transmission, and partly because there are multiple translations off of each.
A Brief History of the Bible(s)
In the first century as Christianity spread via the gospels and the letters of the Apostles, early churches or 'assemblies' [ikklesia] were given copies of the letters, and both churches and individuals made copies and collated the collection for home and church use, although possession of such was outlawed and could result in death or imprisonment. A letter of Clement notes an admonition to study the Word daily which would have implied home use. Most know of the Christian persecutions during the succession of Roman Emperors, but still the Bible managed to survive. The Gospel, traveling to all known parts of the world during that time, survived, although it was corrupted in part in Alexandria where it became mixed with legends, gnostic writings including gnostic gospels such as the Gospel of Mary Magdalen and Thomas and other letters not eventually included such as the Shepherd of Hermes and Barnabas.
In 313ad when Constantine became Emperor, due to the influence of his mother who had embraced Christianity, the persecutions stopped towards the Christians, but not toward the Jews who were exiled once again. Christianity became the 'State-favored' mixed with some forms of sun-worship and other pagan practices. Constantine ordered Eusebius to produce 50 copies of the Bible, which he brought from Alexandria, where the admixtures originated. In the years to come, the Roman Catholic Church, a direct offshoot of the early Constantine efforts collated and approved a canon, or collected books set in early councils, by the criteria that each book must contribute something new to the acceptable text, and that they must have been written by an eyewitness and disciple. Early efforts a translation into Latin were made by Jerome, and Wycliffe was declared heretical for attempting to translate Jerome's Vulgate into English.
In the late 1500s, though, a Catholic monk, albeit a rebellious, self-directed one, named Erasmus, known for his excellence in Greek and Hebrew, began to collate all available pieces of manuscript evidence. He began to note descrepancies between the Vulgate and fragments and portions of a line which had come through the Waldensians in the Swiss Alps and Northern Italy. The true and original writings had indeed been transmitted, without admixture of legends and gnosticism by the Waldensians, a Church which still exists today in Italy from those historical roots. Erasmus then used those and other evidences such as lectionaries, hymnals, Bibles,and Papyrii to collate 5000 pieces of manuscript evidence, which Erasmus collated into what is now called the "Textus Receptus" or the "Received Text". The Ben Chayim Hebrew text and the Textus Receptus became the base for Tyndale's translation into English and also Stephanus', Bezier, and Coverdale. In 1611 after much reluctance by the immoral King James, the
Received Text was translated by an Anglican Committee of the finest scholars of the day, although the result was approximately 90% the same as Tyndale's. [slight differences such as agape translated as love in Tyndale vs charity in AV1611 existed]. This translation became the mainstay for Bible translation for the next 500 years: the Spanish Bible, Luther's German Bible, the Geneva Bible and a few others are all from this line.
Tischendorf, Westcott & Hort: In the latter 1800s, a man named Tischendorf, a collector of antiquities, discovered 3 manuscripts under suspicious circumstances, named the Sinaiticus, the Vaticanus and the Alexandrian manuscripts. While two were missing the Book of Revelation and one was replete with errors, these manuscripts were considered a great find, and the Anglican Church allowed a new translations based upon these 'new' manuscripts headed by two men, Bishops, named Westcott and Hort. HOWEVER: The Greek they translated off of lying heavily on these new finds, accounted for only 20% of the available evidence. The result was the RSV [Revised Standard Version], and later the NASV and all subsequent 'modern' Bibles. While there are several main bodies of texts or 'text families', the KJV Controversy boils down to :
I. The AV1611 Translation based upon the Ben Chayim Hebrew and the Textus Receptus Greek (Byzantine) and the
II. The Westcott and Hort version (RSV) referred to as the Nestle or Nestle-Aland Greek, and the Hebrew for the new versions was off of the Biblia Hebraica, a Hebrew collation by Reinhold and Gerdhard Kittel, a father and son with strong Volkish beliefs, and later Nazi ties.
