If people want a Bible that follows the TR more closely than the KJV and in readable English, they'll get, New King James Version. If a Bible isn't in good, contemporary English -- give it to the recyclers
If you haven't figured this out, Mike I don't consider either party the savior of America
John MacArthur wrote: The greatest temporal good we can accomplish through political involvement cannot compare to what the Lord can accomplish through us in the eternal work of His kingdom. Just as God called ancient Israel (Exodus 19:6), He has called the church to be a kingdom of priests, not a kingdom of political activists. The apostle Peter instructs us, "But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light" (1 Peter 2:9).
Dr. James White wrote: Generally speaking, KJV Only writers have no interest in being fair or impartial in their handling of the manuscript and textual data of Scripture. They also have little desire to accurately or honestly reflect the opinions of those with whom they disagree. Indeed, there is no effort made to appreciate the strengths of the positions of anyone who would speak a word against the inerrancy of the KJV.
The problem this raises is that sincere Christians who read KJV Only materials do not realize that proponentsâ citation of historical facts is always skewed. However, the most consistent problem with KJV Only authors is their use of double standards. For example, the very arguments that would completely disprove the inspiration and inerrancy of the KJV itself are used with regularity against modern versions. Even though this does not cause KJVO promoters the slightest difficulty, can anyone maintain such an approach is either intellectually credible or fair to other Christians?âŠ
V. Edzeltine wrote: "Now, as the Obama administration presses for a $1.9 billion emergency response to Zika, the CDCâs Zika preview is much more serious." I thought obamacare would solve all these medical problems?
Tim Wildmon is American Family Association president. wrote: If we are going to allow individuals to define reality according to their feelings, then Target should allow a 20-year-old to get a senior discount if he self-identifies as a 65-year-old. Would Target accept that self-identity? If not, why not, based on their logic?
Doug Kutilek wrote: ... it must be noted that while Erasmus found the wickedness of the priests repulsive, he did not disapprove of Roman Catholic doctrine. He wished only for a reformation of priestly morals and conduct, not of Roman theology, and he disapproved of the doctrinal revolution initiated by Luther. Though Erasmus laid the egg that Luther hatched, Erasmus disowned completely his offspring.
Erasmus is generally acknowledged as the greatest classical scholar of his time, though he was better at Latin than Greek...Erasmus had but one Greek manuscript which, though of better than average quality (so says Hort), yet lacked the last six verses of the book. To remedy this defect, Erasmus back-translated the last six verses of Revelation from Latin into Greek, with the result that the final verses of Revelation in his printed Greek text contain numerous Greek readings found in no Greek manuscript of any kind, and are therefore devoid of manuscript authority.
Albert Mohler wrote: Successive generations of feminist ideology and political correctness have rendered even Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives, at least some of them in this case, ... from recognizing or making or having the courage to stand by an argument that in some sense men and women are different, and that in any sense it is morally wrong to put women in combat positions,... In just "a matter of weeks and months...fighting on the front lines of a war has gone from being considered a prohibited activity for women, to a right for women, and now potentially a duty for all women.
. Sounds like Dr. Moehler hit the nail on the head with this comment.
Great Information! All of this long auido file should be listen too, for example information on the http://tinyurl.com/hmrnflx (Papyrus 72) comes in at about 44 minutes into the nearly two hour talk.Â¶ Some of the last tidbits of information come nearly at the end! When this was program was made, I --think-- I found out that Dr. White's preferred Bible was the NASB? I found it interesting, and what many people no doubt suspected, is that many new Bible versions come out, because publishing companies want to make as much money as possible and this isn't done by paying other publishing companies for their versions. What Dr. White didn't point out is that also many publishing companies like the KJV because they don't have to pay any sort of royalties to anyone. Â¶ As I said the program was loaded with details, such as the NET Bible has a host of useful translating notes for the New Testament, which are of interest in themselves. He didn't apparently like the Old Testament version of that Bible. Â¶ A good idea is to download the audio file and break into halves and listen to it, but then the whole thing is really no longer than a typical movie would be. Â¶ You could very well find information you weren't expecting. I did!
