members, click to sign in..

4,101 active users!!Bandwidth
AUG 2, 2015
Events & Blogs
New Audio & Video
Local Church Finder
Live Webcasts
Sermons by Bible
Sermons by Topic
Sermons by Speaker
Sermons by Date
Staff Picks
CommentsALL -27 min
Top Sermons
Daily Log
PhotosNew Stuff!
Online Bible
Daily Reading
Our Services
Submit Sermon
Members Only

Breaking News Home | All | Religion | Society | Tech | Choice | SA News
FRONT PAGE  |  8/2/2015
FRIDAY, AUG 15, 2008  |  152 comments
Chronological Bible sparks debate
Bob Sanford wanted to create a Bible that would bring order and clarity to the text. Instead, he's waded right into one of the great debates of biblical scholarship.

The Chronological Study Bible will be released this fall in the midst of a Bible-publishing boom in the United States. In an industry that now as much to do with profits as with prophets, Sanford expects his new edition to have wide appeal.

"(Our challenge) is to take the scholarship and make it enjoyable to a readership that enjoys history," said Sanford, who oversees the Bible division for the giant Christian publisher, Thomas Nelson. ...

CLICK HERE to Read Entire Article

How Do We Know Bible is True?
  Recommended sermons | more..
•  3. Why Believe the Bible, Pt 1 • Paul Viggiano | 4/6/2003
•  How Do We Know Bible is True?Brian Edwards | 7/17/2008
•  Why You Can Believe The BibleVoddie Baucham | 9/4/2014

   08/02/15  |  Most Americans Do Not Believe US is a Christian Nation
   08/02/15  |  Why Obama Admin Won't Use 'Islamic'
   08/01/15  |  Vatican sceptical about close encounters of the third kind • 32 comments
   08/01/15  |  Chinese Christians make crosses at home as church crosses are... • 6 comments
   07/31/15  |  Church Booted from Public School After District Settles Lawsuit... • 4 comments
   07/30/15  |  Chinese leaders order all crosses demolished • 14 comments
   07/30/15  |  Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards Compares Pro-Lifers... • 23 comments
   07/22/15  |  Video: Planned Parenthood Doctor Haggling Price of Baby Body... • 30 comments
   07/21/15  |  Graham: Stop Muslim Immigration • 15 comments
   07/18/15  |  White House backs Planned Parenthood's explanation • 15 comments
   07/15/15  |  SermonAudio Tip: Improved Online Donation Support for... • 13 comments
   07/03/15  |  SermonAudio Tip: Enjoy Sermons + Find Churches On The Apple...
   05/20/15  |  Voddie Baucham‚Äôs big move to Africa • 7 comments
   04/24/15  |  SermonAudio Tip: e-Sword Bible Software Integrates with... • 11 comments
   04/19/15  |  SermonAudio Tip: Upload Sermons From Anywhere Using An iPhone or... • 3 comments
COMMENTS | show all | add new  
    Sorting Order:  
Page 1 | Page 8 ·  Found: 152 user comment(s)
News Item8/20/08 3:53 PM
hidemi williges | san francisco, ca  Contact via emailFind all comments by hidemi williges
Jim Lincoln wrote:
No, hidemi williges, why do you want to use a bible that use Catholic sources has a homosexual/s name on it, and has portions that are too filthy to have out on the coffee table? But as I said I don't need, any expert opinion to say that a bible has to be in a contemporary language. What do you think, Wycliffe and Tyndale fought for?
Resorting to unfounded accusations that border on slander is not a very Christian attitude to have. There is no proof that King James was a homosexual, and if per chance he was, at least he didn't castrate himself like Origen did.

No expert opinion?! Why do constantly rely on John MacArthur? Where is your proof? I don't want a hundred links to various sites, only a fakir would do that. Be like MurrayA, show some real scholarship.


News Item8/20/08 2:54 PM
Jim Lincoln | Nebraska  Find all comments by Jim Lincoln
No, hidemi williges, why do you want to use a bible that use Catholic sources has a homosexual/s name on it, and has portions that are too filthy to have out on the coffee table? But as I said I don't need, Webster's Revision of the KJV (1833), or any other expert opinion to say that a bible has to be in a contemporary language. What do you think, Wycliffe and Tyndale fought for? If you have a really old King James Bible, see what this fellow at, English Bible History, will give you for it. Unless you collect antiquated bibles, then lock it away, somewhere safe, and use information such as, Comparing Bible Translations to get what you needd. Yes, the debate is settled, pick the NASB if you really want the best representation of God's Word that is presently available.

