Secularities of America?

Charles 11 10 13

1) Apple CEO proclaims homosexuality a divine gift, revealing extent of cultural shift on issue

Tim Cook Speaks Up, Bloomberg Businessweek (Tim Cook)

2) Taiwan gay pride march displays importance of theological beliefs to culture’s morality

Taiwan Shines as Beacon for Gays in Asia, New York Times (Andrew Jacobs)

3) Colorado governor warns rapid legalization of marijuana as too costly

For Marijuana, a Second Wave of Votes to Legalize, New York Times (Kirk Johnson)

Go slow on pot, says Colorado governor, Financial Times (Barney Jopson)

4) Cultural influences creating and influencing celebration of Halloween crucial to consider

Shoppers to spend $350 on Halloween costumes this year – for their pets, Washington Post (Sarah Halzack)

The Complete Biblical Library. The Interlinear gives the following helps: (1) Greek Text (2) Grammatical Forms (3) Transliteration (4) Translation (5) Assigned Numbers. Plus verse-by-verse commentary. Plus various version. The KJV is in boldface, and then from 60 other versions we show various ways the Greek of that phrase may be translated.

While at FBC in Kansas I bought one volume at a time over a person of a year as they were just coming out. The Complete Biblical Library 16 volume, 10 volumes of Matthew to Revelation and 6 volumes of The NT Greek-English Dictionary of every word in the NT

Apostolic Fathers:

Apostolic Fathers:
The earliest Church Fathers, (within two generations of the Twelve Apostles of Christ) are usually called the Apostolic Fathers since tradition describes them as having been taught by the twelve. Important Apostolic Fathers include

Clement of Rome
Ignatius of Antioch and
Polycarp of Smyrna. In addition,
the Didache
and Shepherd of Hermas

are usually placed among the writings of the Apostolic Fathers although their authors are unknown; like the works of Clement, Ignatius and Polycarp, they were first written in Koine Greek.

Clement,

His epistle, 1 Clement (c.96)] was copied and widely read in the Early Church. Clement calls on the Christians of Corinth to maintain harmony and order It is the earliest Christian epistle outside the New Testament.

Ignatius,
Ignatius of Antioch (also known as Theophorus) (c.35-110)[7] was the third bishop or Patriarch of Antioch and a student of the Apostle John. En route to his martyrdom in Rome, Ignatius wrote a series of letters which have been preserved. Important topics addressed in these letters include ecclesiology, the sacraments, the role of bishops, and Biblical Sabbath. He is the second after Clement to mention Paul’s epistles.

Polycarp,
Polycarp of Smyrna (c 69–ca. 155) was a Christian bishop of Smyrna (now İzmir in Turkey). Irenaeus wrote that “Polycarp also was not only instructed by the apostles, and conversed with many who had seen the Lord, but was also appointed bishop by apostles in Asia and in the church in Smyrna” and that he himself had, as a boy, listened to “the accounts which (Polycarp) gave of his intercourse with John and with the others who had seen the Lord”.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/hcc2.v.xv.iv.html

Polycarp of Smyrna (c.69–c.155) was a Christian bishop of Smyrna (now İzmir in Turkey). It is recorded that he had been a disciple of John. The options for this John are John the son of Zebedee traditionally viewed as the author of the Gospel of John, or John the Presbyter. Traditional advocates follow Eusebius in insisting that the apostolic connection of Polycarp was with John the Evangelist, and that this John, the author of the Gospel of John, was the same as the Apostle John.


Polycarp tried and failed to persuade Anicetus, Bishop of Rome, to have the West celebrate Passover on 14 Nisan, as in the East. In c.155, the Smyrnans demanded Polycarp’s execution as a Christian, and he died a martyr. His story has it that the flames built to kill him refused to burn him and that when he was stabbed to death, so much blood issued from his body that it quenched the flames around him.[ Polycarp is recognized as a saint in both the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches.

