Is the Clear Word Official?

STEPHEN PITCHER

• What is The Clear Word ?
• Is it an official Bible of the Seventh-day Adventist Church?
• What status does The Clear Word have among Adventists?
• What kind of responses has The Clear Word generated?

The answers to these questions reveal the truth that Adventists are conflicted about this unique, denominationally-specific work. On the one hand they love it because it endorses and explains Adventist theology using biblical terms and format. On the other hand, they know that this work seriously tarnishes their carefully-cultivated reputation as “evangelicals” if the Christian community were to understand its significance. 

Jack J. Blanco, ThD, was the dean of the school of religion at Southern Adventist University when he wrote The Clear Word (TCW). He explains that he had decided to spend his own devotional time rewriting the New Testament text, and he specifically intended to rewrite Jesus’ words as He would say them today instead of as He said them 2,000 years ago. On the program Between The Lines produced by the Adventists’ Review and Herald Publishing Association, Blanco was clear about his methodology:

“If Jesus were here today, what would He tell you? Well, we know what He said, but how would He say it? … If Jesus were here today, riding with me in the car, or meeting me on a walk, or whatever, and He’s talking to me, how would He say what He said? So I started with the Gospel of Mark, and then started writing it down, and then you know you go on and you try to imagine how Jesus is talking to you, trying to make this clearer. Then after you write a passage then you read it, and you say, ‘Well, let’s see…’ then you cross this line out, or this word out or if you write in the margin, you know, this was just a personal experience. And Samuel [interviewer], I used to get so caught up, I was in a different world. I was walking by the side of Galilee; I was listening to Jesus.”¹

In deciding to rewrite Jesus’ own words to us, Blanco ignored His specific teachings as well as the warnings found near the end of the book of Revelation. Jesus taught that, in times to come, the Holy Spirit would bring to His disciples’ remembrance all that He had taught them. John 14:26 tells us: “But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.” 

The Holy Spirit did give the apostles the understanding to write Jesus’ teachings down in the text of the New Testament. Today the Holy Spirit still teaches us the very words of Jesus recorded for us in Scripture. In fact, this function of teaching us the words of Jesus is one of the Holy Spirit’s roles in the life of believers today. We are not to imagine what Jesus would say to us; words we imagine He might say would no longer be the words of God. Rather, we are to reflect on what He has already said in His word. The words recorded in Scripture are truth regardless of the time in history in which we happen to be living, and the Holy Spirit teaches us what those actual words mean.

The first outcome of his conducting his devotionals in this fashion resulted in Blanco’s publishing them under the title The New Testament: A Devotional Paraphrase to Stimulate Faith and Growth. Released in 1990, this early edition of what would eventually become a complete “Bible” contains some passages that have been altered to support early Seventh-day Adventist theology—theology that continues to shape Adventist doctrine today. For example, three central passages that support the deity of Jesus Christ and His oneness with the Father are changed in TCW to reflect Adventism’s foundational anti-trinitarianism. This kind of rewording allows Adventists with either trinitarian or non-trinitarian viewpoints to find support for their doctrines. Even further, these edited texts allow for tritheistic (or at least bitheistic) interpretations. Below are the three texts compared with the English Standard Version:

John 1:1

1990 Devotional Paraphrase

^{Before the beginning of everything, going further back in time than can be imagined, the “Word of God” was there. And the “Word of God” stood by the side of God. And the Word was fully God.}

English Standard Version

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

John 8:58

1990 Devotional Paraphrase

Jesus said, “Because I existed before Abraham was born.”

English Standard Version

Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.”

John 10:30

1990 Devotional Paraphrase

“You see, my Father and I are like one.”

The Clear Word (current ed.)

You see, my Father and I are so close, we’re one.

English Standard Version

I and the Father are one.

These kinds of changes are sprinkled throughout the many versions of Blanco’s paraphrase. Encountered individually, they may seem subtle, but when compared with an accepted translation, these alterations clearly distort trinitarian theology. Moreover, the de-emphasizing of Jesus’ eternal oneness with the Father is not limited to the New Testament in TCW; Blanco has also reworked Old Testament passages. For example, his altering of Genesis 1:26-27 allows for a bi-theistic interpretation of the creation account:

Genesis 1:26-27

The Clear Word (current ed.)

