The Elephant in the Living Room: Dr. Mickey Carter Recounts What Happened at his Church

Dr. Mickey Carter Recounts What Happened at His Church

(Note: The following is an excerpt from the book The Elephant in the Room by Dr. Mickey Carter and contributors.)

The Painting

The "elephant in the living room" metaphor is so absurd that it's clear no one would overlook such a thing unless their purpose is to pretend not to see it. Today's fundamentalism has an "elephant in its living room." Some of the primordial brethren involved in my story have admitted to me privately that they can see the "elephant" but don't want it pointed out. It's strange how we conservative Christians are good at pointing out liberals' "elephants" but can't see our own (Matthew 7:4).

The Price

Our church, our school below our church, and my personal ministry have been and are now paying a very high price for refusing to overlook the "elephant." I didn't want to tell this story. For the past fourteen months, I have refused to answer the emails, letters, and attacks from ministries like "The Fundamentalist." Let me give you some of the price we are paying in detail: For over nine years, our church raised and borrowed money to start a Hispanic ministry on our property under the auspices of our local church. We built a building for the Hispanic church, even though it required leaving room for the main auditorium expansion. We began with one Hispanic family who came forward during the invitation to be saved. Then I received temporary help from Pastor Moisés Rosario, who drove a long distance (four hours each way from Miami) to help me on Tuesday nights. From this beginning, the Hispanic ministry grew to an average of 350 people weekly in eight years. During this time, our church invested in buses, teaching staff, salaries, and provided scholarships to many foreign students so they could study at our school. The first pastor was the one who helped me gather about sixty students and also helped me recruit another young preacher named Danny Ortiz to come here as pastor. Under his leadership, the work grew to about 200 or more. When he left, I asked a famous evangelist, Brother Elmer Fernandez (who had placed his membership and crusade ministry under the auspices of our local church) to take charge of the Spanish department as my Spanish pastor.

I had asked the first gentleman, Brother Rosario, about the Spanish Bible, and he had told me that he used the "old 1909" Bible, dating from 1602, which he thought was the closest to the King James Version. I was also able to review some passages with Brother Ortiz, but I did not discover any problems. This subject was of great interest to me. I have personally taught the "inspiration of Scripture" for over twenty-two years at our own Landmark Baptist College . I also taught this subject for one school year for Dr. Jewell Smith at his "institute" in the early 1970s. Dr. Smith is well known for his collection and exposition of Bible manuscripts that support the KJV on Text Criticism. For over 22 years I have taught against the Alexandrian, Catholic, and Westcott - Hort critical texts . As a result of these courses, I have written a simple but well-received book entitled " Things That Are Different Are Not The Same ." Through this book and my preaching our position against perversions has been well known.

Now, while I wouldn't be easily fooled as to the King James Version , I hadn't checked the Spanish text. I simply assumed the "fundamentalist Hispanic brothers" would be using as close to the King James Version as possible. However, this presumption was the cause of my losing my entire Hispanic department and its offering on Sunday afternoon, July 1, 2001. They even left a trail of "breadcrumbs" of signs indicating their new meeting place about six blocks away. But the price of it escalated even further when the following week it was revealed that we had been charged with "discrimination" by the immigration authorities against our school. The Immigration Department had been told that we had expelled all of the students, consisting of almost 50 students. We were therefore investigated by the authorities, resulting in unnecessary paperwork and even a trip and appearance at the immigration offices in Miami.

The faculty at the Hispanic school also managed to remove most of the Hispanic students from the school dorms and hid them, telling them they had been expelled. This resulted in many now being considered illegal immigrants on their student visas. Their I-20 papers had been issued through our school and required them to be enrolled as students at our school. The law stipulates that if they were not properly enrolled, they had to submit their I-20 forms before returning to their countries of origin.

Of course, upon verifying the facts, the Immigration investigators exonerated us of any obligation. We had never expelled or mistreated the faculty of the Hispanic school, or the students, but, on the contrary, we had previously extended all the protocolary accommodations to them. In fact, I had never threatened to fire any of the administration or expel any Hispanic students; on the contrary, I was kind and courteous to each and every one of them.

