Category: Bible History

King James VI & I

King James VI & I

Biography
James Charles Stuart

King James VI or Scottland, Ireland and King Jmaes I of England

James VI and I (19 June 1566 – 27 March 1625), the only child of Mary, Queen of Scots, was King of Scots from 1567 and King of England and Ireland from 1603, being the first monarch of the House of Stuart to rule all three countries.  His descendants include Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom, Philippe of Belgium, Felipe VI of Spain, Carl XVI Gustaf of Sweden, Margrethe II of Denmark, Harald V of Norway, Willem-Alexander of the Netherlands, and Henri, Grand Duke of Luxembourg. This article deals with numerous descendants of James and his wife Anne of Denmark (Since he is not known to have had any illegitimate children).

James VI and I was King of Scotland as James VI from 24 July 1567 and King of England and Ireland as James I from the union of the Scottish and English crowns on 24 March 1603 until his death in 1625.

Born: June 19, 1566, Edinburgh Castle, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

Died: March 27, 1625, Theobalds House, Goffs Oak, United Kingdom

Spouse: Anne of Denmark (m. 1589–1619)

Mother: Mary, Queen of Scots

Father: Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley

Children: Charles I of England, Elizabeth of Bohemia, Henry Frederick, Prince of Wales
Spouse: Anne of Denmark (m. 1589–1619)
Spouse: Anne of Denmark (m. 1589–1619)
Edinburgh Castle
  Edinburgh Castle

In August 1589, James married Anne of Denmark by proxy and their actual wedding ceremony took place in Oslo, Norway, on 23 November of that year. Although James and Anne were close at the beginning of their marriage, they gradually drifted apart. She had been brought up a Lutheran and converted to Catholicism shortly after marrying James, which was unpopular among the people of Presbyterian Scotland (and, later, those of Anglican England).

By the time of her husband’s accession to the English throne in 1603, Anne was the mother of three living children (Henry Frederick, Prince of Wales, Elizabeth and Charles), but had also suffered at least three miscarriages and stillbirths, and had another four children who died in infancy. Their second son succeeded James as King Charles I.

Children

Name Portrait Birth Marriages and Issue Death
Henry Frederick, Prince of Wales Henry Prince of Wales 1610 Robert Peake.jpg 19 February 1594
Stirling Castle, Stirling Scotland
Never married
no children
6 November 1612 (aged 18)
Elizabeth of Bohemia Elizabeth, Queen of Bohemia from NPG.jpg 19 August 1596
Falkland Palace, Fife, Scotland
Frederick of Bohemia
8 children. The current UK monarchy stems from her
13 February 1662 (aged 65)
Charles I of England Charles I (young).jpg 19 November 1600
Dunfermline Palace, Fife, Scotland
Henrietta Maria of France
5 children
30 January 1649 (aged 48)

 

  1. Henry Frederick STUART, Prince of Wales
    Birth 19 FEB 1594, Stirling Castle; Death 6 NOV 1612, St. James Palace, England. Notes: Duke of Rothesay, Earl of Carrick, Lord of the Isles, Duke of Cornwall, Earl of Chester. Died of Typhoid.
  2. STUART, Child
    Birth JUL 1595; Death JUL 1595–Stillborn
  3. Elizabeth STUART, “The Winter Queen”, Queen of Bohemia
    Birth 19 AUG 1596, Dunfermline; Death 13 FEB 1662, Leicester House, London, England. Notes: Married Frederick V, Elector of Palatine of the Rhine, King of Bohemia 1619-1620. Had 13 children.
  4. Margaret STUART
    Birth 24 DEC 1598, Dalkeith Palace; Death MAR 1600, Linlithgow
  5. Charles I STUART, King of Britain
    Birth 19 NOV 1600, Dunfermline, Scotland; Death 30 JAN 1649, Whitehall Palace, England; Burial , St. George’s, Chapel, Windsor, England. Notes: Acceded to English throne upon death of his father on March 27, 1625. Murdered by order of “Puritan” Oliver Cromwell and other insurgents. Trial of King Charles I ||| Last words ||| more links to information on Charles I on the King James VI & I index page.
  6. Robert Bruce STUART, Duke of Kintyre
    Birth 18 JAN 1602, Dunfermline; Death 27 MAY 1602, Dunfermline
  7. Son
    Birth MAY 1603, Stirling; Death MAY 1603, Stirling
  8. Mary STUART
    Birth 8 APR 1605, Greenwich Palace; Death 16 SEP 1607, Stanwell Park, Middlesex, England
  9. Sophia STUART
    Birth 22 JUN 1606, Greenwich Palace; Death 23 JUN 1606, Greenwich Palace
*King James VI & I is not known to have had any illegitimate children.

Geneaology from King James I
to Prince Charles and Princess Diana

(and subsequent descendants)

The following genealogical chart is used with kind permission from Yvonne Demoskoff (http://users.uniserve.com/~canyon/royalty.html). Thanks Yvonne! One can also see this page as a pdf at kjchart.pdf


This chart outlines the descent of the late Princess Diana and Prince Charles from their common ancestor, King James VI & I. The names in red are five of the six godparents of their son Prince William. Please note that some information (such as full names and titles, in some cases) has been omitted for the sake of space.

(Copyright © 1998 Yvonne Demoskoff)

JAMES I of England and VI of Scotland (1566-1625) | |————————————————————————————————————————| | | Elizabeth Charles I, King of England | | | | Sophia James II, King of England | | | | George I, King of Great Britain (natural daughter:) | Henrietta | | George II, King of Great Britain James, 1st Earl Waldegrave | | |———————————————————————–| |———————| Frederick, Prince of Wales Louisa 2nd Earl Waldegrave 3rd Earl Waldegrave | | | | |———————| | | | | | | | | Augusta George III, King of Great Britain Louise Anne Horatia 4th Earl Waldegrave | | | | | | | | | | Augusta Edward, Duke of Kent Louise Horace 8th Earl Waldegrave | | | | | | | | | | Paul Victoria, Queen of Great Britain Christian IX, King of Denmark Adelaide William | | | | | | |——————————–| | | | Pauline Edward VII, King of G.B. Alice George I, King of the Hellenes 6th Earl Spencer 11th Earl Waldegrave | | | | | | | | | | | | Nicholas George V, King of G.B. Victoria Constantine I, King of the Hellenes 7th Earl Spencer 12th Earl Waldegrave | | | | | | | |—————| |————| | | | Sophie George VI, George, Alice Louis, Earl Paul I, King of the Hellenes 8th Earl Spencer Lady Susan Waldegrave | King of G.B. Duke of Kent | Mountbatten | | | | | | of Burma | | | | | | | | | Anastasia Elizabeth II, Alexandra Philip, Duke Patricia Constantine II, King Lady Diana Spencer | Queen of G.B. of Edinburgh | of the Hellenes | | | | | | Georgina |——————————-| Norton | | | | | | | Natalia Charles, Prince of Wales | |————————————————————————————| | | H.R.H. Prince William of Wales

updated April 9, 2011, H.R.H. Prince William of Wales married Miss Catherine Middleton at Westminster Abbey. They became known as the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.

July 22, 2013, The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge announce the birth of their first son, [the baby was eventually named George Alexander Louis] born at the Lindo Wing, St. Mary’s Hospital, Paddington. “The baby is third in line of succession after His Royal Highness The Prince of Wales and His Royal Highness The Duke of Cambridge. He is styled His Royal Highness Prince [name] of Cambridge.

(derived from www.dukeandduchessofcambridge.org/the-duchess-of-cambridge/biography. Quote taken from www.dukeandduchessofcambridge.org/news-and-diary/the-duchess-of-cambridge-has-been-delivered-of-son)

May 2, 2015, the second child of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge was born–a daughter, HRH Princess Charlotte Elizabeth Diana of Cambridge at St. Mary’s Hospital in London. She is fourth in line for the British throne: (1st) Prince Charles (her grandfather) (2nd) Prince William (her father) (3rd) Prince George (her older brother) (4th) Princess Charlotte.

King James I of England
(VI of Scotland)
INTERESTING FACTS

  • King James I was a Christian who wanted the Bible in the hands of the common man. Specially commanded the Authorized (King James) Version of 1611 of the Bible.
  • King James was known for his wisdom. He was known as “Great Britain’s Solomon” while he was yet alive.
  • Fluent in Greek, Latin, French, English, and his native Scots. Schooled in Italian and Spanish.
  • Wrote extensively including Basilicon Doron (the Kingly Gift), Daemonologie, and tracts on varied subjects such as “Counterblaste to Tobacco” which condemned the use of tobacco. Counterblaste is considered the first anti-smoking tract. These and many other writings are found in The Workes of the Most High and Mightie Prince Iames (in Jacobean typography, the letter “I” can represent I or J), a massive collection of the king’s writings now online. In The Workes, one finds that King James was a contender for the faith of Jesus Christ and cared about the spiritual well-being of his kingdom. He even wrote Christian meditations for his people. His writings are still relevant today–King James has a message that Rome does not want you to hear.
  • William Shakespere was one of his subjects. Learning and writing thrived under the King’s reign.
  • Formed the foundation for what is now known as the British Empire by uniting warring tribes of Scotland and then enjoining the crowns of Scotland and England in 1603. He was the first to call his new kingdom, “Great Britain”.
  • King James was became King of Scotland in 1567 when he was 13 months old and acceded to the English throne in 1603.
  • Scottish reformation leader John Knox read the sermon when he was crowned King.
  • He endured racism as a Scot ruling over the English, nevertheless had the love and admiration of many subjects. Years after his death, detractors tried to sully his good name. Unfortunately, it continues today, yet KJV translators, yea the King himself had predicted such.
  • King James was sickly having crippling arthritis, weak limbs, abdominal colic, gout, and a number of other chronic illnesses. He also had physical handicaps which affected his legs and tongue. Coupled with numerous attempts on his life, he required constant attention and watchcare.
  • His mother was Mary Queen of Scots who was deposed in 1567 and executed in 1587 after 19 years in prison. His father, Lord Darnley, was murdered in 1567.
  • Roman Catholic clerics tried to kill him more than once. The King was born during the time of the Reformation and well knew popery’s atrocities. In 1536, popery burned William Tyndale to death for distributing the Bible and it was MUCH displeased with King James’ authorization of a Bible in English (see translator’s notes). Roman Catholic Nicolo Molin, an Ambassador said this of King James:

    “…He is a Protestant…The king tries to extend his Protestant religion to the whole island. The King is a bitter enemy of our religion (Roman Catholic)…He frequently speaks of it in terms of contempt. He is all the harsher because of this last conspiracy (Gun Powder Plot) against his life…He understood that the Jesuits had a hand in it.”

    King James said this in Basilicon Doron:

    “I am no papist as I said before…Now faith…is the free gift of God (as Paul sayeth). It must be nourished by prayer, which is no thing else but a friendly talking to God. Use oft to pray when ye are quiet, especially in your bed…”

  • He led a chaste life. Sir Henry Wotton (June 1602) said this of King James:

    “There appears a certain natural goodness verging on modesty…He wears short hair…among his good qualities none shines more brightly than the chastness of his life, which he has preserved without stain down to the present time. Contrary to the example of almost all his ancestors, who disturbed the kingdom with the great number of bastards which they left.”

    F.A. Inderwick wrote in 1891:

    “James had a reputation for learning, for piety, for good nature, and for liberality.”

    In 1603, Sir Roger Wilbaham wrote:

    “The King is of sharpest wit and invention…of the sweetest most pleasant and best nature that I ever knew, desiring nor affecting anything but true honor.”

  • King James loved literature and wrote extensively including the Basilicon Doron which contains instructions to his son on how to live and be a just king. King James’ advice to his son concerning chastity:

    “Keep your body clean and unpolluted while you give it to your wife whom to only it belongs for how can you justly crave to be joined with a Virgin if your body be polluted? Why should the one half be clean, and the other defiled? And suppose I know, fornication is thought but a veniall sin by the most part of the world, yet remember well what I said to you in my first book regarding conscience, and count every sin a breach of God’s law, not according as the vain world esteems of it, but as God judge and maker of the law accounts of the same: hear God commanding by the mouth of Paul to abstain from fornication, declaring that the fornicator shall not inherit the kingdom of heaven, and by the mouth of John reckoning out fornication among other grievous sins that declares the commiters among dogs and swine.”

    Advice to his son on how to treat his wife.

    “And for your behavior to your wife, the Scripture can best give you counsel therein. Treat her as your own flesh, command her as her lord, cherish her as your helper, rule her as your pupil, please her in all things reasonable, but teach her not to be curious in things that belong not to her. You are the head, she is your body, it is your office to command and hers to obey, but yet with such a sweet harmony as she should be as ready to obey as you to command, as willing to follow as you to go before, your love being wholly knit unto her, and all her affections lovingly bent to follow your will.”

  • King James loved his wife, Queen Anne, and wrote beautifully of her. They had nine children together. Once, while out hunting, Queen Anne mistakenly killed King James’ favorite dog. Sir Dudley Carleton wrote in 1613:

    The queen shooting a deer mistook her mark and killed Jewel, the King’s most special and favourite hound; at which he stormed exceedingly awhile; but after he knew who did it he was soon pacified and with much kindness wished her not to be troubled with it for he should love her never the worse; and the next day sent her a diamond worth �2000 as a legacy from his dead dog….The Queen by her late pacification hath gained Greenwich.

  • King James is the founding monarch of the United States. Under his reign, we have the first successful colonies planted on the American mainland–Virginia, Massachsetts and Nova Scotia. King James ordered, wrote and authorized this Evangelistic Grant Charter to settle the Colony of Virginia:

    “To make habitation…and to deduce a colony of sundry of our people into that part of America, commonly called Virginia…in propogating of Christian religion to such people as yet live in darkness…to bring a settled and quiet government.”

