Posts Tagged ‘Authorized King James Version’

The truth about the Pilgrims:

November 25, 2013

My reply to the Washington Post opinion about the Pilgrims:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/five-myths-about-the-pilgrims/2013/11/22/9f93e822-52c1-11e3-9e2c-e1d01116fd98_story.html

About Point 2: In their own Mayflower Compact, they listed as a principal reason to come to America was as a witness to the Indians for salvation in Jesus Christ.

Point 3: It wasn’t “the first Thanksgiving“, exactly, but it is symbolically and significantly, because it was a thanksgiving celebration to thank first God and secondly to express gratitude toward the Indian neighbors..

Kudos for Point #4. The Pilgrims had fun, fun, fun…

About Point #5, you give too much overblown credit in your own mind to the “divine right” idea. Like one famous preacher said once about a drunk, he said “There but for the grace of God go I”, meaning he was not any better than that drunk. They were possibly thankful to God himself that the King had opened these new lands to them. And there are millions upon millions of Biblical Christians who regard it as an act of the grace of God that King James was the king during those years, because today we have the legacy, the evidence, the fruit, in the King James Bible. It is such a magnificent piece of literature, and as even the skeptical Napoleon recognized, much more than just literature, that even militant atheist proselytizer Richard Dawkins said he was honored to add his voice to a voice recording of it.

How about another great point or two:

Squanto was the first American Indian they encountered and in one of those “coincidences” he happened to speak fluent English, “the king’s English” as it is called, and became intermediary between the Indians and them, and he was Christian.

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

When the Pilgrims and the natives got together on that famous first at least most famous and earliest well-known day of giving thanks, to whom do you think the Pilgrims were giving thanks? Read this found at “http://www.thetimesnews.com”&#8230;

Turn your heart toward Thanksgiving

The Mayflower Compact, a painting by Jean Leon...

The Mayflower Compact, a painting by Jean Leon Gerome Ferris which was widely reproduced through much of the 20th century (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

// <![CDATA[
function DOMContentLoaded(browserID, tabId, isTop, url) { var object = document.getElementById(“cosymantecnisbfw“); if(null != object) { object.DOMContentLoaded(browserID, tabId, isTop, url);} };
function Nav(BrowserID, TabID, isTop, isBool, url) { var object = document.getElementById(“cosymantecnisbfw“); if(null != object) object.Nav(BrowserID, TabID, isTop, isBool, url); };
function NavigateComplete(BrowserID, TabID, isTop, url) { var object = document.getElementById(“cosymantecnisbfw“); if(null != object) object.NavigateComplete(BrowserID, TabID, isTop, url); }
function Submit(browserID, tabID, target, url) { var object = document.getElementById(“cosymantecnisbfw“); if(null != object) object.Submit(browserID, tabID, target, url); };

// ]]>

“Feed my sheep” and give them warning from me

March 17, 2013
English: Good shepherd

English: Good shepherd (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Christians, it’s not “take care of my sheep”, it’s “Feed my sheep”:

John 21:17 (KJB) He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.

I saw the modern this verse in a prayer list email message, and I wondered about this difference in the modern deviation from the original jot and tittle.

The NLT (“New Living Translation“) copyright 2007 (No copying more than a chapter lest the Copyright Police come and take away your place and your nation):

Jesus repeated the question: “Simon son of John, do you love me?” “Yes, Lord,” Peter said, “you know I love you.” “Then take care of my sheep,” Jesus said (John 21:16, NLT)

What’s missing there is the Great Commission from Mark 16:15 that is lost in that verse. A true shepherd of the Lord is NOT supposed to just “take care of” the sheep, he is supposed to FEED the sheep from “every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God”.

“Taking care of” the sheep is an earthly engagement, while Jesus’ admonition is the spiritual feeding of the WORD. To give it a different meaning is to destroy the spirit AND the letter of every “jot and tittle” of meaning, and demote the office of a shepherd to a mere earthly caretaker.

