All posts by kjvbiblebeliever

The “Three-Fifths Clause” Helped End Slavery In America

“Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.”

–Three-fifths Clause: ARTICLE I, SECTION 2, CLAUSE 3 of the Constitution of the United States of America.

By: Pastor Greg Miller

The Enumeration Clause
The Enumeration Clause is also referred to as the “Three-Fifths Clause” in the U.S. Constitution.  And it is a glaring example of the CULTURE OF LIES that exists in America, today.  A culture that completely misrepresents history, re-defines terms and flat out LIES in order to teach what they WANT to be true instead of actually teaching the truth as it stands.Have you been told that the “Three-Fifths Clause,” or the “Enumeration Clause,” as it is also known, was adopted because slaves were considered less-than-human?  If so, you were LIED to.  And most Americans persist in believing this lie.

Another distortion is to claim that this three-fifths clause GAVE slave states additional representation.  And such a claim is LUDICROUS.  The slave states came to the table demanding ALL slaves be FULLY counted as part of the state population.¹

The FACT is, the Three-Fifths Clause played an important role in ENDING SLAVERY in America.  Here is the true story… ²

Why Did The Founders Adopt The Three-Fifths Clause”?
During the Constitutional Convention, the anti-slavery state representatives became fully aware of the fact that whenever anything decided was proportioned according to population, the slave states would have a great advantage IF every slave was counted as part of that state’s population.

For example, while each state is allowed to send two Senators to that chamber the House of Representatives is proportioned according to the state population.  If slaves were counted fully and added to the population totals, then states like Virginia (whose population was nearly 40% SLAVES) would have additional congressman.  This would give the southern states a great advantage with dozens of additional votes in Congress.

For that reason, after contentious debate and disagreement, the representatives of the Constitutional Convention reached a compromise: Slaves would only count as three-fifth a person for population totalling purposes ONLY.

What Was The Result of The Three-Fifths Clause?
The result was immediately dramatic.  The slave population of America only accounted for 525,000 instead of 700,000.  The number of Congressmen from slave states was considerably smaller, especially when many bills were decided over a single vote!

The three-fifths clause was a substantial BLOW against slavery in America.  That is a FACT.

IF the Constitutional Convention had counted each slave fully as part of the state population, American history would have been MUCH different and slavery would not have ended anywhere NEAR the mid-19th century.  Between 1787 and the terrible “Civil War”, this Constitutional compromise favored emancipation of slavery by:

  • Resulting in laws that were anti-slavery, pro-abolitionist in nature.
  • The appointment of more anti-slavery judges.
  • Even the election of Congressmen was titled a bit more “anti-slavery” by this very clause.

It is simply a fact: the three-fifths clause was a GREAT move toward the end of Slavery in America.³  And every time you see someone mockingly denounce the founders for this “Enumeration Clause” that only counted slaves as three-fifths, especially whenever they pretend this was because slaves were seen as “less than human”?  You know you’re either dealing with an ignoramus or a liar.

Always Verify
That is the bottom line.  In this day of lies and distortion, Bible believing Christians simply cannot afford to assume that we are being told the truth.  We cannot afford to be LAZY.  We must TEST everything by the word of God (Acts 17:11) and try the spirits (1 John 4:1).  We must do our own research and VERIFY the claims made by textbooks, teachers, documentaries, news reporters, journalists, preachers, movies…

For More Information:

  1. Here is an example of someone making this completely fabricated claim:  “Three-Fifths Clause: Why Its Taint Persists,” Paul Finkelman (2/26/13).  (An example of how liberals call good, “evil” and evil “good”, see Isaiah 5:20).
  2. Compare Finkelman’s article to this article written by one of America’s great black authors, Walter E. Williams, “Was A Black Valued At 3/5th of A White?”
  3. Don’t Denounce the Founders Over Slavery,” By Walter E. Williams (June 28, 2011)

See also: “Constitutional Topic: Slavery,”   @

Was It Ornan or Araunah Who Owned The Threshingfloor?