Irenaeus of Lyons  a disciple of Polycarp a dsiciple of John the Beloved Apostle
Irenaeus was bishop of Lugdunum in Gaul, which is now Lyon(s), France. His writings were formative in the early development of Christian theology, and he is recognized as a saint by both the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church. He was a notable early Christian apologist. He was also a disciple of Polycarp.
His best-known book, Against Heresies (c.180) enumerated heresies and attacked them. Irenaeus wrote that the only way for Christians to retain unity was to humbly accept one doctrinal authority—episcopal councils] Irenaeus proposed that the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John all be accepted as canonical.
Barnabas,
Hermas,
Epistle to Diognetus,
Papias

Justin Martyr,
also known as Saint Justin (c. 100 – 165 AD), was an early Christian apologist, and is regarded as the foremost interpreter of the theory of the Logos in the 2nd century He was martyred, alongside some of his students, and is considered a saint by the Roman Catholic Church the Anglican Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church
Most of his works are lost, but two apologies and a dialogue did survive. The First Apology, his most well known text, passionately defends the morality of the Christian life, and provides various ethical and philosophical arguments to convince the Roman emperor, Antoninus, to abandon the persecution of the fledgling sect. Further, he also makes the theologically-innovative suggestion that the “seeds of Christianity” (manifestations of the Logos acting in history) actually predated Christ’s incarnation. This notion allows him to claim many historical Greek philosophers (including Socrates and Plato), in whose works he was well studied, as unknowing Christians.

Irenaeus
of Antioch (Ancient Greek: Ἰγνάτιος Ἀντιοχείας, Ignátios Antiokheías; AD c. 35 or 50 – 98 to 117), also known as Ignatius Theophorus (Ιγνάτιος ὁ Θεοφόρος, Ignátios ho Theophóros, lit. “the God-bearing”), was a student of John the Apostle, and was the third bishop of Antioch.[ En route to Rome, where according to Christian tradition he met his martyrdom by being fed to wild beasts, he wrote a series of letters which have been preserved as an example of very early Christian theology. Important topics addressed in these letters include ecclesiology, the sacraments, and the role of bishops.
Ignatius converted to Christianity at a young age. Later in his life he was chosen to serve as a Bishop of Antioch, succeeding Saint Peter and St. Evodius (who died around AD 67). The 4th-century Church historian Eusebius records that Ignatius succeeded Evodius. Making his apostolic succession even more immediate, Theodoret of Cyrrhus reported that St. Peter himself appointed Ignatius to the episcopal see of Antioch. Ignatius called himself Theophorus (God Bearer). A tradition arose that he was one of the children whom Jesus took in his arms and blessed.

Comment: We do not believe that Peter ever was Catholic nor was he ever a Pope.

Ignatius is one of the five Apostolic Fathers (the earliest authoritative group of the Church Fathers). He based his authority on being a bishop of the Church, living his life in the imitation of Christ. It is believed that St. Ignatius, along with his friend Polycarp, with great probability were disciples of the Apostle St. John.
Epistles attributed to Ignatius report his arrest by the authorities and travel to Rome:
    From Syria even to Rome I fight with wild beasts, by land and sea, by night and by day, being bound amidst ten leopards, even a company of soldiers, who only grow worse when they are kindly treated. — Ignatius to the Romans, 5
.

The observations why Christianity Grew.

2 Timothy 1 9 a 

The early Christian church in the first three centuries after Jesus’s resurrection brought about the most amazing transformation of diverse social and religious cultures ever achieved by peaceful means in the history of the world. How did it happen? What kind of people were these? What was special about their way of living and believing?

It would be a mistake to romanticize the early church as an age of purity to which we should seek to return. The churches always had their problems and internal struggles. Nevertheless, the early churches as a whole did represent something different in their world. It attracted both devoted followers and brutal persecutors. To see what these early believers were like, let’s go to the sources and hear what they were bold to proclaim about themselves.

 

Sociologist Rodney Stark analyzed the survival and growth of the early church in the first few centuries. Here is his fascinating summary of the Early Church.

“. . . Christianity served as a revitalization movement that arose  providing new norms and new kinds of social relationships able to cope with many urgent problems. To cities filled with the homeless and impoverished, Christianity offered charity as well as hope. To cities filled with newcomers and strangers, Christianity offered an immediate basis for attachment. To cities filled with orphans and widows, Christianity provided a new and expanded sense of family. To cities torn by violent ethnic strife, Christianity offered a new basis for social solidarity. And to cities faced with epidemics, fire, and earthquakes, Christianity offered effective nursing services. . . . For what they brought was not simply an urban movement, but a new culture capable of making life in Greco-Roman cities more tolerable.” Rodney Stark, The Rise of Christianity, Princeton University Press, 1996, page 161.

http://www.christianity.com/church/church-history/timeline/1-300/what-were-early-christians-like-11629560.html

Does God Have Emotions?

Charles-s09-01-14-cartin-chair_thumb.jpg

Spurgeon had a sermon on “God Without Mood Swings” http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/articles/impassib.htm Copyright © 2000 by Phillip R. Johnson. All rights reserved. This article is excerpted from Bound only Once, edited by Douglas Wilson, published by Canon Press.

