"The Bible is not the inspired and inerrant word of God"

[brandplucked]

"The Bible is not the inspired and inerrant word of God"

Most Christians today do NOT believe The Bible IS the inerrant and infallible word of God.

This statement may seem shocking at first, and many pastors and Christians will give the knee-jerk reaction saying that they do believe the Bible IS the infallible word of God. However, upon further examimation, it will soon be discovered that when they speak of an inerrant Bible, they are not referring to something that actually exists anywhere on this earth. They are talking about a mystical Bible that exists only in their imaginations; and each person's particular version differs from all the others.

God said: "Behold, the days come, saith the Lord GOD, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the LORD." Amos 8:11

The Lord Jesus Christ also stated in Luke 18:8 "Nevertheless, when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?"

The apostle Paul wrote concerning the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together unto Him: "Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, EXCEPT THERE COME A FALLING AWAY FIRST..." 2 Thessalonians 2:3

The number of professing Christians who do not believe in a "hold it in your hands and read" type of inspired Bible has steadily increased over the years since the flood of multiple-choice, conflicting and contradictory modern bible versions began to appear about 100 years ago.

The following testimonies about the character of Evangelicalism today were made by key Evangelical leaders. The irony is that these same men are part of the problem they lament. Each of these men has been guilty of endorsing modern bible versions.

"MORE AND MORE ORGANIZATIONS AND INDIVIDUALS HISTORICALLY COMMITTED TO AN INFALLIBLE SCRIPTURE HAVE BEEN EMBRACING AND PROPAGATING THE VIEW THAT THE BIBLE HAS ERRORS IN IT. This movement away from the historic standpoint has been most noticeable among those often labeled neo-evangelicals. This change of position with respect to the infallibility of the Bible is widespread and has occurred in evangelical denominations, Christian colleges, theological seminaries, publishing houses, and learned societies" (Harold Lindsell, former vice-president and professor Fuller Theological Seminary and Editor Emeritus of Christianity Today, The Battle for the Bible, 1976, p. 20).

"WITHIN EVANGELICALISM THERE ARE A GROWING NUMBER WHO ARE MODIFYING THEIR VIEWS ON THE INERRANCY OF THE BIBLE SO THAT THE FULL AUTHORITY OF SCRIPTURE IS COMPLETELY UNDERCUT. But is happening in very subtle ways. Like the snow lying side-by-side on the ridge, the new views on biblical authority often seem at first glance not to be very far from what evangelicals, until just recently, have always believed. But also, like the snow lying side-by-side on the ridge, the new views when followed consistently end up a thousand miles apart. What may seem like a minor difference at first, in the end makes all the difference in the world ... compromising the full authority of Scripture eventually affects what it means to be a Christian theologically and how we live in the full spectrum of human life" (Francis Schaeffer, The Great Evangelical Disaster, 1983, p. 44).

George Barna, president of Barna Research Group, reported that a study exploring the religious beliefs of the 12 largest denominations in America highlights the downward theological drift that has taken place in Christian churches in recent years. The study found that an alarmingly high number of church members have beliefs that fall far short of orthodox Christianity. ONLY 41 PERCENT OF ALL ADULTS SURVEYED BELIEVED IN THE TOTAL ACCURACY OF THE BIBLE. Only 40 percent believed Christ was sinless, and only 27 percent believed Satan to be real.

Of the Baptists surveyed 57 percent said they believed that works are necessary in order to be saved, 45 percent believed Jesus was not sinless, 44 percent did not believe that the Bible is totally accurate, and 66 percent did not believe Satan to be a real being. Barna said, "The Christian body in America is immersed in a crisis of biblical illiteracy."

[brandplucked]

What Christians really believe

A book by George A. Marsden, "Reforming Fundamentalism" quotes a survey of student belief at one of the largest Evangelical seminaries in the US. The poll indicated that 85% of the students "do not believe in the inerrancy of Scripture."

This book also lists the results of a poll conducted by Jeffery Hadden in 1987 of 10,000 American clergy. They were asked whether they believed that the Scriptures are the inspired and inerrant Word of God in faith, history, and secular matters: 95% of Episcopalians, 87% of Methodists, 82% of Presbyterians, 77% of American Lutherans, and 67% of American Baptists said "No."

The Barna Research Group reported in 1996 that among American adults generally: 58% believe that the Bible is "totally accurate in all its teachings"; 45% believe that the Bible is "absolutely accurate and everything in it can be taken literally."

