members, click to sign in..

5,174 active users!!Bandwidth
MONDAY
SEP 1, 2014
Home
NewsSITE
Events & Blogs
New Audio & Video
Broadcasters
Local Church Finder
Live Webcasts
Sermons by Bible
Sermons by Topic
Sermons by Speaker
Sermons by Date
Staff PicksNew Stuff!
CommentsALL -29 min
Top Sermons
VideosPDFs
Daily Log
PhotosNew Stuff!
StoresNew Stuff!
Online Bible
Hymnal
Daily Reading
Our Services
Submit Sermon
Members Only

 
RELIGION, CURRENT EVENTS, TECHNOLOGY Subscribe to the breaking newsWhat is RSS?
FRONT PAGE  |  9/1/2014
FRIDAY, NOV 2, 2007  |  41 comments
Niagara Falls prophesied as site of Second Coming
The Second Coming of Christ will occur in Niagara Falls, Isaiah Robertson believes.

“The revival of Jesus Christ will start right here,” he said. “God said he would take his glory from one of the wonders of the world — and that wonder is Niagara Falls.”

Millions of Christians believe in the Second Coming of Christ, in which the Christian savior will return to earth for a final judgment of both the living and the dead.


CLICK HERE to Read Entire Article
www.buffalonews.com

   01/20/13  |  Newsweek: Obama is 'The Second Coming' • 9 comments
   08/17/12  |  The Second Coming Christ Controversy • 1 comments
   03/20/11  |  Franklin Graham: Japan Quake and Tsunami Could Be Signs of... • 7 comments
   07/31/10  |  Bus benches claim to reveal return of Christ • 132 comments
   11/16/09  |  Jews raise millions to be ready for coming of the Messiah • 10 comments
MORE RELATED ( SECOND COMING ) NEWS | MORE..
   08/31/14  |  Captured ISIS Laptop Contains Bubonic Plague, WMD Information • 9 comments
   08/29/14  |  Federal judge decrminalizes polygamy • 2 comments
   08/20/14  |  Legal-Courts Same-sex 'marriage' freight train derailed in Tenn. • 2 comments
   08/18/14  |  Former FBI says only way to defeat Islam is to crush it • 40 comments
   08/17/14  |  Creation Museum breaks ground on Noah's Ark project • 10 comments
OTHER CHOICE NEWS | MORE..
   06/02/14  |  A Letter to SermonAudio From a Missionary to Haiti • 10 comments
   02/07/14  |  Bringing the Gospel of John to Every Home in Austin, TX • 31 comments
   01/07/14  |  SermonAudio Partners with RFC for the 2014 Family Conference at... • 1 comments
   01/01/14  |  Happy New Year from SermonAudio! • 29 comments
   12/10/13  |  SermonAudio Broadcaster Loses Historic Church Building To Fire • 3 comments
OTHER CHOICE NEWS | MORE..
   09/01/14  |  Joel Osteen's wife accused of 'blasphemous' remarks • 9 comments
   09/01/14  |  Hawaii gov. blames political loss on gay marriage • 1 comments
   09/01/14  |  California Sets Stage for First Groundwater Regulations
   09/01/14  |  Judge Blocks Texas' Abortion Regs • 2 comments
   08/31/14  |  LABOR DAY: R.G. Lee steeled by Panama Canal 'rugged toil'
OTHER RECENT NEWS | MORE..

COMMENTS | show all | add new  
    Sorting Order:  
· Page 1 ·  Found: 41 user comment(s)
News Item11/5/07 2:34 PM
Jim Lincoln | Nebraska  Find all comments by Jim Lincoln
Lance, Walt was right, Darby, wanted a Bible that the common man could read, just like the committee who put together the King James Bible. The KJV was quite readable to the 17th Century Englishman. The KJV was meant to be improved upon. It was revised 3 times in the 17th Century. You'll note that the AV's date is 1679, not 1611. Only the original autographs are perfect, man's translations of them are not. Of course a more perfect Bible would only be in Greek and Hebrew, with some Aramaic tossed in. English or Latin can never really get to every nuance that is in the Bible. The history of the English Bible (not the Catholic one) is quite interesting.

"The History of the English Bible"

http://www.bible.org/series.php?series_id=117

The King James Version of the Bible was about the best representative of God's word -- for the English in the 17th Century. It isn't bad, if it part of the Ryrie Study Bible for today.

As far as Darby and the German version of the Bible is concerned,"John Nelson Darby's Version"

http://www.bible-researcher.com/darby.html

explains it at the bottom of the article.

