Battle of the Bibles - Present Truth

the Bible and the Bible only. Inexplicably, as it must have seemed to those who knew
Maxwell, he promoted all versions of the Bible as of equal value. Referring to the
multiplicity of versions available to his readers, he said:
"Perhaps you too are wondering whether the book you hold in your hand is really
the Bible. You need not worry. No matter what version it may be, it is still the Word of
God" (p 43).
Such a sweeping statement is all the more puzzling when it is realised that only a
few years earlier (1946), another of the Adventist presses was still reprinting one of
Wilkinson's books, "Truth Triumphant". In this classic history of Christianity, Wilkinson
showed that the churches which upheld the apostolic faith throughout the Dark Ages had
two things in common. They all had the Traditional or Received Text and they all
observed the Biblical seventh-day Sabbath. He convincingly demonstrated that
historically there were two lines of Bibles, which have persisted down to this day. One
was guarded and handed on to Protestants by the churches in the wilderness, and the
other of which Rome was the author and custodian.
This historical fact was completely ignored by Maxwell. He briefly traced the
origins of the Bible as emanating from the Codex Vaticanus, the Codex Sinaiticus and
the Codex Alexandrinus which, incredibly, he portrayed as the "original text" (p 35). In
such a statement we have an example of an "official" trend which is in utter defiance of
Adventism's respected author and commentator Ellen G White, who, on behalf of the
denomination, specifically denies that Rome has been the custodian of truth:
"'The church in the wilderness', and not the proud hierarchy enthroned in the
world's great capital, was the true church of Christ, the guardian of the treasures of truth
which God had committed to His people to be given to the world" ("Great Controversy", p
64).
Maxwell continued his platitudes:
"You need to entertain no doubt concerning the essential accuracy of the original
text" meaning the aforementioned codices (p 35).
In answer to the question, "Which version is best?" Maxwell was able to lump
both Roman and Protestant Bibles together, and impute to them equal authority:
"For through this book, in all its multiplicity of versions and translations, God has
chosen to speak to human hearts in all the world" (p 44).
While this is true, it is equally true that in many modern versions Satan also has
spoken. Mixing a little deadly error with truth makes a dangerous potion. Maxwell then
proceeded to present the messages of Seventh-day Adventism by selectively quoting
from the King James Version and the Revised Standard Version. Admittedly, he did give
precedence to the KJV by identifying the RSV each time he quoted from it. This man,
whom we have every reason to believe was sincere, probably unwittingly demonstrated
his confidence in the primacy of the KJV.
But did he realise that he was helping his church in what now appears to be a
crusade for public acceptance of the modern versions in accordance with the plans laid
down at the Council of Trent and modified at the Vatican II Council, and now being put
into practice by the United Bible Society - the Bible Society wing of the ecumenical
World Council of Churches?
We wonder if any Seventh-day Adventist noticed the danger in this eclectic
approach to selecting doctrinal texts; for just as most modern translators adopt an
eclectic approach to the text which best suits their purpose, so with the plethora of
3