The Shoah and the Bible
It is odd perhaps at this point to introduce the Holocaust, but the Nazi Regime, growing in philosophical foundations about the time of the new translations and continuing afterward [see note] did have an effect on the modern translations and views of the holiness, inerrancy and completeness or perfection of the Holy Scriptures. Both Hitler and Goebbels, while raised Catholic, had little use for any translation privately: they both believed it was detrimental to the Nazi cause, and Christ was translated into a prototype of the Aryan Superman, while Paul was dismissed as a self-effacing introverted Rabbi who would demoralize the German people. From 1933, Goebbels introduced a new 'Marcionism' in which the Old Testament was dismissed as at the very least unnecessary and at most degenerate for the German Christian and Christians were urged to stay out of it. [See
Marcionism and
Banner] While most Protestants at the time would have been using the traditional Luther Bible based upon the TR, the teaching of the day led to a political Church called the Deutsche Christen, a mix of Nazi and reinterpreted Christian beliefs, and set the stage for a distinct lessening of the view of the Jews in Christian texts, doctrine and practice.
The Jews in later Bible Translations
While many argue that there are no differences between the KJV and Modern Bibles such as NIV, NASV, Living, or GOOD NEWS, many differences have been pointed to. Writers such as Riplinger, Ruckman, D.A.Waite,Burgon and Gipp, have expounded in length upon the differences and net resources are replete with comparisons which show the new translations pejorate former translations such as blood becoming 'death', virgin becoming maid, or girl, and the divinity of Christ mentioned far less often.
Part of the problem in testing word counts accurately though is that some words are translated off of the same Greek or Hebrew word and others are not because of the differing underlying texts. However, an overall view of the dimunition of mention of the Jews can be seen when looking at the following terms: Jew, Jews, Israel, and Children of Israel. The following Charts show descriptive comparisons of these words across translations:


The comparisons above show that there is a significant lessening of the word Jew
in the newer Bibles, a significant lessening of the references to "Jews" and a lessening of the Word "Israel". Further, the chart at the beginning of the article shows a significant lessening of the mention of the "Children of Israel" and inclusive term which has been reduced to the 'sons of Israel' which fails to account for the national flavor of the first standard translation. Statistical tests are difficult because of some conflicting factors and different translation starts, but at face value, one can easily note that for whatever reason or degree, the Jews and their homeland have suffered mention in the new translations.
Conclusion
Why is this discussion significant? Marcionism, old and new was outright declared a heresy by all arms of the Church. It entails a difference of God to the Jew vs the Gentile Christian, and the ancient Marcion posited even a different Jewish God of Wrath vs the Christian God of love. For Marcion, the Old Testament was anathema for the Christian, and his position was quickly dismissed as dangerous and heretical. In WWII Germany, the dismissal of the Old Testament and Jewish influence was to weaken Christianity in a neo-marcionism, and replace it eventually with Nazi philosophy and Volkische mysticism and religion, an effort clearly underway by the higher echelon of the National Socialists, but rarely mentioned directly in public. It is suggested here, that the growing weltanschaunng, or world view in the modern Church of moving again away from a whole Bible for "New Testament Only" Christianity [there are churches which advocate and advertise this] is also influencing the modern translations of the Word of God, already based on a faulty set of texts, and leading once again into an 'acceptable' anti-semitism, along with growing approval of doctrines such as amillenialism, post-millenialism and replacement theology. In all of these, the Jews and their nation are denigrated, lessened, diminished or omitted, allowing the vicarious reign instead of a Christianity which instead of boasting not against the branches, or being grafted into the vine (Rms 11) becomes the vine itself.