1 Chronicles 21:15 (KJV) says, “And God sent an angel unto Jerusalem to destroy it: and as he was destroying, the LORD beheld, and he repented him of the evil, and said to the angel that destroyed, It is enough, stay now thine hand. And the angel of the LORD stood by the threshingfloor of Ornan the Jebusite.”


2 Samuel 24:16 (KJV) says, “And when the angel stretched out his hand upon Jerusalem to destroy it, the LORD repented him of the evil, and said to the angel that destroyed the people, It is enough: stay now thine hand. And the angel of the LORD was by the threshingplace of Araunah the Jebusite.”

So, which was it?  Was It Ornan or Araunah Who Owned The Threshingfloor?

The answer: BOTH.  Because it was, obviously, the same man.  And nothing more needs to be said.  There is no evidence to the contrary and plenty of examples of this same “phenomenon” in not only Biblical literature but ALL literature, both ancient and modern.

Do you ONLY go by one name?  Have you ONLY gone by one name your whole life?  Not even a nickname?  If so, you’d be a rare bird.

This author has gone by multiple names for various reasons.  My first name is Gregory.  But it is rare that anyone calls me that.  Most of the time I am known as just “Greg”.  But there there is the fact that there were several of us named Greg in the small town I went to.  So, while at school and in school functions, I would just be called “Miller” much of the time.  That’s my last name.

But you are probably aware of the fact that there are actually MORE “Millers” than there are boys named “Greg”.  So, it was only natural that I’d be labelled with other names.  And through the years (I won’t explain the reason behind each one), I have been known by the following names and most, if not all, are recorded in writing somewhere in documents: Gregory, Greg, Miller, Andy, Andrew, Fudge…

So, the fact that one account calls the owner of the Threshingfloor Ornan and a totally different author living in a different Kingdom (the North vs. the South) at a different time called that same owner by the name Araunah?  That’s supposed to be a “contradiction”?

Nonsense.  Only if you’re trying to find reasons to doubt the veracity of the Bible so you can feel comfortable in your sins and delude yourself into thinking that the Bible is false and that there is no “God of the Bible” who will one day judge you for your sins.

John 3:19 (KJV) “And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.”

Other Double-Named Characters In Scripture

There are other examples of this in the Bible, itself.  And these are not contradictions, either.  For example, at the Resurrection we see two names mentioned as having seen the Resurrected Jesus.

In the Gospel of John we see this:

John 21:1-2 (KJV) “After these things Jesus shewed himself again to the disciples at the sea of Tiberias; and on this wise shewed he himself. There were together Simon Peter, …”
And in Paul’s Gospel declaration in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4,  he begins listing those who saw the Resurrected Jesus and we see this:

1 Corinthians 15:5 (KJV) “And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve:”

So, Jesus was seen by Peter AND by Cephas.  So, that’s two eyewitnesses, right?  No.  Peter and Cephas are the same man.

Other examples?

  • Lucifer and Satan
  • Jacob and Israel
  • Reuel and Jethro (Father of Zipporah, Moses’ First Wife)
  • Gideon and  Jerubbaal
  • Daniel and Belteshazzar
  • Hananiah and Shadrach
  • Mishael and Meshach
  • Azariah and Abed-Nego
  • Immanuel and Jesus
  • Saul and Paul
  • Thomas and  Didymus

And there are MANY more examples, but this demonstrates the reality.  There is no “contradiction” here.

Are 1 Chronicles 21 and 2 Samuel 24 Contradictory?

At a glance, we see Satan being credited with David’s numbering of the children of Israel in 1 Chronicles 21 and then we see the Lord being credited with the SAME THING in 2 Samuel 24.  But that’s the problem: “At a glance…”

(Caps for emphasis only…  Not shouting.)

We need to look carefully at EXACTLY what the text says.  That is ALWAYS the case.  And when we look at the EXACT wording and EXACTLY what these texts tell us, we see something that is not only NOT a contradiction but is FASCINATING.

