Is the correct view of inspiration really that hard to figure out?  I don’t think so.  So what’s gone wrong?  Here’s what I think.

You’ve got one side that believes in inerrancy only in the autographa, only in those manuscripts originally etched by holy men of God.  They think there are errors in what we have today without any hope of discerning what all the Words of Scripture are.  That doesn’t represent what we see taught in Scripture and it leaves us without full certainty in God’s Word.  Authority comes in shades of gray.  This view comes across like it’s the position of scholarship, the real brainiacs, some very deep thinkers.  They just can’t wrap their faith around the promises of God, but, instead, men like Metzger have wrapped them around their little fingers.  Heavy hitting institutions like Bob Jones and mainstream publishers push the critical text and modern versions.

If you say that you believe that we have all the Words of God in the languages in which they were written, and you base that upon the promises of Scripture about the Bible, they call you a hyper fundamentalist, not worth considering in any other theological point.  If you comment on some other subject, they’ll likely delete your comment.  You’re not welcome to the adult table.  You’ve got to eat at the little picnic table out back with the other children.  You’re now very near or already a laughingstock.  Everything else you say will be treated like a creationist at an evolution conference.

On the other side, you’ve got the people who are stronger on the Bible than the Bible is on itself.   There are others on this side that are pretty much right where the Bible is about the Bible, but they fight against others that are also right where the Bible is, so that they will stay in good standing with those who are stronger than the Bible itself.  For instance, some of these believe that God inspired the English words of the King James Version in addition to having inspired the Hebrew and Greek words of the original manuscripts.

Others take the strongest possible view of the Providence of God by saying that God superintended the translation work in something less than inspiration, but something so close to inspiration that every single word was exactly what God wanted.  He didn’t want “assembly” but “church.”  He didn’t want “immerse” but “baptize.”  He didn’t want “lampstands” but “candlesticks.”  Even the italicized words are exactly the ones God wanted.  And so on.   If you don’t believe that strongly, then to them you just don’t believe in the Providence of God.  You know that Scriptural teaching of the Providential Perfect Translation of the Bible into English view, right?  Hezekiah or 2nd Maccabees, I think.

If you say that you don’t believe that the King James Version was inspired like the original manuscripts, they pounce all over you because you don’t believe that the King James Version was inspired.   You begin to explain, but it’s too late.  You’re weak and defensive.  They are much stronger critics of you, if you believe in the perfect preservation of the inspired Hebrew and Greek words, than they are of Gail Riplinger for her quacky, wacky, and unscriptural views.  There’s no doubt to them on whose side the Rippler is on, but you’re suddenly losing your King James credentials if you say something that sort of sniffs of something less than an inspired King James.  She at least has a Bible, but you; well, snort.  These Ruckman and Riplinger enablers do more damage than good.

I’m tired of playing this game.  I’d like to say that I’m done playing it.  I don’t want to play it any more.  The only thing that tells me that I’ll keep playing it is that there are far, far more on both sides of the swing than there are those with their feet planted on the ground.  You’ve got to play the game even a little just to have a conversation.

The first side will barely to never even deal with your arguments.  The latter side might deal with your arguments.  I think a few of them do.   However, they confuse the issue by not pointing out certain obvious points.  Usually the first side will say, “Oh, I believe in preservation of Scripture.”  The second side will say, “Oh, I don’t believe in double inspiration.”  The first side are no Bart Ehrmans.  The second side are no Peter Ruckmans.  That’s balance for you.

However, you can’t believe in preservation of Scripture and also believe that we aren’t sure what all the words are, at least based on what the Bible itself teaches about preservation.  And you can’t say that you don’t believe in double inspiration when you will not differentiate between inspired original manuscripts and an inspired English translation.  If you believe in double inspiration, then you don’t believe in inspiration at all.  And if you don’t believe in perfect preservation, then you deny what Scripture teaches about itself.  And if you believe in double inspiration, then you also deny what the Bible says about itself.

On the former side, you’ve got to continue with that position if you want any credibility with Bob Jones and its orbit and with the conservative evangelicals.  If you want to be invited to speak at the national leadership conference or the Fundamental Baptist Fellowship meeting, then you better find the critical text to have some appeal.  On the latter side, if you want to get in the Sword of the Lord line-up or receive kudos from most revivalists, you’d better not try to “correct the King James.”

I’m afraid that politics continues to plague fundamentalism.  We can barely discuss the Bible anymore without the pressure of politics.  You feel the start of a cold shoulder coming or the beginnings of a whisper campaign.

With me could you just say you’d like to stop the swing, because you’d like to get off?  I don’t care if you say I’m a fideist.  Oh well if I’m kicked off Sharper Iron.  Too bad if Central or Andy Naselli won’t post my comment.   Or if Maranatha won’t put my two books in their library.  I’m not going to keep trying to defend my belief in the continued inspiration of what God perfectly preserved to people who either are or need to remain cozy with English inspirationists or preservationists.   I don’t want to swing any more….even if you push.

Reading a recent post at Better Bibles Blog titled Thinking about Scripture, the writer mentions that  someone claimed a hard to understand Bible isn’t problematic. This made me think back to a YouTube video I recently watched. It was an interview with The Message translator Eugene Peterson. In this video Peterson revealed some of his personally held beliefs.

• Peoples belief in the Bible as a holy and reverent book, with no personal application
• Peoples belief in the Bible (an English translation) is the words of God
• People using the King James Version is a problem

In certain circles these views would get him hog tied and beat. I have to confess, I think he might be onto something. Of course, hearing the complete context from Peterson himself provides the best explanation of his views.

The Greek word hosanna appears six times in the NT: three times in Matthew, twice in Mark, and twice in John. The context is each case includes the quotation, “Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the Lord,” from Psalm 118:26. Because Psalm 118:25 contains the Hebrew words hoshi’a na, the Greek hosanna is widely (and I think correctly) assumed to be a Greek spelling of those Hebrew words, or perhaps an Aramaic equivalent.

In Psalm 118, hoshi’a means “save,” presumably, “save us.” (The direct object is optional in Hebrew, and can be inferred from context.) And na is a word that’s hard to translate — it may indicate politeness (“please”) or, more likely, formality or elegance.

There’s a persistent rumor that hosanna literally means “save now,” as in the NLT footnote that explains the word this way. But even the NLT translates hoshi’a na as “please save us,” not “save now.” The NAB says hosanna means “(O Lord) grant salvation,” and the NIV’s footnote explains the phrase as “A Hebrew expression meaning ‘Save!’ which became an exclamation of praise.” The rumor about “save now” probably comes from the KJV rendering of Psalm 118, “Save now, I beseech thee…”

In English, hosanna becomes “hosanna,” because the English spelling is taken directly from the Greek, (h)osanna. But the Greek is — again, widely and probably accurately — assumed to be a simplification of the Hebrew. The word should be hoshana, with the “sh” that is consistently lacking from Greek transliterations of Hebrew.

So should we put the “sh” back in to the English? By comparison, what if a French publication took the English “North Carolina” and turned it into norskarolina. Should a transliteration of that transliteration perpetuate the mistake?

For that matter, is transliterating the word the best way to go? And if it is, should “hosanna” be italicized?

Compounding the confusion, in Matthew and Mark “hosanna” appears in a phrase that gets translated as the barely intelligable “hosanna in the highest.” It apparently is supposed to mean “praise God on high.”

