Friday, November 21, 2014

Warning against Doug Riggs of the 'Morning Star Testimony Church' concerning King James Bible

To brother Doug Riggs 20 November 2014

One of Satan's attacks is on the word of God. This should be known by every Christian. All the modern Bible Versions, and I am sorry to be the one to tell you, were planned by the Theosophical Society at the end of the 19th Century. I urge you to watch the following video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQULOGIQQvo and the more you research the subject of King James Bible and Bible Perversions, the more you will be convinced that all the new Bible versions were a result of Satan's conspiracy against Bible believers.

Now the reason I had to tell you that is because I was watching your video The celestial Court: Its link is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1h6XzLkKdB0&list=PLcMFpEBgiIvlW1PPapdqEGrOiz-vlvVvd
and in it you were teaching that Lucifer was called the morning star and subsequently, Jesus took that from him and became the morning star. First of all if you look into the Bible you will not find any verse that supports such claim. This was only an assumption from you and I understand how you came to such conclusion. However, you must be careful in saying such thing because Jesus' authority as King and taking what belongs to him happens only at the appointed time by the Father namely Jesus' second return. Jesus took nothing with when departed to be with the Father. However you will find that the problem that led you to come to such conclusion is the perversion of the word of God. King James Bible was under attack since it was translated. Many millions were killed by the Vatican due to the fact that they possessed and read the King James Bible of 1611. All new versions were not translated from different manuscripts as they claim. This is the biggest lie, because the translation of NASB, or NIV or others are actually missing much of the Manuscripts that underlie the New World Order Versions. The so called translators of the New Versions have omitted multitudes of words, chapters, verses and even an entire book. The manuscripts that were used by the so called translators are nothing but another version of the Vatican's Translation which originated from the same Manuscripts that translated the King James Bible, but the Vatican perverted and omitted all the words and doctrines that did not agree with their teaching and claimed to have found older manuscripts than those that underlie the king james version known as the Textus Receptus, which means the received text. 

There is much that I could explain to you, but you really want to do this research for yourself starting with D. Professor Gail Ripplinger who spent 6 years collating the Bible versions to discover for herself that one of the verses that were perverted by the Theosophical Society's officers or whoever works under them is Isiah Chapter 14: 12 which claims that Satan is the Morning Star, yet from eternity, Jesus was always the Morning Star, and Lucifer is the Son of the Morning which means he was the first of God's creation and Lucifer means Holder of the light from which the term Illuminati came from. He only was entrusted with Holding the Light of God no being the Light of the Morning Star.

Anyway, just type the words Gail Ripplinger in the YOUTUBE search Bar, or Modern Bible Translations or click on the above first link I copied for you and you will be very disturbed and surprised.

God Bless all your efforts Brother Doug and the peace of the Lord and his protection be with you
Brother George 
Brother Doug
_______________________________________________________________________________
From brother Doug Riggs to Me 21st November 2014