Those who make much of this and try to use it to prove a “contradiction” are not usually open to the answer because they approach the Bible with the attitude that IT must match THEIR view of what God SHOULD do, IF there were a God.  Most of these “skeptics” are simply Psalm 14:1 “agnostics” and atheists, even if they are called “theologians” or “Bible professors” or “pastors” or “Reverend” or “Priest,”…

But the answer is very simple.  Satan moved David to sin, so God allowed it and directed (moved) David’s arrogance toward numbering Israel so that the Lord could bring down judgment on Israel as a nation.

This is simply an example of the free will of a man (in David) whose heart is in a state of rebellion (at that time) being used by God for His ultimate purpose.  And, although many died as a result of God’s judgment, the ultimate end is for GOOD: the preservation of the remnant of true believers in Israel AND the repentance and restitution of David to God.

Romans 8:28 (KJV) “And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.”

But the hardened skeptic cannot see the “big picture”.  They do not begin with a holy God who is just in judging sin.  They begin with an unholy figment of their imagination who is SUBJECT to their opinion.  So, they ignore what the text SAYS:

2 Samuel 24:1 (KJV) “And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them …”

1 Chronicles 21:1 (KJV) “And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David…”

Satan had his agenda and God used him to exact judgment.  No contradiction.  But a very incredible look into the workings “behind the scenes” in the spirit realm.  A place we only understand insomuch as we are given such “light” in the words of God.

Reading The Bible Literally

“When the PLAIN sense makes GOOD sense, seek NO OTHER sense.”
Would you read a prescription bottle and not take it LITERALLY? Do you read the morning newspaper LITERALLY? Did you read that job application LITERALLY when you applied for that job?

Do you read a cookbook, the US Constitution, a Map, a history book, love letter (supposing you have received one!), your driver’s license, your family genealogy, legislation, your diary, etc., LITERALLY?

Well, the Bible is a collection of such similar items. Covenants (contracts), historical accounts, future predictions, laws (including civil, domestic, religious and dietary), genealogies, teachings. And, just like any other document, it must be handled IN CONTEXT so that if there are readings utilizing parable, symbolism, etc., the context makes that clear. The ONLY legitimate way to read the Bible is to read it LITERALLY unless the context demands otherwise.

Revelation Revealed!

Of course, the main victim of the anti-literal folks is the Book of Revelation. And a main point that they make is to say, “How can you take all of that symbolism LITERALLY?”

The short answer is, “I don’t!” Why? Because the context makes it clear when it is symbolic.

For example, Revelation 12:1 says, “And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars.”

Now, the Roman and Orthodox pull an interpretation out of thin air and say that the woman is “Mary”. They have no Biblical basis for that. It just fits their worship of Mary, so they stick it in there.  And this claim that Revelation 12:1 refers to Mary is, obviously, false as we will show in a moment.

Many others who want to “spiritualize” the Bible and never take the literal approach will tell you that Revelation 12:1 refers to “the Church”.  Again, they have no Biblical basis for this.  It simply fits their agenda to “build the kingdom” (and it just happens to be THEIR denomination that they wish to head up this “Kingdom”) and they call it THE Church. And this claim also is, obviously, false.

So, what does Revelation 12:1 mean?

We should look to the Bible for the meaning of symbols. And so, we find this verse defined by Genesis 37:9 where Joseph says, “…Behold, I have dreamed a dream more; and, behold, the sun and the moon and the eleven stars made obeisance to me.”

In verse 10, Jacob confirms that he is the sun, Rachel is the moon and the sons of Jacob (the twelve tribes) are the stars. He says, “Shall I and thy mother and thy brethren indeed come to bow down ourselves to thee to the earth?”

Eleven stars represent the OTHER eleven patriarchs whose offspring became known as the tribes of Israel. Joseph would be the twelfth “star”. Israel is represented by stars.

This is confirmed as we see God refer to the seed of Abraham as “stars”, coming from these twelve “stars” over and over in Scripture. You can look up Genesis 15:5, 22:17 and 26:4 to see this before Joseph’s dream. Then you can look up Exodus 32:13, Deuteronomy 1:10, 1 Chronicles 27:23, Nehemiah 9:23 and Hebrews 11:12 to see that Israel is “as the stars” after Joseph’s dream.

