Amen.
Like I said, I'm preaching a standalone sermon tonight,
and it's kind of like just having a special night here.
So I didn't really get to finish
what I was saying on Sunday night.
I was preaching a sermon against Mark Ward,
and who was not here Sunday night?
Raise your hand.
Okay, so if you weren't here
or you didn't get to hear the sermon,
then Mark Ward is basically a guy
that is trying to convince Baptist
and King James only people
that the King James Bible is not readable.
He did a debate last week where he basically said,
the premise of the debate was that
the King James Bible is not readable.
It's not understandable to people anymore.
We can't understand it.
And that we should get rid of it, replace it.
And at one point in the debate,
he basically said that there's,
you know, it's not, he said a lot of things
that were just pretty disturbing,
but one of the things that I'm gonna address tonight
is that he said that it's a sin to give it to children.
That it's a sin to actually give the King James to children.
But he sets up everything he says
by using First Corinthians 14
by saying it's better to say things, you know,
five things people can understand
than 10,000 words people don't understand.
He's basically saying that the King James
is to the point where we can only understand
about five things that it says
and about 10,000 things we don't really understand
is basically what he's using it for.
He's using the preface of the King James
that the translators gave to the readers
where they use those verses to say those types of things
like we do need to have the word of God in other languages.
And I just said also in that sermon,
I mean, I covered a lot of things,
so like I said, you do need to go back and listen to it
if you didn't get a chance to listen to it.
But I agree that if this came to the point
where we could not understand it anymore,
that we just, it was like Latin to us or something
or Greek to us, that yeah, of course
we would need to have another translation.
But everybody in here has been listening
to the King James being preached
and read the King James pretty much every day of your lives
and you can understand it just fine.
Now, he'll take words that maybe meant something different
in 1611 that we would probably have
a different meaning for now.
And he takes those and he calls those things false friends.
And he does like a little, he did like a little quiz
and he does these quizzes where he tries to get people
to say, well, what does this word mean to you?
And he gives you like a multiple choice quiz
and he wants, you know, his goal is so that people
would get those things wrong and say,
see, these people got these wrong.
Even pastors are getting these wrong.
And he did this like national test
where he took like 100 King James only pastors
and he said that like a lot of them failed the test.
I can't remember what the percentages were.
So, he calls these false friends.
And the title of my sermon tonight is
Mark Ward, a False Friend.
He's actually the false friend.
But in my last sermon I showed many false friends
in the New King James Version and that's the Bible
that he recommended because he knows
that independent fundamental King James only Baptists
are not gonna take the NIV.
We're not gonna take all the other modern versions
that are from the corrupted texts of the Alexandrians.
We're not gonna take the corrupted manuscripts
that the modern versions are translated off of
because the New King James claims that it's translated
straight from the same text that the King James
is translated from.
That's not really true, they say it is,
but they don't always go with what that text says.
And I'll explain that a little bit more as we go.
But they'll claim that it's,
so he wants to appeal to us and say,
yeah, it's from the same text,
it's translated from the same Greek and Hebrew
that the King James is and we should just go to that
because it's more understandable.
They make it easier to understand.
They take out the these and the those and all that stuff.
But I made an example last week and just showed you
one of the things where it says,
and God said to Moses,
and there was a specific command to Moses that was given,
and it makes it seem like Moses is not keeping that command
because they changed the tense from you
and it makes it seem like Moses
wasn't keeping God's commandments
when he's actually talking to the children of Israel.
So tenses matter.
The pronouns do matter.
The tense of the pronouns matter.
Maybe we don't talk that necessarily to each other,
but when you read the Bible, you should know,
is this talking to a single person?
When it says it's talking to Moses,
but Moses is supposed to tell to the children of Israel,
it does matter whether Moses is keeping the commandments
or whether he's saying,
hey, Moses, tell this to the children of Israel.
They're not keeping the commandments.
So the New King James Version
has a lot of problems with it.
I don't even have time to go through all the problems with it
but I'm gonna go through some.
I went through some on Sunday night
and so the New King James is,
he claims is a Bible based on the TR or the Texas Receptus.
That he promoted that in his debate
at the Dayspring Bible College on October 21st.
So how they,
and I kind of went into how they chose to take hell
out of the Bible instead of the,
they left the words untranslated
and they left Sheol and Hades and Gehenna
instead of leaving just hell.
And anybody that's watched New World Order Bible Versions
knows that when they went and interviewed people
on the street and they asked what those words meant,
nobody had any clue what they were talking about.
But you ask the average person on the street
what hell means, everybody knows what hell means.
I mean, to say that the New King James
has a better translation
and they don't translate words into hell
and they leave them untranslated is ridiculous.
And I went through a lot of the different ones like
the rich man opened up his eyes in Hades.
It's like, come on, man, that is retarded.
So anyway, I said that is retarded.
Okay, sorry, I know people get on to me about that
so I apologize.
All right, so anyway, so look,
that's not more understandable.
That's not a positive change in the New King James
that makes me want to go and say,
hey, the New King James is better.
No, it's not better.
That's less understandable than the King James.
The King James is simple and plain
and it uses great plainness of speech
to help the common man understand.
It also, so I thought, removes completely sodomites
and the word sodomite and I went into that
but it actually doesn't take it out completely
and I'm gonna go through that here in just a minute.
There's two instances where they actually keep
the word sodomites in there and I didn't realize that
when I was preaching that last week
but they kept it in in two places
that I never thought that they would've
and I'll cover that tonight too
but the places in the Old Testament
where the word sodomite or sodomites are there,
they completely take that out
and what do they put there instead?
Perverted one or perverted persons
and then they have footnotes at the bottom of the page
that say, they don't say temple shrine prostitutes,
they say something else but it's equally stupid, okay?
Or people that are practicing that.
So they really skirt around the issue.
So the Old Testament verses that talk about sodomites
and breaking down the houses,
it actually says something along the lines of,
it says literally houses in the footnotes
and it should've been translated houses,
they break down the houses of the sodomites,
it said like, it's like some kind of hut or something,
their temple hut or whatever,
I can't remember what it said, it was something stupid too
but they literally tell you
that they should've translated that word houses
and didn't translate it houses.
I mean, that's beyond stupid.
It's like you're telling us that you're lying here
and translating it is a different word that it isn't.
So they did that and so,
and also, does someone have to be a sodomite to be a pervert?
No, a pervert can be,
you can be a pervert without being a sodomite.
So to say perverted one,
I mean, that's a pretty broad statement, isn't it?
But when you say sodomite,
you're zeroing in on what they are, right?
So which one's more clear?