"Support dropped between that poll and another taken in 2001. Barna reported in 2001 that: 41% of adults strongly agrees that the Bible is totally accurate in all that it teaches."

"Seminary students, future pastors and leaders in the church, show very little support for the inerrancy of the Bible position. What does that foretell about the future of the church? Undoubtedly, just as the poll results show in the 1996 - 2001 time frame, THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE BELIEVING THE BIBLE IS INERRANT WILL DROP."

http://www.worldviewweekend.com/articles/christianstudents.shtml

According to pollster George Barna:

*   Less than 10 percent of American Christians actually posses a biblical worldview.

*   Two out of three born-again believers assert there is no such thing as absolute moral truth.

Indeed, ideas do have consequences and today, we are reaping the consequences of a humanist worldview that is based on moral relativism that says there is no right or wrong, situational ethics; the end justifies the means, pluralism; all religions and ideas are equal, and tolerance; no one is to speak from a worldview based on moral absolutes. Unfortunately, the desire to be non-judgmental and tolerant is now a growing problem among Christian students, thus causing them to reject biblical truth.

The 1994 Churched Youth Survey conducted by the Barna Research Group for the Josh McDowell Ministry revealed the following facts through a scientifically designed process that randomly selected youth groups from thousands of churches throughout the U.S. and Canada. Over 3,700 youth were extensively and confidentially surveyed. The participants were youth involved in church activities and who overwhelmingly identified their parents as loving and their family experience as positive. This survey reveals the same troubling data as does the national PEERS test results.

The Churched Youth Survey revealed the following:

*   Only 44% asserted that humans are capable of grasping the meaning of truth

*   57% could not even say that an objective standard of truth exists.

*   85% are likely to reason "just because it's wrong for you doesn't mean its wrong for me."

*   Only 29% disagreed with the statement: "When it comes to matters of ethics, truth means different things to different people; no one can be absolutely positive they have the truth."

*   Only 38% disagreed with the statement: "Nothing can be known for certain except the things that you experience in your life."

No absolute truth

The explosion of modern versions has encouraged the student to pick and choose his own preferred readings and has created a tendency to treat every Bible lightly and to look upon none as the final words of God.

Sam Kobia, Secretary, World Council of Churches, ENI 1-23-04:"Having a variety of translations available encourages the Bible to be read in a plural and ecumenical way. HAVING A VARIETY OF TRANSLATIONS AVAILABLE IS A PRECIOUS TOOL IN THE STRUGLE AGAINST RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM." (Caps are mine)

Here are some excerpts from a Wall Street Journal, editorial page, that appeared on the internet in July of 2004. It is an article written by Dale Buss, titled "Christian Teens? Not Very"

Mr. Buss writes: "It turns out that, while they may profess the faith and indeed love Jesus, the vast majority of Christian teenagers in this country actually hold beliefs fundamentally antithetical... Some leaders believe that mushy doctrine among the younger generation ranks as the No. 1 crisis facing American Christendom today."

"About one-third of American teenagers claim they're "born again" believers, according to data gathered over the past few years by Barna Research Group, the gold standard in data about the U.S. Protestant church, and 88% of teens say they are Christians. About 60% believe that "the Bible is totally accurate in all of its teachings." And 56% feel that their religious faith is very important in their life."

"Yet, Barna says, slightly more than half of all U.S. teens also believe that Jesus committed sins while he was on earth. About 60% agree that enough good works will earn them a place in heaven, in part reflecting a Catholic view, but also flouting Protestantism's central theme of salvation only by grace. About two-thirds say that Satan is just a symbol of evil, not really a living being. Only 6% of all teens believe that there are moral absolutes--and, most troubling to evangelical leaders, only 9% of self-described born-again teens believe that moral truth is absolute."

"When you ask even Christian kids, 'How can you say A is true as well as B, which is the antithesis of A?,' their typical response is, 'I'm not sure how it works, but it works for me,'" says George Barna, president of the Ventura, Calif.-based research company. "It's personal, pragmatic and fairly superficial."

Mr. Buss continues in his article: "Some commentators produce even more startling statistics on the doctrinal drift of America's youth. NINETY ONE PERCENT OF BORN AGAIN TEENAGERS surveyed a few years ago proclaimed that THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS ABSOLUTE TRUTH, says the Rev. Josh McDowell, a Dallas-based evangelist and author. More alarmingly, that number had risen quickly and steadily from just 52% of committed Christian kids in 1992 who denied the existence of absolute truth. A slight majority of professing Christian kids, Mr. McDowell says, also now say that the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ never occurred."