The lie that "I had expelled the Hispanics" was maliciously circulated throughout the Hispanic world. We had parents and pastors calling because they didn't know where their students were. The fact is, I never had, nor do I now have, any feelings of animosity toward Hispanic students. The students were innocent victims of the deception perpetuated by those who could reach them. I offer an official copy from our school that was posted on dormitory doors when we discovered the students were missing. (See example)

(Letter to students----not included in this html article )

The problem

Starting a Hispanic Studies department at our Bible college caused me to discover the "elephant in the room." An American friend and preacher, whom I knew was very knowledgeable about the Bible and who also had a Hispanic ministry, asked me if I had checked which text was being used in the Hispanic college classes. Following up on this, I asked the college's executive vice president, Dr. Phil Stringer , about it. He said that surely the Hispanic faculty had the correct Spanish Bible. Later, I heard someone say that Dr. Stringer forced this whole Bible debate on me, when the truth is exactly the opposite, since I was the one who first approached him with this concern. I also mentioned this to my Hispanic pastor, who assured me that he had the correct Bible and that only a few "crazy extremists" were questioning the issue. I later learned that some of these "crazy extremists" were actually good men trying to point out that "elephant." I told him I would look into it and get back to him later.

For the next two weeks he went to a meeting and I was able to check things out, and to my surprise I found that the "elephant" had been there all that school year and that they were even using a Spanish translation of Mr. Earle 's book entitled, "How We Got Our Bible" as a text which upheld the Critical Text and even attacked the King James Version when the two conflicted, which was often the case. The author, Mr. Ralph Earle , is also cited as one of the members of the translation and revision committee for the New International Version. In short, learning of this caused me great consternation.

When my Spanish-speaking pastor returned from his trip, we had a long discussion about this that lasted an entire afternoon. I revealed to him that the 1960 Reina-Valera revision was revised under the leadership of the liberal American/United Bible Society. I also pointed out that its primary reviser in charge of the revision format was Mr. Eugenio Nida . Dr. Nida is credited with infamously eliminating the virgin birth (of Christ) from the Revised Standard Version. I pointed out that he is known as the "father of dynamic equivalence."

(See " Christianity Today ," October 22, 2001) This concept is opposite to the "verbal inspiration" that we biblio -believers have advocated and preached for so many years. Mr. Nida says that the "Critical Text is to be preferred" over the traditional Received Text. He also says that they made several slight changes, particularly if those verses were not well known. (Read his own book, " Bible Translator ", volume 12, number 3, July 1961 in reference to the Reina-Valera 1960.) This is why I had not noticed the matter when I had discussed some verses with Danny Ortiz.

I showed my Spanish-speaking pastor certain passages (in the 1960) that contradict the King James Version. I showed him where Dr. Earle 's book "How We Got Our Bible" defends Text Criticism and attacks the King James Version. This book had been taught in our Spanish-speaking high school classes. Our meeting was Christian civics, with him agreeing that some of the passages were wrong. He even mentioned that Romans 1:16 omitted the phrase "of Christ." I suggested that perhaps God had brought him into the kingdom for such a time as this, and that his influence could quietly be used to correct the problem.

I told him I had contacted several of our missionaries about this, and one had told me that Dr. Bob Gray of Longview, Texas, was aware of the problem and might be pointing it out. I told Brother Fernandez I would call Dr. Gray since I don't like to base my decisions on hearsay. I then called Dr. Gray, and he told me he wasn't aware of the problem but that I should send him any information I wrote on the matter. However, so far I haven't written anything, but I will be sending him this book. In search of a solution, I suggested to Brother Fernandez that perhaps he could publish a Fundamentalist Reference Bible himself using a copyright-free text like the 1602 version and adding a page in the front showing the archaic words he intended to change. The archaic words were his main objection to the 1602-1909 version. The 1960 is copyrighted, and every time one is sold, liberals profit from a percentage in the form of a fee. I don't understand how good men defend a version they can't own; its owners are already liberals. Charles Keen of "Carrying the Precious Seed" told me that the only time they published the 1960, they received threats because the 1960 was copyrighted. I brought Dr. Keen in to discuss this problem.

The session with Brother Fernandez ended with an offer to finance the project that the Hispanic brothers could undertake. I told him that if there was any long-term profit, it could all go toward supporting his "Fires of Evangelism" conferences. I never entertained any idea of profiteering or imposing rights reserved for myself or Landmark .

At this meeting, I never offered an ultimatum or threat, saying nothing more than that I would not defend the Critical Text at my school in contradiction to the King James text . It would certainly be hypocritical to teach the King James in English and the opposing liberal text in Spanish. I certainly didn't dream at this point of the trouble this meeting would start. I loved my Hispanic people and had no idea that many of these people would one day consider me their enemy.