But this was not the end of His work for that day. Next He said to His Son, “Now let us make beings who look like us and can reflect our thinking and our personality. Let’s give them the responsibility of ruling over and caring for the fish, the birds and the animals which we created.”

So they created two human beings, a male and a female, equal but with different functions, to reflect the unity of the Godhead.

English Standard Version

Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.

Here Blanco has blatantly separated God from His Son instead of letting God be One. Moreover, Blanco has limited “God” to two persons, Father and Son, peculiarly omitting the Holy Spirit whose presence is implied in the traditional text which has God referring to Himself using the plural pronoun “us”. Instead, in TCW we have a “God” (actually, two gods) who have created a man and a woman to “reflect the unity of the Godhead” instead of reflecting “his own image” (singular). This bi-theistic wording both allows readers to have an unbiblical view of the Godhead and provides support for that view.

Moreover, Blanco’s rewriting implies that the Father and the Son have physical bodies, an implication contradicting the plain words of Scripture: “God is spirit” (Jn. 4:24). This revision of God’s essence further allows Blanco to define man’s reflection of God’s image as physical looks and mental capacities, thus eliminating the spirit as the reflection of God’s image which both men and women share. 

Is The Clear Word a Bible?

The first edition of Blanco’s full Bible paraphrase that appeared in 1994 was entitled The Clear Word Bible. After much feedback, however, the second edition, also printed in 1994, was retitled. The word “Bible” was removed, and the words “expanded paraphrase” were added to the subtitle of the book. In fact, during 1994 four separate editions of Blanco’s paraphrase were published, each with numerous textual changes. Since 1994, however, The Clear Word has not been referenced by edition number. Now subsequent editions are referenced by copyright date, and each edition represents new changes to the text.

Although the word “Bible” has been removed from the title, one only needs to turn to the table of contents to find “The Books of the Bible” listed, rather than “The Books of the Paraphrase,” or even simply “Books.” This ambiguity between the cover title and the table of contents demonstrates Adventists’ division over whether or not TCW is a Bible. Some use it as a Bible; some use it as a paraphrase, while others simply ignore it.

In reality, The Clear Word is marketed as a Bible. In both the online catalogs and in the Adventist Book Centers, TCW is displayed with the Bibles. Often, in fact, it is given prominence on an end-cap displaying all its formats and versions.

Is The Clear Word Official?

Both Blanco and the distributor of TCW, The Review and Herald Publishing Association, have been clear in their statements: The Clear Word is not an official Adventist version of the Scriptures. Denials notwithstanding, Adventists’ practices often betray a different attitude. First, The Review and Herald is the flagship facility of the Seventh-day Adventist publishing industry. Within Adventism, books printed by The Review and Herald are considered denominationally approved. Thus, books both printed by The Review and Herald and marketed by Adventist Book Centers, as TCW is, carry an implied denominational approval whether or not they are “official”. 

Furthermore, some Adventist pastors use TCW as a Bible and promote its use to their congregations. One such man is Pastor Samuel Thomas, Jr. In an interview with Jack Blanco, on the program Between The Lines, a video presentation of The Review and Herald Publishing Association, he indicates that even on the local church level The Clear Word is trustworthy for Adventists to use, even for Bible study:

I [Samuel Thomas] have enjoyed [The Clear Word]. I have used it in teaching and preaching and ministry, and even in Bible Study.…²

Not long ago we were at a meeting together. I stopped you [Jack Blanco], and I said I’ve shared TCW with my members and encouraged them to buy it, because they need to know that this—although paraphrased—it’s theologically consistent with our Seventh-day Adventist faith, and so from that standpoint, you can say, “Here’s not only a devotional reading or study for me, but I can rest on it,” where you can’t really say that about all the other devotionals.

 [Blanco responds:] No, there are some translations that are a little tweaked, if I can put it that way, as one translation when it talks about not “divine punishment,” but “divine punishing.” 

[Thomas continues:] And those are the kind of distinguishing differences that actually make The Clear Word more valuable, and that’s why I appreciate it, because I knew that you would put forth every effort to make sure that it was consistent.³

Significantly, Blanco never corrects Thomas’ statements about using TCW for preaching and Bible study. Furthermore, regardless of Adventism’s official position on TCW, Thomas recommends it to his congregation and, via this video, to the rest of the watching Adventist world—and Blanco supports this endorsement. Thomas is not unique; he is only one example of the countless Adventists who use TCW as a Bible for studying, reading, and worship.

