AND THE NIV BIBLE
corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit'' Matthew 7:17
means "New International Version"
in our time on the Web since 1997 have I seen such a bomb as this. Robert Landis,
a reader, has sent this compilation. I hope you readers who are still clinging
to the NIV will finally see that the translation fad has finally laid the ultimate
egg, and a very rotten one at that.
reading this article, anyone still clinging to the NIV deserves damnation and
hell fire. The NIV is a bible which promotes sodomy in a hour when this is one
of the most dangerous battles a Bible believer can enter. What insanity to be
reading from a bible which supports the United Nations and the Genocide Treaty
rather than the holiness of God Almighty.
the following is unedited from Robert Landis and those who responded to him. I
usually clean up E-Mailed items before posting them, but I decided this time to
leave the thing as-is. You cannot say I meddled with it. If you don't like it
friend, then burn your NIV. Don't get in my face about this. I was not on the
NIV committee and I did not ask sodomites to mess with the Bible.
may not be long before Rupert Murdock send out hit men to threaten those who expose
his dirty bible. I suggest you copy this article to file if you want to be sure
to have it later.
Robert for the help.
wrote godhatesfags.com asking about fags who participated in the so-called NIV
translation of the Bible. Below I'm setting out a paragraph from a piece
you can find on the Internet at
by Terry Watkins, called the New International Perversion.
critic on the NIV translation was homosexual author Dr. Virginia Mollenkott. In
Episcopal, Witness (June 1991, pp. 20-23), she admits, "My lesbianism
has ALWAYS been a part of me. . ." To no surprise, "sodomite" is completely
removed from the NIV. (Deut. 23:17, I Kings 14:24, 15:12, 22:46, II Kings 23:7)
And of course, I Cor. 6:9, ". . . effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with
mankind. . ." is replaced with the non-offensive ". . . nor male prostitutes
nor homosexual offenders. . ." Notice the NIV in I Cor. 6:9 does NOT condemn
"homosexuals" or the "act of homosexuality" - but ONLY "homosexual OFFENDERS".
Below I'm setting out verbatim a piece found at http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/woudstra.htm.
This piece (a) addresses an effort by the publishers of NIV to distance
themselves from Mollenkott and (b) describes how the chair of the translation
committee, Marten Wouldstra, is a fag. It also has some links to some more
information on this issue. As you can see, there is strong evidence about
both of these fags being involved. Indeed, Mollenkott brags about her involvement.
This is a very well written piece, and gives some good information about
how the fags lie about the truth of God as it pertains to their filth.
Thank you for writing.
"Dr. Marten Woudstra,
and Chairman of the NIV Old Testament Committee
is a report by Mr. Michael Penfold of England, UK. Reprinted with kind permission.
"James White's book The King James Only Controversy (Bethany House Publishers,
1995) includes a question and answer section. One of the questions reads, 'I've
been told that there were homosexuals on the NIV translation committee. Is this
true?' On pages 245-246 of his book James White gives the following answer. 'No,
it is not [true].
But due to the consistent bearing of false witness
by many KJV Only advocates, Dr. Kenneth Barker, Executive Director of the NIV
Translation Centre, had to write a response to the accusation, which I quote below:
[Dr. Barker writes]: 'It has come to my attention that false rumours are circulating,
in both oral and written form, that the NIV is soft on sodomy (that is, homosexual
sins). The alleged reason for this is that some NIV translators and editors were
homosexuals and lesbians. These charges have no basis in fact. Thus they are simply
untrue. And those who make such false charges could be legitimately sued for libel,
slander and defamation of character.
Here are the facts. It is true
that in the earliest stages of translation work on the NIV (in the late 1960s
and early 1970s), Virginia Mollenkott was consulted briefly and only in a minor
way on matters of English style. At that time she had the reputation of being
a committed evangelical Christian with expertise in contemporary English idiom
and usage. Nothing was known of her lesbian views. Those did not begin to surface
until years later in some of her writings. If we had known in the sixties what
became public knowledge only years later, we would not have consulted her at all.