41

News Item11/5/07 12:28 PM
kenny  Find all comments by kenny
Walt wrote:

"God preserved a faithful eccelesiastical text in His providence. You folks can argue up and down until you turn green in the face that those specific older manuscripts you have found digging through history are the correct ones, and if they overturn centuries of orthodox doctrine and church courts then have at it...believe me, the Scriptures have been under attack by you merchants for longer than exclusively in this generation."

Amen, brother!

That may be my favorite post ever on Sermonaudio (that I didn't write).

40

News Item11/5/07 11:07 AM
terry evans | miramar beach fl  Contact via emailFind all comments by terry evans
Cityx2 wrote:
"Gil Rugh said or, wrote:
A literal interpretation of prophecy in the Bible indicates believers can expect the rapture of the Church before the Tribulation begins."
Ah but Jim;
Whats the difference between one human "personal take" and another.
The PreTrib crowd are establishing their own personal take on these future events.
So deep. but true.
How's that go now, something about a plank in your own eye.
Talk about deep, someone in the Bible said, let those who have an ear to hear,hear
39

News Item11/5/07 8:38 AM
terry evans | miramar beach fl  Contact via emailFind all comments by terry evans
Walt wrote:
Murray,
Let's leave it alone. Suffice it to say that all the scientific findings on the age of manuscripts, the age of the earth being 50 million+ and the similar types of money center focused bibles you folks are producing means nothing to me.
God preserved a faithful eccelesiastical text in His providence. You folks can argue up and down until you turn green in the face that those specific older manuscripts you have found digging through history are the correct ones, and if they overturn centuries of orthodox doctrine and church courts then have at it...believe me, the Scriptures have been under attack by you merchants for longer than exclusively in this generation.
It is all about the money, admit it.....
Amen
38

News Item11/5/07 8:17 AM
Walt | Michigan  Find all comments by Walt
Murray,

Let's leave it alone. Suffice it to say that all the scientific findings on the age of manuscripts, the age of the earth being 50 million+ and the similar types of money center focused bibles you folks are producing means nothing to me.

God preserved a faithful eccelesiastical text in His providence. You folks can argue up and down until you turn green in the face that those specific older manuscripts you have found digging through history are the correct ones, and if they overturn centuries of orthodox doctrine and church courts then have at it...believe me, the Scriptures have been under attack by you merchants for longer than exclusively in this generation.

It is all about the money, admit it. I am almost certain Rome is going to release some more manuscripts that are older than what you guys are studying, and I think it just foolish that you don't consider the apocrypha as canon since Rome does.

No, I have zero interest in your own tirads on promoting your money focused parters. Your list of orthodox Scholars was all I needed to see to understand where you are taking this business.

Not interested, sorry! I'll stick with the facts of the manuscripts and not your business opportunity.

37

News Item11/5/07 4:08 AM
Weapon of Mass Instruction | Dehvastating Truth  Find all comments by Weapon of Mass Instruction
[Removed by SermonAudio.com]
36

News Item11/5/07 12:19 AM
terry evans | miramar beach fl  Contact via emailFind all comments by terry evans
Walt wrote:
"The False Greek Texts Of "B" AND "ALEPH" CONTRADICT ONE ANOTHER IN OVER 3,000 PLACES IN THE GOSPELS ALONE. In the total numbers of manuscripts, you'll notice that the Westcott- Hort type has only 45 manuscripts that go along with it as over against 5,210 that go along with the TR that underlies the KJV. This 45 includes "B" (Vatican) and "Aleph" (Sinai) and forty- three of their little heretical puppets that follow them. The theory behind the acceptance of these less than 1% is that "The oldest are the best." The oldest are not necessarily the best...
...agreed that the greatest pollution of the stream of pure manuscripts was accomplished in the first 100 years after the New Testament was written! So the oldest are not necessarily the best! This is especially true since the heretics had their knives out "correcting" the Greek N.T. almost as soon as it was written. The Egyptian scribes and editors of "B" (Vatican)

Wow
Walt
climb down take a break, even if you could get or find anyone to agree with you what would that accomplish. same goes for your critics.
read Proverbs 30 (note v5 and v33")
The Bible does not say who would put the book together, so .
I think God new all this would happen, His sheep will know His voice, His Word also.

