John UK wrote: Hello Thomas Thus far I do not believe there were any revisions of the AV. There have been corrections of printing errors, changes in text style, changes in spelling etc. but never an actual revision where the text was scrutinised and re-translated. The "Revised Version" of 1881 was not a revision of the AV 1611. It was a translation based on entirely different New Testament greek texts. Namely the Westcott & Hort (anglican liberals, who were Catholic sympathisers) greek text, which was formulated from the contradictory vaticanus and sinaiticus texts. I hope this answers your question.
Hello John,
Could there then be additional corrections to spelling, or corrections to printing errors? If so, then how long can that go on?
I'm certainly not trying to disparage the KJV; KJV onlyism is what baffles me. If you can concede something like printing issues then was the Lord somehow incapable of preventing such things but actually capable of ending up with a completely flawless product eventually? That seems absurd to me.
John UK wrote: One change will do for starters. Let us look at that, and then go on to another, and so on.
Can this be simplified? Can you at least acknowledge like "one Book" did that there were revisions. "Change" seems to convey the idea that doctrine was altered to suit someone's particular moral inclination, which I really don't think happened.
one Book wrote: There have been some minor word and grammar amendments to the King James Version since 1611. But no minor or major changes to doctrine and truth.
Splendid. At least your point is more sensible than the KJV being inspired.
one Book wrote: The "version" problem remains the same. That is that the modern versions include the higher criticism works of two Anglican Liberal heretics.
Which translation would you be referring to? And can you be more specific as to what exactly these individuals contributed?
one Book wrote: Whereas GOD has used the KJV for centuries.
Agreed and He will for a long time to come Lord willing. However, your point doesn't exactly follow. Your point seems to want to exclude any other translation from being used by the Lord. Surely you can't mean that.
Really? Which KJV didn't change? :-) Maybe you're thinking of the Geneva Bible. I don't think I have seen hatred of the KJV communicated but simply that it's not the best. I prefer the NASB for my personal study. I also read a couple of other translations but typically come back to the NASB.
O.J. what exactly is useless in Jim's post? Seems to me that your posts typically add nothing but insults. I find the NASB 1984 edition the best translation personally and to my delight even my 8 year old reads it well enough and comprehends some of what he reads (it's a nice start).
John Yurich said it exactly right! Pretentious faith won't save this country any more than it did Europe. Acknowledging our guilt and turning to Christ is in order.
Is it me or since the failed vote on Monday has the name "bailout" been replaced by the word "rescue"? Or was this happening BEFORE the failed vote?
The first time I heard it was in President Bush's comments after the vote and I have started noticing news websites (and radio) calling the plan a rescue instead of a bailout.
Obviously it's a Madison Avenue technique to make the boondoggle more palatable.
We need to stand firm and KEEP calling our congressmen (and senators if it gets that far) to let them know that NO bailout (regardless of what you call it) is acceptable.
Maybe Congress will get wise and REPEAL the 501C3 tax exempt status for churches.
Then the godless can preach about whatever they want.
Of course what we really hope will happen is that many of these charlatans will find ANOTHER business by which to try to fleece people and stop hijacking the true Church of Jesus Christ.
Closing down many of the false churches in this country (by removing the tax free status for ALL churches) would be fantastic!
“ Great Sermon! ” A heart felt defense of the true doctrine of the atonement. This critique of the aberrant doctrines of C.S. Lewis is presented with a firm reliance on Scripture by a speaker with a heart that truly loves Jesus the Christ.
Thank you also for the transcript! It is a blessing to have and to share.
We ditched our TV 12 years ago (just after our first child was born) and though I remember we missed it for a month or two, I look back now and wonder how we ever had time for anything when we DID have it in the house.
We read with our five children (ages 2 through 12) for about an hour at a time three nights a week. We've read some GREAT books over the years (and some real losers, too) but it's been a great family time!
As our oldest daughter approaches being a teenager, there is no sign that she is losing interest in these family reading times.
We have a small (10 inch?) TV we keep in an upstairs closet which we can use to watch home movies, etc. but its absence from the "living" room gives us a lot more room to just live!
NOT that our bridges are falling apart, but that we indulge in such sensationalism.
We've heard so much about "structurally deficient" and "structurally obsolete" over the last few days, but has anyone taken the time to investigate what these terms mean?
NEITHER of the terms necessarily means a structure is unsafe. Yet the media (which seek ratings) and the construction firms (which want the federal money to rebuild bridges) play up the hype in order to get people whipped into a frenzy.
Among so many other things, this is an indication that regardless of how many people are "going to church" America has lost its Christian bearings.
Life in America is more about inflating the media ratings and getting my "cut" out of the federal government and less about a hard day's work.
“ Wonderful exegesis and application ” For anyone looking for a superb sermon on the Lord's Day. This is it! Dr. Pipa has faithfully studied and preached the blessing of keeping the Lord's appointed Day. Not too technical. Has applications that should be instituted immeadiately.
5/31/12 2:58 PM
7/11/09 7:47 AM
3/11/07 4:15 AM
