Eugene Scott wrote: midnight Thursday to mark his opposition to an estimated $320 billion addition to the federal budget deficit ‚ÄĒ something he called Republicans out for supporting: ‚ÄúIf you were against President Obama's deficits, and now you're for the Republican deficits, isn't that the very definition of hypocrisy?‚ÄĚ
Paul, known for his libertarian leanings, said the budget deal breaks past Republican pledges to rein in federal spending.
After GOP leaders refused to allow Paul to offer an amendment, he chose to use a Senate rule that allows individual senators to slow down proceedings that require the consent of all.
‚ÄúI can‚Äôt in all good honesty, in all good faith, just look the other way because my party is now complicit in the deficits,‚ÄĚ he said on the Senate floor.
Adam Taylor wrote: The Syrian war has seen no shortage of twists already this year, but this weekend, it saw one of its most consequential. On Saturday, Israel's military announced that it had carried out a "large-scale" aerial attack inside Syria, after back-and-forth clashes overnight in which an Iranian drone was shot down in Syrian territory and an Israeli F-16 was downed by Syrian antiaircraft fire....
American Experience PBS wrote: ...And neither the sitting President nor the United States Congress appeared willing to mitigate the suffering.
‚ÄúThere are those who believe that if you will only legislate to make the well-to-do prosperous, their prosperity will leak through on those below,‚ÄĚ [William Jennings]Bryan proclaimed. ‚ÄúThe Democratic idea, however, has been that if you legislate to make the masses prosperous, their prosperity will find its way up through every class which rests upon them.‚ÄĚ
Edward T. O'Donnell, Historian: Bryan says, ‚ÄúThere are two theories of government. One theory of government is that government should do things to benefit the wealthy and there‚Äôs another theory of government, which is that the government should do things to maximize the prosperity of the greatest number of people and that will make us a healthy, vibrant democracy.
Dennis Prager wrote: ...if opposition to same-sex marriage is as immoral as racism, why did no great moral thinker, in all of history, ever advocate male-male or female-female marriage? Opposition to racism was advocated by every great moral thinker. Moses, for example, married a black woman, the very definition of Catholic is "universal" and therefore diverse and has always included every race, and the equality of human beings of every race was a central tenet of Judaism, Christianity, Islam and other world religions. But no one - not Moses, Jesus, Buddha, Muhammad, Aquinas, Gandhi, not the Bible or the Koran or any other sacred text, nor even a single anti-religious secular thinker of the Enlightenment ‚ÄĒ ever advocated redefining marriage to include members of the same sex.
To argue that opposition to same-sex marriage is immoral is to argue that every moral thinker, and every religion and social movement in the history of mankind prior to the last 20 years in America and Europe was immoral. About no other issue could this be said....
Dennis Prager wrote: ...Every moral advance has been rooted in prior moral thinking. The anti-slavery movement was based on the Bible. Martin Luther King, Jr. was first and foremost the "Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr." and he regularly appealed to the moral authority of the scriptures when making his appeals on behalf of racial equality....
...Is the man-woman definition of marriage fair to gays who wish to marry? No, it isn't. And those of us opposed to same-sex marriage need to be honest about this, ...
But whether a policy is fair to every individual can never be the only question society asks in establishing social policy. Eyesight standards for pilots are unfair to some terrifically capable individuals. Orchestra standards are unfair to many talented musicians.... Wherever there are standards, there will be unfairness to individuals.
So, the question is whether redefining in the most radical way ever conceived ‚ÄĒ indeed completely changing its intended meaning ‚ÄĒ is good for society.
!. First, I want to affirm with all evangelical Christians that the Bible is the Word of God, inerrant, inspired, and our final authority for faith and life. However, nowhere in the Bible am I told that only one translation of it is the correct one...
2. Second, the Greek text which stands behind the King James Bible is demonstrably inferior in certain places. The man who edited the text was a Roman Catholic priest and humanist named Erasmus....
3. ...the King James Bible has undergone three revisions since its inception in 1611,
4. ...300 words found in the KJV no longer bear the same meaning
5. ...the KJV includes one very definite error in translation, which even KJV advocates would admit. In Matthew 23:24...
6. ...We do God a great disservice when we make the gospel more difficult to understand than he intended it.....
Peter J. Reilley wrote: FFRF is an atheist organization and you could view this lawsuit as just one more attack on religion in the public square like the suit about prayers at the school board meeting in Chino Valley, Calif or the one about a ten commandments monument in front of Valley High School in Pennsylvania. I think that view is mistaken. Lack of transparency in churches is a concern among people who are deeply religious.
The standards of the Evangelical Council on Financial Accountability require that member organizations provide audited financial statements on request. ECFA is concerned about the effect that financial shenanigans have on non-believers citing Paul's letter to the Corinthians which states "For we are taking pains go do what is right, not only in the eyes of the Lord but also in the eyes of men."...
Most charities are subject to some level of transparency, but not churches. That leaves it up to the members to demand transparency. If you meet resistance from the leadership, maybe you might consider that rather than a sheep who is being fed, you are one that is being shorn.