The woman in Revelation 12:1 is shown by comparing Scripture with Scripture to be a reference to: ISRAEL.

It’s That Simple

There are things in the Bible hard to understand (2 Peter 3:16). A Book written by God should be expected to be complex in places. But with the help of God’s Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 2:14) and a healthy attitude toward God’s word (1 Thessalonians 2:13), you can handle the Bible with care and rightly divide the word of truth with no need of being ashamed in God’s presence (2 Timothy 2:15).

Election 2016

Psalm 118:8 Vote Pray Trust In The LordBible Believers Fellowship does not endorse particular candidates.

However, Pastor Greg answers your questions regarding the election, who he is voting for, voting questions in general, facts of history, etc., in these individual videos.
Simply click on the link to watch and learn:

Why Vote?
Answering those who ask, “Why bother?”

Lesser of Evils?
If you vote for the “lesser of evils”, does evil still win?

Did the Apostle John Err In His Reference To The High Priest?


This accusation of error was a new on on me. A reader was claiming that there was an error in the Gospel of John and that the Author (humanly speaking, the Apostle John but, in reality, God the Holy Ghost) had made an error by making the office of High Priest an annual office. In other words, the accusation is that John said the High Priest was decided annually and that the High Priest served a one-year term.

Tha accusation is absurd. There are two references given, as follows:

“And one of them, named Caiaphas, being the high priest that same year, said unto them, Ye know nothing at all,…
“And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation;”
John 11:49 & 51


“And led him away to Annas first; for he was father in law to Caiaphas, which was the high priest that same year.”
John 18:13

Absolutely Ridiculous Mishandling of WORDS
This accusation is simply laughable. But in my research, I found that it has been espoused by certain critics. Schaff cites a Bretschneider making such an accusation (page 710, “History of the Christian Church,” Volume 1 of 8). But that doesn’t surprise me. What passes for “scholarship” throughout human history is, many times, just a big joke.

So, let’s clear the air and make it plain for anyone reading at this point who hasn’t already seen the OBVIOUS.

John was referring to the YEAR of Christ’s CRUCIFIXION.

It was in “that year” of the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ that Caiaphas was the high-priest. John was not making a reference to the status or length of term that Caiaphas would serve as High Priest. He was making reference to the fact that Caiaphas was high priest the very year that Jesus died.

The Gospel of John, after all, has as it’s climax that very event. The Gospel of John was written to tell you:

1. Who Jesus was: and He was God (read the first verse of the Book).

2. What Jesus came to do: which was to DIE and RISE from DEATH.

3. When Jesus DIED: which was on 14th Nisan–a Wednesday.

4. Where Jesus DIED: which was OUTSIDE Jerusalem on Golgotha (and not INSIDE Jerusalem, which is where the Catholic temple is built claiming to be the site of the Crucifixion).

5. How Jesus DIED: which was on a Cross (pierced) without a broken bone, etc.

6. Why Jesus DIED: which was to pay for the sins of the whole world.

When John speaks of “that year”, he is speaking of the year that Jesus died. There is no error in this or any other place where the careless skeptics make their accusations.

Did Paul contradict the teachings of Jesus?

Academics (including the ridiculously named “Jesus Seminar”—a group of apostates who couldn’t handle the Bible accurately if their lives depended on it) teach lies couched in high-sounding theological terminology, such as the idea that Paul somehow HIJACKED Christianity, changed the teachings of Jesus and, then, created a completely new religion.

The simple remedy to this mishandling of the word of God is to “rightly divide the word of truth”. (2 Timothy 2:15, kjv) This means that we must read the Bible IN CONTEXT and we must read the text carefully, understand the author’s intentions and identify the author’s immediate audience, taking into consideration the historical and grammatical information that will give us an accurate understanding. Only then can we apply it to 21st century life in a legitimate manner. This should be grade school stuff, but some of the most highly decorated PhD’s and ThD’s in the nation seem incapable of accomplishing this task.