"There's a greater disconnect now than ever in the history of the church in America between what a Christian young person says they are and what they actually believe," says Mr. McDowell, who has ministered mainly to youth for more than 30 years. "Christianity is based on truth; Jesus said, 'I am the truth.' But you have an overwhelming majority even of Christian kids saying there is no absolute truth."

[brandplucked]

 

A popular New Age religious site that endorses all religions of the world is called Religious Tolerance. Org. (http://www.religioustolerance.org)

This site has some interesting comments regarding the doctrine of the inerrancy of the Bible. They ask: Does inerrancy really matter?

"From one standpoint, this doctrine is of great importance, because it determines, at a very fundamental level, how Christians approach Scripture."

"To most conservative theologians Biblical inerrancy and inspiration are fundamental doctrines. Unless the entire Bible is considered to be the authoritative word of God, then the whole foundation of their religious belief crumbles. If the Bible contains some errors, then conservative Christians feel that they would have no firm basis on which to base their doctrines, beliefs, morality and practices. The books of the Bible must be either inerrant, or be devoid of authority."

They continue: "To most liberal theologians, the Bible is not inerrant. They believe that its books were obviously written and edited by human authors: with limited scientific knowledge, who promoted their own specific belief systems, who attributed statements to God that are immoral by today's standards, who freely incorporated material from neighboring Pagan cultures, who freely disagreed with other Biblical authors." (Religious Tolerance.org)

What I personally found of great interest is the following comment in the same article. The people at Religious Tolerance noted: "Some Fundamentalist and other Evangelical Christians CONSIDER A PARTICULAR ENGLISH TRANSLATION TO BE INERRANT. THIS IS PARTICULARLY TRUE AMONG LAY MEMBERS IN THEIR BELIEFS ABOUT THE KING JAMES VERSION. But most conservatives believe that inerrancy only applies to the original, autograph copies of the various books of the Bible. None of the latter have survived to the present day. We only have access to a variety of manuscripts which are copies of copies of copies...An unknown number of errors are induced due to Accidental copying errors by ancient scribes or intentional changes and insertions into the text, made in order to match developing theology." (Religious Tolerance.org)

Most Christians who do not believe the King James Bible or any other version are now the inerrant, infallible, complete and pure words of God, define Inerrancy in the following manner: “When all the facts become known, they will demonstrate that the Bible IN ITS ORIGINAL AUTOGRAPHS and correctly interpreted is entirely true and never false in all it affirms, whether relative to doctrine or ethics or the social, physical or life sciences.” (P. D. Feinberg, s.v. “inerrancy, Evangelical Dictionary of Theology Inerrancy & the autographa.)

The usual tap dance performed by those who deny any Bible or any text in any language is now the inerrant, complete and infallible words of God is typified by the following quote: "Inerrancy applies to the autographa, not to copies or translations of Scripture. This qualification is made because we realize that errors have crept into the text during the transmission process. It is not an appeal to a “Bible which no one has ever seen or can see.” Such a charge fails to take into account the nature of textual criticism and the very high degree of certainty we possess concerning the original text of Scripture."

Well, this may sound very pious and good, but the undeniable fact is that this Christian scholar is talking about "a Bible no one has seen or can see".

As for this gentleman's "nature of textual criticism" is concerned, this so called "science" is a giant fraud and a pathetic joke played on the unsuspecting saints who might think these men actually know what they are doing. I have posted a series on the "science of textual criticism" that reveals the true nature of this hocus-pocus methodology of determining what God really said. You can see all parts of this study, starting with:

http://www.geocities.com/gotcha104/science.html

[brandplucked]

The true Holy Bible IS the inspired and inerrant word of God

Here are some facts taken directly from the Holy Bible. You do not need to be a scholar or seminary student to get a grasp of what the Bible says about itself. You either believe God or you don't.

The Bible believer first looks to God and His word to determine what the Book says about itself. The Bible cannot be clearer concerning it's preservation:

Isaiah 40:8: "The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever."

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

Psalm 138:2: "I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name."

Psalm 100:5: "For the LORD is good; his mercy is everlasting; and his truth endureth to all generations."

Psalm 33:11: "The counsel of the LORD standeth for ever, the thoughts of his heart to all generations."

Psalm 119:152, 160: "Concerning thy testimonies, I have known of old that Thou hast founded them for ever. ... thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever."

Isaiah 59:21: "... My Spirit that is upon thee [Isaiah], and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the LORD, from henceforth and for ever."

Matthew 5:17-18: "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled."