Jewish roots are not a difference of opinion in the Word or Way of God. They are our foundation and necessity. The Jews are not simply sons born to a land, they are the Children of Israel in all its fullness and inclusiveness. Further, the very word 'Jew', or 'Judah' or Jews indicates 'Praise': they are a people set apart to the glory and praise of God. Scripture teaches in Psalms that God inhabits the praises of his people, and that though seemingly set aside for a long season, their fullness will be accomplished in time. When we through man's rationale begin to reinterpret and remove references to the Jews and the Land of Israel, we cannot expect an lessening of anti-semitism in the Church but an increase, and we cannot expect to find pro-Israel stands but growing pro-Palestinianism.
The fight for the Word of God in this generation is all-encompassing. Most great works and movements in the socio-political realm [such as the fall of the Iron Curtain] have started in the House of God, with the Word of God central. This volatile world is no place for a corrupted version of the Word of God, influencing as its omission did early last century a generation in Europe who lost all concept of the Divine, replacing occultism, and resulting with no surprise in the genocide of the Jewish people of Europe. The Word has to be kept as it has always been: inerrant, perfect, infallible and in the hearts of Jews and Christians, or the world we enter will be the nightmare which is already prophesied.
Difference in Mention of "Israel in Count



Note: Since this study was first done, at least two slides were 'adjusted' but not by the author, changing data points. The slide for 'Jew' has been corrected. Also though, when the data was first presented, the verse count was compared across search engines available and with Strongs, but within about two months, a later doublecheck yielded slightly different results. Catholic bibles may read higher because they include the Apocrypha without mentioning it, and search engines vary so the 'checking' of a word must always be in quotes or some will include 'Jew' in words like 'Jewel' and provide an overcount. Despite the variation which really should not exist with careful robots, the general comparisons still hold and one needs only to examine the pre-shoah Bible counts with the post shoah to see the prevailing differences. Also note though that these are VERSE COUNTS not raw word counts since not all search engines provide both.

NOTE: Unknown to me, the author, the data on the beginning slides/graphs was changed and several data points are incorrect: The correction will be made shortly, but readers may make their own comparisons of word counts using parallel Bibles and amplified online versions--the most accurate KJV count is Blueletterbible.com, but crosswalk.com and bible.com and a few others may be used for cross-reference: the same patterns emerge. I do not know when the slides were 'seditioned' but until corrected, I apologize for a few inaccuracies. One other note: the 'counts' are scriptures containing the words, not raw count: it was the only way to make the count in a timely comparison, but the raw count data is under compilation as well. Was there a Move to De-Judify Modern Bible Translations and Paraphrases in the Years before, during and after the Shoah?Where are the Jews in the New Bible Translations?- Pt. I
Introduction and Review of Part IThat Hitler and the Third Reich meant to rid Germany and Europe of Jewish influence, culture and even bloodlines, is fairly well known today even in popular culture. The extent and methodology which was used by the Third Reich in eradicating Jewish presence in all facets of German society has fascinated, and horrified modern scholars, who have among other things discovered that the
'Final Solution' or Endlosung extended to the Church as well, using the very words and doctrines of the church, to metamorphosize it into something altogether different than the Body of Christ it was intended to be. In past articles we have already looked at the '
I.
morphing' of the German Lutherans into the 'Deutsche Christen',with a redefinition of doctrines and concepts although it was never completed, of
II. The de-judification of the Bible by introducing a Neo-Marcionism in which the Old Testament and Jewish influence in the New Testament such as Romans, and other Pauline Epistles were to be eradicated or redefined, and
III.Within both Catholic and Protestant Churches
a cleansing of Jewish membership altogether or at least a lessening of equality of Jewish members even of converts in the practice of liturgy, including in the 'High' Churches of the taking of sacraments such as communion, and
IV. A
politicizing of the Church including State sponsorship of Ministries such as nursing, benevolence and pastor pensions, State censorship of sermons, State takeover of former religious education sites and orphanages etc. This occurred both in the DC and in the larger body of German Christians as well as in the minority 'Confessing Church' of Bonhoeffer and Neimoller.
