August 11, 2012 journal, a few hundred years after the Great Flood God destroyed cities of Sodom and Gomorrah because of the filthy practice of sodomy. To a great degree the destruction of mankind by the flood included sodomy but a special destruction aimed at the destruction of sodomy. The unnatural practice of laying with the same flesh is clearly forbidden in the Bible. Pat Robertson on the 700 Club quoted the scripture and expressed God's discuss with this perversion. (Leviticus 18:22 KJV): "If a man also lie with man-kind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." How clear can this be? God rained down sudden fire and brimstone on the city's of Sodom & Gomorrah for this. Even without the hundred million aborted babies murdered in their mothers wound or at birth, America is due for fire and brimstone by God to judge the filthy homosexuality practice. Pat said the earth seems to be angry at people, he said he was watching the Olympics on television on Saturday night when lightning struck his house and fried his TV, hisInternet, his deep freeze and left him three days without electric power. Yes it can happen now and it is happening with half of the American continent dried up destroying the corn crop. This year they will not have corn to produce ethanol for gasoline and I hope they will return to pure gasoline which gets 20% better mileage in my car. The foolish ethanol mandate has driven the price of corn to $10 a bushel and it is likely to double this year. While nations are starving we make fuel out of corn and Monsanto modifies our corn. Satan didn't add anything to any Bible. Now, the NIV is owned by Rupert Murdoch, the biggest seller of gay porn, and a manufacturer and seller of the Satanic Bible. So, I stay away from the NIV version of the Bible, out of principle. Quoting: VRWil 1189609 WHAT DOES THE BIBLE SAY ABOUT...HOMOSEXUALITY? "We realize that this subject can be a very difficult one to address. Furthermore, as hate crimes specifically committed against homosexuals occur, many feel that this issue shouldn't be addressed at all for fear of only adding to the hostile environment that many homosexuals face. Despite the cultural climate in which we live, this issue must be addressed according to the Word of God. God's laws are always for our good, although man may see them as restricting. In the end, only obedience to the Word of God can bring true freedom. We address this issue out of God's love for the homosexual to bless and help him. Much of our society has embraced many perverted sexual practices that are considered in the Bible as abominations to God. Homosexuality is among the list of deviate or abnormal sexual practices however, there are many other practices that can be included as well. Pornography, pedophilia, prostitution, bestiality, oral sex, phone sex and computer virtual reality sex, just to name a few of them. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 (NIV): "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters, nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God." Although the Bible doesn't detail each and every one of these sinful acts, it does clearly speak out about many of them. Any deviation from God's original plan for sex between a married man and woman is still a sin in God's eyes. The main reason we call these things perverted is because they are unnatural and scripture clearly tells us those who do such things are committing abominations. Leviticus 18:22 (KJV): "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind it is abomination." Homosexuality is also referred to as the sin of sodomy. This reference comes from an account in the Bible of two exceedingly wicked cities, Sodom and Gomorrah, which the Lord destroyed. Sodom was known for its rampant homosexuality and unrestrained sexual lust, as well as other sins such as arrogance, haughtiness, and disregard for the poor. When the Lord sent angels to warn Lot who lived in the city that it was about to be destroyed, the men of the city actually wanted to rape the angels! Genesis 13:13: "But the men of Sodom were wicked and sinners before the LORD exceedingly." In the Old Testament the penalty for this sin was severe. Leviticus 20:13: "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." Today the penalty of death comes in the form of AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases. It also brings death to the soul and spirit of man because the life of God is pushed out by indulging in something that is an abomination to God. God wants to deliver all who are trapped in this unholy practice and He will if anyone calls out to Him with a sincere heart. We certainly acknowledge that AIDS has broken out of the homosexual community, and now, many innocent people are suffering with this disease through no fault of their own. However, the intent of the above statement is not directed to those who have innocently contracted this disease, but rather to the sinners who are spreading it. A comparison could be made to those who smoke. Smokers are opening themselves up for lung cancer; however, the people who are subjected to breathing the smoke second-hand are also subject to this disease. The person who willfully smokes is guilty of destroying their own bodies, but should those who are forced to live in the environment of the smoke, get lung cancer, they are not guilty of this sin. When we teach that smoking causes lung cancer, we are not judging or condemning those who innocently get lung cancer from breathing second-hand smoke. It is simply a true fact that smoking can cause lung cancer. The same is true of AIDS. A homosexual life style increases the risk of that person contracting AIDS. There is no condemnation or judgment against those who innocently contract this disease through no fault of their own (for instance, through blood transfusions.) However, since AIDS is most prevalent in the homosexual community, we need to warn people of the dangers of homosexuality, so that AIDS and sexually transmitted diseases are not spread to the rest of society, as now, many heterosexuals have contracted these diseases too, through unfaithful partners. Romans 1:24-32: 24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: 25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. 26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: 27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet. 28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; 29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, 30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: 32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them. These scriptures clearly state that these vile affections of men lusting for other men (gay men) or women lusting for other women (lesbians) are not the natural affections God created men and women to have for one another. Let me say here that God loves all homosexuals! However, He hates the deeds of homosexuality because they are sinful. God did not create any human being as a homosexual. They are not born that way, just as murderers are not born that way. However, these spirits can be transmitted to children, especially if someone who had this demonic spirit seduced or raped a child--or even if they were close to gay people. These demons can also be imparted to others through unholy sexual acts. People become homosexuals because they yield to abnormal acts or lust. It is through some source that they have received a demonic spirit that drives them to their lust. Viewing evil videos or pornographic books is a way of opening the door for Satan to give one an evil, perverse spirit. Though people are not born as homosexuals, the Bible does say all human beings are born with a sin nature. If we yield to the evils of our flesh it will lead to our destruction not only in this life, but in the life to come. However, through faith in Jesus Christ and His death on the cross we can break the hold that sin has upon us. We do not have to yield to the old fleshy nature but we can now overcome evil temptations and live our lives controlled by the Holy Spirit. Romans 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. 2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death. 3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: 4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. 5 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit. 6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. 7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. 8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. 9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. 