|
|
USER COMMENTS BY “ HIS STORY ” |
|
|
| RECENTLY-COMMENTED SERMONS | More | Last Post | Total |
| · Page 1 · Found: 4 user comments posted recently. |
|
|
 4/28/16 10:16 AM |
| His Story | |  |  |
|
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
|
Mike wrote:
It's ok to not be a history buff.
From the 1611 preface:
"And now at last, by the Mercy of GOD, and the continuance of our Labours, it being brought unto such a conclusion, as that we have great hope that the Church of England shall reape good fruit thereby; we hold it our duety to offer it to your MAJESTIE, not onely as to our King and Soveraigne, but as to the principall moover and Author of the Worke.
Unless I'm mistaken, which can happen, the C of E is Anglican. John Reynolds was still a Puritan.
In point of fact the Puritans came out of the C.of E. - Before they came over to America to convert you guys to good Calvinist doctrines. |
|
|
| 1/2/11 11:37 AM |
| His Story | | | |
|
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
|
"As the reign of Elizabeth (1558-1603) was coming to a close, we find a draft *FOR AN ACT OF PARLIAMENT FOR A NEW VERSION OF THE BIBLE:* "An act for the reducing of diversities of bibles now extant in the English tongue to one settled vulgar translated from the original." The Bishop's Bible of 1568, although it may have eclipsed the Great Bible, was still rivaled by the Geneva Bible. Nothing ever became of this draft during the reign of Elizabeth, who died in 1603, and was succeeded by James 1, as the throne passed from the Tudors to the Stuarts. James was at that time James VI of Scotland, and had been for thirty-seven years. He was born during the period between the Geneva and the Bishop's Bible. One of the first things done by the new king was the calling of the Hampton Court Conference in January of 1604 "for the hearing, and for the determining, things pretended to be amiss in the church." Here were assembled bishops, clergymen, and professors, along with four Puritan divines, to consider the complaints of the Puritans. Although Bible revision was not on the agenda, the Puritan president of Corpus Christi College, John Reynolds, "moved his Majesty, that there might be a new translation of the Bible..."[URL=http://www.av1611.org/kjv/kjvhist.html]]]History KJV[/URL] |
|
|
| 11/2/10 1:51 PM |
| His Story | | | |
|
• Add new comment
• Reply to comment
• Report abuse
|
Mike wrote:
Not relevant, Kwantum. Again John the Baptist was not sent to be missionary to the Romans. Herod could not be acting unlawfully, if he were not under the law that John was concerned with. That wasn't some generic many-nation frowning thing. (btw, with perverted Roman emperors setting the moral standards, you might be hard-pressed to find Roman law opposing things such as what Herod did.) There doesn't seem to be any biblical warrant for the idea that John the Baptist was to preach unto the gentiles. Appears like you need Herod to be a Roman pagan for some reason.  Actally; Herrod was neither Roman or PURELY Jewish. He was an Idumean, which means that he was half Edomite and part Jewish.
That may not solve the Easter situation (which by the N.T. time was an abberation of the Feast of Ishtar)but maybee it might help to get the thread back on the topic of "Radio 4 to celebrate King James Bible’s anniversary" I mean miracles have happened before. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