Further, like the rest of the German Reich, there was an intensive
Gleichschaltung or 'Coordination' of efforts to infuse Nazi beliefs, control, culture and command at all levels, and the Church was the target of this effort as well. Germany and Europe at the time of the Shoah became a political chessboard for the Reich, the Vatican and the rest of the World, manipulating the placement of loyalists in positions such as pro Nuncios, Bishops, Police, mayors, Priests, Ministers and other Doctrinally and Politically loyal persons to maximize the ease of the 'morphing' of the Church, and carry out other policies of deportation and killing, and meet with as little resistance as possible. As with the Arts and social agencies/law enforcement, they often introduced a few loyalists, changed policies lockstep and promoted from within the Party or sympathizers, without forcing a total and immediate change. [Education differed]
The Holy Bible and the Third ReichWe have discussed previously the gutting of Jewish influence in the scriptures, and on a different website, the treatment of Conversos vs Marranos vs non-converts has been discussed ( See article at
www.shoahrose.com/converts.html).
While there were somewhat diverse opinions in theological schools such as at Tubingen among Catholic and Protestant theologians about Reich policies, at most theological schools, the move toward Party members only and loyalty oaths prevailed, especially in Chairmanships and higher academic offices.
During this time, a man named Gerdhard Kittl [or 'Kittel] a Nazi theologian, was continuing the work of his father Rudolph Kittl on the Stuttgart Hebraica, and accompanying texts, which would come to replace the Ben Chayim text, the traditional Hebrew text on which the King James [AV 1611], Spanish Bible, Geneva Bible and Luther's German Bible translations were based. Kittl was the man Martin Buber called the man who 'made Anti-Semitism theologically acceptable', and while most of his writings are not readily available in English, even a cursory reading shows that he had no love of the Jews or their doctrine, or Jewish influence or interpretations of Scriptures. At one point, he had a Jewish scholar working for him in research, although the man was among those who had to flee the country. From a point of faith and belief, apart from the 'rigor' of scholarship, one would have to rightfully question his lack of scriptural office for a task: he collated a corrupted Hebrew text, was not a Jew which both Old and New Testament attest to as a requirement as an 'oracle' of the Word, and the texts of Westcott and Hort held to only 20% of the available manuscript evidence, based largely on the findings of Tischendorf in the late 1800s, which while deified for many years are now falling into serious question due to suggestions of forgery and lower quality of the manuscripts called the Vaticanus, Alexandrian, and Sinaiticus.
While that is somewhat repetitive of what has been written before on the topic in this column, the proposal here, in a preliminary examination, is that the period of 1908 to 1945 saw not only dramatic changes in the Church, but dramatic changes in the Word of God.
Changes in the Translation of Scripture Which Proliferated After 1933-51. Versions Proliferated after 1933-5, all but one based upon Kittl's Hebraica and
Nestle Aland Greek, the progeny of Westcott and Hort off Tischendorf's
translations
2. Transliterations, Dynamic Equivalents, and Paraphrases proliferated as opposed to word by word or word for word translations: this was true across text families, where even the newer translations were not word for word after their own modified Hebrew and Greek
3. Many many words were changed that directly affected doctrine. This has been well studied by Riplinger,(1) Waite,(2) Burgon (3) and others. Examples include the changing of references to the 'Blood' of Christ pejorized into a mere 'death'4-note , or the virgin birth changed to a birth by a 'maid' or unmarried woman, or the deity of Christ denigrated.
References to the Jews Take a Dive: Is this a De-Judification of Scripture?The Concern here though is not the doctrines which have been examined already, and intensively (see AVpublications.com) but of whether there was either a purposeful denigration of mention of the Jews in the Shoah period, and after, or whether it is a corollary societal change which while some may find a move towards trans-racial language, others may find a move toward a lessening of the place of the Jews in society and History. It is rather inconceivable that the Jews would lose their place in the Bible, given that it is the history of the Jewish people and their Messiah.