Sources: Wikipedia, http://www.edinburghcity.org.uk/attractions/castle-history/, http://scotlandsmary.com/james-i-vi/, https://www.jesus-is-lord.com/kinginde.htm, http://www.israelitesunite.com/king-james.html

Copyright © 1989 - 2017 AIRRINGTON MINISTRIES | www.airrington.com |All Rights Reserved.

Occult Roots Of The Modern Bible Versions

Occult Roots Of The Modern Bible Versions

By David J. Stewart | October 2014

2nd Corinthians 2:17, “For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God:
but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.”

Luciferian Doctrines Infiltrating The Christian Churches

In essence, Theosophy is the worship of Lucifer. Occultists Helena P. Blavatsky and Henry S. Olcott founded the Theosophical Society in 1875. Their number one goal, as stated in “The Secret Doctrine” (a book written by Blavatsky), is “To form the nucleus of a Universal Brotherhood of Man without distinction of race, colour, sex, or creed.” (The Secret Doctrine, 1888, Index, p. 32)

The founder of “Lucifer” Magazine in 1887, Helena Petrovna Blavatsky (1831-1891), and editor Annie Besant (1847-1933), along with other occultists believed that Christian churches were the key to introducing the doctrines of Lucifer to large masses of people. The 1904 annual report of the Theosophical Society stated:

“I believe it is through the Churches and not through the Theosophical Society that Theosophy [the worship of Lucifer]… must and should come to large bodies of people in the West.” (Transactions of the Theosophical Society, H. P. Blavatsky, Annie Besant, 1904, p. 377).

And then just eight years later the 1912 report of the Theosophical Society stated:

“Our Lodges continue their propaganda work….Outside the Lodges many of the members engage in what is really Theosophical work such as lecturing, talking on the principles we are trying to put forward, preaching and other activities in connection with the Christian Churches and other organizations….” (Theosophist Magazine, Annie Besant, 1912, p. 88).

Nineteenth-century occult mystic Fenton Hort is perhaps best known for his part in the work of the corrupt bible revision committee of 1881. Speaking on the subject of creating a new eclectic New Testament text Hort stated:

“At present, very many orthodox but rational men are being unawares acted upon by influences which will assuredly bear good fruit in due time if the process is allowed to go on quietly;” (Life and letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, Vol. 1, 1896, p. 400).

In the Old Testament Jeremiah said that their course is evil, and their force is not right” (Jeremiah 23:10). The apostle Paul warned, “And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.” (II Corinthians 11:14,15). Here’s some startling information about how Theosophy has infiltrated groups Like “Focus On The Family” and “Christianity Today” magazine. Satan is not sitting idle as are most churches today. Rather, Satan “knoweth that he hath but a short time” (Revelation 12:12). Although this particular Scripture reference is to the time during the Tribulation, it is clear to anybody with spiritual discernment that we are living in the end times (toes mixed of iron and clay on Nebuchadnezzar’s image in Daniel 2:31-45).

Westcott and Hort butchered the Greek. Rudolph Kittles butchered the Hebrew. All of the modern so-called easy-to-read Bible versions have been corrupted by Luciferian-worshipping occultists. Sadly, the average churchgoer doesn’t realize it, and worst, the ones that have been warned don’t care enough to address the issue. Please research the evidence. When you do, you’ll trash your modern Bible version and cherish the trustworthy King James Bible. END

The “Easy To Read” Lie Behind Modern Corrupt Bible Versions

T H E   N I N E T E E N T H   C E N T U R Y   O C C U L T   R E V I V A L

Brooke Foss Westcott (1825-1901)Fenton John Anthony Hort (1828-1892) The Legacy of Westcott & Hort

Excellent Information by Dr. Barbara Aho

We learn from history that we do not learn from history,” observed the German philosopher, George W.F. Hegel. The familiar axiom is at once lamentable and understandable. For the common man does not have at his disposal a store of reliable information upon which to base educated judgments, but a bewildering mass of half-truth, untruth, and skewed data. Among the purveyors of misinformation are undiscerning historians, who scarcely take notice of those organizations which maintain a covert existence, and revisionist historians who misrepresent the secret societies to serve their agenda.

Exceptional recorders of human events who probe beyond the aura of mystery surrounding the arcane Traditions discover that a veritable “occult underground” exists and has existed throughout human history. The more perceptive find within the multiform kingdom of the cults that individual persuasions share a common agenda: to conform their society to a mutual set of philosophical ideals. Among these few will be found historian James Webb. With the pen of a ready writer, Webb has explored The Occult Underground of Western Civilization — from the Renaissance through the rise of modern Spiritualism.

The Renaissance or rebirth describes the radical and comprehensive changes which occurred in European culture during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. The Protestant Reformation commenced in 1517, being firmly established in Europe fifty years later. Webb explains:

“From one point of view, what had occurred during the Renaissance/Reformation was roughly this: what might be called the Establishment culture of Western Europe, based entirely upon Christian values as defined by Rome, had at last yielded up its monopoly of jurisdiction — never in theory, of course, but certainly in practice…The Renaissance represents the cultural release from the papal strait-jacket; the Reformation, the same release expressed in religious terms.” (1)

Renaissance scholars believed that Western Civilization had progressed beyond the barbarism of the Middle Ages, having found its inspiration and closest parallel in the ancient civilizations of Greece and Rome. Humanism replaced medieval duty to God and the King and Renaissance men, such as Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and Marsilio Ficino of the Platonic Academy in Florence, revived the artistic styles and metaphysical values of classical antiquity, notably in Italy. However, freedom from religious conscription produced a form of culture shock. Under the veneer of the revival of arts and refinement of culture, interest in the occult, magic, and astrology flourished as a substitute for religious faith.

“In other words, the material of the occult Traditions, whether in the rarified form of Metaphysical speculation or in the practical manifestation of magic, was common currency. This resulted from a period of uncertainty during which both the cultivated and the uncultured alike were searching for a departed security. The New Man of the Renaissance, liberated from his prison of the Middle Ages, flexed his muscles, and tried them on the Traditions . . .The figure of the Renaissance man is not complete if the place of the Magician is forgotten. Ficino was scholar, priest, and magician.” (2)

Ficino incorporated Platonic literature and the Hermetic sciences – astrology, alchemy, and magic – with Scripture, professing a Christian form of Neo-Platonism.

“Another source from which occultists have drawn their Secret Tradition is the school of speculation called Neo-Platonism. It has been argued that the seeds of Neo-Platonic doctrine were sown by Plato himself, but it is equally possible that the originators were his first-generation pupils in the Academy of Athens. Even the ‘magico-religious’ complexion of Neo-Platonism seems to have sprung from the Academy, where there was an interest in demonology and occult phenomena… ” (3)

The Catholic Church, in its alliance with secular powers, had permitted in a limited way theories deriving from Plato and Neo-Platonism as a secular support for religious doctrine.  However, the works of Aristotle had obtained entrance to Western Europe along with Neo-Platonism.  Aristotle introduced the “scientific method,” which was based upon observation rather than faith.

“Plato is the philosopher of the beyond, of the great metaphysical questions, and of the religious spirit. Aristotle is the exponent of what has come to be called the ‘scientific method,’ the careful study of observed data, and the commonsensical drawing of conclusions…  ” (4)

Roman Catholicism and other mystical religions such as Neo-Platonism, regardless of their differences, have more in common with Plato than with Aristotle. When the scientific approach obtained a foothold in Western Europe, it represented a serious threat to the existing order and undermined religious faith. By the end of the Renaissance, the two systems of philosophy which historically had competed for preeminence were reversed and Aristotle became the philosopher of choice.

“At the collapse of medieval society, Aristotle, the philosopher of observation and the scientific method vanquished Plato, the Metaphysician, logician of the beyond, and father of much occult Tradition … ” (5)

The Age of Reason

The Renaissance had been a severe but not fatal assault on the established Church and its alliance with European monarchies. The scientific method, which would be a threat to “faith in Christ,” was now granted an uneasy tolerance. Webb notes that, “For a time, this dangerous aspect of Aristotle was not appreciated by the Church — not until it was too late.”

“The Traditions had entered Europe with Aristotle, but, as has been explained, they were totally alien to the spirit of that philosopher. For a time the two strands of thought could draw support from the same sources. Both were opposed to the over-subtle theological approach of the late Middle Ages, and both employed practical experiment — for magical experiment is as ‘practical’ as any other. But the Traditional view is founded on faith, and is a religious attitude, while the approach of the Aristotelians was that of discovery by observation of what was. . . But by the 18th century the scientific method had triumphed and the Age of Reason began its much-publicized career . . . ” (6)

The triumph of Aristotle over Plato during the Renaissance eventuated in a mass departure from established religion, which was superseded by reliance on human achievement. The popular opinion of the Age of Reason or Enlightenment was Deism, which held that the universe revolved around man and although God had created the world, man was left alone to manage things.

“In the earlier period ideas of duty to God and King had given way to a recognition of secular standards and the pursuit of profit. During the 18th century there gradually developed an attitude of mind which enabled man to pursue with more success his worldly activities. In its extreme form this became Rationalism, and the Age of Reason was characterized, if not by a devotion to the things of this world, at any rate by a neglect of things belonging to the next. The Industrial, Social, Scientific and Romantic revolutions were all, in one way or another, the outcome of this concentration.” (7)

In this atmosphere of scientific rationalism, faith in the unseen realm diminished producing a decline in orthodox religion. Likewise, the pursuit of occult or hidden knowledge was adjudged by the Establishment to be of equally doubtful intellectual respectability.

“But after the turmoil of the transitional period had subsided the Traditions returned to their status as the interest of a tiny minority. They went underground — joined once more the opposition — because during the crisis of the Renaissance and Reformation, Aristotle and the scientific method had won.” (8)

The Romantic Period

The conversion from worship of a Supreme Being to Human Reason had produced no minor insecurity and many failed to make the transition. The Romantic era was an artistic and intellectual movement of the late eighteenth century which also glorified Man, however with emphasis upon strong emotion, imagination, freedom from classical correctness in art forms, and rebellion against social convention. Discontent with the pursuit of materialism to the exclusion of transcendent ideals, the Romantic search for significance found fulfillment in occult mysticism and artists turned to the mysterious East with its Tradition of Oriental wisdom. The music and poetry of the Romantic masters became “conduits of essential truth” and “middle class drawing rooms…seedbeds for discussion of literary, political and musical topics among the intellectually progressive.” (9)

The German metaphysician, Immanuel Kant, “challenged the salon culture to consign both the arid logic of ostensibly omnicompetent reason and tired reliance upon religious dogmas to the ash heap of bankrupt ideologies.” (10) Kant further advocated the establishment of a world federation of republican states and Georg Hegel later developed the Kantian method of reasoning by “antinomies” as the basis for his dialectical method upon which the structure of Marxism was built. (11)

In the 1780’s, young Frederich Schleiermacher readily absorbed Kant’s philosophy. Although he had abandoned faith in the deity and vicarious atonement of Christ, Schleiermacher would enter ministry and become the “Father of Modern Theology.” The evolution of his theology is described by Dr. Mark Devine in “The Apologetic Betrayal of the Gospel” as published in the Premise Journal:

“Doctrine then, odious to Kant in that it boasts of epistemological capabilities denied to it, is not dismissed by Schleiermacher so much as it is dethroned and domesticated. No longer will dogmas judge of true faith.” (12)

As minister and metaphysician, Schleiermacher enthroned, instead of doctrine, “the power of Jesus self-consciousness” which was diffused through the believing community and taught that conversion is an arousal of the universal God-consciousness. Since the unity of the original church was the influence of the Savior, in Schleiermacher’s view, “the essence of the church is fellowship.” (13) The extensive influence of Schleiermacher would uproot the German church from its doctrinal base, giving rise to new principles of higher criticism which rejected the authenticity of the Gospels, particularly the miracles, and also the cardinal doctrines of the Christian faith.

The Occult Revival

Nineteenth century England and Western Europe experienced several major revolutions simultaneously. The Industrial Revolution had reconstructed the European economy; the scientific method of inquiry had challenged accepted religious norms; international communications removed geographical barriers; and the French Revolution of 1789 had created a milieu of abiding discontent among disenfranchised lower classes. James Webb records that “…in the short but significant upheavals of 1848 over fifty violent attempts took place to topple established governments.” (14) Socialist organizations proliferated which received their inspiration from the dialectical writings of Karl Marx (Capital) and Frederich Engels. In 1859, in the midst of these converging revolutions, Charles Darwin published the Origin of Species, which evolutionary thesis shattered the already frail faith of many in the established Church.

James Webb likens the crisis of consciousness which overtook the nineteenth century to the cultural adjustment of the Renaissance period and contends that it was, in fact, “a belated continuation of the intellectual upheavals of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries.”

“What was happening was the final collapse of the old world-order which had first been rudely assaulted during the Renaissance and Reformation.. ..just when the Age of Reason seemed to be bearing fruit in the 19th century, there was an unexpected reaction against the very method which had brought success, a wild return to archaic forms of belief, and among the intelligentsia a sinister concentration on superstitions which had been thought buried . . . ” (15)

“Reason died sometime before 1865…” wrote the historian. “…after the Age of Reason came the Age of the Irrational.” Bereft of assurances of immortality after so great an attack on biblical revelation were masses of hopeless people “begging for a revelation which was scientifically demonstrable.” Ensuing was a widespread flight from reason and a revival of the occult Traditions that had been discredited during the Enlightenment.

