This article is brought to you compliments of:
    
	         HIS BOARD -- (805) 652-1478
	              Sysop: Bob Harris



THE STORY OF THE ALEXANDRIAN CULT
   
ARTICLE FOUR
   
        As noted previously, "The road to hell is paved with 
good intentions."  Intentions to give a "more accurate 
translation" or to "make the passage clearer" or to clear up 
"obscure or archaic words" sound like beautiful INTENTIONS.  
The road to hell is paved with beautiful intentions: There 
isn't one NEGATIVE THING INVOLVED IN EVE'S FALL (Genesis 
3:6).  The "tree" is good on three counts and bad on none, 
yet it damns the human race (Romans 5).
   
        What I am saying is that no good, godly, "dedicated" 
man who believed in the "verbal plenary inspiration of the 
originals" is to be followed where the OLD NATURE in that man 
is purposely leading others to SIN by LYING about authority.  
No one should follow Simon Peter's example in Galatians Two, 
although Peter was more "godly" than any Greek professor a 
student ever sat under.  Neither should anyone follow Paul's 
example in Acts Twenty-one--he lost two years of his ministry 
(Acts 24:27)--although he had a hold of more "verbally, 
plenarily inspired originals" than any professor ever saw in 
a lifetime.  No one is to follow the advice of a saved man (1 
Kings 13) simply because he SAYS that God said something when 
He didn't say it.
   
        1. The issue is not godliness or reputation.
   
        2. The issue is not service or fruitfulness in the 
ministry.
   
        3. The issue is not the character of the witness.
  
        4. The issue is not the reputation of the school or 
faculty.
   
        5. The issue has never been and never will be the 
"fundamentals."
   
        6. The issue has nothing to do with what anyone 
THINKS.
   
        7. The issue has nothing to do with grammar, 
education, or talent.
   
        The issue is FINAL AUTHORITY.
   
        Where TWO FINAL AUTHORITIES are recommended (see any 
correspondence on the matter of final authority by any 
leading Fundamentalist in this century) the motive for 
recommending them is that the "recommender" be accepted as 
superior to EITHER.  The motive is carnal and fleshy; it 
comes from the old nature in the believer; and it is not to 
be admired, respected, tolerated, or imitated.
   
        When the Alexandrian Cult began the practice of 
establishing dual authorities for the New Testament, they 
began to develop the "curriculum" or "implications" which 
survive to this day in the classrooms of Midwestern, Hyles-
Anderson, Fort Worth, Pensacola Christian College, Liberty, 
and Springfield.  This "curriculum" consists of a series of 
facts or PARTIAL facts listed APART from their background and 
future history, and spoken (or written) in as to produce the 
maximum amount of INFIDELITY in the reader (or student) in 
regard to absolute authority.  I will list the most common of 
these used by the faculty members of "Fundamental" or 
"Orthodox" or "evangelical" schools (the cult controls all 
three sufficiently well) to get the student to reject THE 
AUTHORITY OF THE WORD OF GOD:
   
        1. "King James was egotistical; therefore..."
   
        2. "Erasmus was a Catholic; therefore..."
   
        3. The AV does not match all of its editions word for 
word; therefore..."
   
        4. "Some words in the AV are archaic; therefore..."
  
        5. "The TEXTUS RECEPTUS was printed after the AV; 
therefore..."
   
        6. "The AV translators didn't claim inspiration; 
therefore..."
   
        7. "We have found OLDER MANUSCRIPTS; therefore..."
  
        8. "Westcott and Hort were `conservatives'; 
therefore..."
   
        9. "The Russian and Chinese had no AV until 1800; 
therefore..."
   
        10. "The RSV and NEB were translated by Liberals; 
therefore..."
   
        11. "Godly men recommend the ASV and the New ASV; 
therefore..."
   
        12. "Over 36,000 changes in text didn't altar the 
`fundamentals'; therefore..."
   
        13. "If a Bible contains the `fundamentals,' it is 
reliable; therefore..."
   