But it must be stressed that she did not influence the NIV translators and editors
in any of their final decisions.' "
This is a very cleverly worded statement
and one which we can allow Virginia Mollenkott to answer herself. In a letter
to me [Michael J. Penfold] dated Dec. 18th 1996, in reply to my investigation
into her true role on the NIV, Mollenkott wrote the following revealing letter:
'I worked on the NIV during the entire time it was
being translated and reviewed, although I was never free to attend the summer
sessions even when I was invited to do so. Elisabeth Elliot and I were the Stylistic
Consultants: our job was simply to make sure the translation would communicate
clearly to modern American readers, and that the style was as smooth and understandable
was never removed, sacked, or made redundant from my work on the NIV; if I were,
my name would not have appeared on the list sent out by the IBS. It was Dr. Edwin
Palmer, who lived near my college, who invited me to work on the NIV. He had heard
me speak and respected my integrity and my knowledge. So far as I know, nobody
including Dr. Palmer suspected that I was lesbian while I was working on the NIV;
it was information I kept private at that time. Dr. Palmer always sent me the
batches of translating to review, and I always returned them (with my comments)
I have not kept track of which of my suggestions made it into the final version;
I am a busy person, and it was a labour love in the scriptures. I do not think
anything concerning homosexuality was in any of the batches I reviewed. I do not
consider the NIV more gay-friendly than most modern translations, so I do not
understand why anybody would want to bash the NIV because a closeted lesbian worked
on it. I was
not a translator; if I were I would have argued that the word/concept "homosexual"
is too anachronistic to be utilised in translating an ancient text. But I was
a stylist and nobody asked me.
no longer have any contact with the NIV-CBT, but I am often amused to remember
that I frequently refused my $5 an hour stipend because I heard the project was
running out of money. At the time I was naive about how many millions of dollars
are made by a successful Bible translation!
tell Kenneth Barker for me that although there is much controversy about homosexuality
among Biblical scholars, to my knowledge nobody denies that the Bible condemns
lying about other people. He should be ashamed of his attempt to rewrite history.
"'Somewhere in my files is the letter I got thanking me for my work on the NIV
when the project was completed.
also have the slipcase version sent out to the whole NIV team in 1978 by Zondervan;
and I have the tenth-anniversary edition sent out to the whole team in 1988 by
the International Bible Society. Various other editions were also sent out gratis
to the translation committee and stylists, but I have received nothing since 1988
that I can remember. Because I am idealistic and sincere, it never occurred to
me that anyone would lie about my contributions, so I was not meticulous about
keeping records. Thank you for anything you can do to set the record straight.
You may utilise this letter to do so, and I'd appreciate you sending me a copy
of anything you generate.
Virginia Ramey Mollenkott.' "
could not Dr. Barker have told the truth in the first place? Taking Mollenkott's
words at their face value, the NIV publicity machine has nothing to worry about.
Does their anxiety to distance the NIV from homosexual associations reveal something
more sinister? "
In the light of the following, I believe it does, as
it has now come to light that THE CHAIRMAN OF THE NIV'S OLD TESTAMENT TRANSLATION
COMMITTEE, DR. MARTEN H. WOUDSTRA, WAS A HOMOSEXUAL. This is much more serious
than Mollenkott's involvement. Here we have one of the leading scholars on the
NIV CBT who is a homosexual. Obviously this fact compromises the whole project,
especially as this fact was well known by his colleagues for many years. However,
only now is this fact coming to the notice of the general public through articles
like the one you are reading.
"Dr. Woudstra, who died in the early 1990s,
was a long-time friend of Evangelicals Concerned Inc. This organisation was founded
in 1976 by New York psychologist, Dr. Ralph Blair, as a nation-wide task force
and fellowship for gay and lesbian 'evangelical Christians' and their friends.