I think the case of hosanna is interesting not just in its own right, but also because it highlights the question of how much a translation into English has to be written in English. If we allow the word “hosanna,” and assume that it means “praise God” (but only here) can we use “in the highest” for “(God) on high” (but only here)? Or “man” for “people” (but only here)? Or allow any of the other seemingly wrong translations to be “one time exceptions”?

What do you think?

A year or two ago a young couple lost their two-month-old son. They had him in bed with them and one of them must have rolled over on him in the night because when they woke up in the morning their beautiful baby boy was dead. A pastor friend of mine and I went over to their house that night. You talk about heartache! The boy’s daddy, a young fella, kept wallowing in the floor saying “God is judging me – God is judging me!” The pastor was trying to show them some scriptures when the mother blurted out: “I just don’t see how there can be a God.”And before you criticize her, you just wait till you wake up beside your dead baby.

I  said “Ma’am my heart goes out to you – I won’t try to say I know what you’re going through because I don’t. But I was reading a story this afternoon about a lady who had lost her baby boy too. She went to her pastor and said “Where was God when my boy died?”

He was stunned by the question like we all would be but he thought for a moment and said “Ma’am, God was in the same place He was when His Son died 2000 years ago.” And I’m telling you there’s a God in heaven that knows what it’s like to lose a baby boy. He knows what it’s like to lose a loved one and He can sympathize with your pain.

On top of that, I believe the grace of God takes care of little children and that baby’s in Heaven right now. And if mama and daddy are Christians – they might have to spend 40, 50, or even 60 years apart from their child and I know that sounds like such a long time. But looking back, 10,000 years from now, it won’t seem like that long at all.

 Deception Driven Church? You decide…

 Stuart L Brogden Home

Rick Warren Purpose Driven Rick Warren Purpose Driven Rick Warren Rick Warren Purpose Driven Rick Warren Purpose Driven Rick Warren Rick Warren Purpose Driven Rick Warren Purpose Driven Rick Warren Rick Warren Purpose Driven Rick Warren Purpose Driven Rick Warren Rick Warren Purpose Driven Rick Warren Purpose Driven Rick Warren Rick Warren Purpose Driven Rick Warren Purpose Driven Rick Warren

video page updated
Bible History
click here

Adjectives without nouns are quirky and idiosyncratic, and understanding them is important for translation.

As an example, in English we have “the Americans” (American people) but not (*)”the Swisses,” or (*)”the Frenches.” We have “the Swiss” (Swiss people) and “the French” (French people), but “the American” can only mean one person.

Other languages work differently. In French, “la suisse” is a Swiss girl or woman, and “les suisses” is more than one of them. In French, “une suisse” (literally, “a swiss”) makes sense, but (*)”a swiss is here” doesn’t work in English.

Moving away from nationalities, we find in biblical Hebrew that plural adjectives are people when they’re masculine, events when they’re feminine. By themselves, the rishonim (literally, “the first [m,pl]“) are “people from long ago” and the rishonot (literally, “the first [f,pl]“) are “events from long ago”; Isaiah 43:9 is an example of the latter.

This range of variation is relevant for understanding upsistos in Greek. As a singular superlative masculine adjective, it works like any other Greek adjective, and it means “the one who is highest.” In Mark 5:7 we see upsistos with a noun, and in Acts 7:48 without one.

But as a plural neuter adjective, it means “heights,” a usage we see in Luke 2:14, for example: doxa en upsistois theo, “glory to God on high.”

I don’t know of any English translation that renders rishonot as “the firsts” in Isaiah 43:9. It just wouldn’t make any sense in English. Translators generally add the noun “things.”

Yet en (tois) upsistois ends up in English as “in the highest” in the KJV, ESV, and NAB. It seems to me that that translation is just wrong. To me, “in the highest” — if it means anything at all in English — is adverbial and it signifies “greatly.” Other translations preserve the superlative degree, giving us “highest heaven” or “highest heavens,” which may or may not be right. On one hand, there was a hierarchy of heavens in Greek thought, so there was a lowest one, middle ones, and a highest one. On the other hand, the phrase seems to be a Hebraicism, but the original Hebrew m’romim is not superlative (or adjectival — it’s a plural noun).

As for upsistos, “the Most High” is multiply problematic as a translation. First — and it’s hard to know what to do with this — being “high” in English doesn’t usually mean what we want it to here. (An old anecdote tells of a teenager who decided to get religious when he was taught that we should strive to be like God and that God is the most high.) Secondly, we don’t use adjectives that way in English. The closest we have is “high one.” Unlike in Greek and Hebrew, “the high” doesn’t make sense in English. Also, the superlative of “high” is “highest,” not “most high.”

And we end up with capitalization problems. Most versions give us “the Most High God” in Mark 5:7 (and Luke 8:28 etc.), which is not how capitalization works in English.

So all in all, translations of en upsistois and upsistos are a mess.

CBA best sellers list through October 31, 2009

BIBLE TRANSLATIONS – Based on Dollar Sales

1. New International Version – various publishers
2. New King James Version – various publishers
3. King James Version – various publishers
4. New Living Translation – Tyndale
5. English Standard Version – Crossway
6. Holman Christian Standard Bible – B&H Publishing Group
7. New American Standard Bible update – various publishers
8. The Message – Eugene Peterson, NavPress
9. Reina Valera 1960 (Spanish) – American Bible Society and licensees
10. New International Readers Version – Zondervan

BIBLE TRANSLATIONS – Based on Unit Sales

1. New International Version – various publishers
2. New King James Version – various publishers
3. King James Version – various publishers
4. English Standard Version – Crossway
5. New Living Translation – Tyndale
6. Reina Valera 1960 (Spanish) – American Bible Society and licensees
7. Holman Christian Standard Bible – B&H Publishing Group
8. New American Standard Bible update – various publishers
9. The Message – Eugene Peterson, NavPress
10. New International Readers Version – Zondervan

In the 1933 copy of The Minister’s Manuel, Volume 5, published by F.M. Barton Company, Publishers, Inc. (based in Cleveland and compiled and edited by Joseph McCray Ramsey) who at the time was the Editor of The Expositor,  on page 55, quotes this (which I strongly agree with) :

The Authority of the Bible.

TEXT: 2 Tim. 3:16-4:2.

“  Why call the Bible authoritative? Canon fixed by Church: Old Testament by Jews, New Testament by Christians.  It is not the Church that gives the books their value.  The spiritual values of the books forced them on the Church.

I.  THE AUTHORITATIVE ELEMENT.

The Bible is not to be judged by errors of copyists, or by misuse by zealots.  The only true and fair standard is the life produced by the teachings of the Book.

Authority lies in the Message. The Evangel of God, like a golden thread, runs all through the Book.  We hear it from Abraham, through Moses and Elijah and all the prophets, to Jesus-”Come unto Me!”  It is not necessary that we have dates to convince us of the authority of the message.  The Evangel is eternal as the love of God.

The Bible has given us a knowledge of God never obtained elsewhere.  Whenever religion goes wandering from the Bible it lands in various cults that have their day and disappear.  The Church and the Bible abide together.

Authority stands in Christ.  Bible culminates in Christ.  All its parts must be related to Him, either set aside as temporary or affirmed as eternal.  He is the life of the Bible.  Place Him as the living heart of the Bible, and it is the strongest spiritual force.  What are the promises without Christs presence and life?  His Cross gives them validity.

II. POSITIVE PREACHING OF THE BIBLE.

“Christ sent me not to baptize but to preach!”  Apostolic succession: Paul and Chrysostom and Augustine and Wesley and Beecher and Spurgeon and Moody, and so through the ages.  The prophet’s commission is easily seen and verified: to preach Christ and Christ Crucified, and to see the signs and wonders that follow.

