Brother Paul, I appreciate most of your comments on RangerNet. It seems
that we may not be exactly on the same page on some things, though.
At 08:49 PM 1/30/99 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Gallina) wrote:
> We speak English. The King James is the inerrant inspired infallible
>word of God for English speaking people.
I believe that the Holy Bible, as inspired by the Holy Spirit and written
in its original languages (Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic, Chaldee), is inerrant
and infallible.
I believe that God has throughout history used imperfect vessels to record,
copy, translate, and preserve His Word. Even a donkey can prophesy
correctly. Prophesying is no guarantee of salvation, either (search the
Scriptures yourself and see). The manuscripts of the Holy Bible that we
have available to us differ in details due to scribal copying mistakes.
This may be unsettling to many, but it is undeniable. Fortunately, these
transcription errors are generally easily corrected by comparing different
manuscripts and considering the context. Scholars today tend to hold to one
of three different views on what the text of the New Testament in its
original Greek form was. The good news about these three views is that they
are VERY close together, and ALL AGREE on the basis of our salvation
through Jesus Christ and His shed blood. Indeed, the insignificant nature
of these variations actually serve to confirm the reliability of the
transcription of Scripture through time, and show much greater reliability
than other works of literature.
The KJV is a generally trustworthy and important translation which has
great historical value, but I believe the translators "missed it" in a few
places. Actually, the original publication of the KJV in 1611 was riddled
with errors and was edited in a manner that would be considered sloppy by
current publishing standards. There was one infamous early edition that was
called "The Adulterer's Bible" by some, because a typo apparently left out
a "not" in the 10 Commandments. Oops. Later editions of the KJV were better.
Although there were some who objected to the KJV when it was first released
because it was in contemporary common English of that time (although a
little archaic in some of its language), and because it was new, it
eventually became widely used, accepted, and trusted.
A lot has happened to the English language in the four centuries since work
began on the KJV. Spellings changed. Rules of grammar changed, not only in
word endings, but in usage and word order. Some words changed so
drastically in meaning as to mean the opposite of what they started out
meaning. The English of the KJV is definitely not the same dialect as any
living dialect of English used on the Earth today, except for a few
isolated uses in church and perhaps among some Amish people. English is
only understood by about 10% of the Earth's population. (Mandarin is the
most widely understood language, and there are over 6500 languages spoken
today). Of the people who understand English today, most of them would have
great difficulty understanding KJV English. Thank God for the many good
modern English translations that we have! What concerns me is that there
are so many who have no Bible in their language, yet.
> The Greek Orthodox ( not real
>familiar with it ) is worthless for us as would a Russian or Latin Bible
>be.
That is why it is so important that we continue supporting those who
translate the Holy Bible into other languages, so that those who are to be
saved may hear the Gospel in their own language.
> The Catholic Bible is particularly distasteful to Evangelicalism as it
>contains several spurious books ( Tolbit, Bel and the Dragon et. al. )
>from which many of the heresies of Roman Catholicism come.
I used to think that, but the Holy Spirit corrected me.
Actually, the Apocrypha is not the hotbed of heresy you think. Indeed, it
is helpful in understanding the 66 books of the Old and New Testaments. I
would rank the Apocrypha as recommended reading - along side contemporary
Christian books. I may not consider them as inspired in the same way as the
66 books of the Old and New Testaments, but they are worth reading and
preserving. I have even heard some rather respected Evangelical pastors
quote from a part of the Apocrypha on occasion in the process of explaining
some history that helped set the background for whatever they were teaching on.
> Plus if you
>disagree with any of these teachings from Rome you are cursed and on the
>way to Hell. I didn't say that the Pope ( who speaks in the place of God
>) did.
Some died-in-the-wool AG Pentecostals are going to be surprised
(pleasantly, I hope) when they get to Heaven to find Roman Catholics there.
I'm sure the surprise may be mutual. The Bible never preaches anywhere that
you have to agree with all of a certain set of church doctrines (be they
Roman Catholic catechism or the 17 truths of the Assemblies of God) to be
saved. No, all you have to do is confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord
and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, and you will
be saved. Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved. Now, I
do believe that sound doctrine is important, but your salvation doesn't
rest on mental assent to 100% correct teaching or on your favorite Bible
translation.
I realize that there are a few people who consider the KJV the only valid
English Bible. I encourage them to get the KJV Bible out, read it
regularly, and heed what it says. As for me and my household, we will take
advantage of the NKJV, NIV, and other great modern translations. I also
read out of my Greek and Hebrew Bibles.
___
Michael Paul Johnson aka Soaring Golden Eagle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://eBible.org/mpj Rocky Mountain Outpost 207 New Creation Church
Jesus Christ is Lord! If Jesus came back today, would you be READY?
_______
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe rangernet" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Eat the hay & spit out the sticks!" RTKB&G4JC!
Autoresponder: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://rangernet.org