35

News Item11/4/07 10:52 PM
MurrayA | Australia  Find all comments by MurrayA
Walt,
I am constrained to comment that this post below is nothing but a wild and utterly ignorant tirade, unworthy of serious attention. Please read the material on my website (more is forthcoming) and grapple with that. Otherwise, let's leave it at that.
34

News Item11/4/07 10:35 PM
Walt | Michigan  Find all comments by Walt
"The False Greek Texts Of "B" AND "ALEPH" CONTRADICT ONE ANOTHER IN OVER 3,000 PLACES IN THE GOSPELS ALONE. In the total numbers of manuscripts, you'll notice that the Westcott- Hort type has only 45 manuscripts that go along with it as over against 5,210 that go along with the TR that underlies the KJV. This 45 includes "B" (Vatican) and "Aleph" (Sinai) and forty- three of their little heretical puppets that follow them. The theory behind the acceptance of these less than 1% is that "The oldest are the best." The oldest are not necessarily the best...

...agreed that the greatest pollution of the stream of pure manuscripts was accomplished in the first 100 years after the New Testament was written! So the oldest are not necessarily the best! This is especially true since the heretics had their knives out "correcting" the Greek N.T. almost as soon as it was written. The Egyptian scribes and editors of "B" (Vatican) and "Aleph" (Sinai) were some of the most vicious "correctors" of God's Words; yet these two Greek texts form the very bedrock of the new versions and perversions of our day. "B" and "Aleph" contradict each other, as Herman Hoskier has so accurately pointed out in his two volume work entitled Codex B and Its Allies, in over 3,000 places in the four Gospels alone!"

33

News Item11/4/07 9:39 PM
MurrayA | Australia  Find all comments by MurrayA
Walt,
We obviously are not going to agree, but my real problem is the denigration by KJVo-ers and TR-only-ists of those who follow early NT texts as liberals and thus beyond the fold of the faithful. This is an outrage on the Church of God, and why I have put much time into this, both in debate on this site, and into construction of my own website.

"...Aleph, B and other codices that have removed substantial portions of the Received Text"
This is an anachronism! The Received Text was not in existence in the C3rd or C4th for anyone to "remove" certain texts from it. It is rather that during the Middle Ages certain scribes have added pious comments, interpretations, and the like to the original text.

You state your preference for "the ecclesiastical text". By "ecclesiastical" here you have to mean the Greek Orthodox Church. I do not believe that the Greek orthodox Church was the Divinely appointed custodian of the text, whose scribes were endowed with some kind of inspiration and infallibility, which is what your position entails.

32

News Item11/4/07 9:25 PM
Walt | Michigan  Find all comments by Walt
Murray,

You obviously have a substantial amount of time invested in your belief system that there are other, better and more accurate manuscripts. Your support for Aleph, B and other codices that have removed substantial portions of the Received Text in some sections is not for me to judge.

The names you listed, outside of perhaps Zane who I would consider conservative, not orthodox, is of no interest to me. I don't have the personal relationships you do and absolutely would not spend any time in Hendriksen's commentaries. I'm not a big Baker Book House fan when I'm in Grand Rapids, except for their used book section. I'll be there next week, and prefer Heritage Books who is bringing back a lot of the best material into print.

I think these guys you are promoting really need to get buried and their works should never see the light of day.

They are closely connected to your own labors and so that is unlikely to happen anytime soon, but if you want to talk about orthodox scholars I suggest read those who support the ecclesiastical text and don't spend a lot of time trying to undermine the Received Text. While you want to buy Burgon I'll be hoping to bury your list from my library. Their whole focus is making money as much as possible.

31

News Item11/4/07 9:02 PM
MurrayA | Australia  Find all comments by MurrayA
Walt,
You fasten on William Hendriksen. As one who profited greatly from his commentaries I find your gratuitous denigration of him outrageous. Yes, I am familiar with what has happened to Calvin Seminary in recent years, but your attribution of this to Hendriksen is fatuous nonsense. The decline has far more to do with the influx of certain liberals in the CRC, and the tolerance of higher critical and evolutionary ideas, than anything to do with Hendriksen and the use of early NT textual material. Like so many of the KJVOs, you are barking up the wrong tree in your analysis.

We were discussing the long ending of Mark. You say nothing of Leon Morris (whom I knew personally to some extent), Ward Powers (whom I know closely). Both were/are godly men of the Word (Morris is now in glory), whose orthodoxy is unimpeachable. Get to grips with the gamut of scholarship, and not merely fasten on one individual and use him as a chopping block.

I think what I am up against is the definition of a liberal as one who adopts a 'critical text' approach. This sort of circularity is difficult to break, but should be evident to an unbiased observer.

30

News Item11/4/07 8:43 PM
Walt | Michigan  Find all comments by Walt
Murray, none of those names would be considered orthodox scholars in my view, but modern anti-orthodox scholars.

