Hi George,

A while back Ian recommended the ESV as part of the Reformation Study Bible. I purchased a copy and so far I find it very easy to use after years of the KJV (I had not been comfortable with other modern versions). If you want to trial the ESV (or the ASV as recommended by Brolga above), download the e-sword free bible (on the internet) and add the ESV and ASV on for free. I am amazed at how good e-sword resources are...and they are free....however I would encourage anyone to send a donation.

If you like the ESV you might want to buy a Reformation Study Bible ESV.

Kind regards, John Paul

Hi John,

Ha! That was the version/study Bible I was considering purchasing. Good to hear.

I have been downloading podcasts from a Reformed Theological Seminary in the States and listening to the lectures on the way to work. They have been really good. I am working my way through the "Church History" course. Once I am done that one, I will move on to OT then NT.

I am half considering learning Koine Greek as well. Lets see.

God bless - George. 

Hi Ian,

Which would you recommend - the Reformation Study Bible or the Schofield Study Bible? And you can you please state your reasons for your preference?

I am not (yet) a 5 point Calvinist. Would I still benefit from the Reformation Study Bible?

G. 

Hi George, Good luck with the Koine Greek. I am having enough trouble learning German.

Mark Twain made a wonderful quote, which my teacher and classmates (young and old) love:

"Never knew before what eternity was made for. It is for some of us the chance to learn German" (Notebook # 14, 11/1877 - 7/1878)

See: http://www.twainquotes.com/German.html     His humour was, and is, priceless.

John

George, et al.

Just about any modern English translation would be a far better choice than the archaic KJV, and for a good many reasons (both textual and translational). In short, though, I recommend the ESV as being a very good, very reliable translation. I also recommend the NLT, as it often succeeds in bringing out the meaning of a given text far better than do the more formally equivalent translations.

So far as 'Study Bibles' go, my recommendation is the ESV Reformation Study Bible. Forget the Schofield Study Bible, as it's based on the KJV (an inferior text), and is built around a Dispensational hermeneutic (which is just out-and-out cr*p) [EMOTE]smiley-innocent.gif[/EMOTE]

Anyway, enough for now, I'm still on holidays!

Blessings,

Didaktikon/SOTT (haven't used that n-d-p in a while!) [EMOTE]smiley-wink.gif[/EMOTE]

Forget the Schofield Study Bible, as it's based on the KJV (an inferior text), and is built around a Dispensational hermeneutic (which is just out-and-out cr*p)

Reminds me of the Old "Sly and the Family Stone" song "Everyday People"

Sometimes I'm right then I can be wrong
My own beliefs are in my songs
A butcher, a banker, a drummer and then
Makes no difference what group I'm in
I am everyday people

Then it's the blue ones who can't accept
The green ones for living with
The black ones tryin' to be a skinny one
Different strokes for different folks
And so on and so on and scooby dooby dooby

Ooh sha sha
We gotta live together

I am no better and neither are you
We're all the same whatever we do
You love me you hate me
You know me and then
Still can't figure out the scene I'm in
I am everyday people

Then it's the new man
That doesn't like the short man
For being such a rich one
That will not help the poor one
Different strokes for different folks
And so on and so on scooby dooby dooby

Ooh sha sha
We got to live together

There is a yellow one that won't
Accept the black one
That won't accept the red one
That won't accept the white one

Different strokes for different folks
And so on and so on and
Scooby dooby dooby
Ooh sha sha
I am everyday people

There you go again ......

Hi Ian,

Thanks for the answer. I have purchased a NLT and am really enjoying it, gaining much more out of it than I have from the KJV for many-a-year. In fact I bought my 9 year old daughter one for Christmas. I guess if I am buying a non-KJV bible for Christmas, I must be moving slowly away from my CAI past! LOL.

I will get round to buying that ESV study bible, but for the mean-time the NLT is working well.

Thanks again for taking the time to answer.

George. 

And why not? The 'tune' is upbeat, and allows me to get down and boogey! [EMOTE]smiley-yell.gif[/EMOTE]

Blessings,

Ian

"Guest",

Good for you. It is another excellent, modern English translation! [EMOTE]smiley-innocent.gif[/EMOTE]

Blessings,

Ian

Regarding the King James version..

Here's a little issue I'd like to bring up about the KJV translators taking Hebrews 13:4 for an example.

The NA27/UBS4 text reads:

Timio" o& gamo" e*n pasin kai h& koith a*mianto"

The Textus Receptus reads exactly the same ( I have a hard copy in my personal library  !!) and for that matter the Byzantium has a slight variation but the text still remains in agreement.

The mood of the verb  ( Timios ) is the mood of imperative and the voice is passive because it receives the action of  ( gamos) (ie the subject of the verb).

So with these points in mind the sentence should translate: " Let marriage be respected by all and let the marriage bed (koite) be undefiled."

But our ignorant and misguided and ill-informed Revival Centres and Revival Fellowships would uphold the King James translators: " Marriage is honorable in all, and the bed undefiled."

And yet quite clearly the KJV translators have got it completely wrong and probably because they failed to translate the imperative. I suppose this could present some difficulty with Elizabethan English which is not as developed as our modern English.

Of interest, the NRSV translates " Let marriage be held in honor by all, and let the marriage bed be kept undefiled " which I think is pretty close to the knuckle.

The inadequacy of the King James Version becomes all too apparent and indeed an unreliable source for any reasonable hermenuetical work. A perusal of Please Consider suggests that there are a plethora of such mistranslated passages contained within the work of the KJV translation. Many I will ,no doubt, continue to discover as time goes. But nevertheless I feel that some of it may well be due to the difficulty that Elizabethan English may have presented to the translators at that time in our church history.

blessings
Eric

ps the ESV states: "Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled,"

..
 