The foundation for a modern Spiritualist movement was already in place through the enterprises of three eccentrics. Emanuel Swedenborg, “a Swedish engineer turned prophet,” who communicated with angels and spirits, had published the Arcana Coelestia in London in 1749; Franz Mesmer, “an Austrian physician branded unacceptable by the world of learning,” popularized the idea of trance and the concept of Animal Magnetism (c. 1775); and Andrew Jackson Davis, “a young American good-for-nothing who took to seeing visions,” became the first theorist of the Spiritualist movement through the publication in 1847 of his channeled work, The Principles of Nature, Her Divine Revelations.” (16)

In 1848 it was announced, “The gods came down to earth again…” (17) Mysterious rappings of spirits were reported by the Fox family in their home in Hydesville, New York. Modern communications catapulted this isolated affair to international prominence and ignited a revival of occult interest and activity which would become the modern Spiritualist movement. People longed for a new religion and it was estimated that, by 1851, there were 100 mediums in New York City alone. Séances became the vogue in Europe where mediums were in demand to entertain guests with physical and mental phenomena at private parties. In England, clairvoyants would consult the dead for a guinea a sitting. James Webb draws the inference,

“They could shout in the face of the bogey Darwin that they knew they were more than the outcome of a biological process, that they too had ‘scientific proof’–and theirs was the reality of the after-life.” (18)

Alan Gauld, author of The Founders of Psychical Research, estimated that, in England, by the 1860’s and 70’s “…the existence of four fairly successful periodicals suggests that the number of active Spiritualists must have been well into five figures. The numbers of those influenced by Spiritualism, or at least interested in it, may have been perhaps ten times greater.” (19)

The Anglican Spiritualists

The perplexity and inquisitiveness of the age had led to the formation of numerous Spiritualist societies. One of the early pioneers of Spiritualist inquiry was the Ghost Society at the University of Cambridge, England. The Founders of Psychical Research records the stated objective of the Cambridge Ghost Society:

“In 1851, was founded at Cambridge a Society to ‘conduct a serious and earnest inquiry into the nature of the phenomena vaguely called supernatural,’ and a number of distinguished persons became members.” (20)

The Ghost Society is also described in the biography of one of its founding members, The Life, and Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, by Arthur Hort.

“Two other societies…were started…in both of which Hort seems to have been the moving spirit…the other called by its members ‘The Ghostly Guild.’ The object was to collect and classify authenticated instances of what is now called ‘psychical phenomena’…the ‘Bogie Club’ as scoffers called it, aroused a certain amount of derision, and even some alarm; it was apparently born too soon.” (21)

The Society for Psychical Research: An Outline of its History and the Life of Edward White Benson by his son, Arthur, present further documentation of the distinguished founders of the Cambridge Ghost Society:

“Among the numerous persons and groups who in the middle of the nineteenth century were making inquiries into psychical occurrences may be mentioned a society from which our own can claim direct descent. In the Life of Edward White Benson, Archbishop of Canterbury, by his son, A. C. Benson will be found, under the year 1851-2, the following paragraph:

‘Among my father’s diversions at Cambridge was the foundation of a ‘Ghost Society,’ the forerunner of the Psychical Society [meaning the S.P.R.] for the investigation of the supernatural. Lightfoot, Westcott, and Hort were among the members. He was then, as always, more interested in psychical phenomena than he cared to admit.’

“Lightfoot and Westcott both became bishops and Hort Professor of Divinity. The S.P.R. has hardly lived up to the standard of ecclesiastical eminence set by the parent society.” (22)

Canon J.B. Lightfoot, Bishop B.F. Westcott, and Professor of Divinity F.J.A. Hort also served on the Revision Committee for the English Revised Version of 1881. Drs. Westcott and Hort produced a New Greek Text and created a new theory of textual criticism for this revision of the Authorized Version of 1611. Edward White Benson, who became Archbishop of Canterbury in 1883, married Mary Sidgwick. Edward and Mary became the parents of Robert Hugh Benson, who converted to Roman Catholicism during the Oxford Movement led by John Henry Newman. (23) Mary’s brother, Henry Sidgwick married Eleanor Balfour, the sister of Arthur Balfour, who became a future Prime Minister of England. Gauld reflects —

“To say that the Sidgwicks had friends in high places would be an enormous understatement. They were also, I should guess, among the most intellectual couples of the century.” (24)

Arthur Balfour’s brother, Gerald, was also the brother-in-law of Emily Lutyens, a disciple of Theosophist Annie Besant and foster-mother of Jiddu Krishnamurti, who was thought to be Lord Maitreya, the World Teacher of the new age.

“Lady Emily Lutyens, the wife of the architect, is interesting in this context. Before joining the Theosophical Society she had interested herself in state-regulated prostitution, and toyed with the notion of Women’s Suffrage. Her sister, Constance, went the whole way, was jailed and forcibly fed. Converted by Mrs. Besant, Emily became for ten years the devoted “foster-mother” and adherent of Krishnamurti. . . even among the highest reaches of society the crisis of consciousness made itself felt. The supernatural was no stranger to the family of Emily Lutyens.

“She herself had been born Emily Lytton, the granddaughter of the occultist Bulwer Lytton, and was the sister-in-law of Gerald Balfour, who with his brother Arthur became president of the Society for Psychical Research. The Balfours’ sister, Nora, married Henry Sidgwick, whose own sister, Mary, became the wife of Edward White Benson, and the mother of Robert Hugh. Within this family connection, it is quite natural to find at least one devoted Theosophist.” (25)

As an undergraduate at Cambridge, B.F. Westcott also founded the Hermes Club, which he named after the Graeco-Egyptian deity, Hermes Trismegistus. Subsequent Hermetic societies founded by other Spiritualists would become famous in England — one organized in 1884 by Anna Kingsford and Edward Maitland, which was in close contact with the Theosophical Society, (26) and The Order of the Golden Dawn founded by MacGregor Mathers and Wynn Westcott. James Webb has elucidated the meaning of Hermes:

“In the history of the Secret Traditions the Hermetica became important because of the great value place on them in Renaissance Europe; in their context they are significant because they typify this magical attitude to life. The fact that Hermes is taken here as the founder of astrology, alchemy, or magic, the revealer of occult correspondences, is useful to emphasize that European attempts at practicing astrology, alchemy, or magic, often called the “Hermetic sciences,” have their origins in the same period of religious ferment as saw the flourishing of the Mysteries and the birth of Neo-Platonism… the philosophical position of the Hermetica, with its doctrine, that matter is evil and to be escaped, can be paralleled by the Gnostics.” (27)

In her Theosophical Glossary, Madame H.P. Blavatsky also reported the extensive use of Hermetic doctrines in Gnostic writings:

“Hermetic. Any doctrine or writing connected with the esoteric teachings of Hermes . . . Though mostly considered as spurious, nevertheless the Hermetic writings were highly prized by St. Augustine, Lactantius, Cyril and others. In the words of Mr. J. Bonwick, ‘They are more or less touched up by the Platonic philosophers among the early Christians (such as Origin and Clemens Alexandrinus) who sought to substantiate their Christian arguments by appeals to these heathen and revered writings, though they could not resist the temptation of making them say a little too much.’ Though represented by some clever and interested writers as teaching pure monotheism, the Hermetic or Trismegistic books are, nevertheless, purely pantheistic . . . ” (28)

A contemporary of B.F. Westcott, Mme. Blavatsky classified Westcott with the Gnostic philosophers, even laughing him to scorn in her channeled work, Isis Unveiled, for his credulity of The Pastor of Hermas. It seems that Anglican scholars gave the weight of Scripture to apocryphal literature from the occult underground with which she was familiar:

“In their immoderate desire to find evidence for the authenticity of the New Testament, the best men, the most erudite scholars even among Protestant divines, but too often fall into deplorable traps. We cannot believe that such a learned commentator as Canon Westcott could have left himself in ignorance as to Talmudistic and purely kabbalistic writings. How then is it that we find him quoting, with such serene assurance as presenting ‘striking analogies to the Gospel of St. John,’ passages from the work of The Pastor of Hermas, which are complete sentences from kabbalistic literature?” (29)

The Anglican Apostasy

In the early nineteenth century, England had experienced a series of Christian revivals which were continuations of the Methodist revival and during which formed the Evangelical party of the Anglican Church. Evangelicals converted during this awakening recovered the doctrines of salvation which had long been obscured by the sacramentalism and other enormities of the Church of England. Secular historian Alan Gauld noted the profound influence of the Evangelicals upon English society:

“By the eighteen-thirties Evangelicalism had begun to affect the whole life of the nation . . . Many writers have suggested that it was from the zeal and influence of the Evangelicals, and even from the legislation which they brought about, that some of the factors most characteristic of the Victorian middle-class way of life derived. Halevy says that Evangelical religion was ‘the moral cement of English society.'” (30)

Gauld highlighted the distinguishing feature of the Evangelical community: “It is indeed the pattern of family life which Evangelicalism disseminated so widely that seems in retrospect its most important legacy.” Notwithstanding so rich a religious heritage, the spiritual casualties among Evangelical youth were legion.

“The faith of children who were born into such households during the second quarter of the nineteenth century was to be severely tested. These children grew to maturity in a period when, for the first time in almost two hundred years, the discoveries and speculations of scientists and scholars were coming into marked and public conflict with the teachings of Christianity. It was, tragically enough, the most sensitive and the most intelligent Christians who were the most liable to succumb.” (31)

As detrimental as Darwin’s theory of natural selection, were other pernicious elements corrupting the younger generation of England and future clergy of the Anglican Church. The German scholar, Schleiermacher, was by this time molding the theology of Oxford and Cambridge in the Gnostic tradition. And the High Romantic poets of pantheism, William Wordsworth and Samuel Taylor Coleridge, were assiduously read and highly revered among the university intelligentsia. Coleridge, who ultimately died of an opium addiction,

“…had been to Germany and returned as a fervent devotee of its theology and textual criticism. At Cambridge University he became the star around which grouped a constellation of leaders in thought, Thirwall, (F.J.A.) Hort, Moulton and Milligan, who were all later members of the English Revision Committee.” (32)

Another corruptive catalyst was the empiricist philosophy of John Stuart Mill, whose works attained enormous prestige at Cambridge and throughout England. The dominant theme of Mill’s Logic, (1843) was that the only legitimate source of information man has about the world is the physical senses; conversely, “faith” is not a valid foundation for belief.

The failure of much Anglican hierarchy to repudiate the higher critics and radical freethinkers scandalized the Evangelicals, whose outraged response was considered reactionary by the scholarly community. In 1861, Benjamin Jowett and six liberal Churchmen published a volume entitled Essays and Reviews, in which they expressed alarm lest, “…the majority of Churchmen, by holding fast the narrow, fundamental beliefs, should estrange themselves more and more from contemporary thought.” (33) Jowett himself maintained, “Scripture must be interpreted like any other book and some of the essayists were even more radical in their tone.” The portents of apostasy in the Church of England were ominous.

“It seemed to conservative Christians quite appalling that at a time when the impregnable rock of Holy Scripture was being undermined by Darwin and his allies, a group of those whose sacred duty should have been to shore it up again had conspired to hammer their wedges not under it but into it.” (34)

Many of the younger men of Trinity College at Cambridge were repelled by the Orthodox censure of the new speculations. In 1861 Henry Sidgwick, a Fellow and leading figure at Trinity, publicly defended the liberal manifesto of the clerical freethinkers: “As a learned divine (Mr. Westcott) expresses it, they love their early faith, but they love truth more.” (35) Sidgwick finally resigned his Fellowship at Trinity College in 1869 on the grounds that he “could not continue in that assent to the doctrines of the Church of England which had been a condition of his appointment.” It is noteworthy that in spite of this declaration, Sidgwick would be appointed to a position as professor of moral philosophy in 1892. Gauld records the rapid decline in spiritual aspirations among younger Cambridge men:

“Scepticism based on science flowed into and reinforced the older stream of doubt stemming from historical and ethical considerations. Their joint effect may be traced in the fact that whilst the outstanding Cambridge men of the 1840’s — B. F. Westcott, C. B. Scott, J. Llewellyn Davies, J.E.B. Mayer, Lord Alwyne Compton, E.H, Bickersteth, C. F. Mackenzie, Charles Evans, J. B. Lightfoot, E. W. Benson and F.J.A. Hort — all took Orders (three of them becoming great clerical headmasters and six bishops), the outstanding Cambridge intellectuals of the 1870’s — the Trinity group centring on Henry Sidgwick and Henry Jackson and including Frederic Myers, G. W. and A. J. Balfour, Walter Leaf, Edmund Gurney, Arthur Verrall, F. W. Maitland, Henry Butcher and George Prothero — tended towards agnosticism or hesitant Deism.” (36)

Henry Sidgwick, Frederic Myers and Edmund Gurney were from devout Evangelical families and were sons of clergymen, as were their mentors at Cambridge, Brook Foss Westcott, Fenton John Anthony Hort and Edward White Benson. Sidgwick and Myers had matriculated at Trinity with the intent of entering the episcopate of the Church of England, Sidgwick having been influenced by his cousin E. W. Benson, who was a master at Cambridge before becoming a bishop and eventually the head of the Anglican Church. Alan Gauld explains Henry Sidgwick’s mysterious change of mind:

“…the waning of his clerical ambition seems to have been the result of his election in 1857 to membership of the Apostles, a small but extremely select discussion society founded in the early part of the century.” (37)