It is to be positive in its notes.  It will be about the right things at the right times, but it will be positive.  About brotherhood in Christ.  “The fundamental test of religion today, is it capable of solving the problem of how men shall live together?”

III.  THE PREACHER’S BACKGROUND.

“The Church goes on.  Voltaire prophesied its collapse in fifty years, and in fifty years the house where he made the prophecy was a depot for the circulation of the Scriptures.  The Church’s persistent continual adaptation to new conditions, and apparently endless power of revival must have some deep reason.”-  Meaning of Faith: Fosdick. So long as the Bible remains an open book for all to read, so long as the preacher preaches with its authority always behind him, so long the Church will go on. “

–

(Okay.  That was interesting, but who are Chrysostom and Augustine and Wesley and Beecher and Spurgeon and Moody in Apostolic succession?)

Well, wikipedia.org states :

Chrysostom :  John Chrysostom is known in Christianity chiefly as a preacher, theologian and liturgist, particularly in the Eastern Orthodox Church. Among his sermons, eight directed against Judaizing Christians remain controversial for their impact on the development of Christian antisemitism.^[4][5][6]. He was also active in destruction of pagan symbols and places of worship, including the temple of Artemis at Ephesus, one of the seven wonders of the world.

(Augustine?) :  (November 13, 354 – August 28, 430), Bishop of Hippo Regius, also known as St. Augustine or St. Austin,^[3] was a Berber philosopher and theologian.  He was one of the most important figures in the development of Western Christianity.  (He became) a bishop, and opposed heresies, such as the belief that people can have the ability to choose to be good to such a degree as to merit salvation without divine aid (Pelagianism).

(Who is Wesley and why doesn’t he have a first name?) Probably because they were two brothers :

1.  Charles, 1707–88, English evangelist and prolific hymn writer.

2. his brother, John, Founder of the Methodist denomination of Protestant Christianity.

(What about Beecher and Spurgeon and Moody)?

Beecher : Lyman, 1775–1863, U.S. preacher and theologian (father of Catharine Esther Beecher, Edward Beecher, Harriet Beecher Stowe, and Henry Ward Beecher).

Catharine Esther Beecher : 1800–78, U.S. educator: advocated educational rights for women.

Edward Beecher : 1803–95, U.S. clergyman, educator, and abolitionist against slavery.  (What is an abolitionist?) – (abolitionist = annulment) : a person who favors the abolition of any law or practice deemed harmful to society: the abolitionists who are opposed to capital punishment.

Harriet Beecher Stowe – (wikipedia.org) : (June 14, 1811 – July 1, 1896) was an American abolitionist and author. Stowe’s novel Uncle Tom’s Cabin (1852) depicted life for African-Americans under slavery; it reached millions as a novel and play, and became influential in the U.S. and Britain and made the political issues of the 1850s regarding slavery tangible to millions, energizing anti-slavery forces in the American North, while provoking widespread anger in the South. Upon meeting Stowe, Abraham Lincoln allegedly remarked, “So you’re the little woman who wrote the book that made this great war!”

Spurgeon : Again, there were two:

1. Charles Spurgeon, famous Baptist English preacher – and

2. Thomas Spurgeon, son of Charles Spurgeon; also a famous Baptist preacher

(And Moody?) - (February 5, 1837 – December 22, 1899), also known as D.L. Moody, was an American evangelist and publisher who founded the Moody Church, Northfield School and Mount Hermon School in Massachusetts (now the Northfield Mount Hermon School), the Moody Bible Institute and Moody Publishers.

<Thus ends the Apostolic succession>.

(Okay.  I’m tired of reading but my last question is : who is Fosdick, who wrote Meaning of Faith?)

Hang on, this one’s interesting :

Henry Emerson Fosdick : (1878-1969), an American clergyman.  Fosdick became a central figure in the Fundamentalist-Modernist Controversy within American Protestantism in the 1920s and 1930s. While at First Presbyterian Church, on May 21, 1922, he delivered his famous sermon “Shall the Fundamentalists Win?”, in which he defended the modernist position. In that sermon, he presented the Bible as a record of the unfolding of God’s will, not as the literal Word of God. He saw the history of Christianity as one of development, progress, and gradual change. To the fundamentalists, this was rank apostasy, and the battle lines were drawn.

The General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church, U.S.A. (Northern) in 1923 charged his local presbytery to conduct an investigation of his views. A commission began an investigation, as required. His defense was conducted by a lay elder, John Foster Dulles, whose father was a well-known liberal Presbyterian seminary professor. Fosdick escaped probable censure at a formal trial by the 1924 General Assembly by resigning from the pulpit in 1924. He was immediately hired as pastor of a Baptist church whose most famous member was John D. Rockefeller, Jr., who then funded the Riverside Church in Manhattan’s Morningside Heights area overlooking the Hudson River, where Fosdick became pastor as soon as the doors opened in October 1930, prompting a Time magazine cover story on October 6, 1930.

Fosdick was an outspoken opponent of racism and injustice. Alleged victim Ruby Bates credited him with persuading her to testify for the defense in the 1933 retrial of the infamous and racially charged case of the Scottsboro Boys in which nine black youth were tried before all white juries for raping white women, Bates and her companion, Victoria Price in Alabama. Fosdick also supported appeasement of Hitler and argued “moral equivalence“, i.e. that the democracies were largely to blame for the rise of fascism:

(Whew, that was a LOT of reading, but now I’m starting to get this “Relevance in Reading” theme you’ve got going on here. (and I thought this was just one more blog to add to the multitude!)

But I TOLD you it was relevant!! 

]]> http://feileadhmor.wordpress.com/2009/11/16/711/ Mon, 16 Nov 2009 15:47:06 +0000 jm http://feileadhmor.wordpress.com/2009/11/16/711/

How many differences are found between the Scrivener text and the Stephanus and Beza texts?

“There are approximately 190 differences between the Scrivener text and the Beza 1598. There are 283 differences between the Scrivener text and the Stephanus 1550. These differences are minor, and pale into insignificance when compared with the approximately 6,000 differences — many of which are quite substantial — between the Critical Text and the Textus Receptus.”

Just thought I would put some things together on what the Bible says about itself. Many men seem to have their own opinions, but let’s see what the Bible says. Of course we only we consider the KJV.

Bible Terms
Bible
Luk 4:17 And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written,
2Ti 4:13 The cloke that I left at Troas with Carpus, when thou comest, bring with thee, and the books, but especially the parchments.

G975
βιβλίον
biblion
bib-lee’-on
A diminutive of G976; a roll: – bill, book, scroll, writing.

G976
βίβλος
biblos
bib’-los
Properly the inner bark of the papyrus plant, that is, (by implication) a sheet or scroll of writing: – book.

Written/Scripture
Mar 12:10 And have ye not read this scripture; The stone which the builders rejected is become the head of the corner:
Rom 3:4 God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.

G1125
γράφω
graphō
graf’-o
A primary verb; to “grave”, especially to write; figuratively to describe: – describe, write (-ing, -ten).