Blanco’s double-speak, stating TCW is not an official Bible while endorsing its use as a Bible for teaching, preaching, and study, is further demonstrated in his own writing of the preface of the first edition of The Clear Word Bible. For example, although Blanco explains his imaginative rewriting of the New Testament in the episode of Between The Lines quoted above, the preface to the original Clear Word Bible implies that he used a more scientific methodology. In the preface to the first edition he says:

The New Testament was published first after being submitted to qualified colleagues for general accuracy, as well as to knowledgeable laymen for readability. … After the first printing of the New Testament, it was decided to revise the New Testament and attempt to make it less colloquial, yet retain its contemporary style, and to republish it together with the Old Testament.

Some scholars take Genesis 1:1, 2 to mean that God created the material substance of the earth on the first day of creation week while others understand these verses to mean that God brought order and beauty to the raw mass of earth’s material created previously. To paraphrase it both ways would be confusing to the reader, and after careful research I decided on the latter.

He continues in the same fashion throughout two and a half pages of text in the preface. Some of the statements to be found there include:

“… Kings and Chronicles at times appear to be contradictory unless they are allowed to complement and complete each other.” “The description of Solomon’s temple and its measurements also presented a problem …” “The Psalms were difficult to paraphrase.” Regarding the prophets, “To the best of my ability I tried to make one message flow into another for the sake of the reader.” “Chapters 11 and 12 of Daniel were a challenge.” “… I attempted to harmonize in the four gospels what at first appears to be contradictory. The more difficult passages were made clearer by allowing each gospel to inform the other three …” “The epistles of Paul were the most difficult to paraphrase.” “For the sake of the reader, the book of Revelation with its many symbols demanded a greater amount of interpretative freedom.”⁴

In later versions of The Clear Word, the preface was reduced to a page and a half (2000 edition) and later (2003, the current version available in Adventist Book Centers [ABCs]) to less than a page. The scholarly methods to which he refers in the earlier versions are removed, and in their place he has written about the nature of a paraphrase. We must give him credit, however, for the first paragraph in the original Clear Word Bible preface. There he states:

This is not a new translation but a paraphrase of the Scriptures. It is not intended for in-depth study or for public reading in churches. Those who are better qualified have given readers of the Holy Scriptures excellent translations for such purposes and undoubtedly will continue to do so as additional manuscripts come to light.⁵

While admitting TCW is not for in-depth study, this preface does not indicate just how it should be used. The preface in the current edition of The Clear Word, however, says:

As has been stated in previous editions, The Clear Word is not a translation, but a devotional paraphrase of Scripture expanded for clarity. It is intended to build faith and nurture spiritual growth. It should not be considered a study Bible. Excellent translations of the Scriptures are available for such purposes.⁶

Blanco’s writing contradicts his spoken words. By not correcting a pastor who uses and publicly recommends TCW for Bible study and preaching, Blanco gives implicit permission to use it in these ways. These opposing messages give the Adventist organization an excuse to argue that it does not have its own Bible while concurrently promoting the book to members as a means of reinforcing their unique doctrines by providing “biblical” support for them.

How do Adventists use The Clear Word?

Individual Adventists differ in their responses to TCW. Many Adventists avoid using it altogether, and some have actually been vocal against the use of this text. Still others read it as a devotional guide. Others, encouraged by endorsements such as the article “In Defense of The Clear Word” by Jim Miller and published in Adventist Today, Sept./Oct., 2000, and by personal praise from people such as Samuel Thomas and Jack Blanco himself (quoted earlier), use TCW for serious Bible study and teaching.