Gauld hints that the ideological disposition of this elite society was toward the design of a future global harmonization: “(The) Apostles had hoped that developments in the social sciences would before long make possible an equitable and frictionless society.” (38) He notes also the club’s profound effect upon its members: “The spirit of the society gradually came to absorb and dominate Sidgwick completely and to influence the whole direction of his life.” (39) Sidgwick’s memoirs state, “…the tie of attachment to this society is much the strongest corporate bond which I have known in my life.” F.J.A. Hort and B.F. Westcott were also members, Arthur Hort describing his father’s ardor and influence:

“…in June (1851) joined the mysterious Company of the Apostles…He remained always a grateful and loyal member of the secret Club, which has now become famous for the number of distinguished men who have belonged to it. In his time the Club was in a manner reinvigorated, and he was mainly responsible for the wording of an oath which binds members to a conspiracy of silence. ” (40)

Young Fenton Hort had initial reservations about joining the Apostles, but a letter from Dr. F. D. Maurice whose “teaching was the most powerful element in his religious development,” persuaded him to join. In Hort’s words, Maurice was “the well-known radical” who was expelled from his position at King’s College in 1853 for heretical views on cardinal doctrines of the faith, having published a story on the “divine unconscious humanity.” (41) Hort explained his change of heart to a Rev. John Ellerton:

“Meanwhile I had (don’t open your eyes too wide!) been asked to join the ‘Apostles’; I declined, but after hearing a good deal which shook me, begged time to consider. Meanwhile, I wrote to Maurice for impartial counsel, telling my objections, and his second letter contained a P.S. which left me no alternative. He said ‘he could not advise me impartially.’ His ‘connection with them had moulded his character and determined the whole course of his life’; he owed them more than he could express in any words…” (42)

An elite club for elder Apostles, the Eranus, was founded in 1872 by B.F. Westcott, J.B. Lightfoot and F.J.A. Hort. Arthur Hort records his father’s membership in this select society:

“He also regularly went to the meetings of a sort of senior ‘Apostles’ called the ‘Eranus,’ a club composed of elder men of various tastes and pursuits…” (43)

Henry Sidgwick, also a member, provided Arthur a profile of the Eranus for his father’s biography:

“The originator of the idea was the present Bishop of Durham (Westcott), and he, together with Lightfoot and your father, may be regarded as constituting the original nucleus of the club…It was not designed to have, nor has it from first to last had, a preponderantly theological character; on the contrary, its fundamental idea was that it should contain representatives of different departments of academic study, and afford them regular opportunities for meeting and for an interchange of ideas…” (44)

One eminent scholar who addressed the Eranus in 1897 was Lord Acton, a Roman Catholic who was appointed by Gladstone to the position of Professor of History at Cambridge. Lord Acton was distinguished for his vision of the ultimate “Universal History,” a mystical belief in a universal conscience of the human race which enables mankind to gradually evolve morally, and to progress in civilization to overcome the world. (45) James Webb correlated Lord Acton’s Universalism with the vision of religious unity undertaken by the Parliament of the World’s Religions at its opening conference in 1893.” (46)

The Society For Psychical Research

The Anglican clergymen who founded societies for Spiritualist inquiry became dignitaries in the Church of England. However, the younger Cambridge intellectuals whom they had disciplined in Spiritualist endeavors settled to work to establish a scientific basis for Spiritualistic investigation and proceeded to develop psychical research into a respected branch of knowledge.

“Of these (groups) the most important was that centered around Henry Sidgwick, Frederic Myers and Edmund Gurney, all Fellows of Trinity College, Cambridge and deriving its inspiration from the Cambridge University Ghost Society, founded by no less a person than Edward White Benson, the future Archbishop of Canterbury.” (47)

In 1882, Henry Sidgwick, Frederic Myers, Edmund Gurney, Arthur and Gerald Balfour founded the Society for Psychical Research. Sidgwick who became the first president of the S.P.R. continued in this position for nine years. His prestigious connections and influence at Cambridge drew a number of distinguished persons into the Society, which James Webb speculates fulfilled the function of “Spiritualist church for intellectuals.” Future Prime Minister Arthur Balfour, who was Sidgwick’s ablest student at Cambridge, would serve as president of the S.P.R., as did his brother, Gerald Balfour, and sister, Eleanor Sidgwick. The record shows:

“In 1887, Council Members and Honorary Members of the SPR included a past Prime Minister (William Gladstone)…and a future Prime Minister (Arthur Balfour); …2 bishops; and Tennyson and Ruskin, two of the outstanding literary figures of the day;…’Lewis Carroll’…with a surprising number of titled persons.” (48)

William Gladstone, Prime Minister from 1865-74, called psychical research, “The most important work, which is being done in the world. By far the most important work.” William James, the famous psychologist, philosopher, and father of author Henry James, became president of the American S.P.R. in 1885. However, in its industry and operation,

“… the driving force of the S.P.R. came very largely from the group of younger Trinity men of the 1870’s mentioned previously (p. 64), as having turned, often with reluctance, towards agnosticism. Among the eleven who were named, six — Sidgwick, Myers, Gurney, the two Balfours, and Walter Leaf became not merely members of the S.P.R., but its principle organizers, its very engine room. Closely linked with them was Sidgwick’s wife, Nora, and one of his former students, Richard Hodgson.” (49)

The Society for Psychical Research: An Outline of Its History, by W.H. Salter, President in 1947-8, mentions this detail as to Nora Sidgwick, who became principal of Newnham College, Cambridge in 1892:

“Mrs. Sidgwick…did not join the Society till 1884, for fear, apparently, that an open connection with so unorthodox a venture might prejudice Newnham College, in which then recent foundation she held a responsible position.” (50)

The original objective of the S.P.R. was to conduct research into “that large group of debatable phenomena designated by such terms as mesmeric, psychical and spiritualistic.” Committees were organized to examine telepathy, hypnotism, mesmeric trance, clairvoyance, ESP, apparitions, haunted houses, and to determine the laws of physical spiritualistic phenomena. In recognition of the important work accomplished by Benson, Westcott and Hort — the leaders of its precursor, the Cambridge Ghost Society — the S.P.R. Historical Outline posits,

“It would hardly have been possible for the new Society to undertake an enquiry of such a kind or on such as scale if several of its leading members had not already gained previous experience of the difficulties attaching to that type of investigation.” (51)

In its early stages, the S.P.R. held séances in the townhouse of Arthur Balfour of which his sister Eleanor was the principle organizer. Various mediums of reputation were investigated with the purpose of ruling out charlatans and determining if entities from the spirit realm or deceased persons did in fact communicate with the living. In 1884, Madame H.P. Blavatsky, founder of the Theosophical Society, was graciously interviewed by a committee of the S.P.R. Although Richard Hodgson later would report “the tangle of fraud, intrigue and credulity” associated with her work in India, the SPR was at first —

“…considerably impressed by the evidence of Mme Blavatsky and her friends, and in a report, circulated within the Society but not published, declared: ‘On the whole (though with some serious reserves) it seems undeniable that there is a prima facie case for some part at least of the claim made.'” (52)

Later investigations yielded positive results in the area of mental phenomena from prominent mediums, such as Mrs. Thompson and Piper, who were able to conduct “cross-correspondences” devised by the spirits of deceased S.P.R. members to communicate with their colleagues. (53) Edmund Gurney and Frank Podmore, as Secretaries of the S.P.R., investigated and classified information on numerous mediums and, with Frederic Myers, wrote Phantasms of the Living. Gauld notes that Myers and Podmore, who wrote the classic Modern Spiritualism, may have been practicing homosexuals. (54) Gurney died unexpectedly in 1888 from an overdose of chloroform and there was considerable speculation of suicide. Frank Podmore was found drowned in 1910. (55)

In 1896, Frederic Myers joined the Synthetic Society, founded by Arthur Balfour and modeled upon the famous Metaphysical Society. The Synthetic Society was devoted, not to the mere discussion of religious and philosophical questions, but to “contribute towards a working philosophy of religious belief.” Myers read two papers to this Society, which Gauld surmises “were based upon communications from the departed spirits with whom he was now convinced that he was in genuine contact.” (56) Myers had developed and written in the SPR Proceedings a detailed theory of the subliminal self, upon which he based his worldview and which emerges in Gauld’s summary of the five points presented in these papers:

“(1) The ‘preamble of all religions,’ the primary belief from which they all begin, is that our . . . material world is interpenetrated and to an extent acted upon, by another order of things, an unseen spiritual world. . . it is only if the existence and nature of such a world can be established scientifically that we may expect any rapprochement between the warring sects; (2) ‘The founders of religions have attempted to begin at once with the highest generalizations. Starting from the existence of God…It is possible that in all this mankind may have begun at the wrong end…'(3) …we possess or are evolving capacities which transcend merely terrene laws; (4) We can therefore obtain information about the metetherial plane by ‘communicating’ with the discarnate in the orthodox ways…their state is one of endless evolution in wisdom and love; (5)…the metetherial realm (is) a World Soul from contact with which we can in a suitable frame of mind draw in a revitalising strength and Grace…And linked to all…is a Universal Spirit…(whose) benefits may come directly through the World Soul…or are so to speak channelled through spirits nearer to, but still above, us.” (57)

In the early 20th century, Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung were SPR Corresponding Members and contributed to the S.P.R. Journal of Proceedings. (58) In a recent expose of Jung’s occult proclivities, The Jung Cult, Richard Noll gives substantial credit to Myers and the S.P.R. for Jung’s major theories.

“With the founding of the Society for Psychical Research in England in 1882 and the copious publications of its investigators, new models of the unconscious mind emerged. The most respected model was that of the ‘subliminal self’ by Frederick Myers (1843-1901), the ‘mythopoetic’ (myth-making) function of which resembles Jung’s later conception of a collective unconscious. Jung read widely in the literature of psychical research in medical school and his 1902 dissertation cites the work of Myers and others in this school.” (59)

The Founders of Psychical Research closes with the observation that psychical research emerged from the occult underground to a position of respectability within the establishment, largely due to the intellectual stature of the Society for Psychical Research.

“The concluding volume of the popular Harnsworth History of the World (1909) presents the work of the S.P.R. as the culminating point in the story of Mankind. Twenty or thirty years previously psychical research had met with much derision and hostility, but now the climate of opinion seemed to be changing for the better.” (60)

In 1887, based on his investigation of deceased persons believed to inhabit the spirit realm, Frederic Myers forecast the future of psychical research:

“I do not feel the smallest doubt now that we survive death, and I am pretty confident that the whole world will have accepted this before A.D. 2000.” (61)

The Society for Psychical Research is still active in London and is also accessible on the Internet. Current publications offered by the S.P.R. to interested seekers include:

“Hints On Sitting With Mediums; Tests For Extrasensory Perception and Psychokinesis; Trance Mediumship: An Introductory Study of Mrs. Piper and Mrs Leonard; Guide to the Investigation of Apparitions, Hauntings, Poltergeists and Kindred Phenomena; Psychical Research Past and Present; Survival: A Reconsideration, Do We Survive Bodily Death? Parapsychology and the UFO . . .” (62)

The Fabian Society

In 1881, Frank Podmore, who had joined the early Sidgwick group, met Edward Pease at one of the Spiritualist séances that were the vogue in London, at which time they became close friends. The next year he invited Pease to attend a meeting of this group in which the S.P.R. was formed. Norman and Jeanne MacKenzie relate this epic event in their history of The Fabians:

“In this same period a group of young dons from Trinity College, Cambridge, were also turning to psychic research as a substitute for their lost Evangelical faith. In February 1882, Podmore took Pease to a meeting at which this group founded the Society for Psychical Research . . . Among those who founded the SPR were Henry Sidgwick, Arthur Balfour — later a conservative Prime Minister — and his brother, Gerald.” (63)

Edward Pease spent one year in the S.P.R. as secretary of its haunted-houses committee, but then turned to politics with the conviction that a social revolution was necessary. For a time he worked with an associate of Karl Marx, Henry Hyndman who founded the radical Social Democratic Federation. However, Pease was of the opinion that social revolution must begin with educating the intellectual and wealthy classes rather than fomenting agitation among the working class. He organized a Progressive Association which was joined by Podmore and other young fallen away Evangelicals.

The Association split into the Fellowship of the New Life, a commune with utopian illusions, and a research/debating group which Podmore named the Fabian Society, after the Roman general who defeated Hannibal. Fabius Cunctator’s strategy which was to guide the Fabians was summarized in Podmore’s words: “For the right moment, you must wait…when the time comes you must strike hard.” The Fabians soon attracted intellectuals from various other dissident organizations. Of these, Sidney Webb, Bernard Shaw, and Annie Besant were members of the Dialectical Society influenced by the liberal millenarian aspirations of John Stuart Mill. As of 1886, the Fabian executive committee was comprised of Pease, Podmore, Besant, Shaw, and Webb. However, in 1889, Annie Besant was converted to the cult of Theosophy by Madame Blavatsky, whom she succeeded in 1891 as president of the Theosophical Society.

Upon this revolutionary base, Sidney Webb, his wife Beatrice and playwright George Bernard Shaw built an organization which educated the intellectuals, bohemians and disillusioned clergy of England in the art of “permeating” and using the machinery of government for their own socialist ends. The MacKenzie’s observed, “There was, indeed, no clear dividing line between spiritual discontent and political radicalism in the netherworld of dissent.” Bernard Shaw and Sidney Webb argued that “socialism could be proposed without forfeiture of moral credit by a bishop as well as a desperado.” (64) The formation of the Christian Socialists and the Christian Social Union created the vehicle by which socialist doctrine would permeate the Anglican Church.