But in the New, and so in the New Testament,
they take a Greek word
that is only found in all Greek writings,
these two places in the whole writings of Greek
and the whole world in the New Testament
where Paul writes it twice.
The Greek words that are used in the New Testament
that they use for sodomites in the New Testament,
in the New King James, are only found in these places
and Paul's the only one that wrote them.
So they translate those as sodomites
where the King James says abusers of themselves of mankind.
That's where they do it.
So turn to First Timothy chapter nine.
I mean, excuse me, chapter one, verse nine.
Good night, there's not nine chapters.
I'm quizzing you.
I'm gonna read for you the,
as you get there, I'm just gonna read verse nine and 10
and I'm gonna read the New King James version of it.
It says, knowing this, that the law is not made
for a righteous person, but for the lawless
and the insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners,
for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers
and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
for fornicators, for sodomites.
Is that what your Bible says?
For kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers,
and if there be any other thing
that is contrary to sound doctrine.
So there is the place where it retains the word sodomites
in the New Testament, but in the King James,
what does your Bible say right there?
Can some man tell me what it says?
Defile themselves of mankind.
That's less queer, isn't it?
I mean, that could be a lot of different things.
So like, where the King James is super queer
in the Old Testament, using the word sodomites,
telling you exactly what they are,
in the New Testament, sorry about that,
in the New Testament, Ryland,
in the New Testament, it's a little bit less clear
because you can defile yourself of mankind
in a lot of different ways, but it doesn't,
the King James does not say sodomites here, does it?
But like I said, the Greek words used here
are only used by the Apostle Paul in all of antiquity.
There is no other writing that uses the Greek words
except for right here, and then in 1 Corinthians 6, 9.
So, is my mic out, Ryland, mic?
Okay, there we go.
Let's just go with.
Okay.
The New King James, it says, for sodomites.
So, I mean, that's a change, isn't it?
And you know, the other problem with the New King James
is it does make salvation a process,
and I've showed you those verses before,
and we're gonna go to those again,
but I'm just kind of recapping a little bit from last week,
but I thought that they completely took sodomites out,
and they didn't completely take it out,
they just added it in places that it's not in the King James
and then completely took it out of the Old Testament,
which is pretty weird.
So, they also made salvation difficult,
if you listen to that sermon from last week,
where it says, straight is the gate
and narrow is the way that leadeth unto life,
and few there be that find it,
but they said that it's difficult is the way.
Is the way to get to heaven difficult?
No.
So, they make getting saved hard,
because, you know, difficult means hard, doesn't it?
If you've ever played video games,
it says, you know, you have easy, medium, or whatever,
and then it's difficult level.
Difficult means it's the hardest level, right?
So, difficult means it's difficult.
It's hard to do that,
and so, to say that salvation's difficult is a lie,
because getting saved is super easy.
Believing on the Lord Jesus Christ is all you have to do.
So, anyway, so, Mark Ward, he likes to call
certain words in the King James false friends,
and so, 2 Timothy chapter two, verse 15,
where we started, where Brother Eli read,
this is one of his first trap test questions.
The word study, in verse,
2 Timothy chapter two, verse 15, says,
study to show thyself approved unto God a workman
that needeth not to be ashamed,
rightly dividing the word of truth,
and he gives you A, B, C,
and he gives, you know, the answers to the question.
So, the first one is,
the first definition is to strive towards
or direct one's efforts to set one's mind on
to devote oneself to something,
and then the other definition is to devote time,
attention to acquisition of knowledge
on an academic subject,
and then C would be to consider to ponder quietly.
Now, he kind of gives you that multiple choice,
which one are you going to choose as the definition,
and 71% of the audience guessed the first one,
which was the correct answer was,
is to strive towards or direct one's effort
to set one's mind on or devote oneself to something,
study to show thyself approved unto God,
is to strive towards or direct one's efforts
to pleasing God in your study of the word of God, right?
So, people got that one right,
and he thought everybody was going to get it wrong,
but they got it right, 71%.
So, I don't know, he thought that they probably
were giving spoon feeding them the answers
or they'd already seen the test or something,
but the second one, and this is what, like I said,
this is what he calls his false friends,
the people don't get the right definitions for,
because we don't understand what the words meant
back then in 1611.
So, 1 Kings 18, 21 says, Elijah came unto the people
and said, how long halt ye between two opinions?
If the Lord be God, follow him,
but if Baal, then follow him,
and the people answered him, not a word.
Now, the three definitions are come to an abrupt,
so for halt is come to an abrupt stop,
be to waver or hesitate, see to limp or be lame.
What does halt mean?
So, yeah, and B is what people guessed,
waver or hesitate, and so that's 81% pick that one
and that's not the right answer apparently.
It's to limp or be lame.
How long halt ye between two opinions?
But, you know, this is him giving his correct definition,
right, but like, you know, when it says how long halt ye
between two opinions to waver or hesitate,
would be like, that's why people picked 81%,
but he's saying that that's wrong in 1611.
That's not what that meant.
You know, again, he's saying what these definitions mean.
He's telling everybody, but who knows
whether he's right or not about that?
Like, I don't really know whether that is true
because, yeah, I mean, when someone's halt on,
you know, they're limping, you know, like Jacob,
he wrestled with the angel and then, you know,
he applied the submission hold,
popped his leg out of socket or whatever,
first MMA match, first jiu-jitsu match,
and he was halt on his leg for the rest of his life.
That means that he had that limp.
So he was limping or lame because of that,
but in this situation, he says,
how long halt ye between two opinions?
So, I don't know, to be lame,
how long are you gonna be lame with these two opinions?
That doesn't really make sense
that it would be applied that way,
but like, look, words mean different things
in different situations, and English words
mean a lot of different things.
I don't know if I agree with him on that definition or not.
I would say to waver, how long are you gonna hesitate?
How long are you gonna pick between the two wands?
You're gonna be like, oh, I don't know,
maybe it's just, it's kinda like being double-minded,
you know, is what I think he's trying to say here.
But anyway, he's saying this is a false friend.
So I'm just trying to give you what,
this is his spiel, this is what he, you know,
he's like, well, maybe we are too stupid
to understand the King James, and this is what he does.
So I'm not trying to make you feel stupid, okay?
You know, I'm just telling you, this is what he does.
So, Matthew chapter 13, 21 is another one,
where he says, yet he hath no root in himself,
but deareth for a while, for when tribulation
or persecution ariseth because of the word,
by and by he is offended.
Now, we sing that word, or that song,
in the sweet by and by, and that means what?
Someday, you know, we will see him
on that beautiful shore, right?
