 |
 |
 |
 |
|||||||||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
|||||||||||||||||
|
Letters OF THE KING JAMES TRANSLATORS Dear A. P. April 17, l989 ...The article spoke disparagingly of the translators of the Authorized Version of the Bible calling them "the King James boys." The truth of the matter is that each one of those godly men was a linguist, many of them knowing several languages fluently for many years. There is, I have no doubt, hardly one man living who can hold a candle to one of these skilled men who combined scholarship with godliness. This past week a letter came from a man in Buffalo, New York who attempted to belittle the translators of the King James Version. What is so tragic is that these men are in grave danger because they wrest the Scriptures to their own destruction. I grieve for them, but since they refuse the Scriptures which alone is able to make us wise unto salvation, there is no helping them, unless God will open their heart. As Luther said, "Whom God intends to destroy, He gives leave to play with Scripture." It is very sad to me to see men who are conservative in their politics, and who mean to do well, but who fall by pride when it comes to the Word of God. James tells us, "Be not many masters", i.e. teachers, "knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation." It is a serious thing to believe error, but it is so much more serious for one to teach error. ... THE BIBLE NOT OF PRIVATE INTERPRETATION Dear P. C. February 21, 1988 The Apostle Peter, writing under Divine inspiration, wrote, "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost" (II Peter 1:20,21). The Scriptures are not of human fabrication; and, here the man of God declares we must settle this first, before and beyond anything else. Without this truth, all learning is a matter of opinion, and is subject to change with the whims of the king, or of the preacher. The Bible is not open to private interpretations, but is to be understood according to the manner the saints of God have understood it historically; and Paul here condemns them for their folly who, having itching ears, seek to hear some new thing. The integrity of God's Word is of the most primary importance. Without it, we have no authoritative word by which to base our Creed or our Conduct; our Doctrine or our Practice. Therefore, the issue of all issues is whether or not we have the Word of God preserved for our own generation... ON TEXTUAL CRITICISM Dear R. W. February 27, 1991 ...God does not reveal truth to the wise and prudent, but to the man who is simple. This is the reason Tyndale understood his enormous task so that even a ploughboy would know more Scripture than the ecclesiastics of the day. If we believe that for a proper interpretation of Scripture we must consult with the scholar, then, we have a priesthood every bit as oppressive as any that has gone before. If I believed there was any validity to the machinations of the higher critics, I could not hold forth the Book of God and say, "Thus saith the Lord." I would be like all the academic experts who wander in the maze of uncertainties. ... Dear R. W. August 28, 1991 ...Regarding the Masoretic and the Majority texts: after all is said and done, the issue remains: "Do we have the Word of God? Can we honestly hold up our Bible and say, `Thus saith the Lord'? or, Does the Bible merely contain the Word of God?" At issue is the preservation of God's Word. Almost no one will argue that the original manuscripts were inspired of God, but how few there are who adhere to the preservation of God's Word in our English version! What about our English Bible? Is it inerrant? because to the degree it is not inerrant, to that degree it is not authoritative. ON PREACHING THE WORD Dear J. Z. September 22, 1987 ...The Unitarians and Quakers still practice the open invitation to preach, and the Mennonites here, still choose the preacher by ballot. Yet, among the Unitarians and Mennonites, there is a recognized pastor. This is true also of the Quakers. The idea of preaching began in the days of the prophets, and Noah is called a "preacher of righteousness." Synagogue worship grew out of the dispersion, and the Church herself was established by preaching at Pentecost. Paul makes constant reference to his preaching. It was the Protestant Reformers, however, who returned preaching to the place it held in the early church. But the idea of sitting down to study the Bible without a "master," as James calls teachers, is foolhardy. It amounts to everyone pooling his or her ignorance. Not everyone is a preacher, and not everyone is qualified as a teacher. There are certain qualifications that help to identify such a "master," not the least of which is knowing what they are talking about. ...
|
|||||||||||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
|||||||||||||||||
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