Word of God
Luk 4:4 And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.
2Pe 3:5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:

Attitudes towards the Bible
1. The church is above all things. Mostly RCC Matt 16:18
2. People look towards their experiences. People need more than the Bible. Acts 8:5-11
3. People look to a spiritual encounter (Not Salvation) Acts 13:6-12, Matt 16:1-4 (Jews require a sign)
4. The mind is above all things. People can’t accept the Bible tells us of God. Acts 17:16-23
5. It’s the Bible plus some other book. Acts 19:19
6. The Bible is All Authority. Titus 2:15

Amazing things about the Bible
It was written over a period of 1600 years by over 40 various people in various countries and in complete harmony and unity
It was written in 3 languages
Hebrew
Aramaic
Greek

And translated into Our KJV Bible for English-speaking people
Read the Epistle Dedicatory on page viii
Read “The Translators to the Reader” page xv

Written in various countries
http://www.biblestudy.org/maps/map-location-where-books-of-bible-written.html

Italy
Macedonia
Greece
These 4 are modern-day Turkey
Asia
Bithynia/Pontus
Galatia
Cappadocia
Assyria
Persia (Esther, Nehemiah)
Babylon
Israel
Egypt
Moab/Edom (Modern day Jordan)

Authors and Occupations
Moses – Prince
Paul – Tentmaker
Joshua – Military Leader
Daniel – Prime Minister
John – fisherman
Luke – Doctor
Amos – Herdmen
Matthew – Tax collector
David – King
Samuel – Judge
Habakkuk – Prophet
Asaph – Musician
Jesus – Saviour

Various writing styles
Historical Stories
Recorded History
Poems
Songs
Letters
Sermons
Epistles
Biographies
Future Prophecy
Condemnation and Judgment
Blessing and Cursings

Preservation of the Bible
Psa 12:6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
Psa 12:7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

Unable to be destroyed by Man or Satan
1Pe 1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.
1Pe 1:24 For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away:
1Pe 1:25 But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.

Jer 36:1 And it came to pass in the fourth year of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah king of Judah, that this word came unto Jeremiah from the LORD, saying,
Jer 36:2 Take thee a roll of a book, and write therein all the words that I have spoken unto thee against Israel, and against Judah, and against all the nations, from the day I spake unto thee, from the days of Josiah, even unto this day.

Contents of the Bible
Creation in Genesis
God’s Redemptive plan for Fallen Man (salvation) Gen 3:15
His prophetic program and the Messianic Kingdom Gen 12:1-3
The mind of Christ 1 Cor 2:16
Truth John 8:32
The Spiritual Realm Heaven John 14:1-4
God’s great Love for Israel (Hosea 3:1), the Church (Ephesians 5:25) and for you and me (Gal 2:20)

The Bible’s impact on the lives of men John 1:12
The Bible’s impact on nations

The Bible has continuity
Uninterrupted connection, succession, or union
Uninterrupted duration or continuation especially without essential change

It centers around Christ – Luke 24:25-27
It’s Solution to the sin problem of fallen man
It tells us what sin is and how sin can be taken care of – John 1:29
The Bible is clearly a Book that is alive, living and lives – Hebrews 4:12
It tells us about how we are to live (morally and ethically) – Proverbs

The many Bible types
The Bible points out the qualities of men and women along with the faults that they had also.
It is a book that is scientifically accurate
It is always new.
Each time you read it, you can learn something new, even if you read the same verses over again. NO book can boast that type of material

It tells us that we will be judged
Saved -Judgment Seat of Christ (Rom 14:10/2 Cor 5:10)
Lost -Great White Throne (Rev 20:11-15)

Please consider using your Bible for something other than a decoration or a place holder on a book shelf.

I received an e-mail that brought up an interesting question: why do versions differ in significant ways?

Why does the King James (and New King James) include verses and phrases that the new versions do not? It is hard to be objective on this as this is at the core of the King James Only controversy, but careful and thorough research often gives the explanation that is neither King James Only or Modern Version Only. As a ministry to my local church, I do “Bible research”, so I will attempt to resolve this discrepancy.

Here is the e-mail:

Now, if you have time, I have another research project for you:

In Matthew 20:22 there are different versions of this Scripture.

Some versions (NIV, etc) do not mention “be baptized in the baptism…”

Some versions (KJV, NKJV) do have these words in there.

I am not finding these Greek words in this text.

Question: Why do the Bible translations differ from version-to-version?

Let me know if you have time, and if you can find an answer for me, okay?

Matthew 20:22 (KJV)

But Jesus answered and said, Ye know not what ye ask. Are ye able to drink of the cup that I shall drink of, and to be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with? They say unto him, We are able.

[Goto, Matthew 20:22 Part 2 , for answer]

Galatians 1:6-8: I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

In the early 1980’s when I was in college I frequently listened to Family Radio.  The gospel message being proclaimed at that time by FR’s founder Harold Camping was rooted firmly in Scripture.  Regular listeners to his Open Forum programs would consistently hear the truths about man’s total depravity, unconditional election, particular atonement, effectual calling and perseverance of the saints.  Solid, reformed doctrine frequently preached and meticulously explained. 

Let’s now fast forward to around 2000.  The message being proclaimed during  that time by Harold Camping was still sprinkled with sound biblical doctrine; however, there was an increasing emphasis on teachings related to what he termed Latter Rain/High Places.  The result was that the message proclaimed over FR’s airwaves was beginning to change based upon the progressive revelation related to the Latter Rain, High Places, and their associated teachings.

So let’s now fast forward a few more years to around 2004.  Mr. Camping and FR’s message now was largely focused on the Latter Rain, High Places and now a Depart Out teaching.  Mr. Camping’s progressive understanding and approach to Scripture now taught that every single church in the world without exception was being ruled by Satan and that no more of God’s elect would come from within the church.  Rather, they would come from para-church ministries such as FR.  Believers had no choice: given these high places, they must depart out and be edified instead by the latter rain nourishment provided from FR.  Once again, the gospel message proclaimed over the airwaves of FR had changed.

Now let’s look at the present.  In addition to all of the above, Mr. Camping and FR now teach the following:

* the annihilation of the unsaved

* there will not be a visible return of Christ

* there will be no resurrection and final judgement of the unsaved

* the “eternal” wrath of God on the unsaved will last just 5 months

* Christ became the Son of God after He rose from the dead before the foundation of the world.  Quoting Mr Camping directly, “Thus when Jesus went to the cross, He was not there to pay for our sins.”

My intent here is to highlight for everyone how Mr. Camping’s gospel message has progressed over the years based upon his progressive understanding of the Bible as well as upon progressive revelation itself.  If you listened to FR in 1983, you heard one gospel message.  If you listened to FR in 2000, you heard a different gospel message.  If you listened to FR in 2004, you heard yet another gospel message.  And listeners today are hearing still another gospel message. 

This is not an individual’s personal opinion of Mr. Camping’s theology; the teachings are out there for anyone to check out for themselves – don’t listen to us.  This is a statement of objective fact based upon the evidence, which are FR’s broadcasts and Mr. Camping’s teachings.     

Certainly, it’s possible Christ may return sometime during 2011.  He could also return this very moment, or He may choose to tarry for many more years.  But please ask yourselves this question: what new gospel message will FR proclaim should Christ tarry beyond May 2011?  What progression will there necessarily be to their teachings? 

As a footnote to this posting, the doctrine of progressive revelation has been (and is today) supported by many groups:

1. The Latter-Day Saints
2. Pentecostal and Charismatic Churches
3. The Seventh-Day Adventist Church
4. The Religious Society of Friends (Quakers)
5. The Watchtower
6. The Bahai Faith
7. Christian cults (David Koresh and Jim Jones)
8. Family Radio, Harold Camping and all their disciples..
9. FR-related websites (Latter Rain, E-Bible Fellowship, Bible Only)

Galatians 1:9  As we said before, so say I now again, If any [man] preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

To God Be The Glory!