“…the first Fabians…had almost all lapsed Anglicans from Evangelical homes. There was a Christian fringe to the London socialism of the eighties, but this too was Anglican. The Christian Socialists came together in Stewart Headlam’s Guild of St. Matthew and the Land Reform Union; and the more respectable Christian Social Union, formed in 1889 — seeking in Fabian style to permeate the Anglican Church — soon attracted more than two thousand clerical members. Dissenting clergymen too began to find a place in the Fabian Society and the London Progressives, while Unitarian churches and centres like Stanton Coit’s Ethical Church provided a meeting place for believers and idealist agnostics . . . Socialism was for all of them, the new Evangelism.” (65)

As Bishop of Durham, B.F. Westcott also served as the first president of the Christian Social Union. The subject of an address at Manchester in November of 1895 was Christian Law, which Westcott postulated changes to adapt to variable social conditions:

“The Christian Law then is the embodiment of the truth for action, informs answering to the conditions of society from age to age. The embodiment takes place slowly and can never be complete. It is impossible for us to rest indolently in conclusions of the past. In each generation, the obligation is laid on Christians to bring new problems of conduct into the divine light and to find their solution under the teaching of the Spirit.” (66)

In 1894, the Fabian Society designated a large bequest to found the London School of Economics and Political Science. Philosopher Bertrand Russell served on the Administration Committee while Arthur Balfour contributed £2000 and also collaborated with Sidney Webb to introduce legislation in Parliament which would give the school university status. H.G. Wells, who had recently joined the Fabians, was “branching out into speculations about a new social order which naturally interested the Webbs.” (67) An elite group of Twelve Wise Men, which included Russell and Wells, were selected as the “Co-Efficients” who met to discuss and formulate:

“Ideas about racial improvement by selecting out the efficient…and Shaw was working on these ‘eugenic’ notions in his new play Man and Superman. Beatrice Webb called it ‘the most important of all questions, the breeding of the right sort of man.’

“…Above all they were avowed elitists, intolerant of the cumbersome and apparently wasteful processes of democracy, who wanted to see England ruled by a superior caste which matched an enlightened sense of duty with a competence to govern effectively. All of them, moreover, shared Sidney’s belief — which had led him to spend so much effort on London education and at the School of Economics — that social improvement depended upon the training of the superior manpower needed to carry out schemes of reform. Shaw was suggesting in his latest play that universal suffrage was a disaster, putting power in the hands of the ‘riff-raff’ and… Webb who could not wait until a new race of supermen had been bred up to establish the millennium, felt that improved education and intelligent politics would at least start the necessary process of regeneration.” (68)

Established as a long-term investment to educate and train an elite workforce to carry out the schemes of socialist reform, the London School of Economics is now one of the largest schools of the University of London, having also an international reputation. Over half of its 5,000 students and academic staff are from outside of the United Kingdom. Five of its former staff members have won Nobel Prizes and its Journal of International Studies, Millennium, enjoys worldwide circulation and recognition. The L.S.E. also provides consultants to many organizations, including the U.K. government, international bodies such as the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and the United Nations. (69) The Ford Foundation, which funds and whose members serve as trustees on the Council of Foreign Relations, (70) provided a grant in 1967 to the LSE for a Centre for International Studies. The European Institute of the LSE participates actively in the European Series conferences and hosted the 1996 conference which held discussions on the European Union, i.e., EMU: How Would a Single European Currency be Managed? European Governance and Law, Europe in the World Economy. (71)

The New Testament Scheme

The progenitor of the Society for Psychical Research and the Fabian Society was the Cambridge University Ghost Society, founded in 1851. In 1853, two years after founding said Ghost Society, F.J.A. Hort, and B. F. Westcott agreed, upon the suggestion of publisher Daniel Macmillan, to take part in “an interesting and comprehensive ‘New Testament Scheme,'” that is, to undertake a joint revision of the Greek New Testament. (72) The project was withheld from public knowledge during the twenty years required by Westcott and Hort to complete the New Greek Text and during the subsequent ten years during which an English Revision Committee revised the 1611 Authorized Version. However, during this period of nearly thirty years, Drs. Westcott and Hort maintained their involvement in the Spiritualist pursuits of their various secret societies and political cabals: the Hermes Club, Ghost Society, Company of Apostles, and Eranus. The following entry appears in April 1853 in The Life and Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort:

“One result of our talk I may as well tell you. He (Westcott) and I are going to edit a Greek text of the New Testament some two or three years hence, if possible. Lachmann and Tischendorf will supply rich materials, but not nearly enough, and we hope to do a good deal with Oriental versions. Our object is to supply clergymen generally, schools, etc., with a portable Greek text which shall not be disfigured with Byzantine corruptions.” (Italics in original) (73)

The elimination of “Byzantine corruptions” would be the substitution of minority (1%) Alexandrian manuscripts for the Greek Textus Receptus, the Received Text which had been recognized for nearly two millennia of church history and which agrees with the majority (99%) of manuscripts extant. (74) Karl Lachmann (1793-1851) was the professor of Classical and German Philology in Berlin, and also a German rationalist and textual critic who produced modern editions of the New Testament in Germany in 1842 and 1850. David Cloud expounds:

“(Lachmann) began to apply to the New Testament Greek text the same rules that he had used in editing texts of the Greek classics, which had been radically altered over the years… Lachmann had set up a series of several presuppositions and rules which he used for arriving at the original text of the Greek classics… He now began with these same presuppositions and rules to correct the New Testament which he also presupposed was hopelessly corrupted.” (75)

Lachmann furnished the critical authority for Drs. Westcott and Hort in their formulation of a method of Textual Criticism, known as the Westcott and Hort Textual Theory. They hypothesized that the original New Testament text had survived in near perfect condition in two manuscripts other than the Received Greek Text, which theory according to translators of the New King James Bible, “has since been discredited for lack of historical evidence.” (76) In The Revision Revised, the brilliant textual scholar Dean John William Burgon refuted the claims of the Westcott-Hort Theory as:

“…the latest outcome of that violent recoil from the Traditional Greek Text, — that strange impatience of its authority, or rather denial that it possesses any authority at all, — which began with Lachmann just 50 years ago (viz. In 1831), and has prevailed ever since; its most conspicuous promoters being Tregelles (1857-72) and Tischendorf (1865-72) . . . Drs. Westcott and Hort have in fact outstripped their predecessors in this singular race. Their absolute contempt for the Traditional Text, — their superstitious veneration for a few ancient documents; (which documents however they freely confess are not more ancient than the ‘Traditional Text’ which they despise;) — knows no bounds.” (77)

Dr. Hort had, in fact, repudiated the authority of Scripture, writing to a Rev. Rowland Williams in 1858, “There are, I fear still more serious differences between us on the subject of authority and especially the authority of the Bible.” (78) To B.F. Westcott he wrote in 1860, “But I am not able to go as far as you in asserting the infallibility of a canonical writing.” (79) In response to this admission of a heretical position, Westcott wrote:

“For I too ‘must disclaim settling for infallibility.’ In the front of my convictions all I hold is the more I learn, the more I am convinced that fresh doubts come from my own ignorance, and that at present I find the presumption in favor of the absolute truth — I reject the word infallibility — of Holy Scripture overwhelming.” (80)

Constantin Tischendorf (1815-74) was a German textual editor whom Dr. Frederick Scrivener of the English Revision Committee ranked “the first Bible critic in Europe.” Tischendorf traveled extensively in search of ancient documents and was responsible for finding the two manuscripts most relied upon in the Westcott-Hort Greek Text, the Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus. Tischendorf discovered (c. A.D. 1844) the Vaticanus B manuscript in the Vatican Library and Sinaiticus Aleph in a wastebasket in a Catholic Convent at the base of Mt. Sinai. (81) In The Revision Revised, Dean Burgon described for his English readers the corrupt character of the manuscripts primarily used by Westcott and Hort, not to revise the Textus Receptus, but to create an altogether new Greek Text.

“It matters nothing that all four are discovered on careful scrutiny to differ essentially, not only from ninety-nine out of a hundred of the whole body of extant MSS, besides but even from one another. This last circumstance, obviously fatal to their corporate pretensions, is unaccountably overlooked. And yet it admits of only one satisfactory explanation: viz. That in different degrees they all five exhibits a fabricated text…We venture to assure [the reader] without a particle of hesitation, that Aleph, B, D, are three of the most scandalously corrupt copies extant: — exhibit the most shamefully mutilated texts which are anywhere to be met with: — have become, by whatever process (for their history is wholly unknown), the depositories of the largest amount of fabricated readings, ancient blunders, and intentional perversions of Truth, — which are discoverable in any known copies of the Word of God.” (82)

The manuscripts in question were found to derive from an underground of occult scripture within Christendom that has been passed through successive generations since the apostolic era. As the occult Traditions have sought to infiltrate and transform the secular establishment, the Church has historically been attended by an Alexandrian Tradition, which seeks to smuggle Gnostic doctrines into the Sacred Canon via the “revision” or “correction” of Scripture. Bible scholar, Dr. Herman Hoskier parallels the folly of Israel returning to Egypt to the Anglican scribes searching for inspired writings in the ancient house of bondage:

“Nearly all revision appears to center in Egypt, and to suppose all the other documents wrong when opposed to these Egyptian documents is unsound and unscientific . . . those who accept the Westcott and Hort text are basing their accusations of untruth as to the GoGospel listspon an Egyptian revision current 200 to 450 A.D. and abandoned between 500 to 1881, merely revived in our day and stamped as genuine.” (83)

The Revision Committee

In 1857, liberal Anglican churchmen petitioned the Government to revise the 1611 Authorized Version, but were refused permission. A general distrust of revising the sacred text was prevalent and Archbishop Trench, later a member of the Revision Committee, called the issue, “A question affecting…profoundly the whole moral and spiritual life of the English people… (with) vast and solemn issues depending on it.” Nevertheless, in 1871, the Convocation of the Southern Province was appealed to and consented to a revision.

The Revision Committee was divided from the beginning, the majority of two-thirds being those in favor of applying German methods of higher criticism to the revision process. The first chairman, Bishop Wilberforce, resigned calling the work a “miserable business,” and protested the presence on the committee of a Unitarian scholar, Dr. G. Vance Smith. Dr. Smith, who denied the divinity of Christ, had nonetheless participated in a communion service at Westminster Abbey upon the invitation of Bishop Westcott prior to the first committee meeting. (84) Dean John Burgon has recorded that committee members were bound to a pledge of silence. (85) David Otis Fuller stated in Which Bible? that the Westcott-Hort New Greek Text, which altered the Textus Receptus in 5,337 places,

“. . . was, portion by portion, secretly committed into the hands of the Revision Committee . . . The minority members of the Revision Committee, and especially the world, had no knowledge of the twenty years’ effort of these two Cambridge professors to base their own Greek Testament upon these two [Aleph and B] manuscripts.” (86)

The liberal majority was guided by F.J.A. Hort, B.F. Westcott and J.B. Lightfoot, of whom “Hort’s was the strongest will of the whole Company, and his adroit-ness in debate was only equaled by his pertinacity.” Arthur Hort confirms that on the committee, “Hort seems to have been the dominating influence…” In 1861, Dr. Hort implied the necessity of stealth to Dr. Westcott —

“Also — but this may be cowardice — I have sort of a craving our text should be cast upon the world before we deal with matters likely to brand us with suspicion. I mean a text issued by men already known for what will undoubtedly be treated as dangerous heresy, will have great difficulties in finding its way to regions which it might otherwise reach, and whence it would not be easily banished by subsequent alarms.” (87)

Subsequently pleased with the progress of the “New Testament Scheme,” Dr. Hort wrote in 1870 to a friend:

“It is quite impossible to judge the value of what appear to be trifling alterations merely by reading them one after another. Taken together, they have often important bearings which few would think of at first…The difference between a picture say of Raffaelle and a feeble copy of it is made up of a number of trivial differences…We have successfully resisted being warned off dangerous ground…It is, one can hardly doubt, the beginning of a new period in Church history. So far the angry objectors have reason for their astonishment.”(88)

In 1881, the English Revision Committee cast upon the world a New Greek Text and an English Bible which, in the words of one reviser contained “between eight and nine changes in every five verses, and in about every ten verses, three of these were made for critical purposes.” A treatise on modern translations, Another Bible, Another Gospel, includes twenty tables which compare hundreds of Scripture verses — in the English Revised Version and in modern versions based on the New Greek Text — which undermine fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith. (89) One table examines modifications in the modern versions which change the interpretation of key verses pertaining to Bible prophecy. Obscured in the ERV and modern Bible versions are the identities of the future man of sin “who sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God”, the occult Mark of the Beast which he will cause all to receive and the Harlot religious system which is situated upon seven mountains. (II Thessalonians 3:3,4; Revelation 13:16-18; Revelation 17:9,10)

The Legacy

The secular historians of the nineteenth century progressive underground — James Webb, Alan Gauld, the MacKenzies — agree that the dominant figures in the occult/socialist movements were, with few exceptions, from Evangelical homes and whose the fathers were Anglican clergymen. The onslaught of skepticism, higher criticism and mysticism had assailed the citadel of Scripture but not the lofty ideal of social transformation which inspired Evangelical activism. The authors of The Fabians explained this anomaly —

“The lesson instilled by Evangelical parents had been given a secular form. Evolution or what (Sidney) Webb called Zeitgeist, had taken the place of Providence, yet what Webb described as ‘blind social forces…which went on inexorably working out social salvation’ did not relieve men of their moral responsibility. Victorian religion had taught that a belief in God’s purposes must be accompanied by an effort to discern and advance them. Socialists who substituted a secular religion for the faith of their youth felt the same compulsion.” (90)

Of the nineteenth century cast of noteworthy characters, it may be postulated that two figures stand preeminently at the fountainhead of the converging streams of twentieth century Spiritualism and globalism. During the thirty year period in which B.F. Westcott and F.J.A. Hort were employed in the creation of a New Testament Greek Text and revision of the English Bible, they also guided organizations dealing in matters occult and conspiratorial. Their progeny includes not only the plethora of contemporary versions based upon Egyptian recensions, but also the Society for Psychical Research, which first propounded the principles of both modern Spiritualism and Psychology, and the S.P.R. derivative, the socialist Fabian Society, which founded the globalist London School of Economics and Political Science. The contribution of Westcott and Hort to modern spiritualism and global integration is indeed vast and is increasing exponentially as the modern prophets of occult Traditions receive international power to give full expression to MYSTERY BABYLON, which rides the Beast of the apocalyptic vision.