Perhaps the most difficult biblical dilemma for those of us who affirm the classic view of an utterly sovereign and immutable God is the problem of how to make sense of the various divine affections spoken of in Scripture. If God is eternally unchanging—if His will and His mind are as fixed and constant as His character—how could He ever experience the rising and falling passions we associate with love, joy, exasperation, or anger?
Classic theism teaches that God is impassible—not subject to suffering, pain, or the ebb and flow of involuntary passions. In the words of the Westminster Confession of Faith, God is “without body, parts, or passions, immutable” (2.1).

God without passions? Can such a view be reconciled with the biblical data? Consider Genesis 5:6-7: “God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart” (emphasis added). In fact, Scripture frequently ascribes changing emotions to God. At various times He is said to be grieved (Psalm 78:40), angry (Deuteronomy 1:37), pleased (1 Kings 3:10), joyful (Zephaniah 3:17), and moved by pity (Judges 2:18).

Classic theism treats such biblical statements as anthropopathisms—figurative expressions ascribing human passions to God. They are the emotional equivalent of those familiar physical metaphors known as anthropomorphisms—in which hands (Exodus 15:17), feet (1 Kings 5:3), eyes (2 Chronicles 16:9), or other human body parts are ascribed to God.
We know very well that God is a Spirit (John 4:24), and “a spirit hath not flesh and bones” (Luke 24:39)—so when Scripture speaks of God as having body parts, we naturally read such expressions as figures of speech. Almost no one would claim that the biblical tropes ascribing physical features to God are meant to be interpreted literally.
But the texts that assign emotions to God are another matter. Many Christians are loth to conclude that these are meant to be taken figuratively in any degree.
After all, one of the greatest comforts to any believer is the reassurance that God loves us. But if love is stripped of passion, we think, it’s a lesser kind of love. Doesn’t the doctrine of divine impassibility therefore diminish God’s love?
To complicate matters further, when we try to contemplate how any of the divine affections can be fixed and constant, we begin to imagine that God is inert and unfeeling.

Fearing such inferences, some veer to the opposite extreme and insist instead that God is even more passionate than we are. In one of those ubiquitous Internet theological forums, a minister who hated the doctrine of divine impassibility wrote, “The God of the Bible is much more emotional than we are, not less so!”

Someone else sarcastically replied, “Really? Does your god have even bigger mood swings than my mother-in-law?”

The point was clear, even if made indelicately. It is a serious mistake to impute any kind of thoughts to God that are cast in the same mold as human passions—as if God possessed a temper subject to involuntary oscillation.

In fact, a moment’s reflection will reveal that if God is “subject to like passions as we are” (cf. James 5:17), His immutability is seriously undermined at every point. If His creatures can literally make Him change His mood by the things they do, then God isn’t even truly in control of His own state of mind. If outside influences can force an involuntary change in God’s disposition, then what real assurance do we have that His love for us will remain constant? That is precisely why Jeremiah cited God’s immutability and impassibility as the main guarantee of His steadfast love for His own: “It is of the Lord’s mercies that we are not consumed, because his compassions fail not” (Lamentations 3:22). God Himself made a similar point in Malachi 3:6: “For I am the Lord, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.”
Still, many find the doctrine of divine impassibility deeply unsatisfying. After all, when we acknowledge that an expression like “the ears of the Lord” (James 5:4) is anthropomorphic, we are recognizing that God has no physical ears. So if we grant that the biblical expressions about divine affections are anthropopathic, are we also suggesting that God has no real affections? Is He utterly unfeeling? If we allow that God’s grief, joy, compassion, and delight are anthropopathic, must we therefore conclude that He is really just cold, apathetic, and indifferent?

So What Does It Mean To Repent, Repentance?

I read this today, and agree with the message:

 Charles-s09-01-14-cartin-chair_thumb.jpg

The Doctrine of Repentance

What is repentance and how can I define it in a non-technical matter that would allow the average person not only to understand but grasp its meaning and be able to apply in their lives.

Through out the Scriptures, God is constantly calling his creation to repent. When his Children sin, he calls them to repent – not for salvation but re-instate their fellowship in the family.

Repentance and Faith go hand in hand.

Repentance means that we say “Lord, I have sinned. I’m sorry for it. I’m willing to change.”

But Faith, in a way means even more. That’s the way you come to Christ. You believe, and you act on your faith.

God commands repentance.