You’ve got to hear it to believe it. This is from the King James Only Amazing Grace Baptist Church. This is the congregation led by Grizzard that recently made the news for public burnings of the NIV Bible translation. They also destroyed books from Rob Bell to James White to John Piper to Mark Driskol. Driskol? uh… Well, pretty much everybody is labeled a heretic. Boo and hiss for their pile of shame on the Gospel and the Christian faith, but the song is so silly its funny.

And by the way, if you are in this movement or a Church like this, you’re in a cult…

Download here, for additional pain…

from the pen of Don Fortner

This is a question I have addressed before on this broadcast; but it is a question I am frequently asked as I travel around the country. I have been asked several times, just recently, “Why do you still use the old King James version of the Bible?” I realize there are many who use other, more modern translations of Scripture. If the people I preach to used another translation, I would probably use the translation they used, if it were acceptable. (The only modern translation acceptable to me is the New King James Version.) However, I do prefer the King James, or Authorized Version for the following reasons:

1. All other translations are developed by comparing ancient manuscripts. If a passage is found in the oldest, best manuscripts, and in the majority of them, it is received. If not, it is deleted. THE KING JAMES VERSION IS A TRANSLATION BASED UPON THE RECEIVED TEXT. It is a translation, but not a comparative translation.

2. THE KING JAMES IS, IN MY OPINION, THE BEST, MOST ACCURATE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. Certainly, there are some passages that are translated more accurately in other versions. But on the whole, I think the Authorized Version is best.

3. THE KING JAMES IS THE MOST READABLE TRANSLATION. Granted, we no longer use, “thee”, “thou”, and “ye”. But that does not mean that we are unable to read and understand such simple words. Though we do not use the “eth” ending on our verbs, it is important to note that ending as it is used in the Scriptures. Whenever it is employed, it means that the verb is a verb of continuous action. For example, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved” (Mk. 16:16).

4. EVERY ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF THE SCRIPTURES THAT I HAVE READ EITHER OMITS 1 John 5:7 OR SAYS THAT IT SHOULD BE OMITTED. Though it is taught throughout the Scriptures, the doctrine of the Trinity is plainly stated in only one verse in the Bible – I John 5:7. “This text”, wrote John Gill, “is so glaring a proof of the doctrine of the Trinity, that the enemies of it have done all they can to weaken its authority, and have pushed hard to extirpate it from a place in the sacred writings.”

For me, these are sufficient reasons for staying with the King James. God has always preserved his Word in the language of the people, and in the King James it is preserved in our language for us. If you must have a modern English translation, I suggest The New King James Version.

AMEN.

Grace Baptist Church of Danville - Grace For Today Radio Message #702

2734 Old Stanford Road – Danville, Kentucky 40422-9438

Donald S. Fortner, Pastor -Telephone 606-236-8235 – Email grace@mis.net

From the about page comes this important question:

I am currently trying to find a good Bible translation to read and study from. What would you recommend and could you point me to any good articles/books/resources which could help me make this decision? Thanks!

It’s hard to imagine a reply that won’t get someone really angry with me, but I’ll still give it a shot.

My short answer is this: start with the New Revised Standard Version (“NRSV”) or the New American Bible (“NAB”). Both are widely available, and in my opinion generally unsurpassed in accuracy (though each also has its own drawbacks).

The longer answer begins with some background. There are essentially four different kinds of English Bibles available today:

1. Paraphrases. These are like “English books based on the original Hebrew/Greek Bible,” sometimes only coming as close as a movie based on a book. The most common are The Message and The Living Bible. These tend to be written in colloquial, even chatty English, and are easy to read. But even though they are so accessible, I generally don’t recommend them, because they hide much of the original beauty and complexity of the Bible.

2. Word for Word Translations. I could equally call these “partial translations.” They take the words of the original Bible and try to reproduce each one in English. As a matter of translation, this is usually a really bad idea. But as a matter of religion (particularly for Jews) there are some good reasons to do this, so these partial translations of the Bible are more popular than they otherwise would be. The most common word-for-word translation is the English Standard Version (“ESV”). I don’t generally recommend publications that take this approach because they tend to create the wrong impression that the Bible was archaic or even incomprehensible.

3. Full Translations. These are Bibles that try to produce a true English equivalent of the text of the Bible, which is what you probably want. The most common are the New International Version (“NIV”), and the NRSV and NAB that I’ve already mentioned.

4. Outdated Full Translations. These are much older English translations, so they translate the Bible into English we no longer use. There’s no good theoretical reason to read one of these Bibles, but there’s a good practical reason. The King James Version (“KJV”) and the New King James Version (“NKJV”) are examples of this approach, and they are the most widely cited English Bible translations. When most people think of “what the Bible says,” they think of the KJV.

The reason I give all of this background is that at first glance each of (1), (2), and (4) seems to be appealing — for ease of reading, apparent fidelity to the text, and apparent authenticity — but they are each mostly misleading in this regard.

However, which Bible you ultimately want depends on what you want to do with it. If you belong to a religious community that has already chosen a translation, you probably want to stick with what your community has chosen; similarly, most translations reflect not only what the Bible originally meant but also what subsequent religious thinkers said that it meant. If you just want a general sense of what the Bible stories in Genesis or the Gospels are about, a paraphrase is the quickest path. The word-for-word translations frequently “sound like the Bible,” which can be comforting.

Regarding resources for deciding, the Better Bibles Blog has a wealth of helpful information and discussion. And lots of books explain the different Bible versions, but mostly with not enough insight into how translation works. Still, you might want to look at Philip Comfort’s Essential Guide to Bible Versions or Bruce Metzger’s The Bible in Translation.

Finally, I would suggest that more important than a good translation is a good teacher to work with. Even a perfect translation (and none exists) would only be a starting point.

I just recently found out about an organization called Love Packages. You can find them at www.lovepackages.org . They distribute Bibles, Christian teaching materials, and Christian literature to parts of the world where people actually want it!

Here is how it works. They have access to many places where people want the word of God. Two examples are Zambia and Kenya in Africa. There are places in these two African countries where 20 people read each piece of Christian literature before it is discarded. Where else do you find this level of interest in God’s word?

Love Packages will ship Bibles and Christian literature to their missionary contacts. These contacts will distribute the information to the local people. There have been instances where even the most hardened criminals in maximum security prisons have been saved from reading God’s word. Later, missionaries were able to go into the prisons and begin Bible studies.

If you wish to get involved in this wonderful opportunity, you can order Bibles and other Christian teaching materials and have them shipped to Love Packages at 220 Union Street in Butler, Illinois, 62015. You can also go to their site and leave a donation if you prefer.

Bible Bible God’s Word Missions Missions Missions Prison Ministry Prison Ministry Bible Bible God’s Word Missions Missions Missions Prison Ministry Prison Ministry Bible Bible God’s Word Missions Missions Missions Prison Ministry Prison Ministry Bible Bible God’s Word Missions Missions Missions Prison Ministry Prison

I’ve decided to treat myself as a new Christian considering everything I know about myself. After searching the internet I have decided to use the Zondervan Bible Reading Plans and I’m going to start with the beginner and work my way through to the advance. So read with along with me if you like. It’s late now but I will begin reading when I wake up in the morning. It starts with Isaiah 53 and is titled 30 Days with Jesus.

I use the New Oxford Annotated Bible. Use whatever Bible you feel comfortable using. If you are one of those Christians who believe that the King James Version (KJV) is the only true version of the Bible that is fine as well. Do not come here starting debates or arguments about how only the KJV is the true versions and all other versions are false. This is not the place and your posts will be deleted. Although using various dictionaries and concordances to differentiate the different meanings of words in their original language is perfectly fine.