But in 1611, it meant immediately.
So, you know, okay, well, that's a difference.
Because when Jesus said, by and by, they're offended,
means, you know, in that, and I agree with that.
Because he's saying, like, when tribulation occurs,
because if you compare it to the other gospels,
immediately they're offended, is the,
there's actually another parallel passage to that,
where it says when they're going through tribulation,
immediately they're offended.
So, I would agree with that.
Words do, and sayings do change over time, I get that.
But you can define words with the King James, too.
It's its own built-in dictionary,
and that's one thing he might not understand, or whatever.
And then, this one hurt me the most.
John 14, two, it says, in my father's house
are many mansions, if it were not so, I would have told you,
I go to prepare a place for you.
And the word mansions is A, a large stately
or opulent residence, 34%, got that.
And then B, number of separate apartments
or dwelling places in a large house, 50%.
And then C, living, remaining, staying in one place, 11%.
And 50% got that, and that was the correct answer.
So, that was kind of a little bit of a letdown for me,
because all these years, I've been having a false friend
with that one, thinking that it actually
is a large opulent residence.
So, but a lot of people probably think that,
but who cares?
Like, is that make or break my salvation,
if I thought that before?
No.
That's the thing.
Like, just because I might not have been thinking,
because I was thinking it was gonna be like
some MTV Cribs house or something,
doesn't mean, what does that have to do
with what I believe about salvation
or some great things of the faith?
And so, if I'm wrong about that, like, big deal.
Now, I mean, here's the thing about these,
about some of these things and definitions.
There's things that I still find,
and you can find these, look, the Bible's a big book.
And you might not even know just regular words
what they mean in the Bible, unless you look them up.
Because sometimes you'll just be reading something
in any book, let alone the Bible,
and you're like, what does that really mean?
Like, you've read it a lot of times,
and you're like, I wanna know what that actually means.
Because you kinda know what it means,
but then you just really wanna define it.
And you do it a lot when you preach.
When you preach and you're like,
what does that word really mean?
And you'll look it up.
I mean, that doesn't mean you have all these false friends.
It just means you might just not be bright enough
to know what that word means.
So, do we have to be a walking lexicon
or a walking encyclopedia to have a certain Bible version?
To know, I mean, that just doesn't make sense to me.
So, you know, how do these false friends
that I've just showed you, and these are the top,
four of the top five that he uses,
how do these false friends affect major doctrine?
Do they affect any major doctrine that you know of?
They don't.
It's just ignance, is what it is.
And it's not a case to get rid of the King James.
It's not even close to a case to get rid of the King James.
And it might just be a case for you
to get a little bit more wise.
And, you know, if some words have changed since 1611
in their meaning, big deal.
So what?
You still can know what that word meant in 1611,
and it's a lot better than saying perverted one
when that's not what that meant.
It didn't mean that back then,
and it doesn't mean that right now.
They just used the wrong word, period,
in the New King James.
I keep picking on the New King James
because that's the one he likes to recommend
to independent Baptists because he just wants
to get us off the King James.
That's the goal.
They want to take the two-edged, sharpest sword ever,
the King James Bible in English,
and give us the butter knife of the New King James
or the NIV or something else.
Look, this is an old game.
This is what the devil loves to do,
is to try to get us off the true word of God.
So this guy says he has like 86 false friends,
and he's working on a list of 100
and he's going to stop or whatever.
But he says this, and I thought this was really brash
of him to say this, but he says,
do you want to understand your Bible like I do?
I think you wouldn't be here if you didn't.
Like what a puffed up thing to say.
Oh, I just know my Bible.
Do you want to know the Bible like I know the Bible?
What, because you identified some false friends?
Like, okay.
I definitely don't want the lisp that you have.
If I have to have that with your Bible knowledge.
But I just would submit to you
that Mark Ward is the false friend.
He's the false friend.
He's a friend like Judas was a friend.
That he's going to walk up and kiss you on the cheek,
and he probably would like that.
And he's the type of guy that would like to kiss you
on the cheek and then take away your King James Bible
and hand you some piece of garbage New King James,
and tell you this is the right word of God.
He wants to think, he wants you to think he's the guru
and he has all the answers.
When people say, do you want to know the Bible
like I know the Bible?
I mean, that's a pretty arrogant thing to say.
He's pretending he cares.
He says, oh, my King James independent Baptist brothers.
He kept saying that through the whole thing,
but he doesn't really care.
He just wants to disarm you.
He wants to get you out of a church like this,
and he wants to just destroy your faith
because that's what it,
because look, if you don't believe in a Bible
that has every word in it that's perfect,
then what is your faith really resting on?
That's the problem.
And so I'm going to go through some more verses,
and I'm going to have people volunteer
so that way you don't fall asleep.
And so if your wife's sitting next to you,
she can't fall asleep either
because then she's going to look bad.
But, you know,
so Dan Wallace was one of the translators
on the New King James,
and he said this concerning his work
on the New King James as a proofreader.
He says, I worked on the New King James as a proofreader
working directly for Art Farstad.
The Greek text is the same as for the King James version,
which is hardly a recommendation for it.
So he's not saying that as a positive thing.
None of the translators, as far as I know,
thought that the Texas Receptus
was the closest text to the original.
When the majority text Hodges-Farstad appeared,
it deviated from the TR in 1,838 places.
So this is the majority text that they used,
that they said that the King James,
it said it deviated from the TR in 1,838 places.
That's a lot.
This leaves translation philosophy
as the sole criterion in which to judge it.
And there, I think it comes up short.
It is not nearly as elegant as the King James version,
but is far more pedestrian.
In this respect, I found it to be just a bit more readable
than the NASB.
If one wants a more accurate translation,
I would recommend the RSV, ESV, NRSV
over the NASB and the New King James version,
and the NET over these.
So this is a guy that was one of the translators
or proofreaders of the New King James,
and he's just downplaying it like it's not good.
And it's better, all these other ones
are better than the King James and the New King James.
So that's just one of them.
These guys did not believe that the TR
was even the right manuscripts to use,
and it just shows you what a low view
they even had of the source material.
So turn to Acts 17, verse 22.
Now, we're just gonna look at some verses
in the New King James again,
and we're gonna take a look and see which one's right,
the King James or the New King James.
And again, I could do this with,
we could do this all and I,
but I'm not gonna do that to you.
I mean, I could just pull out a big, giant list of ones
that are just like glaring problems.
But I'm not gonna do that to you.
But I will do some, all right?
Acts 17, verse 22, you're in the King James.
Listen to what the New King James says.
It says, then Paul stood in the midst of Iropagus
and said, men of Athens, I perceive that in all things
you are very religious.