Immediate Context

As when reading any other text in the Bible, we must look at the text and see what the immediate context is. There are different Dispensations (“economies”/ages) and each represents a difference in the manner in which God is dealing with mankind.

For example, Adam didn’t start a “new religion”. But God changed the rules after kicking Adam out of Eden. Why? The first dispensation, which began in a paradise garden, ended with Judgment. The second dispensation began with Adam and Eve outside of Eden with the commandment to replenish the earth. You will find some similarities but vast differences between these two ages (dispensations) but this is the continuing unfolding of the SAME RELIGION with the SAME GOD.

The Biblical account of history unfolds as we continue through Genesis. The second dispensation ends with a global flood. Only Noah and his family survive. This begins the third dispensation. Again, you will find some similarities but vast differences in God’s dealings with the post-flood world as compared to the second dispensation (pre-flood).

Gospel Transition Into Pauline Revelation

This brings us to the question of Paul and whether or not he “contradicted Jesus”. By taking note of the dispensational economy-age of each, we see the reason for any seeming differences between what we read in the Gospels when compared to the writings of Paul.

During His ministry on earth, Jesus was a circumcised Jew living under the dispensational economy-age of Law. He declared His intention of fulfilling the Law and spoke of the kingdom. The entire narratives of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John and Acts are of transition from Law to Grace. You will find differences between Jesus and the Old Testament, especially as you move toward the end of each of the four Gospels.

Paul comes along and wasn’t even saved until Acts chapter 9, after much of the transition from Law to Grace was already completed. He, then, was ordained and used of God to complete the task and to establish the infant local churches in sound faith and doctrine.

With that said, we have yet to see that Paul actually “contradicted” Jesus at all! What we do see is that Paul’s message is directed toward the Gentile believer while Jesus did not go after Gentiles, as He said Himself in Matthew 10:6, But He did “…go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.”

On the contrary, we see Paul at the end of the book of Acts rebuking the Jewish majority and saying, “Be it known therefore unto you, that the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear it.” (Acts 28:28 kjv) Paul still preached “to the Jew first” (Romans 1:16) but found fertile ground among Gentiles.

Summary Conclusion

The simple fact is that Paul continued the “revolution” that Jesus began. Jesus tried to pull Jews away from a superficial religion of works that could not save anyone and pointed them toward the Cross that He would bear as a Substitutionary payment for the sin of mankind. Once He accomplished this, He arose from the dead and ascended to Heaven, sending His Spirit to empower the apostles for the task of establishing local churches all over the world.

Paul was the hand-picked replacement of Judas Iscariot (Acts 9 & 1 Corinthians 15:8-10). He continued the work of establishing salvation as a gift from God that is based completely upon the finished work of Jesus Christ upon the Cross, sealed by His resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:1-7).

There is nothing contradictory. The Gospel, Acts and Pauline Epistles are a cohesive unit that, together with the other canonical books, tell us the whole story of God’s plan of the ages. That plan is still being worked out by the Sovereign hand of God.

Are you ready when the end comes? If you were to die tonight, would you be saved by the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the Cross, or would you be condemned by your refusal to receive God’s free gift of eternal life?

We urge you to believe and be saved.

Jesus said NOTHING about homosexuality?

“Jesus said NOTHING about homosexuality!”

The world is going to Hell with a smile. Sodomites (who wish to be called “gay” and “homosexual”) are starting their own churches and denominations, while apostates like Tony Campolo and his wife urge the Church of Jesus Christ to rebel against God and openly embrace/accommodate the “gay lifestyle”.

In order to bolster their claims of being “gay Christians”, Sodomites and their accommodating defenders are developing arguments to promote their agenda.  One of those arguments put forth is the claim that since Jesus never commented directly on the male-on-male sex act (or female-on-female activity) then it’s just not important to God.  Some even going so far as to suggest that God is absolutely “ok” with “gay sex” and the “gay lifestyle”.

But, as we shall see, this is a LAME argument.