ECI's address is 311 East 72nd Street, New York, NY 10021. They can be found on
the internet at http://www.korpi.com/ECWE/ "
It was during a series
of research phone calls to Dr. Blair that I first confirmed the fact of Dr. Woudstra's
homosexuality. Blair and Dr. Woudstra were friends. Dr. Woudstra had been on the
mailing list of Evangelicals Concerned from its inception, and although he had
no formal ties with ECI, on one of his many trips to New York he called in and
had tea with Dr. Blair. Dr Blair told me that Dr. Woudstra shared the viewpoint
of ECI that lifelong 'loving monogamous relationships' between gay men or women
were acceptable to God. He believed that there was nothing in the Old Testament
(his special area of technical expertise) that corresponded to 'homosexual orientation'.
The 'sodomy' of the OT simply involved temple rites and gang rape (Gen 19).
Notice the similarity between this view and that of Virginia Mollenkott.
Dr. Blair clearly stated to me on the phone on 23rd September 1997 that Dr. Woudstra,
a lifelong bachelor, was a homosexual. He intimated that other members of the
NIV translation committee were also quietly supportive of ECI, but he was not
able to tell me who they were (for obvious reasons). He later called them 'bigger'
names than Dr. Woudstra. "
As to Dr. Marten Woudstra theologically,
he was once the OT Professor at Calvin Seminary, the college of the Christian
Reformed Church (Dutch Calvinistic). Over 70% of this denomination's churches
now use the NIV. Dr. Woudstra was considered very 'conservative' within Calvin
Seminary. He wrote the Joshua Commentary in the New International Commentary on
the Old Testament (Eerdmans) which was also contributed to by such illustrious
'evangelical' names as F.F. Bruce. "In 1973 the Christian Reformed Church published
their official position relative to homosexuality.
There is currently
discussion, debate and disagreement over the issue of homosexuality within the
CRC as in the wider Reformed denominations. For instance, the CRC's sister denomination,
the Reformed Church of the Netherlands, took the position in 1979 of actually
approving homosexual behaviour within certain bounds. This is a more liberal position
than the CRC has ever yet taken. Is it not incredible to think how far the CRC
has travelled over the years when one considers some of the former teachers, professors
and presidents Calvin Seminary has had, such as Harry Bultema, Herman Hoeksema,
H.J. Kuiper, Louis Berkof and William Hendrikson, to name a few.
1970, the CRC Synod appointed a six man committee to study homosexuality. Its
report was adopted by the same Synod in 1973. One of the six, Clarence Boomsma,
was four times moderator of the CRC and pastor of two CRC churches. In fact Boomsma
held the record for the longest pastorate in the CRC; 35 years in the CRC church
in Grand Rapids, near the Calvin Seminary.
"I called Clarence Boomsma
on the phone in October 1997, and had a long talk about Dr. Woudstra since he
had know him for many years and had been his friend. HE TOLD ME THAT DR. WOUDSTRA
ASSISTED THEM IN WRITING THE REPORT ON HOMOSEXUALITY. I have a copy of the complete
report in my office. It takes a compromised 'middle line' between the Biblical
anti-homosexuality absolute, and the Reformed Church of the Netherlands liberal
acceptance of homosexual behaviour within certain bounds.
me quote a few lines from the report (Report 42, Art. 53, 1973): "'In fact, its
[homosexuality] origin is so unclear as to be finally a mystery' (page 613) "'As
the cause of homosexuality is uncertain, so is the possibility of correcting it'
(page 614) "'Responsibility and the possibility of personal guilt for the homosexual
arises at the point where he must decide what he will do with his sexuality. It
is here that the Christian homosexual must ask what God's will is for him in the
same way as the Christian heterosexual must ask what he must do in obedience to
God with his sex drive' (page 616) "[Note here the clever but wrong comparison
being drawn. For a man to desire sexual relations with a woman is not wrong within
the marriage relationship. However, for a man to desire sexual relations with
another man is always wrong in all circumstances]. "'From this story [Genesis
19, Sodom &
Gomorrah] read as an isolated incident we cannot conclude
however that homosexualism is here condemned' (page 617). "[Note that this report
took the position that a person may be a homosexual by birth (homosexualism) due
to the fallen and irregular nature of humanity, but should not practice homosexual
acts (homosexuality)!] "'In how far the prohibition of homosexualism [in Lev 18:21
& 20:13] is binding on us is therefore a question that remains' (page 619).