News Item8/20/08 5:37 AM
Daniel Lee Ford | Spring Arbor, Mich.  Find all comments by Daniel Lee Ford
hidemi williges wrote:
scholarship and conviction
in that other thread, I mentioned that the foundation of reliance on the Authorised Bible was the AV men themselves.
letter of the translators -AV bible "not justly to be accepted against"

and in reply to constant pointing to the preface, noted that the above audio and the below text show an exact 180 degree different take on what the preface implies.

AV translators views

These responses to a link Jim's put up many times recently about the preface which tries to uphold 'scholarship only'. We're reading the preface and getting a totally different take.

Here are some good books on the subject:

Which Version by FLOYD NOLEN JONES,Th.D., Ph.D.



News Item8/20/08 1:27 AM
hidemi williges | san francisco, ca  Contact via emailFind all comments by hidemi williges
I guess Jim Lincoln got bashed too much on another thread, that he had to retreat to this article to hide.

You should be more like MurrayA and show some scholarship and conviction of your position.


News Item8/19/08 3:04 PM
Jim Lincoln | Nebraska  Find all comments by Jim Lincoln
Remember you don't have an authentic KJV unless you have the apocrypha in it. May I also add, your KJV should also have the preface in it? The Preface to the King James Version And the King James Only Position.

I don't need any expert to tell me that a Bible has to be understood a reasonably literate person, the KJV itself was written for the common man and the literate man of the 17th century had no trouble understanding it. So, it is great that the original NIV displaced the KJV many years ago, as the most popular bible. Too bad it wasn't the NASB, be the NIV is much more accurate than the KJV, and it never had the apocrypha in it either.


News Item8/18/08 5:12 PM
hidemi williges | san francisco, ca  Contact via emailFind all comments by hidemi williges
Another New Age, Corrupt Bible. When will the Martian version or the Hollywood version come out?

News Item8/17/08 3:34 PM
Jim Lincoln | Nebraska  Find all comments by Jim Lincoln
Yes, as John MacArthur puts it, The Biblical Position on The KJV Controversy. The King James when it is modernized, with at least correct English and the correct meaning of words is much closer to the newer versions than when it is left in a disrepaired state, even Noah Webster's Revision of the KJV (1833), would be a great improvement, unless you're like a Muslim of course, who thinks the AV is like the Koran is only correct when written an Arabic, the original language that it was finally put down in. Almost amusing, Classic Muslim Excuses (or Can the Quran Be Understood by non-Arabic Scholars?).

It is not a question is the contain the inspired Word of God, which is does, but putting most of the questions of accuracy aside, shouldn't some revision like the AKJV, Webster's, or probably much better, the NKJV be used in it's place? -- the answer to that is "yes" something should be used in its place, even when it still contains many of the errors the AV. A person reading the Bible shouldn't have to be distracted by constantly going to various resources to see what is correct.


News Item8/16/08 10:23 PM
Alan H | Washington State  Protected NameFind all comments by Alan H
Jim Lincoln:

I'd like to ask you the same question which "ml" asked DJC49 on another thread, "Do you believe we have the Word of God today and if so where?"


"[John] Owen argued that if the infallible Word is not preserved wholly and intact, then the Book is useless and our faith has no sure foundation. He raised this concern: ‚ÄúIt will assuredly be granted that the persuasion of the coming forth of the word immediately from God, in the way pleaded for, is the foundation of all faith, hope, and obedience. But what, I pray, will it advantage us that God did so once deliver his word, if we are not assured also that that word so delivered hath been, by his special care and providence, preserved entire and uncorrupt unto us, or that it doth not evidence and manifest itself to be his word, being so preserved? (Isa 59:21, Matt 5:18, 1 Pet 1:25, 1 Cor 11:23, Matt 28:20)‚ÄĚ (450).

In other words, if God’s Word is not perfect today, fully preserved, how then can we appeal to it as our sure and steadfast, final and supreme rule of faith and practice? We simply cannot! If the Scriptures be not perfect, Christians are a most miserable lot for sure (1 Cor 15:19)."


News Item8/16/08 6:28 PM
Daniel Lee Ford | Spring Arbor,Mich.  Find all comments by Daniel Lee Ford

graphic of where we got our bible
print if for a quick overview
single page chart


these are pretty extensive , presentations of the case for the Authorised Bible.

for Help regarding any King James Bible issue I highly recommend Dr. D.A. Waite at:
Waite message

listen to this sermon on SA by Graham Chewter. It's really good:
Providential Preservation of the Scriptures
The historic nature of the doctrine is seen:about 10 minutes into the message.
4 reasons to believe it

Ad hominems about rationality can be tossed at the scholarship only position,too. The 'new priesthood' of scholars who will tell you where God's words are hidden appears quite similar to the RCC.