10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness. 11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you. 12 Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh. 13 For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live. 14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. 15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father. Sex is God's idea and its purpose is not only for procreation, but also for recreation and the development of a deep relationship between man and woman. Nothing is wrong or dirty about sex when it is engaged in the bonds of marriage as the Lord commanded in the Bible. However, when perversions are committed inside the marriage relationship, this can be sinful also. God made man and woman and brought them together "face to face." Oral sex is of homosexual origin that replaces the normal "face to face" relationship God intended in a marriage. The Bible describes the sex act in Song of Solomon Chapter 4. In this chapter it speaks of this "face to face" relationship by describing looking into his lover's eyes and kissing his lover's lips and fondling his lover's breasts. Oral sex is not normal or natural as it is an unclean act. No one has to live in bondage with an abnormal life of homosexuality nor any other abnormal behavior. No one has to be controlled by pornography. No one has to have evil thoughts plague their minds. There is a way out through what Jesus has done for us. He loves sinners and wants to free us from any evil practices. He will empower those who cry out for deliverance to get free and stay free. Here are the steps you must take to get free: (1.) Make a total commitment to the Lord Jesus Christ. Be willing to turn your life completely over to the will of God and yield to His plan for your life. This means you must be willing to do anything, go anywhere and give up any thing as He leads. Remember, God will never lead you to do anything that is not in agreement with the Bible. You can trust God. He created you and has a better plan for your life. (2.) Your must pray and read your Bible daily. You must study and apply the Word of God to overcome Satan's attacks. The way that you resist the attacks of the devil is by quoting the Word of God to him. When the devil came to tempt Jesus, He simply quoted the Word to him. Good praise tapes will also be of a great help when you are tempted. Put one on and start singing along with it. (3.) You must pray for and seek out a strong Bible believing group of Holy Spirit filled people. You will need their help and fellowship. As you humble yourself and seek help, the Lord will deliver you. Ask God to lead you to someone that can pray the prayer of deliverance for you, as you probably will need to be set free from a demon. You should also seek to be filled with the Holy Spirit as you will need His power to get free and to remain free. (4.) You must cut off all sources and relationships that would lead you back into sin. The Bible tells us to flee fornication (sexual sins). You must get out of any corrupt entanglements, or areas that you know will be a temptation to you. If you have been hooked on internet pornography subscribe to an Internet Service Provider that will filter out the pornography for you. Destroy all evil books and videos. (5.) Should you slip or fall back occasionally, repent and get right back up and go on with God. Do not allow the devil to condemn you once you have repented. Put your sin under the blood of Jesus. He will strengthen you and you will win this battle because of the Lord's promise to you. Remember, He loves you and is there to help you. Run to Him when you get in trouble, never run from Him. He will not ever give up on you! We too, will be standing with you for your total healing and deliverance. Philippians 1:6: "Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ." (6.) You must forgive everyone that has ever hurt you. You can only do this through the power of God. You must by a simple act of your will voice the forgiveness and then the Lord will give you the feeling of forgiveness. This may be a while in coming but just keep forgiving when you think of any wrong that has been done to you. The Lord will give you His love for those people who have wronged you. EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY Plan. Re: THIS IS WHAT KING JAMES( FAMOUS ILLUMINATI) ADDED IN BIBLE (EZEKIEL 23) is this word of "GOD" or word of SATAN WORSHIPER king james ? PROOF THE NEW KING JAMES VERSION OF THE BIBLE IS CORRUPTED When the New King James Bible departs from the underlying Greek text of the King James Bible. Matthew 18:35 ³if ye from your hearts forgive not everyone his brother THEIR trespasses². Majority and C have ³their trespasses², but the Sinaticus & Vaticanus omit, so not in the nasb or niv. However the nkjv says: ³HIS trespasses². ³his² is not found in any manuscript. ³Their² trespasses is found in other Bibles which are based on the Textus Receptus of the KJB, as Tyndale, Geneva and Young¹s translation. Matthew 22:10 ³THE WEDDING was furnished with guests². The ³wedding² is Œo gamos, and is found in the majority, D, B(2) Tyndale and Geneva, but Sinaticus says Œo numphon, the ³wedding hall² (or bridechamber- KJB). The nkjv follows the nasb/niv with ³wedding hall². Matthew 24:40 ³THE one shall be taken, and the other left², there is a definite article before ³the one² which is in the majority and TR but is omitted in N (Sinaticus) and B (Vaticanus) and the njkv also omits it. Matthew 26:45 is a statement in the majority, even in the original Wescott/Hort text, the ASV, Revised Version, Tyndale, Geneva and Douay. But the UBS (United Bible Society) has changed this to a question, and now the nkjv follows the nasb/niv in making it a question. The KJB reads: ³Sleep on now and take your rest² while the nkjv has: ³Are you still sleeping and resting?². Mark 9:25 presents an oddity that defies explanation. All the texts describe the spirt that piano helped a father¹s son from his youth as ³Thou DUMB and DEAF spirit, I charge thee come out of him.² ³to alalon kai kophon² Even the RV, ASV, RSV and Nrsv besides Tyndale, Geneva read as does the KJB, ³dumb and deaf² spirit. But the nkjv, niv and nas have reversed these two words and say: ³you DEAF and DUMB spirit². This is not even following their own UBS texts. Luke 1:35 ³that holy thing which shall be born OF THEE (ek sou) shall be called the Son of God.² ³Of thee² is found in the TR of th KJB, C, Theta, f1, many cursives, the Old Latin, Lamsa¹s 1933 translation from the Syriac Peshitta, the Geneva Bible and the Italian Diodati, which precedes the KJB. It is so quoted by many church fathers, as Irenaeus, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Athanasius, Origen, Agustine and others. Yet the nkjv, niv and nas omit these two little words from their translations. Luke 5:7 ³they beckoned unto their partners WHICH (tois) were in the other ship. Tois (which) is found in the majority, A.C. and TR, but is omitted in N & B, and the nkjv also omits this word as do the nasb/niv. Luke 6:4 ³It is not lawful to eat but for the priests ALONE (monous). ³ALONE² is found in all texts, and is in the nasb too, but the nkjv unites with the niv in omitting this word. The nkjv reads: ³it is not lawful for any but the priests.² Luke 6:9 ³Is it lawful on the Sabbath DAYS to do good or to do evil?². Here the majority, A and TR have ³days² plural, but N & B have the singular. The nkjv follows nasb/niv and says: ³on the Sabbath to do good or to do evil?² Luke 12:49 is a question in the Textus Receptus of the KJB, and also a question in the R.V, and ASV, Tyndale, Geneva and even the Douay. However, the UBS has once again changed and the nasb, niv and nkjv unite in making it an exclamation. The KJB says:² I am come to send fire on the earth; and what will I, if it be already kindled?² But the nkjv says: ³and how I wish it were already kindled!² John 10:6 ³This parable spake Jesus UNTO THEM², autois - to them, is in all texts and even in the nasb, but the nkjv unites with the niv in omitting it and says: ³Jesus used this illustration². John 18:20 ³I always taught in THE SYNAGOGUE². The TR has en TE sunagogee, singular, but the other texts omit the definite article, and the nkjv says ³I always taught in synagogueS², along with the nasb/niv. John 18:24. Here the nkjv, niv, nas create a contradiction, not because of the text but by the way they have translated it. The KJB, as well as the Spanish, Diodati, Webster¹s, 21st Century KJB and Geneva Bible, have correctly translated the phrase as: ³ Now Annas HAD SENT him bound unto Caiaphas the high priest.