Bible Research wrote: Statements made in the preface regarding this aspect of the version are somewhat misleading. The Preface points out that the few late medieval manuscripts upon which the Textus Receptus was based ‚Äúwere representative of many more‚ÄĚ which constitute ‚Äúthe traditional text of the Greek-speaking churches‚ÄĚ (also called the ‚ÄėByzantine Text‚Äô), and it further asserts that ‚Äúit is now widely held that the Byzantine Text that largely supports the Textus Receptus has as much right as the Alexandrian or any other tradition to be weighed in determining the text of the New Testament.‚ÄĚ While this statement is true as far as it goes ‚ÄĒ all manuscripts and other witnesses to the text deserve to be weighed and are weighed by scholars ‚ÄĒ the reader should be told that nearly all competent scholars agree that the so-called Byzantine manuscript tradition of the middle ages can never be given the same evidential weight as the ancient manuscripts.
It's a pity that the marginal notes are in the most part more accurate than the actual Scripture that is used in the NKJV. ¬† If you read the marginal notes you should be in great shape, though. NKJV KJV
Trump is doing a pretty good job of destroying himself.
ABC News Radio wrote: ...Sean Patrick Maloney, now a New York representative, told ABC News Chief Anchor George Stephanopoulos on This Week Sunday that the FBI's scrutiny of prospective White House staff for security clearance is so thorough that Trump administration officials must have known that Porter had been accused of domestic abuse by two ex-wives.
‚ÄúThat process is incredibly exacting,‚ÄĚ Maloney said. ‚ÄúAnd these guys knew in the first month of the administration about a fact pattern that would have permanently disqualified him from doing the job. He never should have been in the chair.‚ÄĚ...
The Mormon Cult is strongly KING JAMES ONLY. They are attempting to revamp their image as being mainstream Christian, despite their actual beliefs that Jesus Christ is the half brother of Satan. The Book of Mormon written in KJV style English to make the two appear compatible from a literary view point. In America, daily TV adverts by the Latter Day Saints with a toll free telephone number offer a free KJV bible to all callers. Mormonism is of course not the only cult that is KJV Only.
After the textual corruption of its own New World Translation, the Jehovah's Witnesses prefer the KJV because like the the KJV reduces the Holy Spirit from a person to an 'it', (the KJV translators on this point failed to grasp that gender in Greek does not mean what gender does in English) which the JW cult p[o]int to when they are door knocking to persuade people to reject the Trinity.
David Koresh and his Branch Davidian cult were exclusively KJV Only; it is the preferred translation of demonic cults. Why do these Ruckmanites insist on a bible that calls the Holy Spirit an 'it'...
Lurker, 1948? JFB commentary 1887. No, "hiss" is a poorer rendition. :thumbdown:
By the way,
James Jacob Prasch wrote: ...Yet the bible translation of Victoria Dillon, Peter Ruckman, Richard Engstrom, Tom Lamb, Gail Riplinger, Wendy Buester, Barbara Aho, and W.N. Howard is dedicated to 'The most high and mighty prince James by the grace of God King of Great Britain, France, Ireland and Defender of the Faith; King James I; - a drunken sodomite who murdered Born Again Christians. It is little wonder that in their quest to ordain homosexual and lesbian clergy the homosexual community are arguing that "gay people gave you your bible"!
The reasons homosexuals are KING JAMES ONLY are obvious. They are laying historical claim to it as a 'Gay & Lesbian Bible'. However suspect their pro-KJV actions may make them in some people's thinking, we do not suggest any dubious sexual orientation of Buester, Howard, Aho, Ruckman, Texxe Marrs, and Dillen. But why do they join with the homosexual community in this cause of King James Only which in practice effectively becomes a pro-homosexual cause?...
Zechariah 10 6¬† "I will strengthen the house of Judah, And I will save the house of Joseph. I will bring them back, Because I have mercy on them. They shall be as though I had not cast them aside; For I am the LORD their God, And I will hear them. 7¬† Those of Ephraim shall be like a mighty man, And their heart shall rejoice as if with wine. Yes, their children shall see it and be glad; Their heart shall rejoice in the LORD. 8¬† I will whistle for them and gather them, For I will redeem them; And they shall increase as they once increased. 9¬† "I will sow them among the peoples, And they shall remember Me in far countries; They shall live, together with their children, And they shall return. 10¬† I will also bring them back from the land of Egypt, And gather them from Assyria. I will bring them into the land of Gilead and Lebanon, Until no more room is found for them. 11¬† He shall pass through the sea with affliction, And strike the waves of the sea: All the depths of the River shall dry up. Then the pride of Assyria shall be brought down, And the scepter of Egypt shall depart. 12¬† "So I will strengthen them in the LORD, And they shall walk up and down in His name," Says the LORD.---New King James Version
Zechariah 10:8 I will hiss for them, and gather them; for I have redeemed them: and they shall increase as they have increased. ---KJV
It shows why you need an electronic version of the KJV so you can have commentaries and Strong Concordance to help fix some of the many errors in the KJV! Even Jamison, Fausset, and Brown knew that this was a poor translation at least for 19th century English speakers. The New King James version as you have seen, corrects that problem.