Are you sure this is the list you want to use as orthodox Scholars?

William Hendriksen helped turn Calvin Theological Seminary into the liberal college it is today. What am I missing?

Are you familiar with what has happed to Calvin Theological Seminary since Hendriksen's death and as a result of his work?

I don't plan on going down this road on all these new bible translations with you based upon your list of orthodox scholars. I consider none of them orthodox and will stay with the ecclesiastical text received by the church, and you can argue about all these other versions being discovered.

This argument is a serious waste of time as I see the presupposition. I'm glad for one thing you recognized what Dallas Theological Seminary has done, but nevertheless the arguments you make are the same fundamental one's they make by Wallace.

You need to sell your book to Spiritual and Abigail on this site as they are more inclined to follow this tradition.

29

News Item11/4/07 8:42 PM
Dr. Yamil Luciano | Curing Theological Diseases  Find all comments by Dr. Yamil Luciano
As usual, Walt's ad hominem are kept in tact.

As soon as I throw out one, then all of a sudden it is foul game.

At least mine are more creative.

28

News Item11/4/07 8:27 PM
MurrayA | Australia  Find all comments by MurrayA
Walt
"Can you give me those Scholars names?"

Yes, just a sample:
Ned Stonehouse (late of Westminster Theological Seminary)
William Hendriksen, whom I quote on my site, is at least wary of these verses (my own position is the same as his)
Leon Morris is ambivalent in his NT Theology, p.113
B. Ward Powers, formerly of Sydney Missionary and Bible College
William L Lane, NIC Commentary on Mark
Theodore Zahn, Introduction to the NT
S.P. Tregelles
B.B. Warfield
A.T. Robertson
H.C. Thiessen
etc.

"May I assume you have been overwhelmed by the Dallas Theological Seminary on this issue!!!"
No, you may not! I have not read much of their literature. They are the way-out Dispensationals who make their scheme of eschatology a test of orthodoxy. My study is independent of their influence.

27

News Item11/4/07 8:23 PM
Dr. Yamil Luciano | Curing Theological Diseases  Find all comments by Dr. Yamil Luciano
[Removed by Moderator Alpha]
26

News Item11/4/07 8:01 PM
Walt | Michigan  Find all comments by Walt
Murray, you wrote:

"One cannot make orthodoxy to hang on acceptance of Mark 16:9-20, when there are many orthodox scholars, whose commitment to the infallibility of Scripture is abundantly clear, who reject these verses."

Can you give me those Scholars names? I would like to see who you believe is an orthodox Scholar supporting all these later discovered texts which claim earlier and more fundamentally accurate greek texts that likely the Gospel were based upon in the original manuscripts.

Here is someone I find very intersting that has followed Burgen's arguments:

http://www.holywordcafe.com/bible/Letis.html

May I assume you have been overwhelmed by the Dallas Theological Seminary on this issue!!!

25

News Item11/4/07 7:48 PM
MurrayA | Australia  Find all comments by MurrayA
Walt,
With all due respect to J.W. Burgon, and your adherence to him, when you insist that Burgon has amassed "overwhelming evidence" for the Received Text, he has done nothing of the kind. He wrote well BEFORE the discovery of the papyri such as the Chester Beatty and Bodmer collections, let alone the many fragments of the Oxyrhynchus collection, which are still being published to this day (most recently in 2000).

As to the long ending of Mark, see my discussion on my website, along with discussion of the adulteress passage. One cannot make orthodoxy to hang on acceptance of Mark 16:9-20, when there are many orthodox scholars, whose commitment to the infallibility of Scripture is abundantly clear, who reject these verses. One could argue that this passage, esp. vv.17-18, give authorisation to charismatics, snake-handling cults and other such bizarre groups.

I am all for reprints (Puritans etc.), but the works of Burgon are irrevocably dated, and should remain buried and never see the light of day.

24

News Item11/4/07 7:35 PM
Walt | Michigan  Find all comments by Walt
BURGON, JOHN W., The Last Twelve Verses of Mark Vindicated Against Recent Critical Objectors and Established (The Fatal Blow to Manuscripts "B" and "Aleph") (1871)

"Burgon has amassed overwhelming evidence from manuscripts, lectionaries, ancient versions, and church fathers proving the genuineness of the last twelve verses of Mark! ...A thorough grasp of Burgon's methodology of textual criticism such as is exhibited in these pages will convince the honest reader to reject the false conclusions regarding these twelve verses (and other verses as well) which have been accepted by the NASV, the NIV, the RSV, the NRSV, the NEB, TEV, CEV and the other modern versions! If indeed, as Dean Burgon shows clearly, "B" (Vaticanus) and "Aleph" (Sinaiticus) are in serious error here, they cannot be trusted elsewhere either. The manuscripts, the lectionaries, the ancient versions, and the quotations from the church fathers all unite to show that Mark 16:9-20 was in Mark's Gospel from the very beginning" (back cover). 370 pages.