When I started to seriously question my love affair with the KJV, textus receptus, and majority text I found the following book to respectfully, systematically and convincingly deal with the furphies presented by many KJV-only/best proponents.

White JR (1995) The King James Only Controversy – can you trust the modern translations. 286 pp Bethany House Publishers

Hi Ian,

Have been reading commentaries on-line today about Memra and Logos. Thanks for that. It has been very interesting. However, the CAI teach that since Jesus is the Word (Logos/Memra), that He is a personification of the Bible. Thus to know Jesus/preach Jesus/Jesus in the midst of 2-3 believers etc - means that we should simply know the bible/preach the bible/talk about the bible between 2-3 believers. In other words Jesus is synonymous with the written Word of God.

So if I go back and discuss with them the flaws of their beliefs regarding Logos, how would I go about that?

As for the essay on Acts, I understamd your arguments but am not qualified in Greek to say wether or not they hold any water. Having being burned once by taking in what one man said is "gospel", I am a bit more cautios this time around. Once bitten twice shy. So until I can verify your arguments (either through learning Greek, or getting neutral opinions on it), I will need to reserve judgement. But it is very interesting.

Thanks for all of your input,

George.

Hi Ian,

I would not label it "paranoia and distrust", more just like a healthy dose of caution. I guess perspective is everything, eh? LOL.

Your essay was good - logically presented. It is just at this moment I have no way of verifying it. I am leaning in the direction you pursue in your essay - but shall suspend judgement for the meantime. It is precisely because we do not have a good knoweldge base, that we perhaps we are not quick to take on board the comments of another teacher. Have patience! :)

You know, it would be of great service if you could actually put together a short essay on the Logos of John 1. I could then send it on to current and former CAI members. It is just one of the stumbling blocks of CAI theology, but an important one. It came about from the 2nd in charge (Michy) having a revelation one day that since Jesus was THE Word, that evertime the Bible referred to Jesus in the epistles, you could substitute the written word instead. It all seemed bizarre to me at the time, but I lacked the knoweldge, time and will to research it further.

It actually would be a big help to ex-CAI people. So, in the words of a certain website, "please consider" this request. :)

Thanks for all of yoour continued good works.

George.

• I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things. (Isaiah 45:7, KJV)
• Shall a trumpet be blown in the city, and the people not be afraid? shall there be evil in a city, and the LORD hath not done it? (Amos 3:6, KJV)
• Out of the mouth of the most High proceedeth not evil and good? (Lamentations 3:38)

On to the article;

Skeptics love the KJV so much, one would think that they were still back in medieval England. Use of this translation is problematic these days, since it uses an archaic version of modern English, which doesn't necessarily mean the same things today as when it was translated over 400 years ago. In addition, the KJV was produced using a limited number of medieval manuscripts that did not represent the earliest Alexandrian set of manuscripts.

What do the modern translations say?

• The One forming light and creating darkness, Causing well-being and creating calamity; I am the LORD who does all these. (Isaiah 45:7, NASB)
• I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the LORD, do all these things. (Isaiah 45:7, NIV)

Isaiah 45:7 contrasts opposites. Darkness is the opposite of light. However, evil is not the opposite of peace. The Hebrew word translated "peace" is sha^lo^m,² which has many meanings, mostly related to the well being of individuals. Ra^?a^h,³ the Hebrew word translated "evil" in the KJV often refers to adversity or calamity. There are two forms of the word. Strong's H7451a most often refers to moral evil, whereas Strong's H7451b (the form used here) most often refers to calamity or distress. Obviously, "calamity" is a better antonym of "peace" than "evil."

Amos 3:6

• If a trumpet is blown in a city will not the people tremble? If a calamity occurs in a city has not the LORD done it? (Amos 3:6, NASB)
• When a trumpet sounds in a city, do not the people tremble? When disaster comes to a city, has not the LORD caused it? (Amos 3:6, NIV)

Likewise, Amos 3:6 uses the same word, ra^?a^h, referring to calamity or disaster. the context (a disaster happening to a city) does not refer to moral evil.

Lamentations 3:38

• Is it not from the mouth of the Most High that both calamities and good things come? (Lamentations 3:38, NIV)
• Is it not from the mouth of the Most High That both good and ill go forth? (Lamentations 3:38, NASB)

The King James Version of Lamentations 3:38 seems to suggest that God speaks both good and evil. However, if one reads the verse in context, the preceding verses indicate that God does not do or approve of evil.⁴ The verse following indicates that people should not complain in view of their sins.⁵ What the verse really is saying that God decrees times of good things and times of judgment. Lamentations was written by Jeremiah during a time of judgment, when Judah had gone off into exile. Jeremiah was chosen by God to be the prophet to tell Judah to reform or be judged. The people did not believe Jeremiah, and, therefore, fell under God's judgment. In Lamentations 3:38, the word translated "good" is t?o^b (Strong's H2896).⁶ The word usually refers to good things⁵ as opposed to bad things. Again, ra^?a^h³ does not refer to moral evil, but calamities, in this verse. Likewise, the Bible commentaries indicate that the verse refers to God's judgment based upon people's sin.⁷

Conclusion

God is not the author of evil.⁸ However, God does reward and punish on the basis of good and bad behavior. Therefore, God does bring judgment and calamity (either directly or through human authorities) on those who rebel.⁹ God will ultimately judge all people, since rebels will not be allowed in the new, perfect creation.