A few days later we had another meeting with his assistants present. Three of his associates were present: Kevin Terry, Dru DeLoach , and Adrian (Tico) Alonzo , and Dr. Phil Stringer , our executive vice president of the college. By this point, Dr. Stringer clearly realized the problem I was pointing out. It was at this meeting that Dr. Fernandez told me that his Hispanic brethren were upset and that their 1960 Bible was the Word of God, just as mine was, and that therefore they would have no part in making any fundamentalist reference Bibles out of the old 1602.

Once again, I showed some passages demonstrating that baptismal regeneration (1 Peter) and salvation by works were stated exactly as Mr. Nida 's Revised Standard Version stated it. In some cases, word for word, both the Revised Standard Version and the RV 1960 followed the Critical Text.

I now offer the reader the example of the word "hell." Most modern versions refuse to correctly translate the Greek word "inferno" into English. They use, however, the transliteration "hades," which will appear in any language as "hades" since it is not a legitimate word. Therefore, if you are reading Spanish or French, or any other language, you can detect this word very clearly. This transliterated word is a literal attempt to appease "hell." In the Spanish language, as used in the 1602 and even the 1909 versions, it correctly translates the word as "infierno." Thus, it keeps the fire "within" the language. In each of the thirty-two instances it appears in the Old Testament, Mr. Nida and his 1960 Spanish revision translate it as "hades," just as the Revised Standard Version and the New International Version do. Ten of the twenty-three times the word occurs in the New Testament, the 1960 translates the word as "hades," exactly the same number and in the same places as the Revised Standard Version does, and other new versions as well.

(French Bible—not included in this html article )

(Revised Standard Version—not included in this html article )

(Spanish 1960 King James Version)

This would also make Jehovah's Witnesses happy since Nida 's 1960 version reads Luke 16 just as the New World Translation reads, which has had copyright protection imposed on it since 1961.

(New World Translation—not included)

Another example is Mark 1:2 where the King James Version says "prophets" and the VER, NIV and 1960 in Spanish say "Isaiah the prophet" (See illustration).

(Revised Standard Version---Mark)

(New International Version---Mark)

(Spanish 1960 King James Version---Mark)

However, the quotation is actually from Malachi, proving that the new versions are in error. Now, this means they are following the Critical Text. If it's true that the VER follows the Critical Text in Mark, then it's true that the 1960 does as well.

The second meeting ended with some obvious disagreements being revealed. The main argument was that everything meant the same thing anyway. This argument is known as "inspiration by concept." Simply put, it means that only the concepts are inspired, not the words. Eventually, this allows man to redefine the Bible to his whim and desire. An example of this is found in Daniel 3:25, where the King James Version says Son of God. The capital "H" with the definite article "the" makes the fourth man in the fire Jesus. The Liberal Critical Text indicates this with an "un" and a lowercase "h" as one of the king's lesser gods. Jesus said that "jots" and "tittles" were important. The truth is, if they are different, then they are not the same. I ended the meeting by saying that we would have to address the issue before the school year started again and that the truth of the biblical manuscript feature between the two texts would have to be taught correctly. I asked Brother Fernandez to close in prayer and he said he would discuss it with me later.

By this time, Dr. Jack Schaap called and asked if Brother Fernandez could come to Hammond that weekend to help him, since his Spanish pastor had left. Dr. Schaap thought it would be good since this was Brother Fernandez's former position before he went into evangelism full-time. Shortly after he returned to Haines City, he came to my office and said he was thinking of resigning. I asked him if it was because he wanted to go to Hammond and take the position that was open at the time. He said "yes." I asked him if Dr. Schaap had offered him the position, and he said "no," and that he wouldn't do it until I called him and said it was okay with me. I asked him if there wasn't another way, and he replied "no." He also promised me that he wouldn't cause a rift in the church and that with us on the platform, he would announce his resignation in a good and Christlike manner. So I called Dr. Schaap , but he wasn't there, and I left a message with his secretary telling him it was fine with me if he wanted to offer the position to Brother Fernandez. I also mentioned in the message that maybe he could call me to discuss the matter. Had Brother Schaap called me , I would have expressed my concern about the Bible problem, and I would still have given Brother Fernandez a good reference.

The following week, Brother Fernandez left for a meeting in Los Angeles . All that week, his associate team was telling people how they were going to Hammond and what positions they would have. I was puzzled by this since Dr. Schaap never contacted me that week. The following Saturday, Brother Fernandez came to my office, very depressed, to tell me that Dr. Schaap had found someone else for the Spanish pastor position. I told him how sorry I was, and how his associates had boasted that week. He said he knew, and that he knew anyway, he would have to leave.