Some anti-KJV only critics want everything in their power to remove the Received Text and substitute it. They have done a great job in this generation!

23

News Item11/4/07 7:26 PM
MurrayA | Australia  Find all comments by MurrayA
I note from several of the previous posts that the same erroneous views on early texts of the NT are being trotted out. True, the early manuscripts and papyri differ from each other: they did not have cameras or photocopiers back then!

Anyone who has done transcription exercises in primary school, or thereafter, will know the sorts of errors that can creep into copies. Just try it!

However, KJV-only types rail against two main early manuscripts: codices Aleph and B. The many others, especially the papyri, most of which pre-date these two codices, they don't want to know about.

I have discussed these and several other issues in my website:
www.adamthwaite.com.au
Click on Theology, then Textual Criticism

BTW, the book "History of the Bible in English", is by F.F. Bruce, not J.J. Bruce

22
There are a total of 41 user comments displayed | add new comment |Subscribe to these comments
Jump to Page : [1] 2 3 | last
Last PostTotal
Captured ISIS Laptop Contains Bubonic Plague, WMD Information
pursuitoftruth: "p.s. the president did actualy compare isis to a varsity league...."
-27 min 
Devil Worshipers Confident Black Mass in Oklahoma Will Happen...
fg from usa: " christopher000 stever write: 'im glad that the rcc still reads..."
-36 min 17 
Joel Osteen's wife accused of 'blasphemous' remarks
pursuitoftruth: "correction: joel osteen's wife."
-36 min 


The Great Supreme


Store Item
Hurting in Hope Audio Book

Alan Lester
Product: Audio Download
Free!

E. A. Johnston
America Revival Or Ruin

Ambassadors For Christ Intl-US
Teaching
Staff Pick!Play! | MP3

Scott T. Brown
Cure for a Heart Far from Him

Isaiah
Hope Baptist Church
Transcript!Play! | MP3

Rev. Brent Bergman
3 The Hope of Election

TULIP Driven Parenting
Grace Community Church
Play! | MP3

Blog 8/29/14
God Be With You ‘Til We Meet Again...

New York Gospel Mission
for the past sev­eral weeks, many people have expr­ess­ed...

Sponsor:
Voddie Baucham on Puritan Hard Drive

"Simply ast­on­ish­ing. Amaz­ing tool. I have enj­oyed my Pur­itan Hard Drive imm­ens­ely."
www.puritandownloads.com/dr..

Sermon:
The Clever False Prophet
Pastor Alfred J. Chompff






                   
The road is not to be complained of, as it leads to such a home. ... John Newton

Las Vegas, NV
  43   DAYS LEFT
Gospel of John
Cities | Local | Personal
MOBILE
iPhone + iPad
Church App
Android
Church App
Kindle + Nook
BlackBerry
Windows Mobile, Nokia
Chromecast TV
ROKU TV
Pebble Smartwatch
Kindle Reader


HELP
Knowledgebase
Broadcasters
Listeners
Q&A
Uploading Sermons
Uploading Videos
Webcasting
Tips & Tricks
YouTube Screencasts

FOLLOW
Weekly Newsletter
Staff Picks Feed
Site Notices New!
RSS | Twitter | Facebook
SERVICES | ALL
Local Church Finder | Info
MP3 Play & Download
Mobile Apps
Podcasting
Video Support
Live Webcasting
Transcription Service
HIFI Option
Business Cards
SOLO | MINI | Domains
Favorites
QR Codes
24x7 Radio Stream
INTEGRATION
Sermon Browser
HTML Codes
WordPress
Twitter
Facebook
Logos | e-Sword
SOAP API

BATCH
Transfer Agent
Protected Podcasts
Upload via Email
Auto-Upload Sermons
Auto-Blog Import
Picasa | FTP | Dropbox
ABOUT US
SermonAudio.com is the largest library of audio sermons from conservative churches and ministries worldwide. All broadcasters must adhere to the Articles of Faith.

Our Services | Testimonials
Broadcast With Us!
Support Us
Advertising | Local Ads
CONTACT
info@sermonaudio.com
Copyright © 2014 SermonAudio.com.