Another Bible, Another Gospel

ENDNOTES:

  1. James Webb, The Occult Underground, Open Court Publishing Company, 1974, p. 114.
  2. Ibid., p. 222.
  3. Ibid., p. 196.
  4. Ibid., p. 210.
  5. Ibid., p. 349.
  6. Ibid., p. 223.
  7. Ibid., p. 7.
  8. Ibid., p. 222.
  9. “The Apologetic Betrayal of the Gospel, Premise, Volume III, No. 6., July 30, 1996, ” Mark Devine.
  10. Ibid., “Friendship in the Salons.”
  11. “Kant, Immanuel,” Microsoft (R) Encarta. 1993 Microsoft Corporation. 1993 Funk & Wagnall’s Corporation.
  12. Mark Devine, op. cit., “Putting Doctrine in its Place.”
  13. Ibid., “Friendship and Communion at Niesky and Barby.”
  14. James Webb., p. 7.
  15. Ibid., pp. 7-8.
  16. Ibid., pp. 21-26.
  17. Ibid., p. 15.
  18. Ibid., p. 43.
  19. Alan Gauld, The Founders of Psychical Research, Schocken Books, New York: 1968, p. 77.
  20. Ibid., pp. 66-7.
  21. Arthur Hort, Life and Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort, Vol. I, Macmillan & Co., 1896, pp. 171-72; pp. 211, 219-20. Available through The Bible For Today Press.
  22. W.H. Salter, The Society For Psychical Research, An Outline of it’s History, London, 1948, pp. 5, 6.
  23. Ibid., p. 127.
  24. Alan Gauld, p. 116.
  25. James Webb, p. 105.
  26. Ibid., p. 278.
  27. Ibid., pp. 198-99.
  28. H. P. Blavatsky, Theosophical Glossary, London, 1892, p. 140
  29. H. P. Blavatsky, Isis Unveiled, Vol. II, Theosophical University Press, Pasadena, California, p. 243.

30 Alan Gauld, p. 35.

  1. Ibid., p. 44.
  2. David Otis Fuller, Which Bible?, Grand Rapids International Publications, 1975, pp.271-72.
  3. Alan Gauld, p. 49.
  4. Ibid., p. 50.
  5. Ibid., p. 51.
  6. Ibid., p. 64.
  7. Ibid., p. 48.
  8. Ibid., p. 317.
  9. Ibid., p. 49.
  10. Arthur Hort, Vol. I, p. 170-71.
  11. Ibid., p. 242; also pp. 41-2,61, 64, 67, 76, 83, 92, 98, 105-6.
  12. Ibid., p. 196; also p. 198.
  13. Ibid., Vol. II, p. 184.
  14. Ibid., pp. 184-85.
  15. “Professor Lord Acton,” Owen Chadwick, Acton Institute, http://www.acton.org/
  16. James Webb, p. 73.
  17. Ibid., p. 36.
  18. Gauld, p. 140.
  19. Ibid., pp. 140-141.
  20. W.H. Salter, p. 14.
  21. Ibid., p. 8.
  22. Ibid., pp. 21-2.
  23. Ibid., p. 34; Gauld, pp. 274, 338.
  24. Alan Gauld, pp. 90-1 ff., 143 ff.
  25. Alan Gauld, p. 174; Webb p. 38.
  26. Alan Gauld, p. 306.
  27. Ibid., pp. 305-310.
  28. W.H. Salter, p. 31;Gauld, p. 338-9.
  29. Richard Noll, The Jung Cult, Princeton University Press, 1994, pp. 31-2.
  30. Alan Gauld, p. 339.
  31. Ibid., p. 322.
  32. Society for Psychical Research, 49, Marloes Rd., Kensington, London W8 6LA.
  33. Norman and Jeanne MacKenzie, The Fabians, Simon & Schuster, 1977, p. 18.
  34. Ibid., p . 110.
  35. Ibid., pp. 183-84.
  36. Arthur Westcott, Life and Letters of Brook Foss Westcott, New York Macmillan and Co., 1896, Vol. I, p. 197. Available through The Bible For Today Press.
  37. Ibid., p. 283.
  38. Ibid., p. 290-91.
  39. London School of Economics Experts, http://www.lse.ac.uk/experts/intro/ELSE.htm
  40. Gary Kah, En Route to Global Occupation, Huntington House Publishers, Lafayette, LA, 1992, pp. 32, 61.
  41. The British Council, European Series, http://www.britcoun.org/european/euroseries/eur97thm.htm
  42. Arthur Hort, Vol. I, p. 240.
  43. Ibid., p. 250.
  44. D.A. Waite, Th.D., Ph.D., Defending the King James Bible, The Bible For Today Press, 1992, pp. 54, 57.
  45. David Cloud, Way of Life Encyclopedia, 1219 North Harns Road, Oak Harbor, WA 98277.
  46. New King James Version, Preface, “The New Testament Text,” Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1982.
  47. John William Burgon, B. D., The Revision Revised, Dean Burgon Society Press, 1883, pp. 241-42, 270.
  48. Arthur Hort, Vol. I., p. 400.
  49. Ibid., p. 422.
  50. Arthur Westcott, op. cit., Vol. I, p. 207.
  51. John William Burgon, p. 319.
  52. Ibid., pp. 11, 12, 16.
  53. David Otis Fuller, pp. 141-43.
  54. Ibid., p. 291.
  55. John William Burgon, p. 24.
  56. Fuller, pp. 293-95.
  57. Arthur Hort, Vol. I, p. 445.
  58. Arthur Hort, Vol. II, pp. 138-39.
  59. Watch Unto Prayer, http://watch-unto-prayer.org
  60. Mackenzie, pp. 115-16.

 

SOURCE: 19th Century Occult Revival by Dr. Barbara Aho

This is not my article.  I am posting it under the fair use act for educational purposes. (Section 107 of the Copyright Act) I found it to be very informative and I decided to share it with all of you.  I have posted it in its entirety, to include links and source material.  I did however correct numerous spelling & grammer errors.  FOr further information please contact the author or the source.   May God bless you and yours.

Copyright © 1989 - 2017 AIRRINGTON MINISTRIES | www.airrington.com |All Rights Reserved.

NKJV /MEV Marijauna Bible

NKJV /MEV Marijauna Bible

The NKJV/MEV too be sure the New King James Version and /or the Modern English Version (‘updated’ NKJV) is not a King James. They marketed it like that in order to SELL more bibles.

Here are my problems with this version…First, as is the photo I posted from the back of my KJB /NKJV Parallel Bible it says that the NKJV is the perfect transition bible to the modern bibles. I call it the “Marijuana bible” LOL…although, I think we know more today and Marijuana is not necessarily a transition drug to all. It is true that like the KJB the NKJV uses the Textus Receptus (5309 manuscripts from Antioch)…however, it also uses the Critical Text (44 corrupt texts out of Alexandria). The KJ translators had the CT available to them but they discarded them.

Now here are some real PROBLEMS I have with the NKJV.

The NKJV IGNORES the Receptus over 1,200 times.

 

 

 

 

The NKJV

22 omissions of “hell”,
23 omissions of “blood”,

44 omissions of “repent”,
50 omissions of “heaven”,
51 omissions of “God”,
66 omissions of “Lord”.

NKJV omits the word “new testament” entirely
NKJV omits the word “damnation” entirely
NKJV omits the word “devils” entirely

NKJV omits the word “JEHOVAH” 100% of the time!

The NKJV makes a very serious doctrinal error when dealing with the word “JEHOVAH” in Exodus 6:3. They change the word “JEHOVAH” to “LORD” thus making the Bible contradict itself. Even the corrupt “New World Translation” (Jehovah’s Witnesses Bible) has a better rendering of this passage.  LOL and they use the same manuscripts.

So what does Exodus 6:3 say? Please read carefully – “And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them.” (KJV)

Now please note what the NKJV says – “I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as God Almighty, but by My name, LORD, I was not known to them.” (NKJV)

If you will take a concordance and go back to Genesis 1 and go through to Exodus 6:3 you will notice that the word “LORD” is mentioned 242 times.

Did anyone before Exodus know God by the name of “LORD” before Exodus 6:3. The answer is a resounding, YES! Don’t just sit there, look it up for yourself.

So to eliminate the word “JEHOVAH” is not only poor scholarship but also perverts and damages the text making it contradictory. It is a key passage that shows God as He reveals Himself BY ANOTHER NAME to mankind. Someone on the translation committee evidently does not like the name, “JEHOVAH.”

DOCTRINAL PROBLEMS

DEALING WITH SALVATION

The NKJV confuses people about salvation. In Hebrews 10:14 it replaces “are sanctified” with “ARE BEING SANCTIFIED“, and it replaces “are saved” with “ARE BEING SAVED.

In I Corinthians 1:18 and II Corinthians 2:15. The words “may believe” have been replaced with “MAY CONTINUE TO BELIEVE” in I John 5:13.

The old straight and “narrow” way of Matthew 7:14 has become the “DIFFICULT” way in the NKJV.

In II Corinthians 10:5 the KJV reads “casting down imaginations”, but the NKJV reads “CASTING DOWN ARGUMENTS“. The word “thought”, which occurs later in the verse, matches “imaginations”, not “arguments”. This change weakens the verse.

The KJV tells us to reject a “heretick” after the second admonition in Titus 3:10. The NKJV tells us to reject a “ DIVISIVE MAN“. How nice! Now the Alexandrians and Ecumenicals have justification for rejecting anyone they wish to label as “divisive men”.

According to the NKJV, no one would stoop so low as to “corrupt” God’s word. No, they just “PEDDLE” it (II Cor. 2:17). The reading matches the Alexandrian versions.

The KJV correctly says, “For we are not as many, which corrupt the Word of God …. “But the NKJV, NASV, NIV and RSV, change “corrupt” to “peddling.” Is there any great difference between peddling (selling, or making a gain of) the Word of God and corrupting (adulterating) it?

The NKJV gives us no command to “study” God’s word in II Timothy 2:15.

2 TIMOTHY 2:15

KJV reads, “Study to shew thyself approved unto God.” NKJV and NASV change “study” to “be diligent.” NIV and RSV change “study” to “DO YOUR BEST.”

 

MATTHEW 7:14

KJV – “Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life…”

NKJV – “Because narrow is the gate and DIFFICULT is the way which leads to life,”

Is the way unto eternal life difficult? No, that is false teaching. The way unto eternal life is “strait,” as the KJV says, meaning “constricted, restricted, distressed, narrow, restrained.”

 

MATTHEW 20:20

KJV – “Then came to him the mother of Zebedee’s children with her sons, worshipping him…”

NKJV – “Then the mother of Zebedee’s sons came to Him with her sons, KNEELING DOWN…”

This is a wicked change. To kneel is obviously not the same as worship. “Worship” was in Tyndale’s translation of 1526. It was in the Matthew’s Bible of 1537. It was the Geneva of 1537. It was in the Authorized Version of 1611. Even the English Revised version of 1881 and the American Standard Version of 1901 retained the word “worship.” It was the modernistic Revised Standard Version of 1952 which changed to “kneeling.” Now the NKJV editors follow this same wicked error.

 

HEBREWS 3:16

KJV – “For some, when they had heard did provoke: howbeit not all that came out of Egypt by Moses.”

NKJV – “For who having heard rebelled? Indeed, WAS IT NOT ALL who came out of Egypt led by Moses?”

Was it ALL or not all of them?  The NKJV make this verse to say something directly contrary to the KJV and to the Old Testament. The Bible plainly says that not all of the Israelites rebelled against God, but the NKJV creates a contradiction.

The NKJV also lines up with the (NWT) Jehovah’s Witness Perversion in dealing with the above.

DANIEL 3:25 The fourth person who was in the fiery furnace with Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, was identified as “the Son of God.” The same identification is given in the text of the NKJV but a footnote reads “or, a son of the gods,” and both NIV and NASV actually have the latter reading in their texts.  I hate footnotes…it leaves DOUBT as to what God really said!

The NKJV is supposedly easier to read and understand but its impurities actually make it doubly deceptive and dangerous.  The New King James Version / Modern English Version is a counterfeit my friend.

EASIER?  HARDER!

And by changing thee’s and thou’s they actually change the meaning of the text.  Jesus said, “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God” (Matt. 4:4). He also said, “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away” (Matt. 24:35). Since Christ is concerned about every word, we should also be concerned about every word!

Let me help…and you will never be confused by thee and thou again.  ?  If it starts with T it is singular.  If it starts with Y it is plural…see EASY!

Archaic words?  Yes!  But the NKJV has them too as does every bible.   Many of the words are EASIER in the KJB than the NKJV.

Please decide what God is saying to Moses:

“And the LORD said to Moses, “How long do you refuse to keep My commandments and My laws?” (Exodus 16:28, NKJV)

It looks like God is saying, “Moses, you are continuing to refuse to keep My commandments and My laws.” But look carefully at the accurate King James:

“And the LORD said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws?”