He asked for two weeks' salary as a departure for himself and his associates. I said I would give him three, which I did. In the conversation, I promised to call Brother Keith Gomez and give him a good recommendation and place him there. I did so, and I told Brother Gomez that I had a problem with the 1960 Spanish Bible but that Brother Fernandez was a good man. Brother Fernandez again promised me that he would resign from the platform in a Christian manner.

At the beginning of the following week, Brother Fernandez told me he was going to Elgin to join Brother Keith Gomez. I asked him again to keep the Hispanic congregation safe from injuries and to call me if he decided to stay another Sunday and let me know who would be preaching in his place. At 7:40 a.m. the following Saturday, my phone rang. I was about to leave for the bus ministry workers' breakfast meeting, as we usually have every Saturday at 8:00 a.m. It was Brother Fernandez, and he said he needed to stay that weekend and talk with me more. He said his assistant, Brother Kevin Terry, would be preaching, and I said, "Okay, but tell him to preach the gospel and avoid talking about the Bible since I heard his assistants were whispering about discord among the brethren." We hung up, and 20 seconds later the phone rang again. I picked it up and said, "Hello." It was Brother Fernandez again. He was talking so fast and thinking he had dialed Brother Kevin Terry's number, but he didn't realize he had dialed mine again by mistake. He said, "I just got off the phone with Dr. Carter, and he said you'd be preaching, but I didn't tell him about the meeting you're having with the people." I felt my heart sink as I realized I was hearing about a conspiracy to divide the Spanish work. I didn't let him go much further. I interrupted and told him that this wasn't Brother Terry, but Pastor Carter. While he hesitated, I simply said, "I'll talk to you when you get back. Now I have to go to the church workers' breakfast." bus ministry." As I consider everything, I sometimes wonder about this call. I don't think it was an accident, but rather God-directed, since up until this point I thought I was dealing with someone honest. I believe it was the Lord opening my eyes to the truth of what was happening.

Upon arriving at the bus ministry workers' breakfast, I realized that all my Hispanic workers were missing. After breakfast, a Hispanic family came in and asked if I was attending the Hispanic meeting at their church. I told them I didn't know about such a meeting. I learned it would be in the building that housed the Hispanic church, and I went in where Brother Terry was leading the meeting. He was a little surprised but agreed to interpret for me, but it didn't do any good. They had already, behind my back, discussed the situation with Brother Fernandez the previous Wednesday night. Some even asked me, "Why are you taking away our King James Bible?" Another said, "We heard you installed Brother Moisés Rosario as our new pastor." Up to that point, I hadn't even spoken to Brother Moisés Rosario, who pastors in Miami, and I hadn't even mentioned the matter to him. He was the first preacher who helped me start this ministry. I tried to explain some things, but I saw no hope of making them understand. The English-speaking congregation heard about the matter, and by Sunday evening, I felt compelled to address them in the worship service. I did so, and I spoke gently about Hispanics while revealing the problem with the Bible. (A tape of that message is available in English.)

When Brother Fernandez returned to Haines City, he still promised me he would be with me Sunday night to announce his resignation. I then asked one of my associates to preach in my place so I could attend the Hispanic service that evening as we had agreed. When I arrived, the auditorium was empty, signs were posted announcing the new meeting place, and the offering was nowhere to be found. I was told by a Hispanic sister in the congregation that envelopes of Elmer's "Fires of Evangelism" depicting his crusade ministry had been distributed in the morning service. My secretary informed me that no offering had been given that morning at the service, whose normal offerings were several thousand dollars per week. Almost our entire Hispanic congregation had left us to form a new church. Luis Parada of Long Beach, California, had preached the first sermon for them with Brother Fernandez present, and Kevin Terry was appointed their first pastor. This, coupled with the false accusations of racialism levied against us by Immigration and the attacks by our Hispanic brothers and sisters, has become a very high price to pay simply because I pointed out the "elephant."

Since then, over the past fourteen months, we have begun to rebuild our Hispanic congregation and now average an attendance of fifty, with over 120 on a given day. The task is now more difficult because our original Hispanic group, who abandoned us, has been spreading rumors around our small community, saying that we no longer care about Hispanics. They had been manipulated into believing this by our Hispanic associates. The truth will be revealed to them at the judgment throne. Now they are having their own problems, and they have asked Brother Kevin Terry to leave and have called Brother Tico, another former employee, as their pastor.