² The fact that Annas had already sent Jesus to Caiaphas can be seen from verses 13 and 19 of this same chapter, as well as from Mat.26:57, Mark 14:55 and Luke 22:54. The nkjv,nas and niv blunder here in saying: ³THEN Annas SENT Him bound to Caiaphas the high priest.² Acts 10:7 ³And when the angel which spake UNTO CORNELIUS (tw kornelio) was departed, HE called two of his household servants...² This is the reading of the majority and TR, but N & B omit ³unto Cornelius² and have ³to him² (auto). The nkjv follows N & B and makes up its own text by saying: ³when the angel who spoke TO HIM had departed, CORNELIUS called two of his household servants². Here the nkjv tries to combine all of the divergent texts into one, and ends up creating a whole new reading not found in any single manuscript. Acts 15:23 ³And they wrote letters by them AFTER THIS MANNER² After this manner is found in the majority, C,D,TR, Tyndale and Geneva, and even the Revised Version, but the nkjv unites with the nasb/niv, N & B and omits these words. Acts 17:14 ³the brethren sent away Paul to go AS IS WERE (ws) to the sea.² is the reading of the majority and TR, Tyndale and Geneva. But the N & B have ³TO the sea² (ews). And the nkjv unites with the nasb/niv in reading so, thus departing from the KJB text. Acts 18:6 ³And when they opposed THEMSELVES (autwn) and blasphemed...² That is, they put themselves in the way, to block the preaching of Paul. All the texts here are the same and even the ASV reads as does the KJB, but the nasb omits ³themselves², the nkjv says ³they opposed HIM² which in not in any text, and the niv says ³the blips opposed PAUL², again, neither blips nor Paul is in any text. Acts 19:9 ³disputing daily in the school OF ONE (tinos) Tyrannus. This little word, tinos, is found in the majority and TR. but not in N or B. The nkjv unites with the nasb/niv and omits it. Acts 19:39 ³but if ye enquire any thing CONCERNING OTHER MATTERS, (peri Œeteron) it shall be determined in a lowful assembly.² This is the reading of the majority, A,D and even Sinaticus and the Geneva Bible as well as the ASV, but it is not found in B. The nkjv omits this phrase and says: ³But if you have any other inquiry to make, it shall be determined in the lawful assembly.² Acts 21:23 ³We have four men which have a vow ON THEM² On them is Eph Œeauton. This is found in all texts, and in the ASV, but the nkjv unites with the niv and nasb to omit them. The nkjv reads ³We have four men who have taken a vow.² Acts 25:17 ³When they were come HITHER...² (enthade) This is in all texts, even in the nasb and niv, but the nkjv alone has omitted it. The nkjv says: ³When they had come together..² Acts 27:14 ³But not long after there arose AGAINST IT (kat¹ autns) a tempestuous wind.² All texts read ³against it², referring to the island of Crete. But the nkjv omits this phrase and says: ³ a tempestuous head wind arose², the nasb paraphrases as ³from the land² and the niv as ³swept down from the island². Romans 7:6 ³But now we are delivered from the law, THAT BEING DEAD, wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.² This refers to the contextual analogy of the husband having died, and the wife can be married to another. The law died and was put to death by Christ who blotted out the ³handwriting of ordinances that was against us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross.² Col.2:14. Here the TR of the KJB reads ³apothanontOS² masculine singular. The law died. This is the reading of Green¹s interlinear,the 21st Century KJB, Websters Bible of 1833, the Geneva Bible, the Modern Greek translation, Youngs translation, the Diodati, which preceded the KJB, and the Latin of Calvin. So it is a very ancient reading. The other Greek texts have a different reading. They say ³we died² apothanontES, which is masculine plural. The truth that we died is also taught in other passages, but not in this one. The nkjv joins the nasb and niv in saying: ³ We have been delivered from the law, HAVING DIED to what we were held by...² I Corinthians 6:4 is a statement or a command in the KJB, the Majority, the TR. Tyndale, Geneva and even the Douay. But the Wescott/Hort text has this verse as a question, and the nkjv follows the nasb and Westcott Hort. The KJB says: ³If then ye have judgements of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church.² In other words, the Christians were already guilty of judging others in their own congregation, as the context shows, so, he says, set the lowliest of the saints to judge these matters. Paul is using irony. But the nkjv and nas say:²do you appoint those who are least esteemed by the church to judge?² While the niv has ³appoint as judges even men of little account in the church!². An exclamation in the niv. Well, they say variety is the spice of life. II Cor. 3:14 ³for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; WHICH vail is done away in Christ.² The reading ³which² (literally that which- 2 words- Œo ti) is found in the TR of Green, Berry, and Trinitarian Bible Society. It is the reading of Tyndale, Geneva, Darby, Young, Spanish, the Revised Version and even Douay. But the other Greek texts and Westcott & Hort have produced the reading found in he nkjv, nas & niv. The nkjv says: ³the same veil remains unlifted in the reading of the Old Testament, BECAUSE the veil is taken away in Christ.² This is a little change from Œo ti (2 words) to Œoti (one word) and the nkjv follows the Westcott and Hort text here and not the TR. II Corinthians 4:14 ³Knowing that he which raised up the Lord Jrsus shall raise up us also BY (dia) Jesus, and shall present us with you.² The word ³by² is in the majority, and N correction, but B says sun or ³with² instead of ³by². The nkjv reads ³will also raise us up WITH Jesus, and will present us with you.² Is Jesus going to be raised up again? Or is Jesus the person by whom we shall be raised? Here the nkjv clearly does not follow the TR reading. Philippians 2:9 ³God also hath highly exalted him, and given him A name which is above every name². There is no definite article here in the majority or TR, but the Wescott-Hort text adds it. Bibles that read as the KJB with ³a name² are Geneva,Tyndale, Young, Darby etc., while those that follow N & B and the nkjv have ³given him THE name². I mention this only to point out that the nkjv does not always follow the Greek text of the KJB, but frequently follows the Wescott Hort text. While here in Phillipians, notice that the nkjv is not the same from year to year. In just the first 10 chapters of Matthew, the changes from the 1979 nkjv, to the 1982 nkjv would fill up an entire page. In Phil.2:6 the 1979 nkjv said Christ ³did not consider equality with God something to be grasped² but in 1982 they changed it back to ³did not consider it robbery to be equal with God.² In Galations 4:24 the 1979 nkjv said ³which things are an allegory² while the 1982 says ³which things are symbolic², and in blips 12:13 the 1979 said ³so that what is lame not be turned from the way, but rather be healed² but the 1982 edition says: ³so that what is lame may not be dislocated, but rather be healed². The 1982 Nkjv has this word in italics, as though it is not in the text. But it is in the Greek and the KJB is correct and the nkjv is worse than it was before in 1979. blips 3:16 ³For some, when they had heard, did provoke: howbeit not all that came out of Egypt by Moses.² The Textus Receptus of the KJB is clearly a statement here. With the KJB are Tyndale, Geneva, Webster¹s Bible, the 21st Century KJB, the Italian Diodati, the Spanish of 1602 and 1909, the Third Millenium Bible, Youngs translation and even the Catholic Douay of 1950. However, the nkjv follows the W/H text and reads as do the nasb and niv. The nkjv says:² For who, having heard, rebelled? Indeed, was it not all who came out of Egypt, led by Moses?² This is very wrong. Not all who came out of Egypt rebelled. Caleb and Joshua did not rebel, but believed God and entered the promised land. This is the whole point of the passage. We are exhorted to believe God and enter into His rest, just as Caleb and Joshua did. The nkjv not only does not follow the Greek text of the KJB here, but creates a contradiction as well. blips 13:6. ³So that we may boldly say, The Lord is my helper, AND I will not fear what man shall do unto me.² Here the little word ³and² kai is in the TR. majority, A and P46. But N & B omit the word ³and² and so does the nkjv. Also in the TR, and Tyndale, Geneva, Spanish and even Douay, this verse is a statement of fact. However Westcott-Hort have made it a question and so it stands in the nkjv, niv and nasb. The nkjv says: ³The Lord is my helper; I will not fear. What can man do to me?