The Lame Argument

You may have heard about the man who needed his right leg amputated and was put under anesthesia, only to awake and find that his LEFT leg had been amputated. There was no way they could do anything to correct the mistake and they still had to remove his RIGHT leg.

Understandably, he attempted to sue the doctor and hospital. However, his case was thrown out when the presiding judge pointed out that the man didn’t have a leg to stand on.

That’s a lame joke.

But the “homosexual activists” give new meaning to the word lame with their argument that, “Jesus didn’t mention homosexuality, so it must be “ok”.

Jesus Didn’t Say Anything About (fill in the blank)

After changing the word “sodomite” to “shrine prostitute” in the NIV and other Alexandrian trash “bibles”, homosexuals then begin to downplay the idea of sodomy being sin by making the following claim:

“Jesus never even MENTIONED homosexuality and NEVER called it sin. Don’t you think that if Jesus thought that homosexuality was a big deal, He would have at least MENTIONED it?”

In answer to this lame attempt to legitimize what God plainly calls an abomination in Leviticus 20:13, please consider the following:

1) Jesus is THE Word (John 1:1) and gave us the entire Bible. The words in red in your Bible are simply those words that He spake during the years of His earthly ministry. Jesus gave Moses the commandment in Leviticus 20:13 which says, “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.”

2) You should keep in mind that the Gospels only contain a select amount of the words and deeds of Jesus’ earthly ministry. John 21:25 says, “And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.”

3) Jesus didn’t mention the following: Rape, molestation, incest, bestiality and numerous other sins. Do you really think that Jesus doesn’t think rape is any big deal? Do you really think Jesus gave incest a pass?  The “argument from silence” is not a good argument, especially in light of the previous two points and this:

4) As Paul Harvey says, when we hear of a so-called “contradiction” in the Bible, we must be careful to hear, “the REST of the story”. “Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.” (1 Corinthians 6:9-10)

The New Testament clearly condemns homosexuality (sodomy) and those are ALSO the words of Jesus Christ.  A Christian participating is Sodomy will LOSE his kingdom reward.  And if you don’t think that is important, you show a complete lack of understanding.  Meanwhile, that still demonstrates that Jesus does not CONDONE homosexuality among those in His Kingdom!


Only a person who despises the word of God would make the accusation that “Jesus said nothing about homosexuality,” in an attempt to justify this abomination. It’s a patently dishonest handling of God’s word and the honest seeker will acknowledge that fact. The dishonest reprobates who continue to utter this bogus “contradiction” will one day have to give an answer for their lies and deception to Jesus Christ as He sits on a Great White Throne to judge the damned.

On the other hand, if any of the people corrupting God’s word or engaging in the sin of Sodomy would simply repent of their sin (change their mind and turn away from) and turn to the crucified, buried and risen Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they will be SAVED!

The greatest act of love that a Christian can commit is to share the TRUTH with the lost. And if Christians would be truly filled with the Spirit of God, they’d grow a spine and speak the truth boldly out of a pure love for the soul of the lost sodomite or the lost, pro-sodomite Bible-corrupting false teacher!

We praise God for sodomites who turn into SAINTS. Men like Michael Glatze are a thrill and a blessing to us. Michael professes to be saved and we’ll take his word for it and PRAISE GOD.

We love “gays” before they are saved and witness to them with the desire to see them come to Jesus Christ for salvation. And when one of them does come to Christ, we rejoice WITH them and FOR them.   We do not wish Hell on anyone.

Isn’t God GOOD?  He’ll save the WORST of sinners if that sinner will submit to Him, believing on the Gospel of Jesus Christ with the humility of true faith in God’s word.

Oh, sinner, come to Jesus. I am a sinner and no better or worse than anyone reading this article. But God has saved me. I am forgiven. And I now despise what God despises–SIN. But I also love what God loves and God had commended His love toward sinners.

“But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.” (Romans 5:8)

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” (John 3:16)

“That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.” (Romans 10:9)

Is Ezekiel 39:2 in the KJV a mistranslation?