In his article Jim Miller states, “Let me start off by saying that I am not a fan of The Clear Word, Jack J. Blanco’s expanded paraphrase of the Bible.”⁷ He then goes on to defend The Clear Word when used as a “Targum”. He explains that Targums are expansions of the Hebrew Scriptures, documents in which rabbis have inserted text into the passages to help explain their meanings. Miller’s defense of TCW rests on comparing the nature of the Targums with TCW—an interesting but contrived distraction from the real problem. At the end of Miller’s article he unwittingly articulates the seductive danger of TCW:

If I read Blanco’s The Clear Word as an Adventist Targum I can enjoy and respect this expansion on Scripture. And the popularity of The Clear Word compels me to learn to accept its use in church.⁸

Here Miller admits that the paraphrase is being used in church, it is popular, and he is, therefore, compelled to accept its use. Yet the Seventh-day Adventist Church states officially that this work should not be used in church because it is not true Scripture. Many Adventists, nevertheless, do use TCW in church (and in any other place they would use the Bible), because they receive support for doing so from the semantic double-speak of many Adventist leaders and publications.

 Using TCW as authentic Scripture is dangerous for obvious reasons. Using it as a devotional, however, is no less dangerous. Even casual use of this paraphrase reinforces Seventh-day Adventist doctrines. Everything the Adventist believes to be true, all the assumptions that define his great controversy worldview, are reinforced in TCW. The book itself never explains where its text deviates from that of the Bible, nor does it footnote or explain the sources of several Ellen White statements woven into the copy.

What Response Has The Clear Word Generated?

There have been a number of reactions to TCW, primarily from those within Adventism; evangelicals are generally unaware of its importance and distortions. One well-known evangelical scholar, however, Dr. Wayne Grudem, research professor of Bible and theology at Phoenix Seminary in Phoenix, Arizona, and general editor of the ESV Study Bible has responded to The Clear Word with a public statement:

I do not think anyone should trust The Clear Word as a reliable translation of the Bible, or even as a useful paraphrase. It repeatedly distorts the teaching of the Bible. It removes significant content that is in the original Hebrew or Greek, and adds new ideas that are not found in the original texts. Verse after verse has been changed simply to support unusual Seventh-day Adventist doctrines, but these changes are not supported by reliable translations such as the KJV, NKJV, ESV, NASB, RSV, or NIV, or even by dynamic equivalence translations such as the New Living Translation or free paraphrases such as The Message. I was deeply troubled as I read various verses because it was clear that these verses were no longer the words of God only, but the words of God mixed in with many words of man, and ordinary readers of The Clear Word will not be able to tell the difference.⁹

Various Adventist publications have also run responses to TCW. The South Pacific Division Record, an official paper of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, printed the following review issued by the Ministerial Association of the General Conference in 1994 when the paraphrase was just released:

A helpful new Bible study tool—when properly used—is available to Seventh-day Adventists: The Clear Word, prepared by Jack Blanco, head of the religion department at Southern College. …

Where does The Clear Word fit into the picture [of translations, paraphrases, and paraphrases with commentary inserted into the text]? Since the author relies heavily upon extra-biblical sources, including the writings of Ellen G. White, it is more of a paraphrase/commentary than a real Bible.

Nevertheless, there has been considerable confusion and misuse of this study tool. One reason for this was the title of its first edition: The Clear Word Bible. The word Bible has now been removed. Another problem is the verse-by-verse format of The Clear Word, which makes the text appear as a Bible translation rather than as a paraphrase/commentary. Contributing to that misconception is the absence of footnotes to document extra-biblical sources.

To minimize the potential for confusing The Clear Word with an actual Bible we recommend that it not be used for preaching from the pulpit or in teaching Sabbath school. This would be a serious stumbling block to nonmember visitors who may already associate Adventists with cults like Jehovah’s Witnesses who design their own Bibles to teach their strange beliefs. Seventh-day Adventists have no such problem; we can teach all our doctrines out of authentic Bibles familiar to Christians everywhere.

To summarize: The Clear Word is not actually a Bible, but a paraphrase/commentary that, when used properly, can enrich one’s devotional study and can be recommended in that way. It should not be used as the Word of God for teaching purposes.¹⁰

The statement above is confusing. It begins by declaring that TCW is a good “study tool,” yet it attempts to discourage members from using it in church or Sabbath school. Notice, however, the stated reason for not using TCW in church: “This would be a serious stumbling block to nonmember visitors who may already associate Adventists with cults like Jehovah’s Witnesses who design their own Bibles to teach their strange beliefs.” The caution appears aimed at preventing “outsiders” from knowing Adventists have their own version of Scripture. 