The Protest

Since this episode occurred, I have received numerous protest letters, phone calls, and emails from many Hispanic pastors. One newspaper, "El Fundamentalista," encouraged everyone to call or write to rebuke us. Some pastors have referred to me or Landmark as " Nazi Baptists " or even "pious Hitlerians." While most are good men, it is apparent that they have been deceived into adopting the wrong biblical tradition. Many claim that the 1960 is from the Received Text. They do not realize that their changes are from the Critical Text. Calvin George, one of its defenders who has been regularly attacking us, admits that some differences in the RV 1960 "follow the Critical Text" and that "the RV 1960 does contain readings that do not agree with any edition of the Received Text." Brother George was a junior in high school when I began teaching manuscript evidences for the Bible at the university 24 years ago. However, he refers to me and others like me who have pointed to the "elephant" as "impotent preachers." (See his blurb in " The Baptist " dated March/April 2002).

(Propaganda in the magazine " The Baptist "—not included in this html article )

The truth is that when words are altered, the Critical Text is implemented. Examples of this are the New King James Version, the New Scofield Bible , and others. Even the VER claims to be a revision of the King James Version (see the opening page). These are changes based on the Critical Text that would make any new version different from the Textus Receptus and the King James Version. This certainly includes the 1960. Our critics say, "Look at our meetings, our crowded crusades; it's because our Bible must be correct." Well, what about the Pope's meetings? Does he use the correct Bible? The same can be said of Billy Graham, Bill Hybels , and the charismatics (who purposely use the 1960 in Spanish), etc. Some of the reasons for the good harvest of souls in the Hispanic world are due to the faithful cultivation of the seed of the gospel by many faithful missionaries and pastors who have worked for many years. Many of these workers in ranches and towns have raised small congregations over the years using the Old Spanish Bible before the appearance of Nida 's newly developed 1960 group . Now today, large soul-winning conferences are being conducted by men who know how to organize and motivate. In most cases, they learned the truths from the King James Bible or the Old Version of Valera 1909. However, do not despise the works they planted and watered and prepared the soil for the great harvest being reaped today.

Let's remember that these men of old used the old Valera 1909 without the copyrights imposed by the liberals, as the 1960 has now. Many of these men to this day do not allow a visiting pastor who brings the 1960 to preach with anything other than the 1909. Two preachers have personally told me that my former Hispanic pastor had to use their Bibles, not his, when preaching for them. I also called my missionaries whom we have supported for years and found that they also use the old version without the copyrights (with the exception of one who is going back).

Another defense of theirs is, "Well, you can win souls with it." True, and I have won some Catholics by using their own Douay Version (5), but I got them a King James Version as soon as they were converted. Some have said, "Well, the Holy Spirit has led them to use that new version." The Holy Spirit would be contradicting Himself by choosing the KJV in English and the Catholic Spanish text.

The protest that Dr. Carter is trying to destroy revivals in the Hispanic world is also in vogue. The question is, was this when I was raising money to build the Hispanic auditorium? Or when, at the age of 57 as a pastor, I put on work clothes and led the church in pouring over 70 yards of concrete for the parking lot under the hot Florida summer sun? Was I trying to hinder revivals in the Hispanic world when I led my congregation to sacrificially raise $450,000 to purchase a fine building that had belonged to the Presbyterians so that the Hispanic church could have more room and the English and Spanish departments of the College could have better space for their chapels? In this particular offering, the Hispanics sacrificially gave $85,000, yet they were still led eight months later to leave our church and form their own. Right now, they are meeting in a small building that formerly held a Pentecostal church. They are suffering because the authority of the pastor who loved them and built their church was destroyed, along with the plans he had for them in the future. This is thanks to Brother Fernandez, who won their loyalty as if he had been their senior pastor. However, when he was invited by Dr. Schaap to preach in the Spanish department of Hammond , Brother Fernandez told them that Dr. Schaap was their only pastor. A missionary who was present when he said this later said, "What a pity he didn't practice that with Brother Carter." No, I have not been trying to stop the revival in the Spanish-speaking world, but I have been in the forefront of training and equipping Spanish-speaking servants of God to start other independent, fundamentalist Baptist works. Recently, we were able to do this again with great success. I approved and gave honorary doctorates to some Spanish-speaking brethren who well deserved it. I did everything to encourage the Spanish-speaking world to have a revival. However, in good faith and in the name of truth and honesty, in a good spirit, I dared quietly but correctly to point out the "elephant" and now I am being called a villain.