Sean Harrington, what does your Bible say?
Then Paul stood in the midst of Maricha
and said, you men of Athens, I perceive that in all things
you are too superstitious.
So Paul stood in the midst of Mars Hill
and said, you men of Athens, I perceive that in all things
you are too superstitious.
That's a bit different, isn't it?
Does anybody know what Iropagus is?
Is that something you guys just,
that's just an easy word that you just already knew?
No, nobody knows what that is.
And then it says in the footnotes
of the New King James Version, it says,
literally, Mars Hill.
Well, if it says literally Mars Hill,
then why don't you just leave it alone?
Because that's a lot easier to understand, isn't it?
Why change it?
Yeah, that's what it boils down to.
They had to change it for the copyright.
But to change it from, in all things,
you are very religious to, you know,
but the King James says superstitious.
But why did Paul say it was superstitious?
Because they're just doing it just in case
they're offending a god that they don't know.
That's not religion, that's superstition.
That's like having a lucky rabbit's foot, you know,
or just whatever types of things that people think are lucky
you know, you're hoping that something works
to make things work out in your favor.
Oh, to the unknown god.
That's why Paul says, in the next verse he says,
for as I pass by and beheld your devotions,
I have found an altar with this inscription
to the unknown god, whom therefore ye ignorantly worship,
him declare I unto you.
So they change the word, they change to very religious
instead of superstitious, but in actuality,
the very religious is not true.
They're not very religious, they're superstitious,
that's why they're just worshiping anything
that they don't know just in case.
Just in case they're doomed by some god
that they don't know.
But in reality, they are doomed by that god
that they don't know, but it's not because of superstition,
it's just because they just don't know who that god is.
So it has nothing to do with luck or not luck or whatever.
Paul's trying to tell them who they are,
you know, who God is.
So 1 John 5.7, this is a verse that's highly disputed
by the modern versions, 1 John 5.7,
go ahead and turn there.
And the New King James basically gets this right, okay?
But I wanted to teach you something about the problem
with the New King James by showing you this verse.
So 1 John 5.7, of course, is the famous verse
that teaches the Trinity.
And a lot of the modern versions will take it out,
or they'll take big portions of it out,
because they'll say the most newest best manuscripts
don't have this in there.
Yeah, because the devil doesn't want you to know
that there's a Trinity.
But anyway, 1 John 5.7 in the New King James says,
For there are three that bear record in heaven,
the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit,
and these three are one.
That's essentially the same as the King James, isn't it?
It's just, you know, the Bible says the Holy Ghost
and the King James, but spirit and ghost
mean the same thing, so essentially nothing is wrong there.
But the footnote in the New King James is the problem.
The footnote says N, capital N, U, capital,
and then a comma, and then M, capital.
And it says, omit the words from in heaven, in verse seven,
through on earth, verse eight,
only four or five very late manuscripts
contain these words in Greek.
So what are they doing there?
They're telling you to doubt the authenticity of this verse.
They're telling you that from,
that from, to omit from in heaven,
in verse seven, through on earth.
So, in verse eight.
So basically, the rest of the verse, right?
So what's after in heaven?
The Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit,
and these three are one.
They're telling you that those are not in
their stupid Greek manuscripts
that they think are better than the ones
that they're actually translating these off of.
So they're appealing to the modern Bible version
Greek texts and saying, you need to doubt
that these are really supposed to be in there.
N-U-N-M say something different.
Why would they put that in there
if they're telling you, well this is just an update
to the King James, it's just as good,
it just clears up some of the words
that maybe are a little harder to understand.
No, they're trying to poison your mind
and tell you that those words don't belong in there.
The Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost,
and these three are one.
That's what they're telling you.
They're making you doubt God's Word.
So, while the New King James claims
to be translated from the Texas Receptus,
the N-U denotes the Nestles United Bible Society's
Greek text, which is trash by the way,
which is basically the same as the Westcott
and Hort readings.
M denotes the Hodges-Farstad-Nelson majority Greek text,
which is the one that they say that they're translating
off of, which is supposed to be the same thing
that the King James is being translated off of.
You see, remember when I just already said
that they deviated this, Hodges-Farstad-Nelson,
deviated from the T-R over 1,800 times?
Well, that's one of the 1,800 times I guess.
So, they're basically using a text that's not really
the same as the one from the King James.
So, they claim that it's the same exact one,
but it's really not.
It has 1,800 deviations from it, and they're saying
that the one that they're using doesn't have
the rest of that verse in there.
So, what are they saying?
It doesn't belong there.
That's what they're saying.
But yep, just throw your King James in the garbage
because the Trinity isn't true.
That verse doesn't belong in your Bible.
So, if you give that to one of your kids, that's a sin.
That's what this bozo says.
So, now about the long ending of Mark.
Who knows about the long ending in Mark?
Okay, it's not really the long ending,
it's the true ending of Mark.
But go ahead and turn to Mark chapter 16.
And I didn't really have a lot in here about this
because maybe you already know about this.
But people will claim the modern versions will cut out
or put an asterisk next to it.
And I forgot what verse they actually,
I think it's nine through 20 are bracketed
in most modern versions.
So, they basically think that after Jesus,
let's see, I'm in Luke.
That's my problem, okay.
I was like, that doesn't make sense.
Let me get there.
So, in Mark chapter 16.
So, they think that verse eight should be the end
of the book of Mark.
It says, and they went out quickly
and fled from the sepulcher,
for they trembled and were amazed.
Neither said they anything to any man,
for they were afraid.
That's where the book of Mark ends,
according to the modern versions.
Not all the stuff like when Jesus was risen early
the first day of the week,
that doesn't belong in there.
And go preach the gospel,
he that believeth is baptized,
all these signs.
Verse 18, they shall take up serpents.
The Lord's, you know, all that stuff past verse eight
doesn't belong in your Bible,
according to the modern versions.
So, the NU, that Greek Nestles,
Greek or the world Bible translations or whatever.
So, Mark 16, nine through 20 are bracketed in that.
That's the footnote for the modern,
you know, for the New King James Version.
There's a footnote there that says,
verses nine through 20 are bracketed in the NU
as not in the original text.
They're lacking in Codex Sinaiticus
and Codex Vaticanus,
although nearly all the other manuscripts
of Mark contain them.
Why would they put that note in a New King James Bible
that they're saying is just supposed to be the replacement
for the old words and the stuff we don't understand
in the King James?
Because they're full of crap, that's why.
Because it doesn't make sense.
Because they're holding in higher regard other manuscripts
and they're just, they're like Democrats.