In December, 1994, Martin Weber, associate editor of Ministry magazine, published the above article as a book review accompanied by a second review written by Greg Brothers, a former editor of Signs of the Times. Brothers illustrated his review with an apocryphal story of a boy in a Sabbath school class explaining the crossing of the Red Sea as a feat of modern military techniques, to which his Sabbath school teacher replied, 

“Why Johnny, that’s not what the Bible says!”

“No,” said Johnny, “but if I told you what it says, you’d never believe me!”

Brothers continued:

Don’t laugh—Johnny’s dilemma is real. The Bible’s not an easy book to understand. And sometimes it’s even harder to believe!

That’s why Jack Blanco’s The Clear Word fills a real need. It’s a midrash—a running commentary that makes the Bible nice, safe, and simple.¹¹

Brothers praises TCW’s “orthodoxy” and finally refers to it as a “Bible”:

Not content to make the Bible a kindly, gentle book, Blanco’s also seen to its orthodoxy. “The Lord’s Day” of Revelation 1:10 is now “Sabbath morning.” Mark 7:19 no longer declares all foods clean. And in Revelation 21:22, Blanco has added that “the Temple or Sanctuary I [John] had expected to see was located outside the city as a reminder of what God had done for His people.”

Obviously, Blanco has given much thought to the controversies wracking our church: the nature of inspiration, the age of the earth, the authority of Ellen White, et. al. And his Bible provides simple answers for them all.¹²

Not all Adventist responses to Blanco’s bold work, however, were positive. Earlier in the year (1994) the new Clear Word Bible was actually banned from sale in the Victorian [Australia] Adventist Book Center.

Sales of The Clear Word Bible, printed by the Review and Herald Publishing Association, have been suspended in the Victorian Adventist Book Centre at the request of the Victorian Conference Executive Committee. The decision was made following concerns expressed by the South Pacific Division’s Biblical Research Committee noting that the paraphrase was like a denominational interpretation. A new edition will be published under a different title, The Clear Word. The executive committee plans to give further consideration when the new edition is available.¹³

In the North Pacific Union Conference Gleaner magazine, Alden Thompson makes the following statement in an article entitled “Adventist Bible, Adventist Message”:

Given the dramatic and far-reaching revisions found in this book, a more appropriate title would be The Clear Word Commentary on the Bible. In spite of Blanco’s candid statement in the preface that The Clear Word is not intended for “in-depth study or for public reading in churches,” many are making it their Bible companion for Sabbath school and church.¹⁴

Thompson explains his three reactions to TCW: admiration, puzzlement, and alarm. Regarding puzzlement he states:

But The Clear Word goes far beyond paraphrasing: it also harmonizes, expands and explains—and sometimes omits. One omission, for example, is the potentially troublesome phrase in Mark 7:19, that “Jesus declared all foods ‘clean’” (NIV). It disappears without a trace in The Clear Word.¹⁵

He expresses his alarm at how Adventist members are actually using TCW:

But I must admit my disappointment moves to alarm when I hear Adventists exclaim: “Finally! A Bible we can trust!” What’s wrong with the Bibles we already have? And have we become afraid to tackle the hard passages in Scripture? Let’s not confuse the simple beauty of the Gospel with the depth and complexity of Scripture.¹⁶

Another alarmed Adventist is Greek scholar Sakae Kubo who enjoys a strong professional reputation beyond Adventism. In a letter to the Adventist Review entitled “I Am Concerned”, he stated:

Blanco’s paraphrase has subtracted, added, and interpreted freely without footnotes or italics. Frequently the interpretation is Adventistic, sometimes even a private interpretation of the paraphraser. I dread to find this version being reviewed by one of the scholarly journals ….

As far as I am concerned, any addition to the text is unnecessary, even if it is correct and helpful. Such additional matter should be included in the footnotes. But additions that are private interpretations should definitely not be included; in fact, they should be studiously eliminated.

I have several pages of texts in which unnecessary additions are made, some of them quite innocuous but some of them very disturbing. [Kubo then lists four pages of examples.] These Adventistic interpretations of the text cannot be claimed to have come out of the original text, but imported into the text.