Another big complaint we hear is that if we don't speak Spanish, we have no right to point out this "elephant." My response to this is that when a church like mine puts in the kind of money for buses, buildings, and salaries, we have earned the right to demand that the unadulterated Word of God be used. In my case, my Hispanic ministry was started with the Old Spanish Bible, and no one had the right to bring in a modern version produced by liberals just because it could be hidden from us "gringos" behind the Spanish language. I don't speak Spanish, but I employ several people who do. I have a person who not only speaks Spanish but also speaks and writes in other languages, as he works for the government for this purpose. We have sat down with this individual and compared verses and received an honest and sincere translation into English. The Spanish language will no longer be like a fig leaf apron to hide the "elephant."

Another protest is, "You want to judge the 1960 by the King James." As I told my former Spanish-speaking pastor, let's judge by truth. Is it true that baptism doesn't save? Then the verse should read like this. The fact that 1 Peter 3:21 omits the phrase "like a figure," implying that baptism does save, is not the fault of the King James. If Mr. Nida in the 1960 is trying to cool hell with a REVISED STANDARD VERSION word like "hades," it is not the fault of the King James. Certainly if you measure it by truth, you will have to adhere to the King James Bible because truth doesn't change from one language to another.

Let's now look at the biggest "elephant" of all. Some pretend to be blind to the fact that many of those defending the 1960 Critical Text have never been defenders of the King James Version to begin with. This can be clearly seen in the subtle arguments made by Calvin George in his book questioning the KJV (So God Said You?). Some preachers have joined the rest in loudly crying out "King James," only to receive heartfelt "amens" from the congregation. However, this was not said from a heart of deep conviction, as it had not been attained through exhaustive study. It is for this reason that we have heard the protest, "Well, the King James Version has errors too." This was affirmed by my former Spanish-speaking pastor, who said, "Well, how could that pagan king have known that the fourth man in the fire was Jesus?" A liberal professor sat in my office eighteen years ago and made exactly the same comment in defense of the American Standard Version and its Critical Text. I replied that the God of these three Hebrew youths, who had the power to drive the smell of smoke away from them, revealed it to the king. Not to mention that the entire context of the chapter was a contest between the pagan gods (lowercase "d") of the king, and the Lord God Jehovah of the Hebrews. Read the decree in the context of which god was declared the greatest. It has been stated by Calvin George that the original King James does not read like the King James does today. That is a lie. Our church has owned an original copy (not a copy) of the 1611 King James for fifteen years, and I am showing you a photostatic copy of Daniel 3:25 as proof of the definite article "the" and the capital "D" in God.

(1611 KJV original)

I was told by some of the former members of the Spanish church, "Well the word " Easter " (6) is a mistake in your King James Bible." This is another argument the liberals make with their Critical Text. The word " Easter " is not a mistake but was used purposefully by the King James translators who understood the context. Passover had come and passed and was followed by the Feast of Unleavened Bread which lasted seven days. Herod was waiting for his pagan " Easter " (a pagan occasion of rejoicing) to do the dirty work of killing Peter. The Greek word used is commonly translated " Easter " (in secular literature) as also "Pascua." The context determines its particular usage.

The example just mentioned demonstrates what ignoring the "elephant" can lead to. To defend the 1960 Bible, you must attack the King James Bible. This is done to excuse the very identity of the 1960 Bible and to achieve a subtle attack on the King James Bible instead of facing reality. There is a very obvious difference. You cannot ignore this "elephant" unless you do so intentionally. The argument used by Calvin George that these Bibles really mean the same thing is flawed. Things that are different are not the same, no matter how you spin it.

My Position

I take no pleasure in pointing at this "elephant." I have tried to ignore the personal attacks on me and the ministries of Landmark Baptist Church for the past fourteen months. I am not a political preacher. I am not after public popularity. My plate is full with the local church God sent me to pastor over thirty-one years ago. He doesn't ask anyone to be my ally. My ministry stands or falls based on my relationship with the Lord. It doesn't depend on being "politically correct" with my brethren. I have been, from the earliest years, a champion of the King James Bible. One of my first sermons thirty-six years ago was against the 1966 "Good News" Bible, in which Mr. Nida endorsed it in his book "Good News for All" (page 91). This new Bible was published by the liberal American Bible Society at the same time as the Spanish-language RV 1960.