"'It has been suggested that the use of these words [malakoi and arsenokoitai
in I Cor 6:9-10] stresses the activity rather than the condition of homosexuality'
(page 619) "[Note this vital belief of Dr. Woudstra. This is the reasoning behind
the very clever translation in the NIV in I Cor 6 'homosexual offenders'. Thus
the NIV here allows a person to be a homosexual, as long as they don't offend.]
"The report refers constantly to the 'Christian homosexual', and urges that he
'deserves the same acceptance, recognition, compassion and help that is given
to any person (page 626). Since the report urges a fully functional place in the
church for 'Christian homosexuals' is it any wonder that, according the Boomsma,
the CRC has currently (1997) one openly 'celibate' homosexual minister who has
All through the report one is struck with the similarities
it bears to the views of Virginia Mollenkott. Even the title of her book 'Is The
Homosexual My Neighbour' finds an echo on page 631 of the CRC's Homosexuality
Committee's 1973 report where paragraph 2 begins 'Love for the homosexual neighbour...'
"The 1973 report advised homosexual ministers to seek pastoral and psychological
help to cope with their desires, but stopped short of condoning homosexual practice.
Boomsma felt that although the CRC should understand and 'sympathise' (page 630)
with the struggle homosexuals faced, for which they may bear minimal responsibility
(page 631), it could not make an exception and allow such people to engage in
'homosexual activity' that is wrong. This is still the view of the CRC in general.
"Taking the scriptural principle of two witnesses, I will now add the
comments of Clarence Boomsma regarding the sexuality of his friend Dr. Woudstra,
the Chairman of the NIV Old Testament Committee. Boomsma made the following statement
to me on the phone on 25th October 1997; I wrote it down verbatim: 'It is generally
believed among us [Christian Reformed Church and Calvin Seminary] that Dr. Woudstra
was a homosexual.' "I asked Boomsma if Dr. Woudstra was an 'active' homosexual.
Although he knew Dr. Woudstra's views on homosexuality very well and holds in
his possession a written dissertation by Dr. Woudstra on the subject, he did not
feel free to comment on its contents. However, he did tell me about a '[homosexual]
incident' in Dr. Woudstra's career in which his professorship was at stake. Woudstra
survived and was not fired by the Seminary. "Boomsma also spoke of Dr. Woudstra's
frequent trips to New York 'which like all large cities has a large homosexual
population'. On his return Woudstra would tell Boomsma how much he enjoyed the
'plays' in New York. I asked were these 'gay plays'. Boomsma would only say that
New York has a large gay culture and is dotted with gay bars, and it was his impression
that his friend, Dr. Woudstra, took part in this side of New York's social scene.
I submit this research as I feel it has a direct bearing on how the
NIV treats homosexuality. By removing the word sodomy and sodomite from the Old
Testament, the language is changed and new ideas are introduced. By speaking of
homosexual 'offenders' in I Corinthians ch. 6, the NIV allows for people to be
homosexual as long as they don't 'offend' by being 'active'; and this is the position
of the Christian Reformed Church, Calvin Seminary, Evangelicals Concerned, and
who knows, quite a few other members of the NIV Translation Committee other than
the late Dr. Woudstra. The fact that Leviticus denounces homosexuality in total
does not worry them as such ethical condemnations do not apply today! ''A corrupt
tree bringeth forth evil fruit'' (Matthew 7:17)."
Michael Penfold, November
Bicester, Oxon. OX6 8PB,
Virginia Mollenkott & Sodomite Marten Woudstra
Chairman of the NIV Old
More on NIV sodomite/lesbian/homosexual
more on NIV sodomite/lesbian/homosexual Virginia Mollenkott
TO SODOMY MENU PAGE
TO WAR ROOM-- GENERAL WICKEDNESS
TO ENTRY PAGE OF JOURNAL