Battle of the Bibles - Present Truth

elected. Furthermore, it would be preferable to have the "Protestants" do the job
themselves. In the end, both were elected, along with Moulton's colleagues, Drs
Lightfoot and Ellicott - all committed ritualists and critical revisers.
One fly in the ointment was Bishop Wilberforce who, as we have seen, had been
persuaded to support revision on the understanding that as little alteration as possible be
made to the Authorised Bible. It was his assent that had led to the consent of the
Southern Convocation, so it was virtually mandatory that he be elected as Chairman.
The Old Testament Committee, which also elected others, built up their numbers
to twenty-seven. But, for the purpose of this book, our attention will settle on the affairs
of the New Testament revisers and the politics employed by Westcott and Hort to ensure
the success of their scheme to destroy the Protestant Bible.
Prior to getting down to business, Westcott indicated his traitorous intentions to
disregard the Terms of Reference as laid down by the Convocation. He wrote:
"The rules though liberal are vague, and the interpretation of them will depend
upon decided action at first" (Hemphill, "History of the Revised Version", p 44).
Westcott would have no doubt about Hort's willingness to participate in such
dishonest conniving. As far back as 1851, even before they had commenced their Greek
New Testament, Hort had expressed his hatred of the Received Text:
"Think of that vile Textus Receptus" ("Life of Hort", Vol. I p 211).
It is quite evident that Ellicott, the Bishop of Gloucester, was a kindred character,
for Westcott was able to reassure Hort:
"The Bishop of Gloucester seems to be quite capable of accepting heartily, and
adopting personally a thorough scheme" ("Life of Westcott", Vol. I p 393).
And, as to the purpose of the "scheme", Westcott had left no doubt, when he
wrote to his friend, Benson, on November 7, 1870:
"In a few minutes, I go with Lightfoot to Westminster. More will come of these
meetings, I think, than simply a Revised Version" (ibid p 367). 14
(14 Let this miserable confession be noted by those who persist in claiming that
the Revised Version is a genuine revision of the King James Bible. The very name of
this version is as dishonest as the schemers themselves.)
It did not take long for the conspirators to put their "scheme" into action. At the
very first meeting, Chairman Wilberforce was made to see just what the majority of
committee members were about. He gave vent to his despair in a letter to a colleague:
"What can be done in this miserable business?" (Hemphill, "History", p 36).
No wonder! There on the revision team was a non-Christian, the well known
Unitarian, Dr G. Vance Smith. Westcott had recently enraged English Christians by
encouraging this unbeliever in the divinity of Christ to participate in a communion service
at Westminster Abbey!
Wilberforce found the situation so upsetting that he effectively resigned by
refraining from attending any future meetings. (He died a very disillusioned man some
three years later). The schemers were delighted. They promptly installed Ellicott as
Chairman. 15 The "scheme" was now assured of success!
(15 The practice of resigning as a form of objection is fatally flawed. All too often
error has been allowed to prosper simply because good men vacate the floor to make
way for the bad.)
3