News Item8/16/08 3:32 PM
Jim Lincoln | Nebraska  Find all comments by Jim Lincoln
Alan, to carry on this debate, and debate would mean there is a rational discussion about a topic, but of course, I haven't seen much rationality when it comes to supporting the KJV only position. I only see emotional "Catholic" type arguments. Even a famous pastor who had a commentary tied to the NKJV, does not support the Textus Receptus that is used in it or the KJV, q.v.,The Biblical Position on The KJV Controversy. I haven't put up that reference before and would suggest you might read it.

One of the ideas of the King James translators was that the Bible should be understood by the average person. This does not mean they turned out a 17th century edition of The Bible in Basic English. but they did turn out a version that looked like the ASV -- at least in readability. So yes, I am interested in biblical accuracy and of course that is one reason Why I Do Not Think the King James Bible Is the Best Translation Available Today, Dr. Wallace and I that is.


News Item8/15/08 8:21 PM
Alan H | Washington State  Protected NameFind all comments by Alan H
Jim Lincoln wrote:
How We Got Our Bible.
Jim Lincoln, after reading your post below I wouldn't think you even cared "how we got our Bible."

Ah, gentlemen, again you pointed out one of the numerous errors of The King James Bible. However, DJC49, I think there are other arguments about what should be changed in the AV as given in the The Ameerican Standard Version Preface, than the use of the word "thing" in Luke 1:35. The ASV I think is a word for word copy of the AV in this instance.
However, the neither the ESV or NET bible uses "thing" either. I would suppose that you have already read, Why I Do Not Think the King James Bible Is the Best Translation Available Today. Which doesn't directly address the issue at hand, but still reflects on the overall problem of the inadequacy of the KJV. "The King James bible" 8/14/08 2:29 PM


News Item8/15/08 1:59 PM
Jim Lincoln | Nebraska  Find all comments by Jim Lincoln
from the article, "It's like you would attach a pack of cigarettes with a warning label from the surgeon general," Graham said. "Well, this Bible should have a warning from the theologian general or something: 'This bible may be harmful to your spiritual health.'"

Excellent warning. I would suggest people read, How We Got Our Bible.

There are a total of 152 user comments displayed | add new comment |Subscribe to these comments
Page 1 | Jump to Page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] | last
Last PostTotal
Oldest Bible Text Since Dead Sea Scrolls Discovered
lurker: " mike it's sad watching how many are drawn in by jim's obvious version..."
-24 min 440 
The battle over ‚Äėthe facts‚Äô in textbooks
unprofitable servant from georgia: "we have many issues today that had the people..."
-1 hrs 13 
Washington governor lauds abortion giant, Planned Parenthood
wayfairer pilgrim from lubbock,tx: "to the governor's perspective they do not want..."
-3 hrs 

Dr. Calvin Ray Evans

Revelation 12:10-11
Sunday - AM
Evangelistic Outreach
Play! | MP3 | RSS

The Lord MY Shepherd
Richard Warmack

Rev. Ivan Foster
Prospect of Gospel in Ulster

Burning Bush Audio Archive
Sunday - PM
Play! | MP3

Kevin Swanson
McConnell Won't Defund PP

Christians Losing Appeals
Generations Radio
Play! | MP3

Sermon: Rejection of Biblical Marriage
A. Boyd Miller IV

SPONSOR | 2,700+


Christ's blood is heavens key. ... Thomas Brooks

City: Las Vegas, NV
Gospel of John
Cities | Local | Personal
iPhone + iPad New!
Church App
Android New!
Church App
Kindle + Nook
Chromecast TV
Windows Mobile
Apple Watch New!
Pebble Smartwatch
Kindle Reader

Uploading Sermons
Uploading Videos
Tips & Tricks
YouTube Screencasts

Weekly Newsletter
Staff Picks Feed
Site Notices
RSS | Twitter | Facebook
Local Church Finder | Info
MP3 Play & Download
Mobile Apps
Video Support
Live Webcasting New!
Transcription Service
Business Cards
Domain Redirect
Favorites | QR Codes
Online Donations New!
24x7 Radio Stream
Sermon Browser
HTML Codes
Logos | e-Sword

Transfer Agent
Protected Podcasts
Upload via Email
Auto-Upload Sermons
Auto-Blog Import
Picasa | FTP | Dropbox
ABOUT US 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
Copyright © 2015