I mean, they just lie right to your faces
and tell you, you know, they just tell you things
that aren't true and you're just expected to believe it.
Why add these footnotes consistently
if you translated the New King James from the TR?
What is the point?
Why are you doing this?
The point of the New King James was to get people
off the King James and to cast doubt
on it as a reliable translation.
That's the point of the New King James.
It wasn't because they liked it better.
Even that translator said,
you know, all these other ones are better than this.
They just wanted to get people off the these and the thou's,
off, oh it's so hard,
so hard that thee, thou, and thine are singular
and ye, you, and yours are plural.
It's just so hard.
Even a fifth grader could do it.
But, you know, that is the point though.
It's pretty obvious what the point
of the New King James version was
and people are on that thing and they're just like,
it's so much better.
It's not better.
It's so much worse.
Turn to 1 Corinthians 6, 9.
Here's the other smoking gun on the Sodomite verse.
1 Corinthians 6, 9.
Says, let's see.
I'll read the New King James version.
It says, do you not know that the unrighteous
will not inherit the kingdom of God?
Do not be deceived, neither fornicators,
nor idolaters, nor abusers,
nor homosexuals, nor sodomites.
So, yeah, so it's not effeminate, right?
It's homosexuals, nor sodomites.
So they put sodomites in there and homosexuals,
but is that what the King James says?
No, the King James says, nor effeminate,
nor abusers of themselves with mankind.
Now, a lot of people will say,
well, that's what it's talking about in there.
It is talking about sodomites.
Well, then why doesn't it say that?
Why do the King James translators translate sodomite
in the Old Testament, but they don't say it there?
Yeah, I would say that the 54 translators
that were pretty good translators
that spoke multiple different languages
that were way smarter than these guys
understood that that's not what that word meant.
And that's why they didn't translate it as sodomites.
That's why they translated, instead of homosexuals,
even though that word didn't exist at that time,
they translated it as effeminate.
Now, let's break this down a little bit.
So they have two footnotes here.
The first footnote says catamites,
those submitting to homosexuals.
So that's what the first one is for homosexuals.
It's those submitting to homosexuals.
So basically, people that would let, you know,
homos do weird stuff to them or whatever.
And then nor sodomites, that means male homosexuals.
So apparently, you can be a woman homosexual
or a woman sodomite and it's okay.
This is talking about males
and then those submitting to homosexuals.
So it's not talking about just the simple sin
of being a sodomite or a homo.
It's talking about those that would allow themselves
to do it or if you're a male.
But it's just saying it's a sin.
It's not necessarily saying that, you know,
there's some kind of a reprobate or something.
But because it'll say, and such were some of you,
then it's also saying that they could be saved,
which of course, the Bible does not say that.
The Bible says that they're given over
to a reprobate mind in Romans 1.
So Paul wrote both these passages.
Is he contradicting himself?
Because in 1, he says that they're given over
to a reprobate mind, burning their lusts one toward another,
and they're, you know, that they're worthy of death,
is what the Bible, is what he says.
But then all of a sudden, he's gonna say
that they're able to be saved.
Well, which one is it?
Is Paul just double-minded?
Did Paul just learn something
between Romans and 1 Corinthians,
and then just contradict himself,
and then God just allowed both of those
to be published in the Bible
so that we could be confused about it?
Is that what it is?
No, I would just probably say that
the King James translators got it right,
and the new King James translators got it wrong.
So, and it's just interesting that they removed them
where the King James has put them,
and then inserted them where the King James
didn't have those, those words, sodomites.
It's not, it's more than interesting, it's suspect.
And to put them in the opposite places.
What does effeminate mean?
Effeminate does not mean that you're a homosexual, okay?
Effeminate means to grow or make womanish.
So, yeah, I mean, it's kind of like a sissy boy.
A mama's boy or whatever.
It's weak, resembling the practice or qualities of a woman.
Womanlike or tender.
Effeminate, you know?
And so, effeminate can be fixed.
A sissy boy can be fixed.
They're not necessarily a queer.
They just need to do some pushups
and grow some hair on their chest or something.
Quit wearing skinny jeans.
Raise your voice up a little bit.
Talk a little deeper.
Don't talk like Mark Ward, you know?
Stop being effeminate.
So, don't dress effeminate.
I mean, if you saw one of the suits he had on
on his main website, he'd be like,
dude, you look like, you know, Zippy or something.
What was that, he's some kind of, huh?
Bippy, Blippy.
You know what Blippy is?
He's some kid's, some dude who dresses like a weirdo
and like for kids.
Anyway, just look up Blippy and you'll see what I'm,
he looks, his suit looks just like that guy.
Anyway, yeah, my wife was like,
she knew exactly what I was talking about.
Alright, so, but effeminate doesn't mean that they're homo.
So, the King James got it right.
So, they're saying homosexual is effeminate.
That's not what that means.
So, you can recover, you can be saved if you're effeminate.
You can be fixed, you know?
Cut your hair, stop painting your nails.
You know, this whole trend where men are painting
their nails is weird, okay?
Women paint their nails, not men.
I mean, you see, there's professional football players
that are painting their nails.
It's like, dude, what is wrong with you?
Like, there's nothing manly about it, guys.
Nothing manly about it.
Cut your hair, pair your nails, you know,
dirt under your, if you wanna put dirt under your fingernails
if that's how you wanna paint your nails,
then yeah, okay, that's manly.
If I look at you and you have some dirt under your fingernails
I'm like, yeah, that looks manly.
I mean, clean it out every once in a while.
Put some scrub on that.
That's the only kind of paint I should see.
Or if you've been painting your house or something
and you have some paint left over, some varnish, you know?
But to actually paint your nails like a woman
that's effeminate, it's a sin.
All right, so yeah, what does the King James say?
Nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves of mankind.
All right, so Mark Ward said it's a sin
to give a child a King James Bible
because to him that knoweth to do good
and doeth it not, to him it is sin.
That's what he said.
Because in the debate, the guy asked him,
he said like, I just wanna make sure
I understood you correctly when he said this in the debate.
And he asked him to, you know, he was just like
giving the guy a chance to retract what he was saying.
And he didn't retract what he was saying,
he doubled down on what he was saying
and said no, to him that knoweth to do good
and doeth it not, to him it is sin.
So to give a child a King James to him, it is sin,
is what he's saying.
That we know that they can't understand it
and so it's a sin for us to give them a King James.
So 2 Timothy 3.15 says,
and that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures
which are able to make thee wise unto salvation
through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
So the Bible teaches that a child
can understand the scriptures.