Matthew 24:35: "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away."

John 10:35: "... the Scripture cannot be broken."

God has promised to preserve His wordS IN A BOOK here on this earth till heaven and earth pass away. He either did this and we can know where they are found today, or He lied and He lost some of them, and we can never be sure if what we are reading are the true words of God or not.

God's words are in a BOOK. Consider the following verses: "Now go, write it before them in a table, and NOTE IT IN A BOOK, that it may be for the time to come FOR EVER AND EVER." Isaiah 30:8

"Seek ye out of THE BOOK of the LORD, and READ: no one of these shall fail...for my mouth it hath commanded..." Isaiah 34:16

"Then said I, Lo, I come: in the volume of THE BOOK it is written of me, I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my heart." Psalm 40:7-8

"And if any man shall take away from THE WORDS OF THE BOOK of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are WRITTEN IN THIS BOOK." Revelation 22:19

[brandplucked]

I believe the King James Bible is the inspired, inerrant and complete words of God for the following reasons:

#1 The Old Testament is based solely on the Hebrew Masoretic texts, in contrast to the NASB, NIV, ESV, Holman CSB and other modern versions that frequently reject the Hebrew readings. The Old Testament oracles of God were committed to the Jews and not to the Syrians, the Greeks or the Latins. "What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God." (Romans 3:1-2) The Lord Jesus Christ said not one jot or one tittle would pass from the law till all be fulfilled. - Matthew 5:18

See my two articles on how the modern versions all reject the Hebrew texts.

http://www.geocities.com/gotcha104/NIVapos.html http://www.geocities.com/gotcha104/NIVapos2.html

#2 The King James Bible alone is without proven error, and this in spite of intense opposition and criticism from the Bible correctors and modern scholarship.

"Seek ye out of THE BOOK of the LORD, and read: no one of these shall fail..." Isaiah 34:16.

#3 I believe in the Sovereignty and Providence of Almighty God. God knew beforehand how He would mightily use the King James Bible to become THE Bible of the English speaking people who would carry the gospel to the ends of the earth during the great modern missionary outreach from the late 1700's to the 1950's. The King James Bible was used as the basis for hundreds of foreign language translations, and English has become the first truly global language in history.

See article Can a Translation Be Inspired? http://www.geocities.com/gotcha104/transinsp.html

#4 The King James Bible is always a true witness and never lies or perverts sound doctrine. This is in contrast to all modern English versions that do pervert sound doctrine in numerous verses and prove themselves to be false witnesses to the truth of God.

"Thy word is true from the beginning, and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever." Psalm 119:160

"A faithful witness will not lie: but a false witness will utter lies." Proverbs 14:5

In contrast, all the modern versions like the NASB, NIV, NKJV, ESV contain proveable and serious doctrinal errors. See my article on No Doctrines Are Changed?:

http://www.geocities.com/gotcha104/nodoctrine.html

#5 At every opportunity the King James Bible exalts the Person of the Lord Jesus Christ to His rightful place as the sinless, eternally only begotten Son of God who is to be worshipped as being equal with God the Father. All modern versions debase and lower the Person of Christ in various ways.

"GOD was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory." 1 Timothy 3:16. (compare this verse in the NIV, NASB, ESV, and Holman) See also John 3:13; Luke 23:42, and 1 Corinthians 15:47.

See article on The Only Begotten Son

http://www.geocities.com/gotcha104/begotnSon.html

#6 The explosion of modern versions has encouraged the student to pick and choose his own preferred readings and has created a tendency to treat every Bible lightly and to look upon none as the final words of God.

The Bible itself prophesies that in the last days many shall turn away their ears from hearing the truth and the falling away from the faith will occur. The Lord Jesus asks: "Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?" Luke 18:8

"Behold, the days come, saith the Lord GOD, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the LORD." Amos 8:11

"Thus saith the LORD, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein." Jeremiah 6:16

The new versions like the NIV, NASB, ESV, and Holman Standard all reject the Traditional Greek Text, and instead rely primarily on two very corrupt Greek manuscripts called Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. These so called "oldest and best" manuscripts also form the basis of all Catholic versions as well as the Jehovah Witness version.

See my article that shows what these two false witnesses actually say:

http://www.geocities.com/gotcha104/oldbest.html

If you mistakenly think that all bibles are basically the same, I recommend you take a look at this site. It is in two parts, but very easy to read. It shows what is missing in most modern New Testaments.

http://av1611.com/kjbp/charts/themagicmarker.html

For an article showing that the true Historic Confessional position about the inerrancy of the Bible supports the King James Bible view, rather than the recent position of "the originals only". See:

http://www.geocities.com/avdefense1611/historicposition.html

In and by His grace alone,

Will Kinney

[cris]

DID YOU KNOW?