Now we understand! It was the people, not Moses, that God was upset with. “Ye” and “you” mean more than one person. “Thee,” “thou,” “thy,” “thine,” “doeth,” “hast,” etc., only mean one person. How do we know? The “y” is plural. The “t” is singular. Isn’t that easy? Now you know what Jesus meant when He said to Nicodemus, “Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again” (John 3:7).

What Jesus said was, “Nicodemus, marvel not that I said unto thee, all of you need to be born again.” This is very important. Not only Nicodemus needed to be saved. But everybody, including him, needed to be born again. That’s why Jesus used the plural.

 

NKJV Demotes Jesus Christ
NKJV KJV
Luke 13:8 Sir Lord
Matthew 18:26 before him saying, Master and worshipped him saying, Lord
Matthew 20:20 kneeling down worshipping him
Matthew 26:64 right hand of the Power right hand of power
Genesis 22:8 God will provide for himself the lamb God will provide himself a lamb
John 8:35 a son the Son
Colossians 2:2 the mystery of God, both of the Father and of Christ the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ (Trinity)
Matthew 8:19 et al. Teacher Master
Matthew 19:16 Good Teacher Good Master
Matthew 22:16 Teacher Master
Matthew 23:8 One is your Teacher, the Christ one is your Master, even Christ
Matthew 23:10 And do not be called teachers, for One is your Teacher, the Christ Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ

 

NKJV Copies Jehovah Witness Version
NKJV KJV
Demotes Jesus Christ
Acts 3:13 His Servant Jesus his Son Jesus
Acts 3:26 His Servant Jesus his Son Jesus
Acts 4:27 holy Servant Jesus holy child Jesus
Acts 4:30 holy Servant Jesus holy child Jesus
Colossians 1:15 the firstborn over all creation the firstborn of every creature
Mark 2:15 OMITTED Jesus
Hebrews 4:8 Joshua Jesus
Acts 7:45 Joshua Jesus
2 Thessalonians 3:5 patience of Christ patient waiting for Christ
Demotes Trinity
Acts 17:29 Divine Nature Godhead
Philippians 4:20 our God and Father God and our Father
Revelation 1:6 his God and Father God and his Father
Colossians 3:17 God the Father through Him God and the Father by him
John 14:16 Helper Comforter
John 14:26 Helper Comforter
John 15:26 Helper Comforter
John 16:7 Helper Comforter
Works/Progressive Salvation
1 Corinthians 11:1 Imitate Christ followers…of Christ
Romans 3:3 faithfulness faith
Romans 11:30 disobedient not believed
Romans 11:32 disobedient unbelief
1 Corinthians 1:18 are being saved are saved
2 Corinthians 2:15 are being saved are saved
Ephesians 2:8 have been saved are…saved

 

NKJV Supports New Age Ideas
NKJV KJV
Works Salvation
Matthew 7:14 difficult is the way narrow is the way
Galatians 5:22 faithfulness faith
1 John 5:13 may continue to believe may believe
Ecclesiastes 5:20 God keeps him busy God answereth him
Progressive Ages
Matthew 12:32 age to come world to come
Matthew 13:39 et al. end of the age end of the world
Acts 15:18 from eternity from the beginning of the world
1 Corinthians 15:45 Adam became a living being Adam was made a living soul
Pantheism, Androgyny, Gender Equity
Luke 7:19, 20 the Coming One he that should come
Matthew 11:3 the Coming One he that should come
John 7:18 et al. the One he, his
John 4:24 God is spirit God is a spirit
2 Corinthians 2:10 presence person
Genesis 2:18 helper comparable to him help meet for him
Self-Esteem (“The devil made me do it.”)
Philippians 3:21 lowly bodies vile bodies
1 John 5:19 whole world lies under the sway of the wicked one whole world lieth in wickedness
Luke 11:4 deliver us from the evil one deliver us from evil
Matthew 5:37 the evil one of evil
2 Corinthians 1:12 boast rejoicing
Religious Tolerance – One World Religion
Acts 24:14 sect heresy
Acts 17:22 very religious too superstitious
Psalms 19:1 nations heathen
Acts 8:9 astonished bewitched
Acts 25:19 religion superstition
2 Corinthians 10:5 casting down arguments casting down imaginations
Titus 3:10 Reject a divisive man an heretic…reject
Relative/Subjective Standards
Matthew 5:32 et al. sexual immorality fornication
1 Corinthians 6:9 homosexual (catamites only) effeminate
omit all perverted persons sodomite
2 Timothy 3:17 complete perfect
New Age Name Game/Jargon
Matthew 23:10 et al. the Christ Christ
Psalms 109:6 omit Satan
Romans 6:24 et al. slave servant
omit 22x hades hell
omit 81x demon(s) devil(s)
Mark of the Beast
Revelation 13:16 et al. a mark on their hand a mark in their hand
1 Samuel 13:21 the charge…was a pim (positive identification microchip) they had a file…for the coulters

 

NKJV Uses Harder Words than KJV
NKJV Hard Word KJV Easy Word
2 Corinthians 3:12 we use great boldness of speech we use great plainness of speech
Amos 5:21 savor smell
2 Corinthians 5:2 habitation house
Ecclesiastes 2:3 gratify give
Isaiah 28:1, 4 verdant fat
Isaiah 34:6 overflowing fat
Isaiah 13:12 mortal man
Deuteronomy 28:50 elderly old
Judges 19:29 limb bones
Job 2:10 adversity evil
1 Samuel 16:14 distressing evil
Jeremiah 19:3 catastrophe evil
2 Kings 22:16 calamity evil
Ecclesiastes 12:1 difficult evil
Ecclesiastes 8:5 harmful evil
Ezekiel 5:16 terrible evil

HARD WORDS FOUND IN THE NKJV

Abase, abashed, abode, adhere, admonish, adversity, aground, algum, alienate, alighting, allays, allotment, alloy, aloof, alms, amend, amiss, annihilated, anise, antitype, arbitrate, apprehended, archives, armlets, ascertain, asps, attire, austere, backbite, banishment, baths [not to get clean,] bdellium, befalls, beggarly, begetting, behemoth, belial, beseech, betrothal, beveled, birthstools, bittern, bleat, booty, borne, breach, brandished, bray, bristling, buffet, buckler, bulrush, burnished, butress, calamus, caldron, capital, carcasses, carnally, carrion, cassia, caulkers, centurion, chalcedony, chalkstones, chaste, chasten, chrysolite, chrysoprase, circumspect, cistern, citadel, citron, clamor, cleft, cloven, commission, commonwealth [not shared money,] compound, concede, compulsory, conciliation, concubine, congealed, contemptuously, confederacy, contingents, corban, coriander, countenance, couriers  covert, crags, crescents, crest, cropped, cubit, custodian [not the one who cleans the school halls,] curds, dainties, dandled, daubed, dappled, dayspring, denarii, deposed, deride, despoiled, diadem, diffuses, dilapidation, dispensation, disrepute, dissipation, diviner, docile, dragnet,  dregs, drachmas, dropsy, dross, dryshod, eczema, edict, edification, elaborate, embellish, emitted, enigma, enmity, entrails, envoy, eventide, epistle, ephod, exorcise, expiration, faction, fallow, famish, fare, fatlings, feigned festal, fetched, fidelity, figurehead, filly, flanges, foreskin, fostered, fowlers, fuller furlongs, gad, garland, garrison, gaunt, gecko, graven, Hellenists, hew, homers, hoopoe, immutability, indignant, insolence, insubordination, intervene, itinerant, jackdaw, jeopardy, jubilation, kors, laden, lamentations, laud, lusty, mail [not a letter,] mammon, matrix [other than the movie,] mattock, mercenaries, mina [not a type of bird,] mite [not a bed bug,] moorings, nativity, offal, offscouring, omnipotent, oracle, pangs, papyrus [not a fruit,] paramours, parapet, penitents, perdition, phylacteries, pilfering, pillage, pims, pins [not like needles or bowling- has to do with a chariot,] pinions [not a type of nut,] plaited [not dishes,] platitudes, potentate, potsherd, poultice, Praetorium, prattler, principality, prodigal, proconsul, prognosticators, propitiation, pslatery, prow, pulverize, pyre, quadrans, quiver, rampart  ravenous, ravished, raze [not to lift up,] reconciliation, recount, rend, renown, reprisal, retinue, rifled [does not have to do with guns,] rivulets, rogue, salute [ does not have to do with the army,] satiate, satraps, scruples, sepulcher, shamefaced, shards, Sheol, shod, shuttle [not a type of bus or spaceship,] siegeworks, sistrums [not an affectionate term for your sisters,] skiff, soothsayer, spelt straits, superfluous, supplanted, tamarisk, tares, tarries, temperate, terebinth, terrestrial, tetrarch, throng, timbrel, tittle, tresses, usury, vagabond, vassal, vehement, vermilion, verdure, verity, vestments, waifs, wane, wanton, warp, wend, wield, winebibber, woof, wrought.

 

None of the translators of the NKJV  believed that either text was the Divinely preserved Word of God.

 

THE NKJV / MEV IS A DANGEROUS, COUNTERFEIT! 

Copyright © 1989 - 2017 AIRRINGTON MINISTRIES | www.airrington.com |All Rights Reserved.

When Did God Create the Angels?

When Did God Create the Angels?

My purpose for writing this is not to simply present another theory.  I will say this many times throughout this article; Satan’s purpose is to get us to doubt God’s Word (Genesis 3:1).  My purpose for writing this is to CHANGE YOUR MIND.  I don’t want you to doubt God’s Word.

For years I have made it a project of mine to study; creation, evolution, and dinosaurs.  The subject is fascinating and the subject of creation is the very foundations of our faith.  The enemy keeps pounding away at our foundation and we say, “It’s okay, he didn’t the church.”  Soon, the church starts to become wobbly…until it crashes.  I have read everything and watched everything I can get my hands on.  I have written articles and books on the subject.  I believe that Genesis 1 is literally true, as is the rest of the Bible, the King James Bible.

I believe that God created everything in six 24-literal days.  The King James Bible is VERY CLEAR on this.  There can absolutely be no mistake about this.  Whether you believe what it says is the only question.  Let me show you:

GENESIS CHAPTER ONE

1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.

10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.

11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.

12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.

14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.

16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,

18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.

19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.

21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.

23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.

24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.

25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

In Genesis Chapter one we see the phrase, “And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.” There can be no mistake.  “The evening and the morning”…this can be no other but a 24 hour day  Now, I understand the word day can mean different things.  For example:

“Back in my father’s day, he traveled during the day for a day.  There are three different uses of the same word, “day”, however, just as in the First Chapter of Genesis, we know the meaning by context.  What about the Hebrew?  Again, the Hebrew word for the word day is “yom”, can mean more than one thing.

It can refer to the 24-hour period of time that it takes for the earth to rotate on its axis (e.g., “there are 24 hours in a day”). It can refer to the period of daylight between dawn and dusk (e.g., “it gets pretty hot during the day but it cools down a bit at night”). And it can refer to an unspecified period of time (e.g., “back in my father’s day . . .”). It is used to refer to a 24-hour period in Genesis 7:11. It is used to refer to the period of daylight between dawn and dusk in Genesis 1:16. And it is used to refer to an unspecified period of time in Genesis 2:4.  So, what does yom mean in Genesis 1:5–2:2 when used in conjunction with ordinal numbers (i.e., the first day, the second day, the third day, the fourth day, the fifth day, the sixth day, and the seventh day)? Are these 24-hour periods or something else?  Could yom as it is used here mean an unspecified period of time?

Jesus and the apostles quoted from Genesis, arguably more than any other book of the Bible.  I believe that the evidence clearly shows that dinosaurs did not live millions of years ago, but they have lived on this earth for only about 6,000.  I believe that dinosaurs have always lived with man.  I believe that evolution is not even a theory, it is a fairytale. I believe that to deny the creation in Genesis 1 is to question the very credibility of Jesus and the Apostles.

Some will read this article and disagree with me on the time when God created the angels.  Of course, some of you may disagree with me on everything. J   You and I can disagree, as long as you and I agree with what God’s Word says.  I know many Christians that will simply hold that angels were created the first week or “early” first week”.  However, I believe that scripture can be more precise and show us an exact day during the creation week when God created the angels.  To be honest, as long as you are at least putting angels the first week and even after reading this article…and reading the Scriptures that I will share you still disagree…then I am ok.  And you should be too.  We have bigger fish to fry…souls that are lost…we do not need two mature Christians arguing about a day or two.

However, if you are from the camp that claims that God created angels before the first week, then we have a problem.  I dare say that if you are in this camp that you are stepping into heretical territory. Come back on this side of the line, the truth is over here.  In fact, since I am making bold statements, I will make one more.  If your position is that God made the angels before Genesis 1:1 then you sir/madam are in fact calling my God a liar!

If the hair just stood up on the back of your neck, GOOD, then I have your attention.  “I would never call God a liar!” you bark back at me.  Of course, you would not.  But I believe that inadvertently that is what some of you may be doing.  What I am about to teach you may contradict what you may have already learned and believed the truth to be.  A few assumptions if I may.  Both of us cannot be right.  One of us has to be wrong.  Both of us could be wrong.  So what do you do if what I am about to teach contradicts what you may have already learned?  First, keep in mind that this is not what I would refer to as a “Salvation Issue”.  The virgin birth, the resurrection, the deity of Christ and the creation account in Genesis all are examples of what I would call, “Salvation Issues”.

If you are questioning if God created angels in the first place or if God created them sometime other than the creation week in Genesis 1, then we need to have a different discussion.  As far as this discussion is concerned, and this may be dangerous but I will assume that you will agree that angels were created and that they were created during the first week.  The only thing left to settle is on what day during the first week was the angels settled?   Let’s look at the creation account in Genesis 1 to see if we can find the answer?