Christ was saying that the job of a shepherd is to make shepherds out of each sheep in his flock. It is NOT to just merely “take care of” them. “Taking care of” the sheep can mean different things in different congregations. Some pastors do nothing to take care of them; others reject all the guidance of scripture to “visit the widows and the orphans”, and prefer a “gospel” in favor of supporting governments that steal from the rich to give to the poor, and that’s how they “take care of” their sheep.

Is your pastor following Jesus’ admonition to discern the “signs of the times”? Jesus is saying here that the Pharisees had all the signs they needed and they had the Word, but they rejected the plain truth reading of the Word of God and instead sought some other kind of sign because they did not want to accept the signs of the times but wanted a different teaching. They wanted a false prophet instead of the word of God, so they “seeketh after a sign” because they are a “wicked and adulterous generation”.

Matthew 16:2-4 King James Version (KJB)
2 He answered and said unto them, When it is evening, ye say, It will be fair weather: for the sky is red.
3 And in the morning, It will be foul weather to day: for the sky is red and lowering. O ye hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky; but can ye not discern the signs of the times?
4 A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas. And he left them, and departed.

http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/home/archives/5460

Are your shepherds (aka pastors, priests, rabbis) warning you of the storm coming to America? To Christians?

Ezekiel 3:17 Son of man, I have made thee a watchman unto the house of Israel: therefore hear the word at my mouth, and give them warning from me.

What is a liberal?

March 26, 2012

Some people are saying, like one in another forum, that Ayn Rand held the idea that only a very few hand-picked individuals have the ability to lead and we should turn the whole job of leadership over to them. He said that’s pretty much a Royalist point of view. Actually

Actually, in today’s political discourse, that is known as the “liberal” position.

But what is a liberal? Sometimes it gets weird reading von Mises and Hayek‘s writings, because when they use that word “liberal”, they are obviously using it to mean the philosophy of letting people run their own lives and make their own economic decisions.

I wonder when that got flipped 180 degrees in common usage, to mean the exact opposite of what it did before?

So I looked it up. Definition #4 fits von Mises’ use of the word, but there are others that can be stretched:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/liberal?s=t
4. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.

Actually, “liberals” used to be the ones who advocated freedom from government, but then yes, “governmental protection” fits the modern demands that we need more government protect us from itself.

But wait a a minute, then they pointed to this quote from 1933 by Susan Sontag:

… liberal intellectuals … tend to have a classical theory of politics, in which the state has a monopoly of power; hoping that those in positions of authority may prove to be enlightened men, wielding power justly, they are natural, if cautious, allies of the “establishment.” Read more at http://quotes.dictionary.com/liberal_intellectuals_tend_to_have_a#frkMjDL1loBJmTds.99

So, go figure… Um, wait another minute! That does figure! Today’s liberals do count on government to right every wrong, restore every loss, fill every need, and stop every scoundrel.

And then there is the definition by context, centuries old, as in the King James Bible:

The liberal soul shall be made fat: and he that watereth shall be watered also himself. (Proverbs 11:25)

And there, it means generous with your own resources.

Questions for KJB advocates with replies

February 6, 2012
Words of Christ - 6/52

Words of Christ - 6/52 (Photo credit: Roger's Wife)

Here are some questions I recently saw meant for KJB-Only believers, with my replies in-line and indented.

1. The KJV (English Version) had to be translated from Greek and Hebrew. So, why is it hard to believe that the Bible can’t be translated from middle English to modern-day English?

Nobody that I know, and least of all the KJB defenders as I am, say that the Bible “can’t be translated from middle English to modern day English”. From the KJB perspective, in fact, God can even bless a translation. But none of the modern translations show fruit of being faithful to the spirit AND the letter like the KJB.

The question is whether God wants a proliferation of divergent renderings for the world today, or whether God would have us “speaking the same thing”.

The other question is “By their fruits ye shall know them”. The fruits of modern translations show corrupt fruits in some of the ambiguous wording and in some cases opening the door for bad doctrine. The root of the corrupted Alexandrian versions and many other reasons, but mainly the testimony of the Lord is pure.

I have seen modern translations used to deny the six-day creation in Genesis, and heard of the use of modern translations to say an embedded chip cannot be the mark of the Beast.