To review the data from before: modern translations and paraphrases such as the NASV, the Living Bible, Good News for Modern Man, NIV and others:
1. Mention the word "Israel" less frequently
2. Mention the word "Jew" and "Jews" less frequently
3. Change the expression "Children of Israel" almost entirely to "Sons of Israel"
4. Err either in non-mention or changed mention.
The table below shows the exact figures. While not always in descending order chronologically or count wise, it can be clearly seen that there is a trend to a lesser mention in translations beyond the Textus Receptus. Less mention of Israel, less of the Jews, and less, not more inclusive language regarding the children of Israel.
O Daughter of My PeopleWhat is even more interesting is the changes in expressions having to do with the Jews which are more subtle: for example in the following graphs, set against the historical events which affected the change in mention the following expressions show a dramatic change, mostly toward lessening but certainly toward a marked instability of translation after the period in which the Reich affected doctrine, the Church and the approach to Scripture and its interpretation. These terms which change after that point are:
1. Daughter(s) of Zion
2. Daughter of My People [Bat Am]
3. Daughter(s) of Jerusalem
While the changes appear to be statistically significant regarding the line between TR Greek and Nestle Aland and between Hebraica and Ben Chayim Hebrew translations, it should be noted that a quick perusal gives further creedence to the 'de-judification' process as paraphrases are usually more severe in there pejorations and omissions. While some may argue that there is little difference between the phrase "Daughter(s) of Jerusalem" and women of Jerusalem, one can easily see that a daughter is a beloved person, belonging to a family, with a place in the family and a father, whereas 'woman' or 'women' is far more generic and does not carry the same connotation. It promotes a view of a less cohesive Jewish community, and on a broader note, relationship to others and God as Father.
Conclusion and QuestionsAt this point in the research, what can be clearly stated is that there is a marked lessening of mention of the Jews, and key terms referring to the Jews as a nation, people, or in relationship to God. Where there is not a lessening, there is almost an overemphasis. If one views the enclosed graphs, one can see a decided instability after certain key events: after the influence of the change in German theology to Higher Criticism, after Kittl's Stuttgart Hebraica and negative re-definition of the Jews and their place [he is openly anti-Semitic], after the Deutsche Christen reinterpretations of theology and liturgy, after the Jehovah's Witnesses adoption in 1943 of NASV, after blurring of Church-State lines, with the State in the eminent positioning, and after the incorporation of Darwinism, Social Darwinism, Root Race theory [promoted by Blavatsky who also promoted Theosophical translations/interpretations of the New Testament and non-canonical books] and within 30-40 years of Westcott and Hort's introduction of the New Greek. Since almost all of the above changes were at the hands of authors and instigators who were openly Anti-Semitic, it seems hardly logical that the dramatic and systematic changes in Jewish mention in the New Bible translations would not be at least corollated, and very probably causal.
More work needs to be done in the area including
A. Careful histories of text transmission and interpretations during the Shoah years and where [at what Theological institutes]
B. Statistical tests to compare observed trends against decided patterns
C. Investigations into policy making among translators and Committees regarding the inclusion of Jewish mention.
When these issues are resolved, it is highly likely that one will find the pattern of the gleichschaltung of the De-judification of the Word of God itself, which has lasted into this new century, and has forboding potential.
_________________________________________________________________________
REFERENCES AND FOOTNOTES
1. Riplinger, G.
New Age Bible Versions Avpublications.com 1993
2. D. A Waite, D. A., Th.D., Ph.D .
Defending the King James Bible: A four-fold superiority : texts, translators, technique, theology (Hardcover - Jun 1, 1998)
3. Dean John W. Burgon
Causes of Corruption of the New Testament Text reprint 2000
4. Note: While some downplay the importance of such differences such as the 'blood' vs the 'death' of Christ, it is actually a critical point: the difference between a Divine Savior and Redeemer vs a dead martyr. Further, the denigration here is deliberate as the word in Greek in both text families is 'hemos' indicating blood [e.g. hemotology] and not 'death'. All die, but only one shed His blood in atonement for sin.