The very obvious and serious danger is that our own people will be confused as to what the Bible really says. Interpretation has been so mixed in with the text that our people will think that the interpretation is part of the Word of God.¹⁷

These and other responses from inside the Seventh-day Adventist Church issue stern warnings about the dangers of using TCW in preaching or in teaching Sabbath school on the one hand, but on the other hand they allow the readers to use the work as a devotional tool. This mixed message appears to protect members from misunderstanding the Bible, but in reality it allows them to become even more firmly indoctrinated. By encouraging church members to use this work as a commentary, Adventist scholars are actually endorsing it as a helpful supplement to the Bible rather than teaching members to wrestle with Scripture. Using TCW as a commentary or devotional work reinforces the notion that Adventist doctrines are derived from the Scripture. Their true source in the writings of E.G. White is totally eclipsed. 

In contrast to these Adventist scholars’ mixed reviews, William Johnsson, then editor of The Adventist Review, published a pair of articles in the April, 1995, issue of the official Adventist magazine. These articles reviewed two different paraphrases of the Bible: The Message by Eugene Peterson, and TCW. The three-page review of The Message was a reprint of an article by John R. Kohlenberger, III, and states that it is an “expansive paraphrase” in which one does “not know where the text ends and the commentary begins.”¹⁸ In contrast to evangelical scholar Kohlenberger’s response to Peterson’s popular paraphrase, William Johnsson’s review of Blanco’s The Clear Word is only one page in length and favorably compares it to J. B. Phillip’s New Testament and Taylor’s The Living Bible.

The primary problem with Johnsson’s review is that he states, “The Clear Word is fine if used as the author intended. Much potential harm can be avoided if readers of The Clear Word would stick to Blanco’s instruction in the opening paragraph of his preface to the work: …”¹⁹

The Clear Word, though, is not “fine” even if one sticks to the instruction in the preface. The rampant changes, additions, and deletions to the text allow someone with an Adventist worldview to remain comfortable while believing the Bible supports unbiblical doctrines.

Johnsson further misses the fact that The Message does not represent any denominational positions, while The Clear Word specifically adds Adventist dogma to the text, allowing many passages to oppose the original writings. A person can easily identify these altered passages, however, if one compares them to a reliable translation of the Bible.

Johnsson also fails to note that the expansions in The Message are minimal compared to the expansions in The Clear Word. For example, over 30 words are added to Daniel 8:14 in TCW, completely changing the meaning of the text. The Message, on the other hand, simplifies the words but retains both the general meaning and length of the text. Daniel 8:14 is the central passage for Adventism’s core doctrine of its “sanctuary service”, but the Adventist interpretation of the passage cannot be supported from the plain words of Scripture. The following comparison demonstrates Blanco’s addition of Adventist dogma to this text compared with Peterson’s rendering:

Daniel 8:14

The Clear Word

He answered, “After two thousand three hundred prophetic days (which represent actual years), God will restore the truth about the heavenly Sanctuary to its rightful place. Then the process of judgment will begin of which the yearly cleansing of the earthly Sanctuary was a type, and God will vindicate His people.”

The Message

“The other answered, ‘Over the course of 2,300 sacrifices, evening and morning. Then the Sanctuary will be set right again.’”

Editions of The Clear Word Bible

Since Blanco published his first New Testament paraphrase in 1990, there have been numerous editions of The Clear Word Bible.

In 1994 Blanco published his first full “Bible”—and its title contained the word “Bible”. Within weeks, however, a flood of criticism resulted in Blanco’s removing the word “Bible” and republishing the work as The Clear Word—his second edition. Editions three and four followed quickly that same year, and each contained editorial amendments. Six years later the 2000 edition was published with new text amendments, and in 2003 the still-current edition rolled off the Review and Herald press. The following year, 2004, yielded a new pocket-sized edition, and two paraphrases known as The Easy English Clear Word and The Clear Word for Kids were published in 2005. These last two are subtitled “A Simplified Paraphrase” and are textually identical, but they are titled differently to appeal to the two audiences they are targeting. One more new edition appeared in 2006: a giant print version of the text occurring in the 2003 edition.

Besides these different versions of his paraphrase, Jack Blanco has also published condensed works of various books of the Bible. The book Savior was published in 2008. It is a condensation of the four gospels blended into “one story”. Witness was published in 2009 and is a condensation of the New Testament from the book of Acts through Revelation. Finally, in 2010, Visions and Dreams was published with the subtitle, “A Fresh Look at Daniel and Revelation.”