I was, Judah was back there and he's very interested
in people's birthdays and when they are
and whose names are where and stuff
and he was just kind of checking that out.
He kept coming back there and he's reading names.
How old is Judah?
Six years old and Judah can read those names,
he was reading the names off.
And so children at very young ages can read the Bible.
He can read those names up there.
Some of those names that are up there are in here.
His name is in here.
His name is Judah of the tribe of,
the line of the tribe of Judah.
His birthday is March 2nd.
And children can read the Bible and they can understand it.
This is what the Bible actually says.
And they can get saved and understand what the Bible says.
They can understand salvation through faith
which is in Jesus Christ.
And this bozo's telling us that we can't give our kids
a King James Bible, they can't understand it.
Every kid in this church has a King James Bible.
Can you all understand it?
I'm not yelling at you.
But can you understand it?
Of course they can understand it.
A lot of kids in here are saved.
A lot of kids in here read the Bible every day.
You're a bozo and you're probably unsaved.
In fact, I'm sure that you're unsaved
if you're going around saying garbage like that.
And telling us we need to throw our King James away
and not give our children King James.
You're a devil if you're saying stuff like that.
Children can understand the Bible a lot better
when we're out preaching the gospel
than a lot of adults can.
In fact, they get the gospel way easier than adults do.
I can show a kid the Bible that's nine, 10, 11, 12 years old
and they follow along real easy.
Do you get this?
Yep, 100%.
They're way easier to get saved than adults are.
And it says it's able to make them wise
unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
So yes, I'm gonna give kids the Bible.
As soon as I get them saved at a door or at a park
or whatever kid gets them saved in here or adult
and whatever kids get saved in this church,
they're gonna get a Bible
and then they're gonna be able to read it
and understand just like everybody else does.
And I'm not gonna hold back from giving them a Bible.
Dang, sure not gonna give them a new King James.
So turn to 1 Corinthians 1.18.
Look, our church has led hundreds of kids to the Lord,
hundreds of children to the Lord
in the years that we've been here in this city
and in places where we've started other churches
and in missions trips that we've been on.
Hundreds of kids have gotten saved.
And you know what, every time we get people saved,
we give them a Bible.
So we're gonna keep giving children Bibles
as long as we have a church here in this city.
In any city where we start churches, we give away Bibles.
We give them away to adults.
We give them away to teenagers.
We give them away to children.
1 Corinthians 1.18, here's what the new King James says.
For the message of the cross is foolishness
to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved,
it is the power of God.
So are we being saved?
No, we're not being saved.
The Bible says in 1 Corinthians 1.18 in the King James,
it says, for the preaching of the cross
is to them that perish foolishness,
but unto us which are saved, it is the power of God.
When we believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, we are saved.
Right then, we've passed from death unto life.
We are saved forevermore.
It's not a process.
We're not being saved.
And look, they try to explain this away by saying,
well, you know, we're not fully saved
until Jesus comes down and gives us a new body.
Look, we know that, but it doesn't mean
we're not fully saved the moment we get,
we believe on Christ.
We're just as saved today as we're gonna be then.
We're just waiting for the redemption
of the purchase price, but we're still saved
just as saved right now as we're gonna be then.
So that's just a weird excuse they give
for being stupid in their translation
and putting in some sly works salvation in there.
So the Bible says that we need to become
as little children if we're gonna get
into the kingdom of heaven, doesn't it?
And my experience is that little children and teens
get in a lot easier than adults do.
Last thing is Mark Ward wants us to ditch
the King James Version, but it's obvious
that his own church beliefs are heretical
based upon their departure from the King James Bible.
On his front page, he has hyperlinks
to all these different things, articles he's written,
the college he's attended, and the church
he currently attends, which is in Washington State.
Turn to 2 Timothy chapter three verse 16.
Now, I know that people are gonna be like,
eh, you're gonna pick on him because of
what his church doctrinal statement says?
Yeah, I am.
And you know why?
Because he hyperlinked it on the front page
of his website so that people would go to it
and look at what his church is like.
He's showing off what church he goes to,
and you know, the guy's so meticulous
in all of the other things he does,
so what am I supposed to think he didn't look
at what all of his church believes
before he put all that stuff up for us to see?
No, I'm gonna hold him to that he believes
what that church believes.
And if he doesn't believe that,
well then he better come out and say it.
But here's what he, let's read the verses here.
2 Timothy chapter three verse 16 says,
All scripture is given by inspiration of God
and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof,
for correction, for instruction in righteousness,
that the man of God may be perfect,
thoroughly furnished unto all good works.
The Bible has been given to us so that we can live
the kind of life that God wants us to live.
All scripture has been given to us.
It's all inspired.
It's profitable for us, for doctrine, what's that?
For teaching, for us to learn, for us to be reproved
when we're wrong, to correct us when we need correction,
to be given, to instruct us in righteousness,
in how to be saved, in how to do good works.
It says that the man of God, and not just the man,
but the women of God also, may be perfect.
And that means that we can be complete.
We can be the total package.
We cannot have any glaring weaknesses in our lives.
And maybe we do, maybe we do have weaknesses in our life,
but we do have the tools to be able to fix those things.
We do have the tools that God has given us in this book
to live the complete package, perfect Christian life.
I'm not talking about walking on water,
I'm just saying that you can still live the life
that God wants you to live.
We have no excuses.
And it says, throughly furnished unto all good works.
So God's given us everything in here that we need to know.
Isn't that what it's saying?
Okay, so now if you have a Bible that can instruct you
in that way, that's great.
And your church, if your church is,
the bedrock of your church is laid upon these scriptures,
then your doctrine is probably gonna be pretty good.
If the church membership is saved, if the pastor's saved,
if you're using the right book with the right words,
you're gonna have a pretty good foundation.
And if you have the right head of your church,
which is the Lord Jesus Christ,
everything's gonna be great.
Well, one thing I noticed when I looked at the leadership
of their church is that most of the leadership is women.
On the front, I mean on the front page,
it's a bunch of women that are directors of everything.
That's pretty bad.
But, you know, he wants to talk about false friends
and words that confuse and all this other stuff.
You know, besides his own phlogic and his hypocrisy
on Bible version standards that he has,
how about the church he currently attends?
The church he currently attends is called
Emmanuel Baptist Church in Mount Vernon, Washington,
which is about three and a half hours north of us.
And on the tab that they have that says the gospel,
they have this section that says God,
it explains who God is.
Jesus explains who Jesus is.
I didn't really see any glaring problems with that.
Then it says like sin, and it explains to you
why we're sinners.
Didn't really have a big problem with that.
But then it says response.
This is the person reading it, this should be our response.