Thank you for reading and may God bless you in your life.

JESUS DIED AT EXACTLY 12 NOON

ARISTEO CANLAS FERNANDO
Peace Crusader and Echo

Tradition has it that Jesus Christ died at about 3pm.  The Holy Bible, King James Version, gives the following accounts:

Matthew 27:45-54
45 Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth hour.
46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? That is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?
47 Some of them that stood there, when they heard that, said, This man calleth for Elijah.
48 And straightway one of them ran, and took a sponge, and filled it with vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave him to drink.
49 The rest said, Let be, let us see whether Elijah will come to save him.
50 Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost.
51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;
52 And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,
53 And came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.
54 Now when the centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jesus, saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared greatly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God.

Mark 15:33-39
33 And when the sixth hour was come, there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour.
34 And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? Which is, being interpreted, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?
35 And some of them that by, when they heard it, said, Behold, he calleth Elijah.
36 And one ran and filled a sponge full of vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave him to drink, saying, Let alone; let us see whether Elijah will come to take him down.
37 And Jesus cried with a loud voice, and gave up the ghost.
38 And the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom.
39 And when the centurion, which stood over against him, saw that he so cried out, and gave up the ghost, he said, Truly this man was the Son of God.

Luke 23:44-47
44 And it was about the sixth hour, and there was a darkness over all the earth until the ninth hour.
45 And the sun was darkened, and the veil of the temple was rent in the midst.
46 And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.
47 Now when the centurion saw what was done, he glorified God, saying, Certainly this was a righteous man.

The Holy Spirit revealed that Jesus died at exactly 12 noon.  This is in http://aristean.org/e03a-pah5.mp3 which is in the Pilipino language.  If you don’t understand the language, you may ask a Filipino to translate it for you.  Basically, the Holy Spirit said that it was not about 3pm when Jesus died but at exactly 12 noon.  At exactly at 12 noon!  I found this out on 2009-10-31 while playing the tapes of our sessions with the Holy Spirit.  This must be the reason why He told us before that if anyone dies at 12 noon, He goes straight to Heaven.

The sixth hour is equivalent to 12 noon, and the ninth hour, 3pm in the afternoon.  Logically, a 12 noon death of Jesus is more believable than about 3pm death because would darkness precede His death, or darkness succeed after He died?  Also, if Jesus died at 3pm, would three hours (3pm to 6pm) be enough for Joseph of Arimathea to beg Pontius Pilate to give him the body of Jesus, Pilate inquiring from the centurion if He was already dead, the breaking of bones of the crucified people, the removal of Jesus from the cross, the taking of the body of Jesus to the sepulcher?

Jesus was crucified on preparation day of the high day sabbath (John 19:31).  His body should not remain on the cross on the sabbath day, especially, the next day sabbath day was a high day.  Hence, Joseph of Arimathea went to Pontius Pilate and begged him to give to him the body of Jesus.

Not only did the sky darken when Jesus died.  The earth quaked, the veil of the temple was split into two from the top to the bottom, rocks split apart, and graves were opened, as related in the Holy Bible.

The Holy Bible that we are using now was not directly written by the disciples but by their descendants.  These descendants pieced together the notes of the disciples and came up with the stories.  The descendants were not eyewitnesses to the crucifixion that is why there are inaccuracies in the accounts.  Hence, the Holy Spirit is here with us now correcting these errors.  He recommended that we use the King James Version because He said that it is nearer the truth.

File:  041-12noon.htm                                                  First uploaded:  2009-11-10    
URL:  http://aristean.org/041-12noon.htm         Last updated:  2009-11-10        Rev. No. 0

Copyright © 2009 Aristeo Canlas Fernando
All rights reserved.

Dr. Lauren Winner writes to the Wall Street Journal about a Baptist Church book burning. They burned books by Mother Theresa, Billy Graham and even non-KJV Bibles. Check it out: Burnt Offerings.

Grace and Peace

DJR

I’m not sure if any of you have ever come in contact with a King James Onlyist, but in the South this belief seems to be spread out in every community. This sect is small and by no means a dominate force within the church, but it is present and presents a danger nonetheless. This belief that only the King James Bible is the perfectly preserved Word of God is a terrible misunderstanding of the preservation of the Bible as a whole (see here for an example of this error). I will not get into any great detail into the foundation of the belief, but I will inform you that it was started by a Seventh Day Adventist named Benjamin G. Wilkinson in 1930. Refer to The Great Which Bible? Fraud.

Many times I have passed by some local Independent Fundamental Baptist churches and seen a sign that says something like “Bible believing old fashioned AV1611 King James Bible preaching” (Click here for an example). I must admit it is a catchy phrase to read as I’m riding by, but a question comes to mind about this AV1611 King James Bible claim. Do these pastors actually use a 1611 KJV? Are they teaching the whole council of God from the 1611 KJV? The short answer to my questions is no they are not using a 1611 KJV. They are using either a 1762, 1769, or a 1873 revision of the AV1611 King James Bible.

This belief of King James Onlyism has many problems. This doctrine has no Scriptural support, and for people like me who are Sola Scriptura this is a major issue. If God did finalize His Word for us in English as the King James Bible, then where is the prophecy concerning this action by God? Where is the Scriptural support in the KJV that says only the KJV is the perfect English Bible? Where is the Scriptural support that even remotely hints that God would move over a group of English men in circa 1600 to create a perfect English Bible?

Let’s say that King James Onlyists are correct and that God did finalize the 1611 KJB. We will assume the Psalm 12:6-7 King James Only interpretation is correct. The following links will help any King James Onlyist who reads my blog to identify their KJV:

Which KJV? 1611 or 1769

Do we use a 1769 KJV?

Are you using a 1611 KJV?

It’s easy to see the changes made to the AV1611 go far beyond KJVO advocates’ claims of only updating the spelling and grammar of the KJV in latter editions of the 1611 version.

Why were the Books of the Apocrypha found in the AV1611? Did God authorize these extra books as canon in circa 1600? If the AV1611 is the perfect Word of God, then the Books of the Apocrypha must be perfect also. Therefore we need to start teaching out of them along side the OT/NT. Check out The Inspired KJB for some typical King James Only double standards and wishful thinking.

The whole notion of any form of Bible version onlyism is foolishness at best. There are bad translations like the NWT and weak paraphrases like The Message, but there are very accurate translations like the NASB and KJV. To say that one translation in English is the only perfect Bible is an opinion. I prefer the NASB95 as my Bible of choice, but I will not say that it is the only perfect translation and all others are inferior and/or perverted. The message contained in all faithful translations is the perfect Word of God. The way that God preserved His living Word is far superior to what King James Onlyists claim as preservation.

See the following for more information about King James Onlyism:

The King James Only Issue

Alpha and Omega Ministries dealing with King James Onlyism

KJV Only advocates refuted

Buses in Israel have the following written over the priority seating reserved for the elderly: mipnei seivah takum. Though the first two words sound esoteric to adult Israeli speakers and are often incomprehensible to children, the line is, in my opinion, a beautiful nod to the holiness code of Leviticus: “Stand before the elderly.”

Unfortunately, even if we wanted to (and even if it were legal), we couldn’t do the same thing in the U.S., because everyone has a different (often bad) translation. The KJV “Thou shalt rise up before the hoary head,” would prompt more than a few laughs but it wouldn’t do the job. The ESV, “you shall stand up before the gray head” is only a little better. (Why aren’t these heads attached to bodies?) The NAB “stand up in the presence of the aged” is much better, but those who grew up with the KJV might not even recognize it as Leviticus.

