A Grievous Wolf - Time for Truth

41
stead the AV1611’s simple one or two syllable words, in the main, make the new versions more difficult
both to read and to memorize.
Wolf is also lying on his site about Wycliffe’s Bible being the earliest English Bible and that it was
translated from the Latin Vulgate. In Chapters 21, 22 of In Awe of Thy Word, Dr Mrs Riplinger gives
several examples of pre-Wycliffe scriptures in English, where she also shows that Wycliffe used Old
Latin and even Hebrew manuscripts for his bible, not Jerome’s Vulgate. Efforts were made after Wycliffe’s
death to change his bible to follow Jerome’s Vulgate more closely, one of the revisers being
Nicholas Hereford, who had been one of Wycliffe’s helpers. See In Awe of Thy Word pp 873-874.
Note again Wolf’s incorrect use of the term “Word.” See Question 20. Note again Wolf’s error in referring
to the 1611 Holy Bible as “one seventeenth-century English translation.” The time of the translation
is clearly not the intent of Wolf’s disparaging remark. See Question 28 and Dr Hills’s statement
with respect to the 1611 Holy Bible.
“The English of the King James Version is not the English of the early 17 th century.”
Question 37 could reasonably be answered with another question, once “the Bible” has been identified
between two covers.
Where does the Bible teach that God will limit the perfect preservation of His word in the Old Testament
to the Hebrew language, which for the vast majority of individuals in the world today would result
in a sealed book according to Isaiah 29:11, even for learned individuals?
“And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed, which men deliver to
one that is learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I cannot; for it is sealed:”
As the King James translators pointed out, see Question 34, the sealed Book has to be unsealed for
“every man to profit withal” 1 Corinthians 12:7.
“And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Juda, the Root of
David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof” Revelation 5:5.
The restriction that Grievous Wolf seeks to impose by means of Question 37 in turn violates the priesthood
of all believers, 1 Peter 2:5, 9, most of whom today, as indicated, have not and in this life will
never master Hebrew. Yet Malachi 2:7, the last word on priests in the Old Testament, shows that today’s
“royal priesthood” can nevertheless bring forth “the law of the LORD” Psalm 19:7.
“For the priest’s lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the law at his mouth: for he is the
messenger of the LORD of hosts.”
Note how Philippians 2:15-16 confirms the priesthood of all believers with respect to ordinary believers,
who could not have obeyed Paul’s exhortation with “a book that is sealed.”
“Do all things without murmurings and disputings: That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons
of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as
lights in the world; Holding forth the word of life; that I may rejoice in the day of Christ, that I have
not run in vain, neither laboured in vain.”
The Lord’s rebuke to lawyers in Luke 11:52 applies equally to Grievous Wolf and his entire ‘originalsonlyist’
wolf pack, whose aim is to keep the sealed Book sealed. See Introduction.
“Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves,
and them that were entering in ye hindered.”
38. Did God lose the words of the originals when the “autographs” were destroyed? How come God did
not preserve them if he was intent on the actual inspired word as given to be preserved?
God has preserved His words. See the answers to the last ten questions. Wolf is being wilfully ignorant,
again, 1 Corinthians 14:38. See also Question 19.
“But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.”