The King James Only Controversy: Can You Trust Modern Translations?: James R. White, Mike Baird
What About the KJV?
“I’m arguably the only person in the world who has literally been through every syllable of the Masoretic Text, comparing it to the KJV translation. Seriously. I know the KJV and its relationship to the original languages very well. Why did I do this? It was part of my job at Logos Bible Software. I’m the guy who created our KJV reverse interlinear, OT and NT (by hundreds of thousands of hand links — Hebrew / Aramaic segments to KJV, Greek segments to KJV).1 In broad terms, I like the KJV since I’m used to it and I favor formal equivalence. The archaic language doesn’t bother me much, though it is admittedly impenetrable in places (did you know that “go fetch a compass” means “go around” or “proceed circuitously”?). Don’t feel bad; no one else does either. Aside from oddities like that which simply do not communicate beyond the 18th century, I think the KJV a good translation for the most part. It deserves its reputation as a quality rendering of the original languages. However, I will never trust it again in Job. Job is filled with weird things, such as words that are still uncertain in meaning (since they occur only once and nowhere else in Hebrew) and that must be “translated” by appeal to related (cognate) languages. Ugaritic has a special role in that process (Ugarit = ancient Syria). That alphabetic cuneiform language is the closest linguistic cousin to biblical Hebrew. There were many words in the Ugaritic tablets (discovered and deciphered in the late 1920s-early 1930s) that are consonantal equivalents to difficult words in the Hebrew OT. The KJV translators had no access to that, nor did they have access to other cognate languages for the same purpose (like Akkadian), or the Dead Sea Scrolls. They did the best they could and did it well, but in books like Job, it is easy for someone like me to know they are just simply guessing in places. I also saw many places where one translator (the KJV was a committee translation) knew his Hebrew or Aramaic grammar than another guy, and hence did a better job. But I’m digressing. I like the KJV and the reason I wanted to do the reverse interlinear for Logos was because I felt I owed the project to the translation, since I was weaned on it as a Bible reader.
The above should also inform you that I have little (actually, no) time for the “KJV debate” (aka, “KJV-only”). I taught bibliology and the history of the Bible in Bible college, so I know all the arguments defending the idea that the KJV is the best translation, or that it’s the inspired English translation, or that other English translations are heretical. etc. They are all lame arguments.2 Not only are they lame, but this is really a NT debate (Westcott-Hort vs. the Byzantine Majority text debate). NONE of the arguments for the “KJV only” view work at all when it comes to the OT and the history of the transmission of the Hebrew text. They are DOA (dead on arrival). But KJV-only people usually don’t get into Hebrew. But this is also a digression. If you love the KJV, read it. It’s as good or better than anything out there, as all translations have weaknesses (some have more than others).” Dr. Michael Heiser http://drmsh.com/about-michael-s-heiser/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Followed by: From Brother Doug Riggs:
Hi brother George,
If you have not gone through our four part teaching series “Jesus Christ the Bright and Morning Star” I suggest that you prayerfully consider this which addresses the issues you have brought up in this regard.http://www.dougriggs.org/AudioFiles.html
Blessings, Doug
______________________________________________________________________________

My reply to Brother Doug Riggs on 22nd November 2014

I wish to be open with you and tell what is in my heart that bothered me concerning your reply. Before I tell you that, just let me give an extremely brief overview of my experience with the Bibles and with the Lord concerning the same issue.
I  was born in the old city of Jerusalem  to a Catholic family who obviously knew almost nothing of the Bible. Subsequent to migrating to Australia, I was exposed to other type of Christians whereby I learned over the years a lot of the word of God. My first Bible version was the RSV. I was content with it and I was not aware of any different translations. The I purchased an NIV through a website thinking that all versions say the same thing in a slightly different way. Until I came to the verse in Isiah 14:12 concerning the fall of Satan and the Morning Star, when I discovered that there was a problem with the NIV. This happened years before I discovered the Bible Versions Controversy. I was then taught by the Lord himself not by any man's explanation that Lucifer is not the Morning Star and never was. This had never anything to do with the controversy. I wrote to you what the Lord taught me. 
Son of the Morning: We know that the direct creation of God are known in the Bible as sons of God. Morning is the beginning of the day. Combined together. Lucifer was the beginning of God's creation. However the Morning Star as you pointed out something which was new for me to learn that the morning star appears in the heavens at the end tail of the darkness in the morning. Which we both agree that it is a name given to Jesus. Lucifer will not appear at the end the night's darkness, Lucifer has fallen. 
Now what bothered me is that instead of responding to what I wrote to you concerning this issue, you chose to copy what Michael Heiser wrote. And this I appreciate and I read what he said, but I never learned the word of God reading scholarly works. I always depended upon the Holy Spirit. I read some works, I view videos but in the end what the Lord himself teaches me from what I research is what I believe. 
The translators of the King James Bible did not just translate, that was the work of God for which possessing it millions died. If KJB was good for 400 years it is good for the rest of the age. 
When a crime is committed the prosecution always looks for the reason as to what made the alleged criminal perpetrate the crime. Similarly the reason behind the translation is of the utmost importance. And you are one of the very few that were exposed to the Satanic conspiracy. When the Holy Spirit is our teacher, and I have learned a lot from the Lord using the NIV; why do we need 351 different Bible Versions? We don't. And in looking into the King James Bible and comparing it to some modern Bible Versions, I discovered the reason behind the modern versions. Modern versions of the Bible were not created to help the Christians find out more about God. They were not created by saints of the Lord. I do not know much about all the Versions, but I know enough to know that they were created for reasons other than the glory of God. 
For Example; NIV was changed in the direction of digression since it was first printed. Two: A Satanist owns the copyright of NIV and three: Some of the so called translators of the NIV are Satanists. 