1. REPENTANCE IS REMORSE – but alone it is not repentance. Remorse is to be sorry, but it doesn’t necessarily change your course in the future.

2. REPENTANCE IS SORROW – but alone it is not repentance. It means more than what a child would pray: “Make me good, not real good, but good enough so I won’t get spanked.”

3. REPENTANCE IS CONVICTION – but alone it is not repentance. You may know you are a sinner before God. You may even stand trembling under great conviction but still not cross the line to Christ.

4. REPENTANCE IS FORSAKING SIN – and this is the real definition of repentance. It is a change of mind towards yourself, towards sin, towards God. It is a change of will, of disposition and of purpose.

Repentance means to say, “I’m going to forsake my sin. I’m going to submit myself to God and accept Jesus Christ into my heart as my Saviour and Lord. I’m going to stop my sin and never do it again. I’m going to trust Jesus for everything in my life.”

True Repentance also requires restitution – what can a child of God give back to God who owns everything? OUR FAITHFULNESS – OUR TOTAL OBEDIENCE to HIM.

“Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?” Romans 2:4

God has been so good to America. The riches of His goodness are abounding. And how does America respond to God’s manifold blessings? We trample underfoot God’s goodness without giving Him a word of thanks. His goodness is treated lightly and taken for granted.

God’s goodness is His appeal for us to repent. He is forbearing and patient with us. Yet, we presume on His goodness, thinking we deserve it. When we fail to respond to His goodness with repentance, we are actually showing contempt for His goodness.

Paul continues by saying, “After thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath…” (Romans 2:5). God’s goodness and patience is like a dam holding back His wrath. The longer we enjoy His goodness without repentance, we are treasuring up wrath. It continues to build up until one day the dam of His forbearance will break and His wrath will burst forth like a flood.

The longer someone enjoys God’s goodness, but never repents, the more severe his judgment will be (read Matthew 11:20-24). America, take heed!

How do you treat God’s goodness? Never presume upon it? It is God calling you to repentance.
Miguel I will talk to you later about this,if you want to join in the debate fine

Definition Of Repentance
1. Repentance is not an emotion, but is an attitude that leads to a specific action. Repentance is changing your mind about your sin and about God. It means turning from your sin and toward God.
2. It is an attitude that chooses to confront failure rather than to ignore it.
3. It is not just a one-time action concerning our salvation…it is an attitude that confronts and deals with failure in every area of our lives.
4. It isn’t very popular today, because it requires us to honestly confront sin

Psalms 59:16 By Spurgeon

Pslm 59:16

Psalms 59 16 z

EXPOSITION

Verse 16. But I will sing of thy power. The wicked howl, but I sing and will sing. Their power is weakness, but thine is omnipotence; I see them vanquished and thy power victorious, and for ever and ever will I sing of thee.

Yea, I will sing aloud of thy mercy in the morning. When those lovers of darkness find their game is up, and their midnight howlings die away, then will I lift up my voice on high and praise the lovingkindness of God without fear of being disturbed. What a blessed morning will soon break for the righteous, and what a song will be theirs! Sons of the morning, ye may sigh tonight, but joy will come on the wings of the rising sun. Tune your harps even now, for the signal to commence the eternal music will soon be given; the morning cometh and your sun shall go no more down for ever.

For thou hast been my defence. The song is for God alone, and it is one which none can sing but those who have experienced the lovingkindness of their God. Looking back upon a past all full of mercy, the saints will bless the Lord with their whole hearts, and triumph in him as the high place of their security.

And refuge in the day of my trouble. The greater our present trials the louder will our future songs be, and the more intense our joyful gratitude. Had we no day of trouble, where were our season of retrospective thanksgiving? David’s besetment by Saul’s bloodhounds creates an opportunity for divine interposition and so for triumphant praise.

EXPLANATORY NOTES AND QUAINT SAYINGS

Verse 16. We must not pass by the contrast with the wretched condition of the wicked, which is indicated by the pronoun hmh, they, in Psalms 59:15 , an ygaw, but I, which are in exact antithesis; also the “evening,” mentioned above, and the “morning,” now occurring for the times of trouble and happiness, and the dog like noise of the wicked, and the singing with joyful sound of David, to pass by other particulars, likewise give to the diverse states additional difference. Hermann Venema.

Verse 16. Cantabo and exaltabo, I will sing, and I will sing aloud. Here is singing only of God’s power; but there is singing aloud of his mercy; as if his mercy were more exaltable than his power, and that reached the very heavens; this unto the clouds. Psalms 26:5 . From Humphrey Sydenham’s Sermon, entitled, “The Well toned Cymball,” 1637.