Verses 1-5 — FIRST DAY

1In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

2And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. {this will become important later}

3And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

4And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

5And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day”.

“In the beginning…”  We have what we call a definite article here.  Meaning there was a beginning.  This is important.  The other thing I want to point out is who did the creating.  Genesis 1 says, God.   Now, we know and understand from further study of Scripture that God is actually three persons in one: God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.  The Son submits to the Father and the Holy Spirit submits to the Son.  John 1:1-3, Colossians 1:16, etc. all proclaim Jesus Christ as the Creator, not the Father and not the Holy Spirit.  This is important…Jesus is not a created being…He is the Creator.

On day one of the creation Verses 1-5 we see the Creator, Jesus Christ, creating heaven (not heavens as incorrectly translated in some versions, see my article on the three heavens) and earth.  The heaven, in this case, refers to outer space, everything beyond earth.  It also says that the Spirit of God moved upon the waters.  Then the Creator created light and darkness.   We see no evidence of angels being created on day one as recorded in the first five verses alone.  But pay close attention…

Verses 6-8 — SECOND DAY

6And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

7And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

 8And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.”

God creates the sky.  The sky forms a barrier between water upon the surface and the moisture in the air.  At this point, earth would have an atmosphere.  Some talk about a layer of ice or water called a canopy around the earth that shields the earth from UV light.  This canopy came down at the time of the flight.    Read carefully, were there angels created on the second day?

Verses 9-13 — THIRD DAY

9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.

10And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.

11And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.

12And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

13And the evening and the morning were the third day.

God creates dry land. Continents and islands are above the water. The large bodies of water are named “seas” and the ground is named “land.”  The Creator creates dry land, the seas, and vegetation. God declares that all this is good.  We do not see any direct clear evidence of the creation of angels on day three of the creation week…pay close careful attention,  I am about to trick…play VERY close attention.

Verses 14-19 — FOURTH DAY

“ 14And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

15And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.

16And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

17And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,

18And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.

19And the evening and the morning were the fourth day. “

On the fourth day, God made the sun, the moon, the stars and the planets.  Complete with an established orbit so as to mark the passage of time (months, seasons, and years).

Verses 20-23 — FIFTH DAY

20”And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.

21And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

22And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.

23And the evening and the morning were the fifth day”.

On the fifth day, the Creator created the living creatures of the water and of the air (The birds and the fish).

Verses 24-31 — SIXTH DAY

24”And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.

25And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

26And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

27So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

28And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

29And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

30And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

31And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day”.

On the sixth day of creation, land animals, dinosaurs and man were created. At this time there was no death on the Earth, and God proclaimed it was good.  Up to this point at least in the Genesis account, we do not see, angels being created.  If it were that simple there would be no need for me to write this document.  When we look at God’s Word as a whole it becomes very clear that angels were created on day two of the creation week.  It was not a complete waste of time spelling out Genesis chapter one…it helped us to sort out exactly what was created on each day.  This will be important later on in this article and many of you had no idea as to the order.  And just because the order can get lost in a bunch of words I am going to outline it for us here:

The First Day The heaven, the earth, light and darkness.
The Second Day The atmosphere, (a canopy of water or ice)
The Third Day The land and plants
The Fourth Day The sun, the moon and the planets
The Fifth Day The birds and the fish.
The Six Day The Land animals, dinosaurs and man,

Remember that the issue of this discussion is not if He created them but when He created the angels.  If Satan can get you to doubt what God says then he has you!  The truth is God created angels and the truth is He created them early first week or creation and the truth is He created them on the second day.

Alright, we need to jump over to second Peter chapter three.  It is important for us to understand that Satan has been twisting the Word of God since the Garden of Eden.  Genesis 3:1 Satan says to Eve, Yea hath God said.  Right off the bat, we see Satan twisting God’s Word.  He is a professional; he knows every trick because he has been at this game for the last 6,000 years.  And if Satan can get us to doubt God’s Word then his job is finished.  Some have asserted, and to be honest, I have heard this argument before, that 2 Peter 3 shows that we are standing on the second earth. Their theory claims that the Millennium is actually the third coming.  Say what?  We used to say in Junior High, “brotha please!”   Ok, before we get too far ahead of ourselves and all the bad 80’s terminology starts coming out… let’s open our Bibles to 2nd Peter chapter 3 and get into the meat of this thing.

Verse 2 — “That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Savior:”

Verse 3 — “Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,”

Verse 4 — “And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? {Doubting God’s Word} for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation{there God goes ago again, claiming there was a beginning}.

Verse5 — “For this they willingly are ignorant {In the Greek this means dumb on purpose :)} of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:”

Verse 6 — “Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:” (ahhh, interesting!  Here we have a clue.  Write this down.)

Verse 7 — But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.”

Verse 10 — “But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which, the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.” {sound like the big bang?}

The BIG BANG is going to happen…it just has not happened yet. 

Verse 13 — “Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.”

John 3:16, “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever believeth on Him shall not perish but have everlasting life.

Why would God send His son to die for a world that has already been destroyed?  In other words, is it enough for Jesus to die for one world or does He need to die for multiple earths?  I am not asking you to make a stretch or leap of faith here.  However, I am asking you to THINK!  Put to work that 4-pound organ between your ears that God designed.  2 Peter 3 is clearly speaking about future events; events that can be lined up with the book of Revelation. “But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night”2 Peter 3:10.

Paul also makes mention of this in 1 Thessalonians 5:2, For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.”  When is the day of the Lord?  When will He come as a thief in the night?   At the second coming…a future event that has been prophesied in the Old Testament and the New Testament.  The second coming of Christ is an event that we as Christians long for.  This event is referred to as the RAPTURE 2 Peter 3:9 —The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.  If 2 Peter 3 was talking about the past, why would God be concerned that none would perish and that all would come to repentance?  2 Peter is referring to the future and is supported by Revelation 21:1, And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.

Unknowingly, some Christians that teach that there was an earth before this one are teaching part of the Gap Theory.  Now, when you mention that they say, “no way”…look at the Gap Theory and you will see.  Basically, the Gap Theory claims there are millions of years between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2.

We are still standing on the first earth.  Revelation 21:1 says, “And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.”  Is there still a sea?  Yes.  This is an event that is yet to happen.  John Hagee preaches a sermon that states the first earth was destroyed when Satan fell.  This is not scriptural.  It preaches real good and he has nice graphics and all, but he is dead wrong! John Hagee is a heretic.

So when did Satan fall?  The answer can be found in Ezekiel 28:12-15,

Verse 12Son of man, take up a lamentation upon the king of Tyrus, and say unto him, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Thou sealest up the sum, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty. {Satan was smart and beautiful}

Verse 13 — Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold: the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created.

Verse 14 — “Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire.

Verse 15 — “Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.

We can learn a lot from this scripture:

  • Satan was in Eden
  • Satan was Created
  • He was perfect until sin was found in him
  • He was in Eden until he sinned

Genesis 1:31, “And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.”

After the sixth day God had a look around at everything He had created.  He said, “yep, everything is very good.”

Satan could not have fallen before the sixth day.  God would not have said everything was, “very good” if Satan was running around being a bad guy.  He was probably a nice guy in Eden for a long time.  Another argument, but from my studies, this was probably about 100 years.  Can you imagine God saying everything was very good and the lion ripping guts out of the zebra or Satan running around doing what he does today or any of the terrible things we see today?  I think not.

The scriptures tell us that angels were created.  Psalm 148:2-5, etc.  This would include Satan.  In order to understand when angels were created, it is important to understand why angels were created.  Now, I understand we read about angels worshipping and praising God, but was that why they were created? (Revelation 5:11-14) According to Scripture angels were NOT created to worship and praise God, I understand that is something angels do…but that is not why they were created.  Yes, I did repeat myself.  Not because I have a speech impediment, but because for some reason people will come back to this point over and over again.   We need to be clear, angels do things…they sing they fly, they are messengers, etc., but these are not WHY they were created.

Hebrews 1:14, “Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?”

Hebrews 1:14 clearly says that angels are ministering spirits created to minister to manGenesis 28:12, Psalm 104:4, Matthew 4:11, Mark 1:13, Hebrews 1:7 could all be used to show that angels were created to minister to man.  Question?  If God created angels to minister to man, and He did (see Scripture); why would He need to create them millions of years before man got here?  I asked this question to a Pastor who was speaking on the topic of creation.  Of course I was fascinated by every word he spoke.  I loved his animation and the detail of his presentation.  When I question him about his theory that angels were created before Genesis 1:1 using the fact that angels were created to minister to man he responded this way:

“Did God create plants on the 3rd day and plants were for man to eat and God created plants before man needed them?”  God created everything before man I said.  And we are talking 3 days not millions of years.  If that is what he believes he is welcome to, but I believe the scriptures show otherwise.  I then went into my explanation of why angels were created on day two, what you are reading here.  His senior Pastor was standing within earshot of our conversation.  He walked over and said, “I have to go with Airrington on this.”  It’s not hard when you are right.  Hold on, I am not being arrogant…I have been wrong plenty of times.  Let’s continue…before I get myself into trouble…

Looking now back to Genesis 1:1 and then we will wrap this up with the final blow to the theory that angels were created before Genesis 1:1.  “Genesis 1:1 says, “In the beginning God created the heaven {no s, another argument for another day} and the earth.”  I would like to point out your Honor that God through Moses said that there was a beginning.  It is true that according to Psalm 90:4, the same man that wrote Genesis 1:1, said that God was outside of time and then Peter quoted Moses in 2 Peter 3:8.  So, once upon a time, there was no time.  I would also like to point out your Honor that the Bible was written for man’s benefit not for God’s benefit.  If God said there was a BEGINNING and Moses believed Him and wrote it down…then I believe Him too.  Why would God tell us that there was a beginning if this was really not the beginning?  Remember Genesis 3:1, “Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?”  Satan has been trying to confuse us and make us doubt God’s Word for the last 6,000 years.  If God says, “In the beginning…” we have no reason to doubt God except Satan trying and make us doubt what God said.  You know there is another name for this theory it is called the pre-adamite period.  Look that one up.

Job 38:4&7 tells us that the angels including Satan shouted for joy when God laid the foundations of the earth.  Genesis 1:2, “And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.”  In Genesis 1:2 The earth was empty and nothing was here.  The earth was a ball of water.  The foundations were laid on the second day.  Genesis 1:3, “And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.”  On the third day, the foundations of the earth were formed.   Kevin, how can you be sure of this?

Psalm 104:1-5, “Bless the LORD, O my soul. O LORD my God, thou art very great; thou art clothed with honour and majesty.

Who coverest thyself with light as with a garment: who stretchest out the heavens like a curtain:

Who layeth the beams of his chambers in the waters: who maketh the clouds his chariot: who walketh upon the wings of the wind:

Who maketh his angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire:

Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever.”

There are three significant things that I would like to point out from Psalm 104:1-5 (in the first two verses the psalmist is praising God):

  1. God creates the waters
  2. God makes the angels
  3. God laid the foundations of the earth

Notice the order of things in Psalm 104Job 38 says that the angels (including Satan) witnessed the laying of the foundations of the earth.  Genesis, Job, Psalm all point to angels being made prior to the laying of the foundations of the earth.  Psalm gives us the order of events and amplifies Genesis, the first 3 days of creation and again it says that angels were created as ministers.

Summary – Statements of Fact

  • God’s Spirit moves across the face of the water(Genesis 1:2)
    • “Who Layeth the beams of his chambers in the waters” (Psalm 104:3)
    • Angels were Created (Hebrews 1:14, Psalm 104:4)
    • Angels were Created to minister to man  (Hebrews 1:14, Psalm 104:4)
    • Angels witnessed the laying of the foundation of the earth(Job 38:7, Angels shouted for joy when the foundations of the earth were laid)
      • “Who laid the foundations of the earth…?” (Psalm 104:5)
      • Genesis, Job & Psalm all point to Angels being made prior to the laying of the foundations of the earth.
      • Exodus 20:11 God tells us that He created EVERYTHING in six days.

If this is not enough, I wonder what God Himself said?  For that, I will take you to the 20th chapter of Exodus where the 10 commandments are recorded.  Exodus 20:1, “And God spake all these words, saying,” Okay boys and girls…what you are about to hear next GOD SAID!  That’s right!  All 1189 chapters of the King James Bible were inspired only this one chapter was actually written by the finger of God (Exodus 20).  Exodus 20:11, “For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day and hallowed it.”  God said that He created the heaven, the earth and the sea and ALL THAT IN THEM IS…in six days.  Including…angels.  The question you should not be asking is, “Did He say it?”  The question is do you believe He said it? By my count, God asked Job 84 rhetorical questions.  One of those questions can be found in Job 38:4:

“Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth?”

None of us were there when God laid the foundations of the earth.  Moses was not there when God laid the foundations of the earth (Day 3), but Moses believed God.  All we have is God’s Word and if we cannot take God’s Word when angels were created then we can’t take His Word when it comes to anything else.

At this point there should be little doubt in your mind that God created angels early in the week; probably the second day according to Job 38 and Psalm 104.  If we begin to doubt what God said, this is exactly what Satan wants us to do (Genesis 3:1).  If we doubt God’s Word on something as simple as when the angels were created…then what else will we doubt?

Copyright © 2010-2017 Reverend Kevin R. Airrington All rights reserved. www.airrington.com

Copyright © 1989 - 2017 AIRRINGTON MINISTRIES | www.airrington.com |All Rights Reserved.

Copyright © 2017 airrington.com. All Rights Reserved.  WordPress Plugin

Website is Protected By Using The WP Site Protector Plugin From : ExattoSoft.com