² Do you see the differences? II Peter 2:15 ³Balaam the son on BOSOR². Bosor is the reading of the majority, P72, N correction,A, and C. It is the reading of Tyndale, Geneva, Darby, Young, Spanish and Douay. However, Vaticanus reads Beor instead of Bosor and the nkjv reads as the niv and nasb with ³Balaam the son of BEOR.² II John 7 ³for many deceivers ARE ENTERED into the world² Here, the majority, other uncials, and the TR of the KJB read EISnlthon - ³entered², while N, B and A read EXnlthon, ³went out². One word means to enter into, and the other means to go out. The nkjv again departs from the KJB text and follows Wescott and Hort with its ³many deceivers have GONE OUT into the world.². Remember, the devil is in the details. Jude 3 ³I gave all diligence to write unto you of THE common faith². The TR and majority have THE common faith, but N & B say OUR common faith, and so does the nkjv, agreeing with the niv, nasb. Jude 19 ³These be they who separate THEMSELVES, sensual, having not the Spirit.² The TR, and C read apodiorizontes ŒEAUTOUS. The Wescott Hort text does not have ³themselves². Separate themselves is found in Geneva, Latin Vulgate, Darby, Young, 21st Cent. KJB, Webster¹s Bible and Douay. The nkjv says: ²These are sensual persons, WHO CAUSE DIVISIONS, not having the Spirit² , thus reading as the nasb. The niv says ³these are men who divide YOU². The ³you² is not found in any text, and the whole meaning is changed. In the KJB they separate themselves from the others as a special class with superior knowledge, while the niv says they divide you, the Christians. Not the same meaning. Revelation 6:11 ³And white ROBES WERE given unto every one of them². Here the TR reads plural ³white robes were given². Both the noun and verb are plural. The W/H text reads singular ³ A WHITE ROBE WAS given². The nkjv again joins the nasb/niv and reads: ³ And a white robe was given to each of them.² Rev. 16:16 ³And HE gathered them together into a place called in the blip tongue Armageddon.² All texts here read ³he² referring to God. The nkjv reads: ³ And THEY gathered them together to the place...² The niv and nasb are also in error here, because ..even their Greek texts read suvngogen singular, not suvngogon plural. Tyndale, Douay, World English Bible, Webster¹s, Green, Berry, Spanish and Darby agree with the KJB. Rev. 16:21 ³and the plague THEREOF (Œautns) was exceeding great.² The word ³thereof² or its, is in all texts, including the nasb, but the njkv has joined the niv in omitting this word. The nkjv says: ³that plague was exceeding great.² Rev. 18:9 ³shall bewail HER, and lament for her.² Here the first ³her² is Œautnv. It is in the TR, and many other mss. But the njkv again has omitted it by following Sinaticus and the nasb/niv. It says ³will weep and lament for her.² Revelation 19:2 ³and hath avenged the blood of his servants AT HER HAND². Here, ³at her hand² is ek tns xeipos Œautns. Four words in Greek. They are found in all texts, and though they are in Tyndale, Geneva, 0the RV, the ASV, World English Bible, Webster¹s, Spanish and Douay, the nasb and niv have shortened it and changed the meaning by saying ³has avenged the blood of his bond servants ON HER², and the nkjv has ³the blood of His servants shed BY HER² (omits hand). I have personally gone through the book of Revelation, comparing every word between the KJB and the nkjv. The nas and niv follow a very different text in Revelation, and hundreds words are missing from their texts. However, though the nkjv claims to follow the same text as the KJB in Revelation, I found that the nkjv adds some words like ³some² in 2:17; ³sick² in 2:22; ³there² in 4:3; ³more² in 9:12; ³their² in 20:4 and ³as² in 21:16. The nkjv also omits some 91 words. Eighty of these words are the little word ³and² or kai in Greek. That¹s eighty times omitted when in the Greek text that underlies the KJB just in one book! For example in 018:12,13 the word ³and² is omitted 8 times in just 2 verses. The nkjv also omits ³the same² houtos in 3:5; ³nor² (mnte) twice in 7:1,3; ³called² (legetai) in 8:11; ³for her² Œautnv in both 16:21 and 16:18 ³so² (Œuto), as in ³so great²; the word ³for² (gar) in 21:25 ³FOR there shall be no night there.², and the verb ³shall be² (estai) in 22:12. The KJB has ³to give every man according as his work SHALL BE². The ³shall be² is in the majority and TR, but the nkjv merely says: ³to give every one according to his work.² I will keep adding to this list as I study more of the nkjv, but in light of Rev.22:18,19 where we are told not to add to nor take away from the words of this book or God will take away his part out of the book of life, I would not recommend the nkjv to anyone. Stick to the King James Bible, and you will not go wrong." Quoting: EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN still no answer . what was the reason to alter bible in original form --- between the Old and New Testaments. Although the term had been in use since the 5th century, it was in Luther's Bible of 1534 that the Apocrypha was first published as a separate inter-Testamental section.[1] Luther was making a polemical point about the canonicity of these books. As an authority for this division, he cited St. Jerome, who in the early 5th century distinguished the Hebrew and Greek Old Testaments,[2] stating that books not found in the Hebrew were not received as canonical. Although his statement was controversial in his day,[3] Jerome was later titled a Doctor of the Church and his authority was also cited in the Anglican statement in 1571 of the Thirty-Nine Articles.[4] There was agreement among the Reformers that the Apocrypha contained "books proceeding from godly men" and therefore recommended reading. The Geneva Bible[5] said this in 1560: These bokes that follow in order unto the New testament, are called Apocrypha, that is, bokes, which were not received by a comune consent to be red and expounded publickely in the Church, neither yet served to prove any point of Christian religion, save inasmuche as they had the consent of the other Scriptures called Canonical to confirme the same, or rather whereon they were grounded : but as bokes proceding from godlie men, were received to be red for the advancement and furtherance of the knowledge of the historie, and for the instruction of godlie maners : which bokes declare that at all times God had an especial care of his Church and left them not utterly destitute of teachers and meanes to confirme them in the hope of the promised Messiah, and also witnesse that those calamities that God sent to his Church, were according to his providence, who had bothe so threatened by his Prophetes, and so broght it to passe for the destruction of their enemies, and for the tryal of his children. Later, during the English Civil War, the Westminster Confession of 1647 excluded the Apocrypha from the canon and made no recommendation of the Apocrypha above "other human writings",[6] and, as the Catholic Encyclopedia says, "...the name Apocrypha soon came to have an unfavourable signification which it still retains, comporting both want of genuineness and canonicity."[7] This hostile attitude towards the Apocrypha (considered Catholic by some British Protestants) is represented by the refusal of the British and Foreign Bible Society in the early 19th century to print it (see below). Catholic and Orthodox Christians regard as fully canonical most of these books called Apocrypha, and their canonicity was explicitly affirmed at the Council of Trent in 1546[8] and Synod of Jerusalem (1672) respectively. They are called deuterocanonical by Catholics and anagignoskomena by the Orthodox. [edit] Biblical canonMain articles: Biblical canon, Christian biblical canons, Development of the Christian biblical canon, Protocanonical books, and Deuterocanonical books [edit] Vulgate prologuesJerome completed his version of the Bible, the Latin Vulgate, in 405. In the Middle Ages the Vulgate became the de facto standard version of the Bible in the West. These Bibles were divided into Old and New Testaments only; there was no separate Apocrypha section. Nevertheless, the Vulgate manuscripts included prologues[9] that clearly identified certain books of the Vulgate Old Testament as apocryphal or non-canonical. In the prologue to the books of Samuel and Kings, which is often called the Prologus Galeatus, Jerome described those books not translated from the Hebrew as apocrypha; he specifically mentions that Wisdom, the book of Jesus son of Sirach, Judith, Tobias, and the Shepherd "are not in the canon". In the prologue to Esdras he mentions 3 and 4 Esdras as being apocrypha. In his prologue to the books of Solomon, he mentioned "the book of Jesus son of Sirach and another pseudepigraphos, which is titled the Wisdom of Solomon". He says of them and Judith, Tobias, and the Books of the Maccabees, that the Church "has not received them among the canonical scriptures". He mentions the book of Baruch in his prologue to the Jeremias and does not explicitly refer to it as apocryphal, but he does mention that "it is neither read nor held among the Hebrews". In his prologue to the Judith he mentions that "among the Hebrews, the authority [of Judith] came into contention", but that it was "counted in the number of Sacred Scriptures" by the First Council of Nicaea. Although in his Apology against Rufinus, Book II he denied the authority of the canon of the Hebrews, this caveat does not appear in the prologues themselves, nor in his prologues does he specify the authorship of the canon he describes. Whatever its origin or authority, it was this canon, without qualification, that the prologues of the bibles of Western Europe described. [edit] Apocrypha in editions of the BibleApocrypha are very well attested in surviving manuscripts of the Christian Bible. (See for example Codex Vaticanus, Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Alexandrinus, Vulgate, and Peshitta.) After the Lutheran and Catholic canons were defined by Luther (c. 1534) and Trent[10] (April 8, 1546) respectively, early Protestant editions of the Bible (notably the Luther Bible in German and 1611 King James Version in English) did not omit these books, but placed them in a separate Apocrypha section apart from the Old and New Testaments to indicate their status. The 1647 Westminster Confession of Faith during the English Civil War (1642-1651) specifically excluded the Apocrypha, thus Bibles printed by English Protestants who separated from the Church of England began to exclude these books. [edit] Gutenberg BibleThis famous edition of the Vulgate was published in 1455. Like the manuscripts it was based on, the Gutenberg Bible lacked a specific Apocrypha section;[11] its Old Testament included the books that Jerome considered apocryphal, and those Clement VIII later moved to the appendix. The Prayer of Manasses was located after the Books of Chronicles, and 3 and 4 Esdras followed 2 Esdras (Nehemiah), and Prayer of Solomon followed Ecclesiasticus. [edit] Luther BibleMain article: Luther Bible-Martin Luther translated the Bible into German during the early part of the 16th century, first releasing a complete Bible in 1534. His Bible was the first major edition to have a separate section called Apocrypha. Books and portions of books not found in the Masoretic Text of Judaism were moved out of the body of the Old Testament to this section.[12] Luther placed these books between the Old and New Testaments. For this reason, these works are sometimes known as inter-testamental books, see also Intertestamental period and Luther's canon. The books 1 and 2 Esdras were omitted entirely.[13] Luther also expressed some doubts about the canonicity of four New Testament books, although he never called them apocrypha: the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Epistles of James and Jude, and the Revelation to John. He did not put them in a separate named section, but he did move them to the end of his New Testament.[14] [edit] Clementine VulgateSee also: Books of the Latin Vulgate. In 1592, Pope Clement VIII published his revised edition of the Vulgate, referred to as the Sixto-Clementine Vulgate. He moved three books not found in the canon of the Council of Trent from the Old Testament into an appendix "lest they utterly perish" (ne prorsus interirent).[15] Prayer of Manasses 3 Esdras (1 Esdras in the King James Bible) 4 Esdras (2 Esdras in the King James Bible) The protocanonical and deuterocanonical books he placed in their traditional positions in the Old Testament. [edit] King James VersionThe English-language King James Version (KJV) of 1611 followed the lead of the Luther Bible in using an inter-testamental section labelled "Books called Apocrypha", or just "Apocrypha" at the running page header. The KJV followed the Geneva Bible of 1560 almost exactly (variations are marked below). The section contains the following:[16] 1 Esdras (Vulgate 3 Esdras) 2 Esdras (Vulgate 4 Esdras) Tobit Judith ("Judeth" in Geneva) Rest of Esther (Vulgate Esther 10:4-16:24) Wisdom Ecclesiasticus (also known as Sirach) Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremy ("Jeremiah" in Geneva) (all part of Vulgate Baruch) no BFBS funds were to pay for printing any Apocryphal books anywhere. Since then most modern editions of the Bible and reprintings of the King James Bible omit the Apocrypha section. In the 18th century, the Apocrypha section was omitted from the Challoner revision of the Douay-Rheims version. In the 1979 revision of the Vulgate, the section was dropped. Modern reprintings of the Clementine Vulgate commonly omit the Apocrypha section. Many reprintings of older versions of the Bible now omit the apocrypha and many newer translations and revisions have never included them at all. There are some exceptions to this trend, however. Some editions of the Revised Standard Version of the Bible include not only the Apocrypha listed above, but also the third and fourth books of the Maccabees, and Psalm 151; the RSV Apocrypha also lists the Letter of Jeremiah (Epistle of Jeremy in the KJV) as separate from the book of Baruch, following the Orthodox tradition. The American Bible Society lifted restrictions on the publication of Bibles with the Apocrypha in 1964. The British and Foreign Bible Society followed in 1966.[20] The Stuttgart edition of the Vulgate (the printed edition, not most of the on-line editions), which is published by the UBS, contains the Clementine Apocrypha as well as the Epistle to the Laodiceans and Psalm 151. Brenton's edition of the Septuagint includes all of the Apocrypha found in the King James Bible with the exception of 2 Esdras, which was not in the Septuagint and is no longer extant in Greek.[21] He places them in a separate section at the end of his Old Testament, following English tradition. In Greek circles, however, these books are not traditionally called Apocrypha, but Anagignoskomena (ναγιγνωσκ?;όμενα), and are integrated into the Old Testament. The Orthodox Study Bible, published by Thomas Nelson Publishers, includes the Anagignoskomena in its Old Testament, with the exception of 4 Maccabees. This was translated by the Saint Athanasius Academy of Orthodox Theology, from the Rahlfs Edition of the Septuagint using Brenton's English translation and the RSV Expanded Apocrypha as boilerplate. As such, they are included in the Old Testament with no distinction between these books and the rest of the Old Testament. This follows the tradition of the Eastern Orthodox Church where the Septuagint is the received version of Old Testament scripture, considered itself inspired in agreement with some of the Fathers, such as St Augustine, rather than the Hebrew Masoretic text followed by all other modern translations.[22] [edit] AnagignoskomenaThe Septuagint, the pre-eminent Greek version of the Old Testament, contains books that are not present in the Hebrew Bible. These texts are not traditionally segregated into a separate section, nor are they usually called apocrypha. Rather, they are referred to as the Anagignoskomena (ναγιγνωσκ?;όμενα, "things that are read"). The anagignoskomena are Tobit, Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, Wisdom of Jesus Sirach, Baruch, Epistle of Jeremy (in the Vulgate this is chapter 6 of Baruch), additions to Daniel (The Prayer of Azarias, Susanna and Bel and the Dragon), additions to Esther, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, 3 Maccabees, 1 Esdras, i.e. all the Deuterocanonical plus 3 Maccabees and 1 Esdras.[23] Some editions add ad0ditional books, as Psalm 151 or the Odes, including the Prayer of Manasses. 2 Esdras is added as appendix in the Slavonic Bibles and 4 Maccabees as appendix in Greek editions.