It says, what shall you do with this information?
Repent and believe in Christ for salvation.
I don't really have a problem with that.
Repent, turn from all that dishonors God.
Whoops.
It is more than just being sorry for what you've done.
There are examples of individuals in the Bible
that repented because they were afraid of what was to come.
That is a false repentance and not what God desires.
That type of repentance leads one to an eternal hell.
What type of repentance does God desire?
What shall you do?
You must turn from your sin and turn to Jesus Christ
as Lord and Savior.
You must submit everything about who you are,
will, desires, hope to Christ.
You must remove yourself from the throne
and surrender that place to Christ.
Sounds like lordship salvation, doesn't it?
Recognize that you have broken God's law
and respond in obedience to God in every area of your life.
That's definitely a lordship salvation.
Call on His grace to help you
through this new life of submission.
Did you see where it says believe on the Lord Jesus Christ?
Carefully consider this.
There is a cost to this life.
You are called to a life of obedience.
Obey, which means that you are to forsake your sin.
This might mean a change of relationships
or practices that do not honor God.
Christ Himself said that if one were to be
wholly devoted to Him,
which meant that one would not be wholly devoted to himself,
he would have life in Christ.
So to be saved, what is it saying?
You have to be wholly devoted.
Not to yourself, but you have to be wholly devoted to Christ.
This is eternal life.
This is everlasting joy.
This is being restored to a right relationship
with the one who created you.
And it sourced Luke 9 23,
and I'll read Luke 9 23 for you
so you don't have to turn there, but it says,
and he said unto them that if any man will come after me,
let him deny himself and take up his cross daily
and follow me.
He's using that for a salvation verse.
This is talking about following Jesus
after you're already saved.
And the other verse he cites is,
he that finds his life shall lose it,
and he that loseth his life from my sake shall find it.
Also talking about following after you're already saved.
You must confess your sin to God,
he will forgive you, 1 John 1 nine.
So that's talking about after you're already saved.
And you're just confessing the things that you do
like on a daily basis or whatever.
Now, repentance doesn't end with a confession of sin.
You must believe in Christ as Lord and Savior.
You must have saving faith in God's son,
not in your own efforts.
What?
I thought it just said we had to obey everything
and follow everything and complete obedience,
and not in your own efforts, though.
What?
Having faith in Christ means that you recognize
that his death was sufficient to pay for your sin's penalty.
Like, I mean, are they schizo-,
is this two people writing the same thing, or what?
Having faith in Christ means that you depend
on Christ's righteousness alone
so you're acceptable to God.
Having faith in Christ means
that you believe his resurrection
and you submit your whole life to him.
So they're just going back and forth,
they don't know what they believe.
Will you repent and believe in Christ,
or will you remain under God's judgment?
The time is now to repent, Acts 17, 30.
Which is the chapter we were just in not too long ago.
But anyway, what you have heard is true,
and God commands that you turn from your rebellion
against him and agree with him.
Through your confession that you have disobeyed
and deserve judgment,
you can't do anything good to please him.
I thought you had to do everything good to please him.
I don't know.
Call out to God and ask him to forgive your sins
and tell him of your desire to repent.
Affirm what you just read about who he is
and who Christ is and how God has made it possible
for you to be reconciled to him and through his son.
Believe in God's son, Jesus Christ.
Believe in who he is and what he did for you.
So Acts 17, 30, I'm going to have you turn to Acts 19,
but Acts 17, 30 says this,
And the times of this ignorance God winked at,
but commandeth all men everywhere to repent.
That's what he is sourcing.
But what they magically add after this is of your sins,
but that's not in the Bible.
It probably is in the New King James Version.
I didn't check that, but it might say that in there.
It probably doesn't, but I'm sure there's a Bible version
you can find that says it.
But it says, Because he hath appointed a day
in which he will judge the world in righteousness
by that man whom he hath ordained whereof
he hath given assurance unto all men,
in that he hath raised him from the dead.
So Acts 19, you know, Paul comes across these guys
and he asks them, Have you received the Holy Ghost
since you believed?
And they said they didn't even know
that there was a Holy Ghost, right?
So, but in verse four it says,
Then said Paul, John verily baptized
with the baptism of repentance,
saying unto the people that they should believe on him
which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.
So look, people will try to play this repentance game,
but they'll say, John preached repentance of your sins.
Jesus preached repentance of your sins.
But what did John preach?
That you should believe on him that should come after him.
Repentance unto salvation is that you change your mind
about whatever was taking you to hell
and you put all your faith in Jesus.
If you believed in a false god,
you have to stop believing in that false god
and you have to believe in Jesus.
That's what true repentance is.
True repentance is not, you know,
repenting of all your sins and, you know, submitting
and you take yourself off the throne.
I didn't know I was on the throne, but anyway.
You know, look, this is garbage, man.
And this guy's gonna sit here and tell us
what Bible we need to read out of.
He's not even, their church doesn't even know
what salvation is.
And he's pimping this thing online?
You gotta be kidding me.
And if he hasn't read this, he has a responsibility
to read this and see what his church is actually teaching.
Because it's trash.
Here's what they believe, and I didn't attack everything
because whatever on their doctoral statement
that was okay, I just left alone.
But here's some really bad things.
I know I gotta end real quickly and I'm going to.
But here's some other really bad inconsistencies.
And this is the problem with modern Bible versions.
And this is the problem with unregenerate people
leading your church, is that they're gonna lead you
into false doctrine.
Here's what they say on the word of God.
We believe that the Bible is the word of God
fully inspired without error in the original manuscripts.
Well, that's part of the problem there almost.
Original manuscript only is.
Well, it's too bad that Moses broke the 10 Commandments,
the original ones, because now we never know
what the true 10 Commandments really were.
Same thing with Jeremiah.
You know, when they cut the scroll and threw it in the fire,
you know, we'll never know if there was some extra stuff
in there that we really just don't know.
Because Jeremiah, you know, that guy threw Jeremiah's
original manuscript into the fire.
This is just trash.
And so, after that it says, we believe that it was written
under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit,
and that it has supreme authority in all manners
of faith and conduct.
But they don't have it.
So if they don't have it, how can they believe
that it has supreme authority in all matters
of faith and conduct if they don't have it?
You see how that's a slippery slope?
See, we believe that we have it, and therefore we put it
into practice, and therefore we teach it,
and that's why we go out and preach it,
and that's why we know that we have converts,
and when we give a child a King James Bible,
we know that that's gonna affect their life
if they read that book after they're saved,
that they can trust in that, and they know
that they're saved.
That's why when we write in their Bibles,
I know some people do this, they say saved
and what day it was.