Relatedly, I was recently at a Jewish funeral. Some 1,000 people came to mourn, and there were no prayer books, bibles, or printed guides of any sort available. “Please join me in reciting Psalm 23,” the rabbi nonetheless instructed. “The Lord is my shepherd. I shall not want. He makes me lie down in green pastures…” the whole group responded, basically quoting the NKJV. This even though most people in the room had been studying from a different translation (the 1984 NJPS) for over 20 years. That translation renders the Psalm “…I lack nothing.”

I understand that proponents of the ESV try to keep “the Bible” from changing precisely because of issues like these, but it’s worth keeping in mind that neither the (N)KJV nor the ESV would help with the buses.

It seems as though, in many cases, we have to choose accuracy or standardization; we can’t have both, even though they both have merit.

And unfortunately, beyond lamenting the situation (or foolishly suggesting that everyone should learn Hebrew and Greek), I can’t think of a solution.

Guy Fawkes & The KJV

“Where the word of a king is, there is power: and who may say unto him, What doest thou?”

Ecclesiastes 8:4

This past Thursday, November 5, 2009 a fellow by the name of Malik Nidal Hasan shot up the army base at Fort Hood killing 13 and wounding 31. But something you may not know is that the British celebrate November 5 (Guy Fawkes Day) kind of the way we celebrate 9/11.

November 5, 1605 was the day a group of Catholics had plotted to blow up the King of England along with the entire parliament. Most Catholics of that day like most Muslims of our day wouldn’t have participated but wouldn’t have felt too bad about it either.

In 1605 the economy was on the rise and thriving kind of like it was in 2001 when terrorists flew planes into the twin towers. The King knew he had opposition but never imagined it would escalate to the level it did.

The name of the King was James and he was a student of the Bible.  He wrote a paraphrase of the Book of the Revelation and even translated some of the Psalms.

But being king of England wasn’t James’ first crowning achievement.  In fact, James was only 13 months old when he was crowned James VI of Scotland on July 29, 1567. Five months earlier his father had died in a bomb blast at his home. Then 20 years later his mother was beheaded at the age of 44. Finally, in 1603 when Elizabeth died, James VI of Scotland was crowned King James I of England.

I don’t know if James was a saved man but when you study the history behind Nov 5, 1605, you can’t help but see the hand of God at work.  Historians speculate that they would have carried out the plot sooner but for some strange reason the meeting of parliament had been delayed.

If you’ve ever noticed in football, sometimes when one team goes to kick a field goal the other team will call a timeout.  They don’t call a timeout because they need it.  They call a timeout because they want the kicker to get shook up thinking about his next kick.  And when God delayed the meeting of parliament those men got nervous.

Some of them even took the time to try and warn several members of Parliament to stay away from the court that day (all of which were Catholics too). One of those was Lord Chamberlain Monteagle.  When he received an anonymous letter telling him to avoid parliament that day, he immediately brought it to the attention of the King

The king and his people had little to go on. On November 4, 1605 they were still investigating and looking for clues, when, at the stroke of midnight they discovered Guy Fawkes standing outside the cellar door of Westminster Palace. The men had searched the cellar before and found nothing.  But after finding a tinderbox and some matches in the pocket of Guy Fawkes, they decided to search it again.

This time, under a pile of firewood and coal they found 36 barrels of gunpowder sitting right under the spot where King James would be standing in just a few short hours.

So at 1 AM they woke up the King and drug Fawkes in to stand before him. Historians say that he stood emotionless, regretting only that he had failed in his attempt to kill the King. If I’m not mistaken they used “enhanced interrogation techniques,” otherwise known as “torture” to make him give up the names of his buddies.   None of them ever stood trial but died in a shootout when authorities tried to apprehend them. Not long afterward, Guy Fawkes was tried and hung all by himself in St. Paul’s churchyard.

400 years later the British celebrate Guy Fawkes Day as a day they killed the Catholics who tried to kill their King.

Now, why would Satan have wanted to destroy the King and his parliament? Perhaps because only a year before that day the new King had given permission to a large group of scholars to begin work on a new translation of the Bible.   This translation would never have been completed had Fawkes and his Catholic co-conspirators been successful.  But they weren’t and in 1611 the new translation was completed, presented, and dedicated to King James.

Most King James Bibles still have this dedication in the front of the Book.

TO THE MOST HIGH AND MIGHTY PRINCE

JAMES,

BY THE GRACE OF GOD

KING OF GREAT BRITAIN, FRANCE, AND IRELAND, DEFENDER OF THE FAITH,

The Translators of the Bible wish Grace, Mercy and Peace, through JESUS CHRIST, our Lord.

GREAT and manifold were the blessings, most dread Sovereign, which Almighty God, the Father of all mercies, bestowed upon us the people of England, when first he sent Your Majesty’s Royal Person to rule and reign over us. For whereas it was the expectation of many, who wished not well unto our Sion, that upon the setting of that bright Occidental Star, Queen Elizabeth of most happy memory, some thick and palpable clouds of darkness would so have overshadowed this Land, that men should have been in doubt which way they were to walk; and that it should hardly be known, who was to direct the unsettled State; the appearance of your Majesty, as the Sun in his strength, instantly dispelled those supposed and surmised mists, and gave unto all that were well affected exceeding cause of comfort; especially when we beheld the Government established in Your Highness, and Your hopeful Seed, by an undoubted Title, and this also accompanied with peace and tranquillity at home and abroad.

But among all our joys, there was no one that more filled our hearts, than the blessed continuance of the preaching of God’s sacred Word among us; which is that inestimable treasure, which excelleth all the riches of the earth; because the fruit thereof extendeth itself, not only to the time spent in this transitory world, but directeth and disposeth men unto that eternal happiness which is above in heaven.

Then not to suffer this to fall to the ground, but rather to take it up, and to continue it in that state, wherein the famous Predecessor of Your Highness did leave it: nay, to go forward with the confidence and resolution of a Man in maintaining the truth of Christ, and propagating it far and near, is that which hath so bound and firmly knit the hearts of all Your Majesty’s loyal and religious people unto You, that Your very name is precious among them: their eye doth behold You with comfort, and they bless You in their hearts, as that sanctified Person who, under God, is the immediate Author of their true happiness. And this their contentment doth not diminish or decay, but every day increaseth and taketh strength, when they observe, that the zeal of Your Majesty toward the house of God doth not slack or go backward, but is more and more kindled, manifesting itself abroad in the farthest parts of Christendom, by writing in defence of the Truth, (which hath given such a blow unto that man of sin, as will not be healed,) and every day at home, by religious and learned discourse, by frequenting the house of God, by hearing the Word preached, by cherishing the Teachers thereof, by caring for the Church, as a most tender and loving nursing Father.

There are infinite arguments of this right christian and religious affection in Your Majesty; but none is more forcible to declare it to others than the vehement and perpetuated desire of accomplishing and publishing of this work, which now with all humility we present unto Your Majesty. For when Your Highness had once out of deep judgment apprehended how convenient it was, that out of the Original Sacred Tongues, together with comparing of the labours, both in our own, and other foreign Languages, of many worthy men who went before us, there should be one more exact Translation of the holy Scriptures into the English Tongue; Your Majesty did never desist to urge and to excite those to whom it was commended, that the work might be hastened, and that the business might be expedited in so decent a manner, as a matter of such importance might justly require.