        Observe in all this that the "facts" are presented to 
produce implications.  First of all, dual authorities were 
recommended to water down and weaken absolute authority, and 
then a curriculum was erected to get students not only to 
take that authority lightly but eventually to ABANDON it.
   
        This is how apostasy begins.  This is the motive 
behind Bible rejection, and it doesn't vary once in the 
history of apostasy.  All apostates begin with TWO 
AUTHORITIES, and wind up with no authority but tradition and 
their own opinion.  Every UNSAVED LIBERAL AND LOST MODERNIST 
in the National Council of Churches began his defection by 
taking some man's word OVER THE AUTHORITY OF A BOOK WHICH HE 
HAD IN HIS HAND AND WHICH HE COULD READ.  There isn't one 
unsaved liberal in the eighteeneth century (English Deism and 
German Rationalism) who ever was concerned or upset with any 
theory about how ANY Bible was written.  When he rejected the 
"fundamentals," he rejected them as they were found IN THE 
BIBLE THAT HE READ.
   
        Is THAT clear?
   
        How is it then that Gaussen, Smith, Rice, Wuest, 
Zodhiates, and the "World Congress of Fundamentalism" kidded 
suckers into thinking the issue was the "ORIGINALS"?  The 
"originals" don't figure as the main issue one time in the 
history of the church from 325 A.D. to 1900.
   
        Someone is giving a "graffted act."
        Now who could it be? (Genesis 3:1)
   
        Origen and Clement accepted PHILOSOPHY as the 
competing authority with the Bible they READ.  Iraeneus and 
Eusebius accepted TRADITION as the competing authority with 
the Bible they READ.  Augustine and Jerome accepted TRADITION 
and the Church Fathers as the competing authority with the 
Bible they READ.  The Popes and Colleges of Cardinals 
accepted TRADITION and SUPERSTITION as the competing 
authority with the Bible they READ.  Aquinas, Abelard, 
Anselm, and Peter Lombard accepted PHILOSOPHY and TRADITION 
as competing with the Bible they READ.  No man in the list 
worried two minutes about any unattainable "originals."  No 
heretic or apostate from 200 A.D. on, ever had to deny or 
affirm "verbal inspiration of the original" to be a heretic 
or an apostate.  NEITHER HERESY NOR APOSTASY BEGIN THAT WAY.  
They begin by denying what God said (Genesis 3:1) and by 
accepting an equal authority as "reliable" because they 
"prefer" it (Genesis 3:3-4).
   
        Westcott and Hort accepted TRADITION and IMAGINATION 
as competing authorities with the Bible they READ.  Schaff 
and A.T. Robertson accepted EDUCATION and GRAMMAR as 
competing authorities with the Bible they READ.  Joe Smith 
accepted Moroni's "golden plates"; Mary Baker Eddy, the 
"Key"; and Nestle and Metzger, DESTRUCTIVE CRITICISM and 
HALLUCINATIONS as equal authority with the Bible they READ.  
And on it goes into the night.
   
        Where a man recommends TWO AUTHORITIES, the purpose 
he has in mind is to eliminate one or both of them.  (See 
Machiavelli's "The Prince".)  "Divide and conquer."  If the 
two disagree (compare Acts 8 and 9 in any new "bible" with 
the same chapters in the AV), the SCHOLAR or the SCHOOL or 
the CHURCH (Rome has always acted as a final authority for 
her followers) must decide which is right or tell the 
follower to "MAKE UP HIS OWN MIND," in which case the 
follower is indebted to the school or scholar for 
"liberating" him FROM THE WRITTEN AUTHORITY OF GOD ALMIGHTY 
AND FOR SETTING UP THE INDIVIDUAL AS HIS OWN GOD.  Eve all 
over again (Genesis 3).
   
        Article number five will discuss the thirteen 
misleading "facts" listed above and show the student the 
MOTIVE behind their construction and the result of taking 
them at face value without investigation (Proverbs 14:15).


             ../