("Good News for All", page 91---not included)

Now, we Independent Baptists have the advantage of making our own decisions, whether our friends or our standards. If a preacher has no problem standing for the King James Bible behind his English pulpit and allowing the opposition text in his Hispanic ministry, that's his business, not mine. However, whether he's being deceived is another matter. I believe that many good, faithful Hispanic men have been deceived by what is being taught in American universities. Several supposedly "fundamentalist" Christian Bible colleges for several years have allowed the Critical Text to be taught in class even though their pastors are of the "King James-only" position. Some colleges have even defended such corrupters as Westcott and Hort .

Personally, I believe that several good Hispanic brethren were seduced into abandoning their old Bibles by a "perversion" based on the Critical Text published by liberals, and that they now find it difficult to confront the "elephant." The deception was further compounded by the clever publication of the King James text side by side with the 1960 text, making it seem like the same text. Scofield 's old notes were also included in a 1960 edition since the copyright had expired. This certainly created a package of deception. I recently met a national missionary from Colombia. He was saved in America, and his first Bible was a King James. However, he was later given a 1960 Spanish Bible with the King James text in parallel columns. I told myself that he immediately realized they were not the same and wondered why no one spoke out about it.

My position is that independent Baptists can make their own decisions. I have made mine by standing for the King James Version and the manuscript line from which it was received. Below is a Spanish translation of an editorial by Dr. Charles Keen from "Carrying the Precious Seed" (Fall 2001) and another article by the editor dated August 2, 2001. I believe the editorial expresses my feelings as they should be. I should add that this position certainly eliminates versions and revisions made by the liberal "United Bible Societies" that implement Text Criticism to correct the Received Text as we see it in the authoritative King James Bible.

DR. CHARLES KEEN , The President's Column

Resolution on the King James Version/Received Text and declaration through our ministry of Bearing the Precious Seed.

We hereby establish the following resolution, declared and approved, as an expression of the purpose and policy of Bearing the Precious Seed, of Milford, Ohio, the printing ministry of the First Baptist Church. Be it understood that the purpose of Bearing the Precious Seed is, has been, and always will be to fulfill the divine mandate given to the people of God in general and to the local churches in particular to print, publish, and distribute the Word of God to every tribe, tongue, and nation.

We reaffirm our faith in the Word of God and our conviction that it is God's final authority in faith and practice. We believe it is verbally and plenary inspired in its essence, complete in its content, preserved in its translation, and perfected through a divinely directed process in the English translation as translated from the Textus Receptus and commonly referred to as the "Authorized" or "King James Version." We further believe that any version accepted in another language must be derived and developed through this process and diligently compared with this translation. We further define and qualify the textual basis as the Textus Receptus. This is the text used by the King James translators.

This being understood we resolve that:

* We will not publish or distribute any version other than the English version known as the "Authorized Version."

* We will publish and distribute translations from languages other than English unless they have first met the following requirements:

1)  We resolve that we will use every effort to search for and identify a language and one that can be certified by reliable sources. Having identified such a translation, we will resolve not to print any other translations.

2)  We resolve that if there is no acceptable and legibly faithful translation of the Received Text in any language, it will be our policy and duty to diligently seek and identify the best available translation and to accomplish the following:

a.    To encourage the revision and translation of these languages by scholastics, missionaries, national pastors, and laypeople, and to incorporate their translation and revisions into future editions in an effort to obtain an acceptable translation.

b.    Ensure doctrinal integrity through a New Testament checklist consisting of 158 questions and affecting textual revisions through word reconciliation to achieve doctrinal compatibility.

c.     Print small print runs of a text (based on the total population of the recipient group) so that revisions can be incorporated frequently in our desire to progressively present the pure Word of God to them.

d.    Include a delicately written preface page to encourage the receiving group that they should expect and accept acceptable revisions, as an effort will be made to ensure and obtain an acceptable translation based on the Received Text without diminishing their faith in what God has provided for them thus far.

We resolve to maintain a good spirit toward those who disagree with this resolution in part or in whole. We pray that God will guide them and us in our quest to do His will and to better fulfill our responsibility to reach that half of the world who do not yet have the Word of God. We likewise pray that the Lord will give them and us a Christian spirit of love and understanding that will enable us to do the best we can in this task with the understanding and resources we currently possess until better methods and access become available.

We resolve that Bearing the Precious Seed will endeavor to bring us to obedience to our Lord Jesus Christ and His Great Commission and to work diligently to reach the unreached people groups of the world. We therefore launch these printing resolutions with the sincere desire to honor and glorify God. We do so with compassion for souls and a clear conscience before God and man as we focus on fulfilling the Great Commission.