Go to Theology, page 3 thread, "Irrefutable Facts of the KJV", then on to reply 12 on page 1 of same thread for my May 18, 2005 comment.

[brandplucked]

DID YOU KNOW?

Go to Theology, page 3 thread, "Irrefutable Facts of the KJV", then on to reply 12 on page 1 of same thread for my May 18, 2005 comment.

Hi Chris, I'm guessing I got the right post.  In it you say:

DID YOU KNOW---------------

That the New Testament part (Rheims) of The Rheims Douay Bible (catholic) was used extensively by the King James revisers?

Sorry Chris, but this is totally not true.  The preface to the KJB speaks directly against all Catholic translations and considers them to be vastly inferiour.


..... " The OT rested upon the same Masoretic Hebrew text as all subsequent versions, but inasmuch as no ancient manuscripts of the Greek NT arrived in England until 1628, those responsible for this greatest of all versions did not have the advantage of the best Greek text."

Chris, part is true and part is pure baloney.  The Old Testament is indeed based on the Hebrew Masoretic text, however ALL modern versions like the RSV, ESV, NASB, NIV and Holman Standard frequently reject the Hebrew Masoretic texts and follow other things like the Syriac, the so called Greek Septuagint, the Vulgate or they just make up their own text, believing that the Hebrew texts have been lost.  Want me to prove all these facts?  I will gladly do so.  This is not a fabrication on my part, but proveable FACTS that I can document for you.  If you want proof of these charges, please be specific in your questions and I will try to answer them for you.

Chris, exactly what is this "best Greek text" you speak of?  Exactly what are you talking about here?  Name it or them for us, will you?  Aren't you saying in effect that we STILL don't have an inerrant Bible, but it is a work in progress with much disagreement among the "scholars"?





In 1613, the text showed over 300 differences from the original 1611 version.  ...
The KJV gradually came to be accepted as so far absolute that in the minds of myriads there was no distinction between this version and the original texts, and they may almost be said to have believed in the literal inspiration of the very words which composed it.-------Albert S. Cook


Uh, Chris, the "300 differences" you speak of had nothing to do with the underlying Hebrew and Greek texts, but were minor printing errors that were soon corrected.  By innuendo you are distorting the facts.

As for the alleged "Revisions" of the King James Bible, may I suggest you read one or both of the following.

http://www.geocities.com/gotcha104/PrintErr.html

Or

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/mythofearly.htm

Chris, it seems your arguments are meant instead to prove that there is no such thing as The inerrant and inspired Bible anywhere on this earth, and so you prove my original point.

If you believe The Bible IS the inspired and inerrant words of God, then by all means, please tell us exactly where we can get a copy of it.  If you do not believe the Bible IS now the inerrant words of God, then have the integrity to openly admit what I strongly suspect is what you really believe about this issue.

Thanks,

Will Kinney

[cris]

DID YOU KNOW?

Go to Theology, page 3 thread, "Irrefutable Facts of the KJV", then on to reply 12 on page 1 of same thread for my May 18, 2005 comment.

Hi Chris, I'm guessing I got the right post.  In it you say:

DID YOU KNOW---------------

That the New Testament part (Rheims) of The Rheims Douay Bible (catholic) was used extensively by the King James revisers?

Sorry Chris, but this is totally not true.  The preface to the KJB speaks directly against all Catholic translations and considers them to be vastly inferiour.


..... " The OT rested upon the same Masoretic Hebrew text as all subsequent versions, but inasmuch as no ancient manuscripts of the Greek NT arrived in England until 1628, those responsible for this greatest of all versions did not have the advantage of the best Greek text."

Chris, part is true and part is pure baloney.  The Old Testament is indeed based on the Hebrew Masoretic text, however ALL modern versions like the RSV, ESV, NASB, NIV and Holman Standard frequently reject the Hebrew Masoretic texts and follow other things like the Syriac, the so called Greek Septuagint, the Vulgate or they just make up their own text, believing that the Hebrew texts have been lost.  Want me to prove all these facts?  I will gladly do so.  This is not a fabrication on my part, but proveable FACTS that I can document for you.  If you want proof of these charges, please be specific in your questions and I will try to answer them for you.

