Monday, January 31, 2011

DEBATE WED FEB 2 @ 1 PM west coast (4 PM east)

THIS IS A VERY INTERESTING DEBATE. I'm listening now to Jack Moorman's introductory statements.

Dear Friends,
Dr. J. A. Moorman has notified us that his 90 minute debate with James White on live TV in London concerning:

Are the modern translations on a par with the
King James Bible ?

will be held this Wednesday, Feb. 2, 2011, at 4 pm, Eastern Time (NY time) (9 pm UK time, which is 5 hours ahead). You can click in to the debate live by going to:

Dr. Moorman is a member of the Executive Committee of the Dean Burgon Society and a Bible and a manuscript scholar. Dr. White is a modernist who believes the modern Bibles and texts are satisfactory and has made a career out of debating the issues related to this debate.

We hope you will click in and watch this monumental debate. It should be informative and interesting. You do not want to miss it.

Please forward this email to all of your friends.

In Christ,
H. D. Williams, M.D., Ph.D.

Sunday, January 30, 2011

The Damage Done to God's Church, to Christendom, to the English Language

Just a little quote or two from Cloud's book, For Love of the Bible. I can hardly read anything on this subject any more without bursting into tears over the evil that has been done to the Church by the Bible revisions, a state of mind I'm sure few can grasp. Comes from spending so much time reading about it, deepening my knowledge of the horror. I do wish of course that others would also acquire a sense of the hurt done to the Church brought about by this Trojan Horse "gift" from the "scholars."
Let me emphasize that much of the opposition to the Revision was voiced by men who, though believing the King James Bible could be improved, were convinced it should not undergo revision. Following are three of the reasons they had for this position:

(1) The revision would not be wise, inasmuch as the Authorized Bible is an ancient Standard for the English-speaking world and as no revision could take its place, the division of authority that would accompany any such revision would result in far greater evil than any possible advantage.
Cloud, FLOTB p 127 (the other two reasons bottom of this post)
We should all weep because this is exactly what has happened. We've lost the ancient standard and are reaping the far greater evil AND HARDLY ANYONE NOTICES. They go on blithely accepting and even celebrating this miserable situation as if it were a great blessing to the church, accepting the loss of well-memorized and frequently quoted passages that either no longer exist in our Bibles or have been usurped by disgustingly ugly and stupid replacements. When in doubt themselves, pastors consult their lexicons and their commentaries to choose among these ugly and stupid alternative readings INSTEAD OF CONSULTING THE HOLY SPIRIT, Who is put aside in this time-consuming busywork. He was put aside in the making of the Revision itself and in every new version that spun off it and He is put aside now.

Here's another quote, on the reception of the English Revised Version at the time by "the great majority of the people to whom the Bible was dear:"
[They] hailed the Revised Version with pleasure; bought it when it appeared with eagerness; glanced over its pages with interest; and then returned to the Authorized Version. ... The men who had inherited the Puritan love for the very letter of the Scriptures were many of them indignant at proposed changes which would rob them of texts familiar in their mouths as household words. T Harwood Pattison, the History of the English Bible, pp 163-64, in Cloud FLOTB, p. 127


But not for long, as by our generation it's a done deal, we've BEEN robbed! Robbed of this rich cultural heritage that had the very words of God on English-speaking lips for centuries. They are still in countless quotations in English literature, though I wonder how many could even recognize them any more as they are now blasted to the four winds by a cacophony of moronic substitutions.

The most vocal supporters of the modern Bible versions are literary Philistines as well as spiritual deadheads who have no sense of the cultural heritage that has been destroyed by their crass enterprise. Oh how they have succeeded at that destruction too, as if they had themselves intended it! The people who have been deprived of this spiritual heritage haven't enough knowledge any more even to shed a tear over its destruction, yet no nuclear bombs or Richter 9 earthquakes could have done more to destroy the English Church, and therefore Western Civilization, and invited all the other grenades lobbed in the growing Apostasy and the consequent Culture Wars. By undermining faith in God's word. By undermining the English language itself.

That's what happens when profane hands touch the ark of God.

Just to round things out, Cloud concludes his list of the reasons the 1881 revision was opposed:

(2) The revision would not be godly, inasmuch as the spiritual and theological climate of the late 1800s was too decadent to produce a godly revision of the KJV.
Sadly borne out in the result of the revision that was nevertheless done anyway.
(3) The revision would not be honest, inasmuch as many of those who would be involved in producing the revision were not to be trusted.
Sadly, this dishonesty is well documented by J W Burgon.