Conclusion

The Clear Word has received numerous reviews over the years by a variety of people, mostly within Adventism, yet these reviews have been primarily negative in word and tone. Blanco’s paraphrase, which has changed with almost every new edition, continues to be used for teaching, preaching, Bible study, Sabbath School, and devotionals. Moreover, contrary to its author’s and publisher’s recommendation, TCW is not safe even if it is used only used as a devotional. Its altered text is formatted to look like a Bible, and unwary readers are deceived into believing that the Bible teaches Adventist doctrine.

In spite of the fact that some Adventist leaders have written about the problems within The Clear Word, there has been no effort to remove it from use. Instead, new editions and formats have been published, and they all are sold in the Bible sections of Adventist Book Centers as well as in their online catalogs. In fact, TCW is available hard-bound, soft-bound, leather-bound, pocket-sized, large-print, as an e-book, as an audio book read by Lonnie Melashenko, and also as the Gospel of John (1994, 4th edition).

The ongoing argument about whether TCW is an official Adventist version of Scripture or not is simply an extraneous argument. The Clear Word is as “official” as any other work sold in Adventist Book Centers because its paraphrased passages completely endorse and teach official Adventist doctrine. 

The apostle John has the last word regarding this egregious distortion of God’s eternal word: 

I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book” (Rev. 22:18-19). †

Endnotes

1. From Youtube website: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oy_roGWv0L8 at 2 minutes and 16 seconds into the interview.
2. Samuel Thomas, Jr. from Youtube website: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oy_roGWv0L8 at 42 seconds into the interview.
3. Samuel Thomas, Jr. and Jack Blanco from Youtube website: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oy_roGWv0L8 at 8 minutes and 38 seconds into the interview. Online as of 11/13/13. Notice how the speakers use the words “devotional” and “translation” interchangeably. This should cause serious concern on the part of Jack Blanco; however, he is the one in the conversation that responds with “translation” after the interviewer uses the word “devotional.”
4. Blanco, Jack J., All quotes from the Preface of The Clear Word Bible, 1st Ed., pp. vii-ix © 1994, Review and Herald® Publishing Association, 55 West Oak Ridge Drive, Hagerstown, MD 21740
5. Blanco, Jack J., The Clear Word Bible, 1st edition, p. vii, Review and Herald® Publishing Association, Copyright © 1994 by Jack J. Blanco.
6. Blanco, Jack J., The Clear Word Bible, 1st edition, p. vii, Review and Herald® Publishing Association, Copyright © 1994 by Jack J. Blanco.
7. Miller, Jim, Adventist Today, “In Defense of The Clear Word,” Sept./Oct. 2000, p. 22.
8. Ibid.
9. Permission has been granted by Dr. Grudem to quote his letter only in its entirety.
10. South Pacific Division Record, October 29, 1994, p. 10. Also reprinted in Ministry magazine, December 1994, p. 27.
11. Brothers, Greg, Ministry magazine, December, 1994, p. 27.
12. Ibid.
13. South Pacific Division Record, February 4, 1995, p. 6.
14. Thompson, Alden, North Pacific Union Gleaner, December 12, 1994, p. 11.
15. Ibid.
16. Ibid.
17. Kubo, Sakae, Adventist Review, April 1995, p. 15. Bracketed statement in original.
18. Kohlenberger, John R., III, Adventist Review, April 1995, pp. 11-14.
19. Johnsson, William G., Adventist Review, April 1995, p. 14.

• Author
• Recent Posts

Stephen Pitcher

Stephen Pitcher was raised a non-Christian but met Jesus at the age of 17. Subsequently he studied with Mormon teachers, but Walter Martin's teaching kept him from converting. Later, it was Walter Martin's endorsement of Seventh-day Adventists as evangelical brothers that gave him "permission" to become an Adventist before marrying his Adventist fiancÈe. Fifteen years later Steve began to learn the truth about the origins of Adventism and the doctrinal issues that remain today. Seventeen years ago Steve left Adventism and now stands on Jesus alone. He attends Redeemer Fellowship in Loma Linda, California.

Latest posts by Stephen Pitcher (see all)

• I Followed the Voice of Another Shepherd - November 9, 2023
• 12. In Conclusion - October 26, 2023
• 11. More Bible Texts Compared - October 19, 2023