Chris, exactly what is this "best Greek text" you speak of?  Exactly what are you talking about here?  Name it or them for us, will you?  Aren't you saying in effect that we STILL don't have an inerrant Bible, but it is a work in progress with much disagreement among the "scholars"?





In 1613, the text showed over 300 differences from the original 1611 version.  ...
The KJV gradually came to be accepted as so far absolute that in the minds of myriads there was no distinction between this version and the original texts, and they may almost be said to have believed in the literal inspiration of the very words which composed it.-------Albert S. Cook


Uh, Chris, the "300 differences" you speak of had nothing to do with the underlying Hebrew and Greek texts, but were minor printing errors that were soon corrected.  By innuendo you are distorting the facts.

As for the alleged "Revisions" of the King James Bible, may I suggest you read one or both of the following.

http://www.geocities.com/gotcha104/PrintErr.html

Or

http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/mythofearly.htm

Chris, it seems your arguments are meant instead to prove that there is no such thing as The inerrant and inspired Bible anywhere on this earth, and so you prove my original point.

If you believe The Bible IS the inspired and inerrant words of God, then by all means, please tell us exactly where we can get a copy of it.  If you do not believe the Bible IS now the inerrant words of God, then have the integrity to openly admit what I strongly suspect is what you really believe about this issue.

Thanks,

Will Kinney

Everything I typed was written by Albert Cook.  None was my opinion.

THE PREFACE?  The preface says?  Is the preface the Word of God?  Is the preface truth?  Is the preface inerrant?  I'm sure that preface was the opinion of a protestant.  It couldn't have been a catholic.  The catholics could have a preface saying whatever, also.  As far as I'm concerned, I believe the Douay-Rheims is closer to the original.  Jerome translated the entire bible into Latin and then that Latin bible was translated into English.  The King James followed shortly after that translation by a group of anti-catholics.  The catholic faith was believed for 1500 years until 100 years before Luther.  I am not catholic...........first of all.  I have to say, from what I've read, that the catholic church was in dire need of reform but it was taken too far, hence, all the different denominations today.  When one person disagreed with the theology of another, then a different denomination was started.  It's just gone on and on and on. There are different interpretations of the bible, even the KJV.  Different denominations use the KJV and obviously disagree or they would be of the same denomination.  The catholic interpretation of the bible has not been changed since it was written.  Modern man doesn't like that either, especially a lot of catholics.  They want the doctrine of the catholic church changed but the catholic church won't budge.

As for me, I believe God preserved His Word in my heart, all of our hearts for that matter, which have been given to Him.  I'm accountable to Him only.

I don't like the old English of the KJV.  I use the NASB.  If that bible led me astray, then I'm accountable to God for that.  I don't think it has.

Grace and peace,
cris

[JudgeNot]

Cris said:

THE PREFACE?  The preface says?  Is the preface the Word of God?  Is the preface truth?  Is the preface inerrant?

He-he-he-he - - YOU GO GIRL!  

[cris]

Cris said:

THE PREFACE?  The preface says?  Is the preface the Word of God?  Is the preface truth?  Is the preface inerrant?

He-he-he-he - - YOU GO GIRL!  

GIRL?  GIRL?  What makes ye think I'm a goil?

[JudgeNot]

GIRL?  GIRL?  What makes ye think I'm a goil?

Uh-oh - JN is in trouble now.  

When I rant my wife tells me "you go girl!" - so I'll claim the "dumb expression used at no risk to me" defense.  

[cris]

GIRL?  GIRL?  What makes ye think I'm a goil?

Uh-oh - JN is in trouble now.  

When I rant my wife tells me "you go girl!" - so I'll claim the "dumb expression used at no risk to me" defense.  

hahaha, nah, yous not in trouble but you will be if you keep evading the question.  Why do you think I's a goil?  For a very long time BEP addressed me as brother and then a couple of months ago he addressed me as sister.  Now, which gender am I?  I know, but I'm not telling.  Remember the game the poster, Whitehorse, had going?  No one knew if it was a he or a she.  To this very day, no one really knows and he/she is gone away from the CU forum.

[JudgeNot]

Now, which gender am I?  I know, but I'm not telling.

"I know"

Whew!  That's a relief!!!  

[cris]

Now, which gender am I?  I know, but I'm not telling.

"I know"

Whew!  That's a relief!!!  

How could this be a plop plop, fizz fizz moment?

[nChrist]

   Dear Person in Christ Chris,

I thought that I knew at one time, but maybe it was like that dream I had once:

I dreamed that I was awake and woke up to find that I was asleep.