Ezekiel 39:2: Is the King James reading of “…leave but the sixth part of thee” a mistranslation?

The new translations (including the so-called “New King James”) have all changed this verse.

KJV: “And I will turn thee back, and leave but the sixth part of thee…”

NASB: “And I will turn you around, drive you on, take you up…”

NIV: “I will turn you around and drag you along.”

Amplified: “And I will turn you about and will lead you on, …”

NKJV: “And I will turn you around and lead you on, …”

Most prophecy teachers “prefer” this new translation rendering and they do so simply because it seems to fit their idea of what SHOULD happen as a result of the war described in Ezekiel 38-39. But this is a dangerous way to handle God’s word. We will see, in a moment, that their idea of what SHOULD happen is dead WRONG.

In his book on Ezekiel 38-39 titled, “The Coming Islamic Invasion of Israel,” Mark Hitchcock writes on page 93, “God will come to rescue His helpless, overwhelmed people using four means to totally destroy Russia and her Islamic allies.” Then, in his footnote, he writes:

“31. In Ezekiel 39:2, the King James Version reads as if only five-sixths of the invading army will be destroyed. “And I will turn thee back, and leave but the sixth part of thee” (emphasis added). However, most modern versions translate the Hebrew verb as “lead thee on” (ASV), “drive you on” (NASB), “drag you along” (NIV), and “drive you” (NLT). These translations are preferred over the King James Version. See Charles Lee Feinberg, The Prophecy of Ezekiel (Chicago: Moody Press, 1969, 228.”

[We have left the quote exactly as given by Hitchcock, including his use of italics and his parenthetic comments.]

This is how this verse is handled by the typical new evangelical prophecy teacher. And it is a clear ERROR in judgment on their part.

First of all, the Hebrew “shawshaw” is of an unclear root of origin. For any translator to pretend to be translating “shawshaw” (or any other Hebrew root, for that matter) without consulting the CONTEXT would be insane. And to know the context of this battle scene and translate the passage that, IN ANY WAY, requires God to “totally destroy” the armies of Ezekiel 38-39 is an ERROR and MISTRANSLATION of the highest order in these new translations.

The context is a battle that precedes Armageddon.

In Revelation 16, the Battle of Armageddon is described. This battle is NOT the battle of Ezekiel 38-39 which has already taken place BEFORE Armageddon. That is a fact that Hitchcock, Walvoord, Pentecost and the majority of evangelical dispensationalists agree upon. So, how can they also miss the fact that all the nations listed in Ezekiel 38:1-6 (that have been defeated by God at some point before or DURING the Great Tribulation) gather AGAIN with the rest of the world against Israel at the END of the Great Tribulation???

Revelation 16:14, “…which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty.

Revelation 16:16, “And he gathered them together into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon.”

God’s word says that there will be a battle involving what is clearly a Russian-Islamic confederacy at some point before or during the Time of Jacob’s Trouble, also called the Great Tribulation. It is not our purpose to discuss the timing of this war, but most dispensationalists agree on this much.

God’s word also says that there will be a gathering of ALL nations (not just Russia and the “Islamic Nation”) at the Battle of Armageddon (see also Psalm 2). This battle happens only a few years (at the most) after the battle described in Ezekiel 38-39.

The King James Version, once again, demonstrates it’s supremacy above all other English translations by leaving a sizeable but utterly de-humanized number of enemy (Islamic and Russian) troops alive at the end of the battle in Ezekiel 38-39. They return to those who remain at home: The elderly, their wives, their children and others that may be disabled or simply “conscientious objectors” who have stayed at home and prayed for Allah to wipe out the Jews and grant victory to his armies as they fought a Holy Jihad.

To the dismay of the ENTIRE population of earth (with only a small number of gentile believers alive at that time), Allah’s armies fail and the Jews survive. Only one out of six Jihadists and Ruskies make the trip home, after the war of Ezekiel 38-39 is complete.