JFB Commentary wrote: Zechariah 10:8:
¬† ¬† ¬†8. hiss for them‚ÄĒKeepers of bees by a whistle call them together. So Jehovah by the mere word of His call shall gather back to Palestine His scattered people (Zec 10:10,Isa 5:26,Eze 36:11). The multitudes mentioned by JOSEPHUS [Wars of the Jews, 3:2], as peopling Galilee two hundred years after this time, were a pledge of the future more perfect fulfilment of the prophecy. ¬† ¬† ¬† for I have redeemed them‚ÄĒnamely, in My covenant purpose "redeemed" both temporally and spiritually. ¬† ¬† ¬† as they have increased‚ÄĒin former times.
John MacArthur certainly had an excellent commentary for Zechariah 10:6-8 Mr. Thomas, if you like the Byzantine manuscripts, then use the New King James Bible
Daniel B. Wallace wrote: 4. The King James Version is perfect. This myth continues to be promoted today, yet even the translators of the KJV were not sure on hundreds of occasions which rendering was best, allowing the reader to decide for himself. Again, the preface notes: ‚ÄúTherfore as S. Augustine saith, that varietie of Translations is profitable for the finding out of the sense of the Scriptures: so diversitie of signification and sense in the margine, where the text is not so cleare, must needes doe good, yea is necessary, as we are perswaded‚Ä¶ They that are wise, had rather have their judgements at libertie in differences of readings, then to be captivated to one, when it may be the other.‚ÄĚ
Daniel B. Wallace wrote: The original KJV had approximately 8000 marginal notes, though these have been stripped out in modern printings of the Authorized Version. Further, some the heKJVOe typos and blatant errors of the 1611 KJV have continued to remain in the text after multiple corrections and spelling updates (weighing in at more than 100,000 changes) through the 1769 edition. For example, in Matthew 23.24 the KJV says, ‚ÄúYe blind guides, which strain at a gnat and swallow a camel.‚ÄĚ The Greek means ‚Äústrain out a gnat.‚ÄĚ Or the wording of Hebrews 4.8, which says, ‚ÄúFor if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day.‚ÄĚ Instead of ‚ÄėJesus,‚Äô Joshua is meant. It‚Äôs the same word in Greek, but the reader of the text will hardly think of Joshua when he or she sees ‚ÄėJesus‚Äô here since ‚ÄėJoshua‚Äô is found everywhere in the OT.
Bill Plaschke wrote: But, slowly, fear over the effects of football is gnawing at the game's edges. It is much like the fear that eventually consumed America's first real national sports pastime, boxing. The more that is known about the long-term effects of football, the more tenuous its grip will become, perhaps mirroring America's once-close relationship with tobacco.
Speaking to a football academy in 2013, Hall of Fame cornerback Lem Barney said he feels the sport could eventually disappear, saying, "The game is becoming more deadly today. . . . I think it's the greatest game if you like gladiators. . . . I can see in the next 10 to maybe 20 years, society will [eliminate] football altogether."
Pamela Starr Dewey wrote: ....The insistence that everyone, including children and teens and new Christians, must get their only exposure to the truths of the Bible from listening to and reading the King James Version effectively cripples the ability of many to comprehend the Gospel. While there are, indeed, a few minor points of doctrine that may be affected by the choice between one translation or another, the basics of Salvation are very clear in any of the standard modern translations such as the NIV, NASB, or NKJV. And the basics of guidance on Christian daily living are identical in all these also. The Golden Rule, the Ten Commandments, the Sermon on the Mount, the Love Chapter (I Corinthians 13) all convey essentially the same meaning in all of the modern translations, and do not "teach something different" from what the KJV teaches....
http://tinyurl.com/zlglefs (When the Bible Becomes an Idol: Problems with the KJV-Only Doctrine) [The following, titles to the subsections of the article] 1. The KJV originally contained the Apocrypha.... 2. Even excluding the Apocrypha, the KJV of 1611 differed slightly from editions of the KJV in common use today.... 3. The translators of the KJV did not believe in the KJV-Only doctrine.... 4. The KJV Bible itself does not teach the KJV-Only Doctrine.... 5. The KJV-Only doctrine contradicts the evidence of the KJV Bible itself.... 6. The KJV-Only doctrine is not the historic belief of the Christian faith.... 7. The KJV-Only doctrine does not fit the facts about the transmission of the Bible.... 8. One need not adhere to the KJV-only doctrine to respect the KJV as God's word.... 9. One need not adhere to the KJV-only doctrine to express criticisms of other translations.... 10. Advocacy of the KJV-only doctrine is no guarantee of doctrinal truth or interpretive accuracy.... 11. The KJV-only doctrine requires that we have some sort of faith in the KJV translators.... 12. Advocates of the KJV-only doctrine all too commonly exhibit a spiteful and disrespectful attitude toward other Christians....