That is all said, I believe that should one search for God from his heart, the Lord never disappoints him. God is our true Father and he will never give us a serpent if asked him for fish. And for me, using any Bible Version other than KJB, is informing the modern Bible Versions creators that it is OK to pervert the word of God and still make monetary profit from it.

I hope I did not take too much of your valuable time, but I needed to get the words taught me by the Lord to you.

God Bless you

George 

From Doug Riggs (A reply) 22nd November 2014

Dear George,
 
You do not need to be concerned about me. I am in very good hands. My focus is only in one place and everything else is a diversion:
 
Blessings,
Doug

My reply to Doug Riggs 22nd November 2014

Fine. I will not be concerned for you. Can I be concerned for those you are teaching. 

You teach in your video that Lucifer was the Morning Star and Jesus took it from him. This is false teaching.

I am not writing you again at least not concerning this issue.

If you are where you really believe to be, then correct it. 

Teaching false things after knowing it to be false will have negative consequences for you and others 


From Doug Riggs (A reply) 22nd November 2014

I am not teaching false doctrine. This is your opinion and your interpretation. I stand before God and not you.
 
Maranatha,
Doug

My reply to Doug Riggs 22nd November 2014

Please read this and respond only if you have time.

Just remember Lucifer never had anything to give God subsequent to his fall from grace. Not even at the second return of Jesus is Jesus taking anything from Satan. Nothing belongs to Satan, all creation is God's and Jesus never took Lucifer's name. I have no idea as to on what you support the idea that Jesus took the name of Lucifer i. e. the Morning Star. 
I just want to learn that if I am wrong, I will be more than happy to learn from you. You teach in the Morning Star audios in the first part that Jesus will be appearing at the very end of the dark of night which alludes to the fact that he returns at the end of time while things are so bad that he had to come before no one will be left alive. I agree 100%.
My question is: why would God call Lucifer as the Morning Star? And what does the Morning Star in possession of Lucifer teaches. You did not explain this part in your audio.
You might want to teach me via email. 

May God grant you blessings according to your heart
George

From Doug Riggs (A reply) 22nd November 2014

George,
 
I agree with you in some of what you have stated and that you need further clarification of what I have taught. I am very involved in training counselors who are working with SRA survivors so I don’t have the time to go into this via email.  If you with to discuss this further I would be happy to visit with you by phone or skype. Your question is valid and very simple to resolve from the Word of God.
 
skype: doug.riggs2
 
Blessings, Doug

My reply to Doug Riggs 24th November 2014

Brother Doug

I am sorry I can't speak to you directly due to my illness, however according to you, you said: It should be easy to prove it through the scriptures. I am certain it would not take you as long as a phone call to point out the verses upon which you relied to prove that Satan was the morning star.
God bless
George 

Warning against Doug Riggs by George, 1 December 2014

That my Brothers and sisters in the Lord was the end of the dialogue. Today is 1 December 2014. Doug's claim that he needs to talk to me over the phone because he has no time is absolute lie. For Doug Riggs to point out the verses upon which he relied to claim that Satan was the Morning Star and subsequently Jesus took it of him is unscriptural and definite perversion of the Biblical doctrines. The deal struck between God and Satan, is that Satan has until the end of time with all his powers given to him and God's permission to Satan to use them. God does not Change his mind half way through the deal and reclaim one of Satan's powers. After all God own everything anyway and does not need anything whether it is in the possession of Satan or not. The reason God at the end of time takes everything from Satan and gives them to Jesus is because God wants to end evil not because God is needy by any means. 

Bothers and Sisters Doug Riggs is just trying to justify the perversions of the New World Order Satanic Bible Versions.

No comments:

Post a Comment