For several years, the anger, frustration, shame and hatred will boil like a pot stew of emotional and spiritual poison. And God will USE that to gather their emaciated, shell-shocked troops to join “hand in hand” with the more powerful, untested, unbeaten armies of Antichrist and fight one last battle against the Jewish State (Proverbs 11:21).

“These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings; and they that are with him are called, chosen, and faithful.” (Revelation 17:14)

ONLY THE KING JAMES BIBLE is translated in a way that doesn’t make God out to be a LIAR.

Isaiah 53:9: Does Isaiah contradict the New Testament Gospels?

Isaiah 53:9 in the King James Bible reads, “And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death.”

I have received two takes on this that claim an inaccuracy or contradiction in the King James Bible.

Take #1: Jesus actually was with the WICKED in death and with the RICH in his grave. In other words, Isaiah got it BACKWARDS.

Take #2: The new translations are more accurate and their translation of Isaiah 53:9 is better than the King James Bible.


Take #1 To answer this first accusation, was must refer you to the King James reading above while remembering that the best commentary on the Bible is the Bible itself.

In Romans 6:23, we are told that the wages of sin is DEATH. 2 Corinthians 5:21 then tells us that Jesus was “made to be sin for us.” In other words, Jesus never sinned but became sin on the Cross. In this way, He became our SUBSTITUTE and paid for the sin of the whole world (1 John 2:2).

Only the WICKED die. Jesus made his grave with the wicked because the sins of the wicked were placed on Him. And that is exactly what Isaiah said would happen.

Also, the text says that he “made his grave with the rich in his death.” This is absolutely true. He died as the wicked do and was buried in the tomb of Joseph of Arimathaea according to Mark 15:42-47, which describes the preparation and burial in terms that clearly indicate that Joseph of Arimathaea was a man of considerable wealth. He spent serious money on the preparation and owned a tomb originally intended to be used for his own body. ONLY  “rich” Jews of the 1st century could pull this off.

There is nothing contradictory between Isaiah 53:9 and the Gospel accounts. However, there is another take on this…

Take #2 The other accusations regarding this text come largely due to the confusion created by the new versions and/or some self-appointed “scholar” who claims to have found that their translation of the Hebrew text proves that Isaiah was mistaken and that the King James translation is inaccurate.

The latter is answered as we deal with the former. None of these “private interpretations” really add anything to the discussion. They are virtually the same as the copyrighted new versions on the market. So, let’s deal with the new versions and, in so doing, we answer all of the skeptics who attack Isaiah using Take #2.

We will list some examples of new versions as they corrupt the word of God:

The New American Standard “His grave was assigned with wicked men, Yet He was with a rich man in His death.”

This is just a bad translation. The Hebrew for “wicked” is (transliterated) RASHA. The Hebrew for “rich” is ASHIYR. The Hebrew for “man” is ADAM and it does not appear in any Hebrew text with RASHA or with ASHIYR. Why did the NASV translators ADD to God’s word?? This is a corruption of the text.

249 times the King James translates RASHA as “wicked” and only three times as “wicked man”, and that is only when the context demands it. Likewise, ASHIYR is translated “rich” 20 times and “rich man” three times, only because the context demanded it.

By adding the word “man” TWICE in their translation of the first half of Isaiah 53:9, the New American Standard casts confusion on the word of God. The New American Standard Version is a piece of useless trash.

The Message “They buried him with the wicked, threw him in a grave with a rich man,”

“The Message” is a warped paraphrase. It doesn’t even qualify as a translation and it reads like it was translated by Charles Manson. But many people have bought this bad work because of the false advertising telling them that it simply puts the Bible in “the contemporary language” of the day. That’s a flat lie. It’s a perversion of God’s word.

There isn’t a Hebrew text in the world that says they “threw [Jesus] in a grave with a rich man.” That’s just ridiculous and it would be hilarious if it weren’t so sad.

How To Avoid Error

As we have pointed out previously, the way to avoid error is to be born again by faith in the Gospel of Jesus Christ AND to get a King James Bible and handle the word of God carefully. Do this and you will never stumble over passages like this one in Isaiah.