And so when they doubt, they can look at that date
and say, I know I got saved that day.
I know that they showed me how to get saved,
and I know that the Bible's true.
And then some bozo like this comes along and says,
you know, you can't trust in your King James Bible.
And he says it way faggier than that.
Anyway, regeneration.
We believe that all men are sinners by nature,
and by choice and are, therefore under condemnation.
We believe that those who repent of their sins,
and trust in Jesus Christ as Savior,
are regenerated by the Holy Spirit.
Well, we saw the long version of that,
and it was pretty bad, right?
Not just repent of your sins, but you gotta submit.
To everything.
So repent of your sins first, trust in Jesus second.
The church.
We believe in the universal church.
Eh!
Wrong.
Right off the bat, just wrong.
A living spiritual body in which Christ is the head,
and all regenerated persons are members.
We believe in the local church,
consisting of companies of believers in Jesus Christ,
baptized on a credible profession of faith
and associated of worship.
Oh, the credible profession of faith?
Oh, they repented of their sins?
They're the regenerated ones?
Okay.
Work in fellowship and believe that God
has laid upon the members of the local church
the primary task of giving the gospel of Jesus Christ
to the lost world.
Well, we'll see if they do that.
We'll get to that one in a minute.
Church cooperation.
We believe that, I've never seen this
in a doctoral statement before.
Church cooperation.
We believe that the local churches can best promote
the cause of Jesus Christ by cooperating
with one another in denominational organization.
Okay.
Yep.
Such an organization, whether a regional
or district conference, exists and functions
by the will of the churches, cooperation in conference
is voluntary and may be terminated at any time.
Churches may likewise cooperate with
interdenominational fellowships
on a voluntary, independent basis.
Interdenominational, ecumenical.
Like, oh, we don't have to do it, but we do.
That's what they're saying, basically.
The last things, I mean, they stop short of calling it hell.
They say the endless suffering of the wicked,
they don't call it hell, which, whatever.
And so, here's their outreach.
This is their, they had a tab called outreach
and I was like, oh, maybe they do outreach.
But I'm glad they don't really do outreach
because if that's their message, then it's, you know,
I don't want them going out and giving,
they're making people twofold more of the child of hell
than they are themselves.
But it said, EBC is committed to local global outreach
because God's purpose through human history
has been to deliver depraved, hopeless sinners
from around the world, out of their sin
and into a worship relationship with himself
from the resurrection of Jesus onward.
This saving task has been entrusted to the local church
and requires men and women to go
and proclaim the glorious gospel of Jesus Christ.
Our missions team actively leads
in supporting our outreach partners
with prayer and resources while they are on the field,
as well as supports our outreach partners off the field
through hosting receptions for our congregation
to meet, fellowship with, and encourage our partners.
Please check out our MOCA's for Missions coffee stand,
located in the Chapel Foyer
for our list of outreach partners.
MOCA's for Missions coffee stand.
Not soul winning, not knocking doors,
and I'm glad, honestly, by the way,
after seeing what they believe.
You know, your MOCA stands perish with thee, is what I say.
You know, to close this off, just, you know,
Mark Ward is a false friend.
He's no friend of ours.
He's no friend of Baptist,
and he can take his New King James Version
and go jump in the lake of fire with it.
Amen.
And, you know, the fact that he,
and another false friend of ours,
Pastor Tom McMurtry, the gently led husband,
took a picture together, you know,
and he says, let's see how many people
I can make mad with this
by taking a picture with this guy.
You know, it's a picture with him and Mark Ward.
Doesn't surprise me at all,
because false friends like to stand together,
but it doesn't really make me mad at all.
It just doesn't surprise me at all, either.
So, you know, I've had that guy pegged for a long time, too,
so when he's just, you know,
buddying up with a, taking a picture with a false teacher,
but doesn't want to have anything to do
with people that are real men of God,
then it just doesn't surprise me.
So, he's a false friend, too,
and, you know,
he likes to just do endless podcasts
against, you know, people like me,
people like our churches,
and encouraging people to leave our churches,
and things like that.
It's just like, dude, just stay in Rock Falls,
stay under the rock,
and just lead your church and leave our churches alone.
Nobody cares what you have to say, honestly.
Like, we just want to live our lives,
and not have to deal with you.
Like, I wish that he would actually finally
just leave the new IFB after four years.
We've been waiting all this time.
Just leave, man.
Nobody cares what you have to say.
Like, nobody likes you.
Nobody likes your shows.
You're running the echo chamber.
You're the real echo chamber.
Your buddy's the, you know, pastor of church
with a town of 2,000 people in it, or something.
And, you know, basically Mark Ward is like,
he's like a placosomus.
You guys know what a placosomus is?
It's like a sucker fish catfish.
They usually have them in tanks, fish tanks,
you know what I'm talking about?
Have you ever seen those at a doctor's office or something?
They just have the big sucker fish,
and they suck the algae off the sides.
That's what Mark Ward's like.
You know, he's using Baptists,
sucking and sponging off them.
That's what Tommy McMurtry's like, too.
He's basically the same exact thing as a placosomus.
He's a bottom feeder.
All the washout weirdos and losers have gone to his side.
It's funny, because they're just like,
yeah, all the weirdos have left,
and now, or all the weirdos have stayed
and all the normal people have left the new IFB.
It's just like, I don't see that.
I actually see the exact opposite of that.
There's so many, everybody in here is totally normal,
and there's been a lot of weird ones that have left.
I don't find that at all.
I just, I find that there's a lot of normal people left,
and so all the weirdo ones are with them
in their little weird echo chamber,
just constantly talking about people that they have.
I mean, they have no idea what our church is like.
Our church is a great church,
and we have a lot of great families here,
and we're just trying to do our thing,
and the placosomus Baptist of the world
can suck and feed off the bottom other places,
but they need to leave our churches alone and get a life.
Go pastor your people who are trying to suck the,
you can suck the scum someplace else
and just leave our church alone, all right scumbag?
All right, so Mark Ward, false friend, and mark and avoid.
Mark, ward, and avoid.
All right, let's pray.
Lord, we thank you so much for this great church,
and pray that you just help us
to always cherish the King James Bible
and the great words that it has, Lord,
and to avoid people like Mark Ward and his devices,
and he tries to look like a Baptist
and tries to pretend he cares about Baptists,
but in reality, he's just a devil
hiding behind false lips and a lying tongue.
Pray, Lord, that you bless us as we go our separate ways
and keep us safe and bring us back in due time on Sunday.
Pray that you just bless as we go.
In Jesus' name we pray, amen.