HINTS FOR PASTORS AND LAYPERSONS

Verse 16. The heavenly chorister.

  1. His song is sweet in contrast with the revilings of
    others — but I.
  2. It treats of subjects which terrify others — thy
    power.
  3. It grows louder on tender themes — thy mercy.
  4. It has its choice seasons — in the morning.
  5. It is tuned by experience — for thou hast.
  6. It is all to God’s glory — thy power,
    thy mercy, thou hast.

Quotes by Charles on Facebook, Passon for Preaching

image_thumb.png

Inclusivism, one of several approaches to understanding the relationship between religions, asserts that while one set of beliefs is absolutely true, other sets of beliefs are at least partially true. It stands in contrast to exclusivism, which asserts that only one way is true and all others are in error. It is a particular form of religious pluralism, though that term may also assert that all beliefs are equally valid within a believer’s particular context. Ok! its does seem we all have this exclusivism approach!!@!

In preparation of the sermons for Sunday, three lessons, I will study a few hours, which includes prayer, thinking, meditation, a lap, and reading, writing, typing. I would say I will read more than twenty different books (on Romans, Luke, and the Tabernacle) Now in the sermon presentation I will not mention all the resources that I used to complete the sermon. How then does it take 45 minutes to say what I have on four pages, and have 20 pages to go.?

God gave us four children to raise and then let them out into the world. So we have them for 20 years and then let them go. Our lives was not totally for our children, thus when they leave they are set to live their lives, and we are set to live our lives together. We love it when our family comes home for a nice visit, we miss them when the are gone.

Chad Whisnant You and mom did a great job giving us guidance and love to prepare us for our adult lives in the real world. I thank you for the moral compass you instilled in me. I would not be here today without it ever guiding me to what I know is right. We are blessed to have parents like you. I wish we were able to visit more. However it does make those visits all the more special. We miss you just as much as you miss us. Love you both soooooo much.

There are those who think if you use John MacArthur, Martin Lloyd-Jones, John Piper, David Jeremiah, Charles Price, John Calvin, Martin Luther Charles Spurgeon, Ray Pritchard, Ray Steadmen, Steve Lawson, etc, sermons and don’t mention them in your sermon that you should not be preaching! I totally disagree. First I would love to mention that I know these men, (well those who are alive) and sometimes I do. I would love to mention all the references used in the preparation of a sermon. To claim that my sermons are 100% or even 75% totally from my own thoughts would not be true. What I know and say has been put into my mind by my reading and studying others over the last week or over the last 50 years. I have reworked many outlines, notes and sermons over the years.

Spiritual Leadership: The main dominant feature of your leadership will be your preaching. And that is how you lead the people that is how you shepherd the people of God, by preaching the word of God, teaching the word of God.

Bibliography are great. I love searching out resources. For example I was ready a article and these are the bibiography books:

Boehlke, Paul R., Laurie M. Knapp, Rachel L. Kolander. “Putting Presuppositions on the Table: Why the Fondations Matter.” Zygon 41, no. 2 (2006). http://www.zygonjournal.org/issue2006_2.html

Helm, Paul. “Understanding Scholarly Presuppositions: A Crucial Tool for Research?” Tyndale Bulletin 44, no. 1 (1993). http://www.tyndalehouse.com/…/TynBull_1993_44_1_09_Helm_Sch… 12 pages good.

Klein, William W., Craig L. Blomberg, Robert L. Hubbard. Introduction to Biblical Interpretation.Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, Inc., 2004. $25.79 Amazon

Swanson, James. Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains: Greek (New Testament).Vol. 1997. electronic ed. Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997. $30.00
https://www.logos.com/…/a-dictionary-of-biblical-languages-…

The KJV 1611 Idea

The Various Editions of the 1611 A.V.]Bible-authoirty.jpg

 Comment: I did not write this article: but I did write the statement here

I am almost sad that we hole the KJV as God’s only way of getting out the Word of God, like He is not able to accomplish His will and salvation of the elect by another translation.

Over the last 45 years many have disagreed that the various translations have come out of the hands of the devil, and have taken issues with any translations other than the KJV.  Some have gone as far as to say, if you don’t use the KJV you are not preaching the Word of God.  Some go as far as to say that the Greek was translated by the KJV.  Some have said you should not preach if you use another translation.  Some just say if you don’t use KJV I want listen to you preach.