[23] [edit] PseudepigraphaTechnically, a pseudepigraphon is a book written in a biblical style and ascribed to an author who did not write it. In common usage, however, the term pseudepigrapha is often used by way of distinction to refer to apocryphal writings that do not appear in printed editions of the Bible, as opposed to the apocryphal texts listed above. Examples[24] include: The Apocrypha of the King James Bible constitutes the books of the Vulgate that are present neither in the Hebrew Old Testament nor the Greek New Testament. Since these are derived from the Septuagint, from which the old Latin version was translated, it follows that the difference between the KJV and the Roman Catholic Old Testaments is traceable to the difference between the Palestinian and the Alexandrian canons of the Old Testament. This is only true with certain reservations, as the Latin Vulgate was revised by Jerome according to the Hebrew, and, where Hebrew originals were not found, according to the Septuagint. Furthermore, the Vulgate omits 3 and 4 Maccabees, which generally appear in the Septuagint, while the Septuagint and Luther's Bible omit 2 Esdras, which is found in the Apocrypha of the Vulgate and the King James Bible. Luther's Bible, moreover, also omits 1 Esdras. It should further be observed that the Clementine Vulgate places the Prayer of Manasses and 3 Esdras and 4 Esdras in an appendix after the New Testament as apocryphal. It is hardly possible to form any classification not open to some objection. Scholars are still div ided as to the original language, date, and place of composition of some of the books that come under this provisional attempt at order. (Thus some of the additions to Daniel and the Prayer of Manasseh are most probably derived from a Semitic original written in Palestine, yet in compliance with the prevailing opinion they are classed under Hellenistic Jewish literature. Again, the Slavonic Enoch goes back undoubtedly in parts to a Semitic original, though most of it may have been written by a Greek jewish in Egypt.) A distinction can be made between the Palestinian and the Hellenistic literature of the Old Testament, though even this is open to serious objections. The former literature was written in Hebrew or Aramaic, and seldom in Greek; the latter in Greek. Next, within these literatures there are three or four classes of subject material. Historical, Legendary (Haggadic), TRUTH IS CURRENT CHRISTIANITY IS HIJACKED BY PAGAN CULTURE AND IDOL WORSHIPING-Quoting: EXPOSING SECRET SOCIETY PLAN Then you have been fooled with great success since the KJV is the only one close to correct. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 12845371 no brother, king james deleted 100k verse from bible and added some verses of his "freemason " beliefs and infected bible with some pegan belief of idol worshiping(current jesus idol in churches) and godess worhiping (like queen of heaven, isis,and many more) just follow the message of jesus. For example, jewish people don't believe that any of the New Covenant books are divinely inspired. Muslims go even further, holding that much of the Old Covenant has been corrupted (only to be restored in the Qu'ran). Among jewish people there is dispute over which parts of the Old Covenant tradition is divinely inspired as well (e.g., the Dead Sea Scrolls and other Jewish pseudepigrapha, the works of the mystics, &c). Furthermore, among Christians there is not a universal agreement on the canon of Scripture either. Protestants believe that the deutrocanonical books ("apocrypha") are not part of sacred Scripture, while most Orthodox churches and the Roman Catholic Church believe they are. Yet still, several Orthodox churches hold books to be inspired which are not recognized by the Roman Catholic church. And of course, there have also always been the Christian pseudepigraphal works as well (as exemplified by the [mainly] Gnostic corpus discovered at Nag Hammadi). All of this does not preclude, of course, the possibility of a single, completely accurate canon (nor even necessarily preclude one from the knowledge of such a canon by purely human means); this is just to say that the words "Bible" and "missing" carry a *huge* amount of baggage that needs to be sorted before the question can be answered properly. I will assume you mean something along the lines of "are there really sixteen chapters missing from [some major Protestant Bible translation as compared to some other major Protestant Bible translation]?" This is commonly asserted by those who believe that all modern Protestant Bible translations are in some way inferior to the 1611 edition of the King James translation, and is the only context which makes sense to me, given the above considerations. If that is the intent of the question, the answer is that it is very possibly true (or it could be said the other way, i.e., the one translation "inserts" 16 chapters, rather than the other "missing" them). The reasons for this are complex, and essentially come down to choices the translators had to make when they encountered different ancient manuscripts of the same passage, which had different readings from each other regarding some word or phrase, or where one lacked (or included) some bit that was present (or missing) in the other. These differences are called "variant readings" (or just "variants" for short), and the act of choosing between two or more variants to arrive at a reading is known as "collation." The science behind this collation process is known as "Textual Criticism" (probably a poor choice of words, since it has nothing to do with "Higher Criticism," which is actually *critical* of the historical truth and accuracy of the Christian traditions). This science is used by everyone trying to reconstruct any ancient text from multiple fragments / editions. That means that the same principles for selecting between variants are used to determine what Plato originally wrote, as are used to determine what the evangelist Mark originally wrote. So long answer short--some Protestant Bible translations omit (or include, depending on your perspective) certain words, phrases, or even entire sections of text (e.g., the last portion of Mark 16), because the translators of that version believed those textual choices best represented the original text as the authors wrote it. The issue is complicated, and to properly explain it would take a book-length treatment (of which there are several), dealing with issues such as manuscript families, individual manuscript pedigree, common scribal practice and errors, &c. Suffice it to say that no Protestant Bible translation willingly omits any portion of text that another translation includes, unless the translators felt it was not part of the original text as penned by an inspired writer, based on rigorous Textual Critical analysis there were 72 chapters in orignal bible which were reduced to 66 by king james The Bibles used by Catholics and Protestants are not the same. The first thing to know is that Catholics have more then the bible to follow. They have a lot of other scriptures to go by as well. Some Catholics don't follow them correctly and other Catholics see that as sin to not follow it (that's the correct way). Like dressing modestly is a big problem right now. people rebel. Catholics and Protestants use the word "apocrypha" differently. There are OT books that are considered apocryphal by all Christian churches, including Catholicism. There are other books, called "Deuterocanonical" by Rome, that are considered part of the canon by Rome, and are considered apocryphal by other Christian churches. These Deuterocanonical books are: Tobit, Judith, First and Second Maccabees, The Book of Wisdom, and Ecclesiasticus (NOT to be confused with Ecclesiastes, which is accepted as canonical by all Christian churches). Protestant churches do not accept the deuterocanonical books as canonical, and you will not find them in their bibles. Another difference are the texts from which the translations were made. The Catholic Bible is sourced primarily from the Latin Vulgate and Codex Vaticanus. The early Protestants used the Textus Receptus. This difference is not so pronounced today with many different versions available for Protestants being sourced from additional texts. Special note on The Jerusalem Bible: As biblical scholarship opened up in the mid-20th century, Catholics began to pay more attention. The Dominican Biblical School in Jerusalem was called upon by a French publisher (Editions du Cerf) to rise to the occasion and produce a French translation from the best available texts. The result was a single-volume translation of the entire Bible in 1956 known popularly as La Bible de Jerusalem. This French version, of very good quality with full textual critical aparatus of a very scholarly nature, was translated into English. But the English was not simply taken from the original French. Some books were first drafted from the French into English and then compared word for word with the Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, and other books were drafted into English from the ancient texts first and then compared word for word with the French. The desire was to be as completely faithful to the original texts as possible, while preserving the intent and scholarship of the original French materials. The General Editor of the English translation effort was Alexander Jones, and those who are not aware of this will be fascinated to learn that among the major contributors to the work was J. R. R. Tolkien of literary fame. This English version is called The Jerusalem Bible, and it contains the standard books of the Catholic canon. Notes are paraphrased from the first (I believe) English publication; Doubleday, Garden City New York, 1966. -Answer Bible translations developed for Catholic use are complete Bibles. This means that they contain the entire canonical text identified by Pope Damasus and the Synod of Rome (382) and the local Councils of Hippo (393) and Carthage (397), contained in St. Jerome's Latin Vulgate translation (420), and decreed infallibly by the Ecumenical Council of Trent (1570). This canonical text contains the same 27 NT Testament books which Protestant versions contain, but 46 Old Testament books, instead of 39. These 7 books, and parts of 2 others, are called Deuterocanonical by Catholics (2nd canon) and Apocrypha (false writings) by Protestants, who dropped them at the time of the Reformation. The Deuterocanonical texts are Tobias (Tobit), Judith, Baruch, Ecclesiasticus (Sirach), Wisdom, First and Second Maccabees and parts of Esther and Daniel. Some Protestant Bibles include the "Apocrypha" as pious reading. As a side note: The Bible is the most preserved work of literature in our history. In fact, there are approximately 5,600 original manuscripts still today. When the Catholic church translated into English in 1966, it used as many of the original texts as there were. What is most interesting is that in 1415 AD, Erasus translated to English using 5 copies of a German translation. Then King James used Erasus translation to come up with the KJV of the bible. Ever wonder why there are differences???? These differences are very minor other than the KJV not including the Apocrypha as God had originally inspired. If we all agree that the Bible is inspired by God, then how can we as man decide later that those books we don't agree with are not? Roman Catholic Answer -It was Protestantism that removed these "deuterocanonical" books from the Bible, many centuries later. And contrary to the myth, the early Church did indeed accept these books as Scripture. The seven disputed books are: Tobit, Judith, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus (or Sirach), and Baruch. Catholic Bibles also include an additional six chapters (107 verses) in Esther and three chapters (174 verses) in Daniel. According to major Protestant scholars and historians, in the first four centuries Church leaders (e.g. St. Justin Martyr, Tertullian, St. Augustine, St. Ambrose, St. Cyprian, St. Irenaeus) generally recognized these seven books as canonical and scriptural, following the Septuagint Greek translation of the Old Testament, following the Council of Rome (382), and general consensus, finalized the New Testament canon while also including the deutercanon, in lists that were identical to that of the Council of Trent (1545-1563). There's a scholarly consensus that this canon was pretty much accepted from the fourth century to the sixteenth, and indeed, the earliest Greek manuscripts of the Old Testament: the Codes Sinaiticus (fourth century) and Codex Alexandrinus (c. 450) include the (unseparated) deuterocanonical books. The Dead Sea Scrolls found at Qumran did not contain Esther, but did contain Tobit. According to Douglas and Geisler, Jamnia (first century Jewish council) was not an authoritative council, but simply a gathering of scholars, and similar events occurred afterward. In fact, at Jamnia the canonicity of books such as Ester, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Solomon was also disputed. Since both Protestants and Catholics accept these books today, this shows that Jamnia did not "settle" anything. The Jewish people were still arguing about the canonicity of the books mentioned earlier and also Proverbs into the early second century. And St. Jerome's sometimes critical views on these books are not a clear-cut as Protestants often make them out to be. In his Apology Against Rufinus (402) for example, he wrote: When I repeat what the jewish people say against the story of Susanna and the Hymn of the Three Children, and the fables of Bel and the Dragon, which are not contained in the Hebrew Bible, the man who makes this a charge against me proves himself to be a fool and a slanderer; for I explained not what I thought but what they commonly say against us (Apology Against Rufinus, book II, 33) Significantly, St. Jerome included the deuterocanonical books in the Vulgate, his Latin translation of the Bible, (And he defended the inspiration of Judith in a preface to it.) All in all, there is no clear evidence that St. Jerome rejected these seven books, and much to suggest that he accepted them as inspired Scripture, as the Catholic Church does today. But St. Jerome (like any Church father) does not have the final authority in the Church. He's not infallible. The historical evidence, all things considered, strongly supports the Catholic belief that these books are inspired and thus indeed part of Holy Scripture." "The Great Drought of 2012 has yet to come to an end, but we already know that its consequences will be severe. With more than one-half of America's counties designated as drought disaster areas, the 2012 harvest of corn, soybeans, and other food staples is guaranteed to fall far short of predictions. This, in turn, will boost food prices domestically and abroad, causing increased misery for farmers and low-income Americans and far greater hardship for poor people in countries that rely on imported U.S. grains. This, however, is just the beginning of the likely consequences: if history is any guide, rising food prices of this sort will also lead to widespread social unrest and violent conflict. Food -- affordable food -- is essential to human survival and well-being. Take that away, and people become anxious, desperate, and angry. In the United States, food represents only about 13% of the average household budget, a relatively small share, so a boost in food prices in 2013 will probably not prove overly taxing for most middle- and upper-income families. It could, however, produce considerable hardship for poor and unemployed Americans with limited resources. "You are talking about a real bite out of family budgets," commented Ernie Gross, an agricultural economist at Omaha's Creighton University. This could add to the discontent already evident in depressed and high-unemployment areas, perhaps prompting an intensified backlash against incumbent politicians and other forms of dissent and unrest. It is in the international arena, however, that the Great Drought is likely to have its most devastating effects. Because so many nations depend on grain imports from the U.S. to supplement their own harvests, and because intense drought and floods are damaging crops elsewhere as well, food supplies are expected to shrink and prices to rise across the planet. "What happens to the U.S. supply has immense impact around the world," says Robert Thompson, a food expert at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs. As the crops most affected by the drought, corn and soybeans, disappear from world markets, he noted, the price of all grains, including wheat, is likely to soar, causing immense hardship to those who already have trouble affording enough food to feed their families. The Hunger Games, 2007-2011 What happens next is, of course, impossible to predict, but if the recent past is any guide, it could turn ugly. In 2007-2008, when rice, corn, and wheat experienced prices hikes of 100% or more, sharply higher prices -- especially for bread -- sparked "food riots" in more than two dozen countries, including Bangladesh, Cameroon, Egypt, Haiti, Indonesia, Senegal, and Yemen. In Haiti, the rioting became so violent and public confidence in the government's ability to address the problem dropped so precipitously that the Haitian Senate voted to oust the country's prime minister, Jacques-Édouard Alexis. In other countries, angry protestors clashed with army and police forces, leaving scores dead. Those price increases of 2007-2008 were largely attributed to the