Observer wrote: Note the vacuity of his thought processes ... the KJV is Romish because of Erasmus, but he is happy for the Byzantine texts to be superseded by 2 texts, one found in a trash can in a Roman Catholic monastery and the other in the Vatican library!!!....
Obserer! what a sense of humor! Apparently you know nothing about about Codex Sinaiticus, except kindly put, propaganda from the KJV movement. Listen to the James White talk here on SermonAudio, It's highly informative, yes, it does last nearly two hours, but http://codexsinaiticus.org/en/ starts around an hour into the recording. No, it was not found in trashcan! The ignorance of the KJV authors is truly amazing (amazing not in a good way.) Anyway, http://tinyurl.com/h2sauu8 (KJV Onlyism and Can You Trust Your Translation?). You'll find out the truth about that oh, and the Oxford and Cambridge editions of the KJV as well. No, some of the Textus Receptus such as the Chapter 22 belong in the trashcan but that's for another message.
Whatisacult wrote: ...Theologically, the KJVO movement is spinning out of control, lashing out at other conservative Bible Christians, espousing bizarre teachings,...
Are the KJVOnlyers Christian? Well, at the very least, they are a schismatic, aberrational group. To their credit, they are generally Trinitarian, although who knows if that is a given since they reject many of the early Trinitarian writers as evil âcorruptersâ. Only time will tell if the movement re-integrates with the rest of the Christian church, or if they continue on a tangent moving away from the loci of the historic Gospel.
Bible Discernment Ministry wrote: Conclusion KJV-Onlyism runs the gambit from moderately reasonable advocates (David Cloud, E.L. Bynum, John R. Rice), to the wacked-out, stone throwers ( D.A. Waite , Jack Hyles , Samuel Gipp, Walter Bebe, Texe Marrs , Peter Ruckman, ..., etc.). A couple of years ago, Gary Hudson launched a website devoted to exposing the errors of âKing James Onlyismâââ The King James Only Resource Center .â Gary has a number of articles and reports posted. This site has become a âone stopâ resource center for all questions related to âKing James Onlyism.â
Lynn Stuart Parramore wrote: To make it into the one percent, you need to have, according to some estimates, at least about $350,000 a year in income, or around $8 million accumulated in wealth. At the lower end of the one percent spectrum, the âlower-uppers,â as they have been called, youâll find people like successful doctors, accountants, engineers, lawyers, vice-presidents of companies and well-paid media figures.
Plenty of these affluent people have enjoyed blessings from Lady Luck, but a lot of them work hard at their jobs and want to contribute to their communities in positive ways. In times past, these kinds of citizens served on the boards of museums and cultural institutions and were active and prominent figures in their towns and cities. But now they are getting shoved aside unceremoniously by the vastly richer Wall Street financiers and Silicon Valley tycoons above them.
Observer, I have strong convictions against the Romish Bible, http://tinyurl.com/hgsvaj4 (Is the King James Version a âRoman Catholic Bibleâ?), which of course it is, "I believe it is misguided for fundamental Baptists to defend a version of the Bible based on a Greek text, prepared by a liberal Roman Catholic, translated by Episcopalians and authorized by a king who hated Baptists. While they reject translations based on a Greek text approved by all the great scholars and early fundamental leaders and translated by good Bible believing scholars from all groups, including Baptists. A.T. Robertson was the greatest Greek scholar America ever produced. He was a conservative Baptist and approved of the American Standard Version. This irony is strange indeed when fundamental Baptists take sides with Episcopalians and Catholics and reject their own. "I also find it disturbing that the KJV Only group can write books, preach sermons and talk continually against all other versions. However, the minute I point out errors in the KJV, they call me a âBible correctorâ and an unbeliever, and other names.... http://tinyurl.com/j8gpwqv (Which Bible?).