THE EVIL ONE?
They are corrupt, and speak wickedly concerning oppression:
they speak loftily.
This verse from the IV (Inspired Version), otherwise known as the KJV, is a reference to the wicked who rebel against God. Most modern versions do not offer renderings that merit a great deal of discussion. They mess it up some, but it is not outlandish enough for much commentary. Not so with the foul version known as the Anchor Bible. This perversion of God’s Word hired a Jesuit, Mitchell Dahood, to prepare their version of the Psalms. The following is what this vile Jesuit has done to the verse. It may very well be the most evil perverted verse that I have yet to encounter. Sit down before you read this one.
Anchor Bible: “They scoff and speak against the Evil One, they speak against the oppression from the Exalted.
Dahood has actually called God “the Evil One” in his counterfeit Psalter. He explains this in a footnote thus:
“the Evil One. In the mind of unbelievers, Yahweh is the cause of evil upon the earth and hence the Evil One.”1
Dahood has completely mangled the Hebrew in order to come up with this weird, demonically inspired rendering. His footnote tries to explain that this is meant to express the views of God’s enemies, but this is not at all expressed in the translation itself; this thought is only expressed in the footnote. If someone were to just read the Psalm rendering itself, or quote it, there would be no reason for anyone not to think that it was the psalmist calling God the Evil One. In fact, that is exactly what Dahood has done.
When Dahood chose to make this a name by capitalizing it, and by making it a word pair (the thing that he is most famous for is word pair studies) with the Exalted One, he himself has treated it as if it were a name for God. Not only has he showed himself to be an incompetent Hebraicist, as he has done on so many other occasions, but he has exposed his true opinion of God.
What are the criteria that modern version users and supporters have for determining whether or not a “translation” is legitimate? It is obvious after even the most casual observation that the criteria are that someone has published them, and that they are read by someone. That is it and no more. The Lockman Foundation is an anonymous organization, so it does not matter at all to modern version users who did the translation. It could be a group of abortion supporting, sodomite loving socialists that produced the translation, but they do not know nor care. James White was paid by this anonymous organization, so his motivations for using it are not hard to discern, but the for others, no sound reason is discernible. It was the World Council of Churches that produced and endorsed the RSV and NRSV. We know for a fact that they are abortion supporting, sodomite-loving socialists who support dictators that murder Christians, and this does not matter to the modernists. Of course this description also fits the committees of dozens of versions published by scores of apostate branches of numerous congregations. It could be produced by a wicked New World Order billionaire and published by a company that publishes pornographer and homosexual literature, as is the case with the NIV, and they care not. It could be owned by Catholics as the NKJV is, and professed fundamentalists and creation scientists will not care. It could be put together by atheists, lesbians, witches, New Agers, and sundry other unrepentant sinners, and that makes no difference whatsoever to the modern version user and supporter. They cannot deny any of this, and they do not try to deny it; they simply do not care. Some may occasionally give the KJV lip service, but they invariably prefer the products of reprobate sinning liars, atheists and abortion-promoting witches and feminazis, over God’s Word and many even bristle up like stuck pigs when they are confronted by God’s actual Word. Whatever their reasons for choosing modern versions over the KJV it has nothing whatsoever to do with their having an understanding of who or what was behind the translation, or with the level of scholarship involved in its production. It is simply that they want to look wise in the eyes of the rubes that have come to dominate the modern church. I use the word rube here because it is appropriate. These modern Bible “correctors” can very well be likened to the average carnie hanky pank man (operator of various types of rigged carnival games), and their gullible victims to what the carnie calls a rube.
What then would prevent the average new version shopper from using Dahood’s wicked rendering of Psalm 73:8? The answer is that there is nothing whatsoever to prevent him from doing so. The Anchor Bible has been endorsed by the same kind of people that have produced all of the other modern versions, and many later versions have actually borrowed from the Anchor Bible’s renderings. I have not found an example where a modern version has copied off of the Anchor Bible for this verse, but I have found many other incidents where they have for other verses. If all versions are equally legitimate, and if the modern “Christian” need not concern himself with discernment, then why is the verse from this version any different than any other. If the modern “Christian” is going to lean on his own understanding rather than upon the Final Authority, what is to stop him from using this Anchor Bible verse other than his own judgment, which he has already demonstrated to be impoverished? It would not surprise me to hear some blathering Sunday school teacher someday say: “The King James had it wrong in this passage, what it should say is “They scoff and speak against the Evil One.” Nothing is too absurd for the modern church during this period of the great falling away.
1 The Anchor Bible: Psalms II, 51-100, p. 189.
John Hinton, Ph.D.
Bible Restoration Ministry
A ministry seeking the translating and reprinting of KJV equivalent
Bibles in all the languages of the world.