soaring cost of oil, which made food production more expensive. (Oil's use is widespread in farming operations, irrigation, food delivery, and pesticide manufacture.) At the same time, increasing amounts of cropland worldwide were being diverted from food crops to the cultivation of plants used in making biofuels. The next price spike in 2010-11 was, however, closely associated with climate change. An intense drought gripped much of eastern Russia during the summer of 2010, reducing the wheat harvest in that breadbasket region by one-fifth and prompting Moscow to ban all wheat exports. Drought also hurt China's grain harvest, while intense flooding destroyed much of Australia's wheat crop. Together with other extreme-weather-related effects, these disasters sent wheat prices soaring by more than 50% and the price of most food staples by 32%. Once again, a surge in food prices resulted in widespread social unrest, this time concentrated in North Africa and the Middle East. The earliest protests arose over the cost of staples in Algeria and then Tunisia, where -- no coincidence -- the precipitating event was a young food vendor, Mohamed Bouazizi, setting himself on fire to protest government harassment. Anger over rising food and fuel prices combined with long-simmering resentments about government repression and corruption sparked what became known as the Arab Spring. The rising cost of basic staples, especially a loaf of bread, was also a cause of unrest in Egypt, Jordan, and Sudan. Other factors, notably anger at entrenched autocratic regimes, may have proved more powerful in those places, but as the author of Tropic of Chaos, Christian Parenti, wrote, "The initial trouble was traceable, at least in part, to the price of that loaf of bread." As for the current drought, analysts are already warning of instability in Africa, where corn is a major staple, and of increased popular unrest in China, where food prices are expected to rise at a time of growing hardship for that country's vast pool of low-income, migratory workers and poor peasants. Higher food prices in the U.S. and China could also lead to reduced consumer spending on other goods, further contributing to the slowdown in the global economy and producing yet more worldwide misery, with unpredictable social consequences. The Hunger Games, 2012-?? If this was just one bad harvest, occurring in only one country, the world would undoubtedly absorb the ensuing hardship and expect to bounce back in the years to come. Unfortunately, it's becoming evident that the Great Drought of 2012 is not a one-off event in a single heartland nation, but rather an inevitable consequence of global warming which is only going to intensify. As a result, we can expect not just more bad years of extreme heat, but worse years, hotter and more often, and not just in the United States, but globally for the indefinite future. Until recently, most scientists were reluctant to blame particular storms or droughts on global warming. Now, however, a growing number of scientists believe that such links can be demonstrated in certain cases. In one recent study focused on extreme weather events in 2011, for instance, climate specialists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and Great Britain's National Weather Service concluded that human-induced climate change has made intense heat waves of the kind experienced in Texas in 2011 more likely than ever before. Published in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, it reported that global warming had ensured that the incidence of that Texas heat wave was 20 times more likely than it would have been in 1960; similarly, abnormally warm temperatures like those experienced in Britain last November were said to be 62 times as likely because of global warming. It is still too early to apply the methodology used by these scientists to calculating the effect of global warming on the heat waves of 2012, which are proving to be far more severe, but we can assume the level of correlation will be high. And what can we expect in the future, as the warming gains momentum? When we think about climate change (if we think about it at all), we envision rising temperatures, prolonged droughts, freakish storms, hellish wildfires, and rising sea levels. Among other things, this will result in damaged infrastructure and diminished food supplies. These are, of course, manifestations of warming in the physical world, not the social world we all inhabit and rely on for so many aspects of our daily well-being and survival. The purely physical effects of climate change will, no doubt, prove catastrophic. But the social effects including, somewhere down the line, food riots, mass starvation, state collapse, mass migrations, and conflicts of every sort, up to and including full-scale war, could prove even more disruptive and deadly. In her immensely successful young-adult novel The Hunger Games (and the movie that followed), Suzanne Collins riveted millions with a portrait of a dystopian, resource-scarce, post-apocalyptic future where once-rebellious "districts" in an impoverished North America must supply two teenagers each year for a series of televised gladiatorial games that end in death for all but one of the youthful contestants. These "hunger games" are intended as recompense for the damage inflicted on the victorious capitol of Panem by the rebellious districts during an insurrection. Without specifically mentioning global warming, Collins makes it clear that climate change was significantly responsible for the hunger that shadows the North American continent in this future era. Hence, as the gladiatorial contestants are about to be selected, the mayor of District 12's principal city describes "the disasters, the droughts, the storms, the fires, the encroaching seas that swallowed up so much of the land [and] the brutal war for what little sustenance remained." In this, Collins was prescient, even if her specific vision of the violence on which such a world might be organized is fantasy. While we may never see her version of those hunger games, do not doubt that some version of them will come into existence -- that, in fact, hunger wars of many sorts will fill our future. These could include any combination or permutation of the deadly riots that led to the 2008 collapse of Haiti's government, the pitched battles between massed protesters and security forces that engulfed parts of Cairo as the Arab Spring developed, the ethnic struggles over disputed croplands and water sources that have made Darfur a recurring headline of horror in our world, or the inequitable distribution of agricultural land that continues to fuel the insurgency of the Maoist-inspired Naxalites of India. Combine such conflicts with another likelihood: that persistent drought and hunger will force millions of people to abandon their traditional lands and flee to the squalor of shantytowns and expanding slums surrounding large cities, sparking hostility from those already living there. One such eruption, with grisly results, occurred in Johannesburg's shantytowns in 2008 when desperately poor and hungry migrants from Malawi and Zimbabwe were set upon, beaten, and in some cases burned to death by poor South Africans. One terrified Zimbabwean, cowering in a police station from the raging mobs, said she fled her country because "there is no work and no food." And count on something else: millions more in the coming decades, pressed by disasters ranging from drought and flood to rising sea levels, will try to migrate to other countries, provoking even greater hostility. And that hardly begins to exhaust the possibilities that lie in our hunger-games future. At this point, the focus is understandably on the immediate consequences of the still ongoing Great Drought: dying crops, shrunken harvests, and rising food prices. But keep an eye out for the social and political effects that undoubtedly won't begin to show up here or globally until later this year or 2013. Better than any academic study, these will offer us a hint of what we can expect in the coming decades from a hunger-games world of rising temperatures, persistent droughts, recurring food shortages, and billions of famished, desperate people. To stay on top of important articles like these, sign up to receive the latest updates from here" Food Price Volatility: What Was and Wasn't Said in the Leaked Report to the G-20 By Jennifer Clapp, Triple Crisis | Op-Ed-Food Fears Return By Jomo Kwame Sundaram, Project Syndicate | Op-Ed How the Chosen Ones Ended Australia's Olympic Prowess and Revealed Its Secret Past.