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 hopes that the Church of England shall reap good fruit thereby; we hold it our duty to offer it to Your Majesty, not only as to our King and Sovereign, but as to the principal Mover and Author of the work: humbly craving of Your most Sacred Majesty, that since things of this quality have ever been subject to the censures of illmeaning and discontented persons, it may receive approbation and patronage from so learned and judicious a Prince as Your Highness is, whose allowance and acceptance of our labours shall more honour and encourage us, than all the calumniations and hard interpretations of other men shall dismay us. So that if, on the one side, we shall be traduced by Popish Persons at home or abroad, who therefore will malign us, because we are poor instruments to make God’s holy Truth to be yet more and more known unto the people, whom they desire still to keep in ignorance and darkness; or if, on the other side, we shall be maligned by self-conceited Brethren, who run their own ways, and give liking unto nothing, but what is framed by themselves, and hammered on their anvil; we may rest secure, supported within by truth and innocency of a good conscience, having walked the ways of simplicity and integrity, as before the Lord; and sustained without by the powerful protection of Your Majesty’s grace and favour, which will ever give countenance to honest and christian endeavours against bitter censures and uncharitable imputations.

The Lord of heaven and earth bless Your Majesty with many and happy days, that, as his heavenly hand hath enriched Your Highness with many singular and extraordinary graces, so You may be the wonder of the world in this latter age for happiness and true felicity, to the honour of that great GOD, and the good of his Church, through Jesus Christ our Lord and only Saviour.

Five Qualities Of The Believer’s Hope
1 John 2:28 – 3:3

It needs to be understood at the beginning of this message that none are perfect nor can we be perfect in this life.  Our Lord is working in us toward perfection when we shall see Him face to face.  However, we must, by the Holy Spirit within us who know personally the Lord Jesus as Lord and Savior have Christ as the central being of our lives.

As a Christian we have new hope and desires; the first of which is seeing  Him one day; and seeing Him face to face.  We also desire to one day be like Him, and as verse three of chapter 3 tells us; “We shall see Him as He is”.  What a glorious day that will be.

In this message we will look at FIVE QUALITIES OF THE BELIEVER’S HOPE.

I.  A LONGING FOR – A DESIRING FOR THE RETURN OF JESUS CHRIST (v. 2:28).

A.  A longing for the appearing will motivate the believer to “abide in Him”.

1. It is like the  branch abides in the vine (John 15:1-11).
2. It is similar to your home – the place you live.

a.  You may leave it to go to work, on vacation, etc., but you know there is no place like home – you return.

b.  It is the place where you receive nourishment, and love.

B.  This abiding ‘in Him’ keeps us from being ashamed when he returns.

1. When we ‘abide in Him’ we keep His commandments;
2. When we ‘abide in Him’ we have the anointing -

“But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things.”  1 John 2:20 (KJV)

II.  KNOWING JESUS IS RIGHTEOUS – THOSE BORN OF HIM PRACTICES RIGHTEOUSNESS (v. 2:29).

A.  Jesus is righteous – He is Deity [God].

1. He is righteous as the Christ;
2. He is righteous as the sin-bearer;
3. He is righteous as the resurrected One.

B.  Those who do righteousness are born of Him.

1. Doing what is right in one’s life;
2. Doing what is right according to God’s law;
3. Doing what is right to others.

“Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.”  Matthew 7:12 (KJV)

III.  ENAMORED, AWED, AND STRENGTHENED BY HIS GLORIOUS SALVATION (v. 3:1).

A.  Nothing in this world is comparable to the love of God.

“Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? 36 As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter. 37 Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us. 38 For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, 39 Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.”  Romans 8:35-39 (KJV)

1. Love ‘bestowed upon us’ by our benevolent, loving Father through His precious loving Son.
2. John seems to be awe-struck with the thought Himself.

B.  Love so great we are called ‘the sons of God’.

“But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: 13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.”  John 1:12-13 (KJV)

C.  The ‘Inhabiters of earth’ are so enamored with the world, they miss God.

“Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth.”  Revelation 3:10 (KJV)

“And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?”  Revelation 6:10 (KJV)

“And I beheld, and heard an angel flying through the midst of heaven, saying with a loud voice, Woe, woe, woe, to the inhabiters of the earth by reason of the other voices of the trumpet of the three angels, which are yet to sound!”  Revelation 8:13 (KJV)

“And they that dwell upon the earth shall rejoice over them, and make merry, and shall send gifts one to another; because these two prophets tormented them that dwelt on the earth.”  Revelation 11:10 (KJV)

“Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.”  Revelation 12:12 (KJV)

“And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.”
“And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed.”
” And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live.”  Revelation 13:8, 12, 14 (KJV)

“And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people…”  Revelation 14:6 (KJV)

“The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.”  Revelation 17:8 (KJV)

IV.  EXPECTANT OF BEING CONFORMED TO THE IMAGE OF CHRIST – NOT CHRIST, BUT LIKE HIM (v. 3:2).

A.  In moral character.

1. Not Christ, not deity, but of His character and love for the Father and one another.

B.  Now the ‘Sons of God’.

1. That means living like ’sons of God’ – Kings and priests.
2. Living right in the present time unto the day of His appearing.

C.  We will see Jesus as He is.

V.  KEEPING THEMSELVES READY FOR HIS APPEARING (v. 3:3).

A.  The hope and promise of His appearing is the greatest hope of mankind.

1. His appearing otherwise known as Second Coming is a grand promise of change according to the Scriptures;
2. It will mean the change in ge0logy (Zechariah 14), environment, government and most of all in the hearts and lives of mankind;
3. It will also means change in the animals of the earth as well.

“The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them. 7 And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together: and the lion shall eat straw like the ox. 8 And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrice’ den. 9 They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD, as the waters cover the sea.”  Isaiah 11:6-9 (KJV)

B.  Those who are prepared for His coming will be keeping themselves ready.

1. The presence and  gift of His Spirit within directs us to preparation.
2. There is a place being prepared for the prepared.
3. We must fight the good fight – there is a war going on daily in our lives.

“1 Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me. 2 In my Father’s house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.”  John 14:1-3 (KJV)

“7 I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith: 8 Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.”  2 Timothy 4:7-8 (KJV)

C.  Let’s keep ourselves pure – as much as Christ is in us.

“Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God”
2 Corinthians 7:1 (KJV)

1. Because of Jesus’s wonderful gift;
2. Because of these precious promises;
3. Because we are the ’sons of God’.

-Tim A. Blankenship

A few weeks ago we posted about a North Carolina church that planned to burn Bibles and other Christian materials on Halloween.

I had hoped that the media coverage would have made them slink back into their cave like a member of  the Taliban, but it seems to truly have taken place.

The Wall Street Journal has an article about this event and has titled it Burnt Offerings.

What irony!

You see, it was on October 31, 1517 that Martin Luther nailed his Ninety-Five Theses on the door of the church in Wittenberg.  This act is marked as the official beginning of the Protestant  Reformation.  One of the hallmarks of the Reformation is the fact that the Scriptures were translated into the vulgar, or common, language.  No longer was it locked up in Latin and inaccessible to the common man.

While we respect and love the King James Version we must say that the burning of Bibles is more in tune with Halloween than it is with Reformation Day and Reformation faith.  There is more satanic movement behind the burning of Bibles than there is true, Biblical faith and principle.

As a Burnt Offering the burning of Bibles is more in line with the wicked act of king Jehoiakim instead of the spirit of righteous Jeremiah.

Let it thus be stated, then, that the Burnt Offering of Amazing Grace Baptist Church is unacceptable to God, and is probably akin to the strange/foreign fire of Nadab and Abihu.