Here is one of these comments:

If someone decides to produce a “new Bible version”, then they must also convince Christians that there is a NEED and a justifiable CAUSE for the new version. One of the deceitful excuses being used today for producing new versions is that the King James Bible has been revised several times since 1611, and that a new revision is needed once again. While spreading this piece of deceitful misinformation, the KJV critics hold their breath, hoping that no one will be intelligent enough to ask for specific details about these “revisions”. The many revisions that have occurred since 1881 bear NO RESEMBLANCE to the various EDITIONS of the KJV prior to 1881. The modern revisors are just trying to justify their sins!

There were only FOUR actual EDITIONS of the King James Bible produced after 1611: 1629, 1638, 1762, and 1769. These were not translations (like the new versions SINCE 1881), and they really weren’t even “revisions”.

The 1629 edition was simply an effort to correct printing errors, and two of the original King James translators assisted in the work.

The 1638 edition of the KJV also dealt with printing errors, especially words and clauses overlooked by the printers. About 72% of the textual corrections in the KJV were done by 1638, only 27 years after the first printing.

Please bear in mind the fact that printing was a very laborious task prior to 1800. Publishing a flawless work was almost impossible. Even today, with computers and advanced word processors, printing errors are still frequently made. Imagine what it was like in the 1600’s!

Then, in 1762 and 1769, two final editions of the KJV were published. Both of these involved spelling changes, which became necessary as the English language became more stabilized and spelling rules were established.

There were no new translations, and there were really no new revisions published in 1629, 1638, 1762, or 1769. These were simply EDITIONS of the 1611 KJV, which corrected printing errors and spelling. Those who try to equate these editions with the modern translations are just being deceitful or stupid–or both. The many other so-called “revisions” of the KJV that occurred in 1613, 1616, 1617, and 1743 are nothing more than running changes and touch-up work at the printers. The REAL revisions and translations do not start appearing until 1881 (RV) and 1901 (ASV). So if some punk walks up with a smirky grin on his face and asks you, “So which King James Bible do you have, the 1611, the 1629, the 1638, the 1762, or the 1769?”, you can simply state that you have a 1769 edition of the King James 1611 Authorized Version.

And this was one of the response the the article about KJV

It must be noted though that the KJV translators weren’t KJV Only. They would not have a problem with new translations, in fact they probably anticipated that would happen.
They would have been open to new translations as the English language chan
ged. This is what they said in their letter to the reader in the first edition.

“Who would have ever thought that was a fault? To amend it where he saw cause?”

This statement is important because they never considered their translation the be all, end all in English translations. They anticipated revision and change. They even said if theirs needed it, then it should be changed. If they didn’t think they get it 100% right, why are we so arrogant to say they did. Do we know better than they did? Are we more spiritual than they were? I choose to respect what they said about their own translation.

They didn’t consider themselves infallible or inspired. By putting in 8000 marginal notes, they admitted they could be wrong and therefore gave alternate readings.

“Some peradventure would have no variety of senses to be set in the margin, lest the authority of the Scripture for deciding of controversies by that show of uncertainty, should somewhat be shaken. But we hold their judgment not to be so sound in this point.”
They felt we should all have a translation in our own language.

, “But we desire that the Scripture may speak like itself, as in the language, that it may be understood even of the very vulgar.”

This is important too. They never considered their English to be all, end all. They would want you and me to understand the Bible. So a translation that is 400 years old that has a different style of English that many people struggle with, that has hundreds of words that have either changed meaning or we just don’t use anymore isn’t helping anybody if they can’t understand it.

“There be many words in the Scriptures, which be never found there but once, (having neither brother or neighbor, as the Hebrews speak) so that we cannot be holpen by conference of places. Again, there be many rare names of certain birds, beasts and precious stones, etc. concerning the Hebrews themselves are so divided among themselves for judgment, that they may seem to have defined this or that, rather because they would say something, than because they were sure of that which they said, as S. Jerome somewhere saith of the Septuagint. Now in such a case, doth not a margin do well to admonish the Reader to seek further, and not to conclude or dogmatize upon this or that peremp- torily? For as it is a fault of incredulity, to doubt of those things that are evident: so to determine of such things as the Spirit of God hath left (even in the judgment of the judicious) questionable, can be no less than presumption”

There has been justification for new translations. More discoveries of manuscripts have happened since 1611 and English has changed a lot. However, if you like the KJV and that’s how God speaks to you, please continue to use it. However, please don’t judge my or anybody else’s orthodoxy and salvation because we use a different translation besides the old KJV.