Editor's note:

On August 2, 2001, the First Baptist Church of Milford approved and adopted this Resolution, which appeared in the President's Column. Before this resolution was presented to the First Baptist Church family, Dr. Keen consulted in detail with a wide variety of national leaders regarding this decision. Without exception, all agreed that at this point, we had no other choice. The collective conclusion of these leaders was that if we are to be globally significant and focused on fulfilling our effort to take the Gospel to all nations and every creature, then there is no other option.

The Great Commission given by your head, the dear Lord Jesus, is to go to every nation, kindred, people, and language. God leaves no one out and shows no partiality. Neither does First Baptist Church and Carrying the Precious Seed. Missionaries can only be effective when they have the Word of God. We must do the best we can with what we have at this time.

This is the new challenge that fundamentalists must face. For the first time in our history, we have the opportunity and the ability to address the needs of Scripture and reach unreached people groups. This is the first attempt to address this new challenge. As with all pioneering work, this will require revision and refinement. Please pray for God's wisdom and please contribute whatever light you can on this matter of translations. May we ask that grace be granted as we unite in the common desire to be globally significant for our Lord Jesus.

Request to Correct

My final plea is for the English- and Spanish-speaking fundamentalist brethren, who are great enough in basic Christian character, to put aside emotional fervor and unite in a solution to this problem. It was never my intention to divide the brethren. I tried to point out the problem and offer a solution quietly and gently. This blew up in my face, with my good being vilified. However, I believe that until good brethren decide to act in honest faith, this "elephant" will continue to grow. It is my prayer that the uncopyrighted Spanish text be revised. I have never asked for a new translation. Several different brethren have been working on a revision long before I knew of the need. I believe there could be a union of these groups to resolve this problem in the right spirit for the glory of God.

Meanwhile, there are several Bibles that are far more accurate than the 1960 Bible, and which are not written by liberals.

Apparently there is some confusion about whether the 1602 is the 1909. In most cases it is, but the 1602 date has been left in, and this has resulted in the confusion. Some of the 1909 contains Nestle 's text and is therefore not the pure Textus Receptus. However, at least the 1909 is not copyrighted and monopolized by the liberal American/United Bible Society. The challenge of achieving this does not require extensive scholarship. The true Bible has been preserved by the Lord through the "believer's priesthood," as Edward Hills explains well in his book entitled "Believing . " Bible Study ." Throughout history, perversions came through schooling in monasteries and universities. Origen's work is an example.

Since the "elephant" lawsuit began, I have heard from several other people more knowledgeable about the issue today. Dr. D.A. Waite called me and left a message to tell me I was right. We also received a letter dated June 20, 2001, from the " Sword of the Lord" newspaper stating their long-held suspicion that the 1960 text came from the minor text. They also sent us documentation of some of the variations. Now, brethren, I have done much meditation on the matter and received much abuse until I finally decided to write this. It is my prayer that I have not made myself your enemy by telling you the truth. Galatians 4:16 "Have I therefore become your enemy, in that I have spoken the truth unto you?"

EXAMINATION OF THE OBVIOUS FACTS

The Elephant 1960

1. Fact: The Liberals revised and marketed the 1960 and Mr. Nida of VER fame was involved:

But ___

2. Fact: The variants against the KJV read the same as the VER.

But ___

3. Fact: These changes came from the Critical Text, sometimes called the Alexandrian or Catholic side.

But ___

4. Fact: The changes in the text affect doctrine and Deity. Examples include "Hades" or "Hell" and who the fourth man in the fire was.

But ___

5. Fact: The truth of God's Word will be more important at the Throne Judgment than the "preachers' politics" now.

But ___

Dr. Mickey P. Carter

Dr. Mickey P. Carter holds a Th.G. from Temple Baptist College and further education from Florida Baptist Seminary. He has received honorary Doctor of Divinity degrees from Sacramento Baptist College and Baptist Christian College. Dr. Carter has been the pastor of Landmark Baptist Church in Haines City, Florida, since January 1971. Some of Landmark Baptist Church's ministries include includes a growing bus ministry, Youth for Truth, Patriotic Elders, Missions, Landmark Christian Schools (K-12), Landmark Freedom Baptist Curriculum , and Camp Glory. Dr. Carter also is president of the Landmark Baptist College and is author of "Things That Are Different Are Not The Same" and "The Truth About the Battle for the Preserved King James Bible."