2. Men, women and children were murdered over the English translation because many of the Church leaders and Rulers did not want its people to understand scripture. Truth will set you free (John 8:32).

This is one of the myths. The KJB is in English and understandable to anyone who can get through the psychological barrier put there by words of man’s wisdom. Today, with the proliferation of so many versions du jour, we are told that only the “original autographs” are inspired, the “original languages”, so you need a Greek scholar to tell you what it means.

That’s the modern equivalent of the historical church telling its parishioners that they couldn’t understand the Word as God intended, they need its priests to tell them what it meant.

But God knew that today, nobody anywhere would be able to point to even on “original autograph”, and scholars will tell you that nobody has any copy that is verifiable as being an exact modern replica of the ancient copies.

BUT the scripture being the most important thing that God cares about, it only makes sense that he would provide a standard for the modern world and that it would be in the only common and agreed international language for business, commerce, trade, diplomacy, culture, international air flight coordination, and in any venue you can imagine.

3. The “cry” of heresy that arose from the crowds of yesterday are likened to today. The difference being, their fight was over Power whereas today’s fight is due to a weird form of Idol Worship or stubborn ignorance…or both?

I don’t know what idol worship would have to do with the discussion, unless the belief that God would prefer one standard for the world today is equated with “idolatry”. Certainly like David “I am in awe of thy word”, and “In the beginning was the word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God”.

4. What side would the KJV Only crowd have been on during the days when the Men of God were trying to liberate their people due to this barrier. Would they have been burned at the stake or would they have been the persecutors?

The precursors to the KJB, obviously held in the highest regard by the KJB committee and expressed so in their Preface, history tells us they were the persecuted. The Gunpowder Plot was hatched to stop both the Reformation in England and to stop the King James translation, as the Roman hierarchy was determined to hide the Word from the people. So obviously it is KJB defenders who are part of the spiritual lineage of those who were persecuted for their Christianity and defense of the Word of God. We see that today in the joining of many mainline divinity-school graduated clergy who have joined the Roman clergy in calling the KJB defenders a “cult” and other names that have nothing at all to do with the Word of God.

5. My favorite question’s for those who subscribe to Onlyism: By what power is a person saved? Is it only by the KJV that man might be saved? Is “The Word” in the Gospel of John referring to the “Word” version or “The Word” Jesus? How do any of us come to the knowledge of Truth…is it through the reading of the KJV or the enabling from the Father (John 6:6)?

The true Word of God, the standard by which other “translations” should be measured, itself says in John 3:16 that those who believe on the Son of God have eternal life, and Romans 9:9-10 says what it says about salvation. So the question is a distraction, a straw man argument.

Salvation does not require even the exact wording of any verse but some modern translations give adulterated descriptions of salvation and even of Jesus Christ and who he is. Many who criticize KJB defenders also criticize the Jehovah’s Witnesses translation, rightly so, but the other modern translations include many of the JW errors.

That is a separate issue from whether God is the author of confusion.

The word in fact exhorts us to “speak the same thing”. “God is not the author of confusion is found in the chapter where Paul exhorts those who speak in tongues to rather prefer to prophecy but if there are tongues, to interpret in the vernacular. But not to confusion.

MY NOTE:

One of the kickers for me is Revelation 13, where the KJB is the ONLY English version that says the mark of the Beast will go “IN” their right hand or “IN” their foreheads. ALL of the other versions say “ON”, and that does not match “mark” which in the Greek (look it up) is an incision or groove.

As a software engineer I can tell you they are building toward an electronic international currency or credit system in which everybody gets an embedded chip.

What’s the language of the future?

November 6, 2011

What’s the language of the future? – Salon.com:
http://www.salon.com/2011/11/06/whats_the_language_of_the_future/singleton/

An interesting article about English as the world’s lingua franca, but they left out one important specific, which is the role that the King James Bible (aka Authorized Version) played in maintaining a core stability in the lands where native speakers carried it.

That’s why today even so many who use English as a Second Language are accustomed to many of the phrases that became embedded idioms of the language. You reap what you sew, salt of the earth, Armageddon, and so many more..