Falwell says it is heresy to use King James Bible??

See this link... http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/falwell.htm

Can any of our bible scholars on this board tell me what on earth this is all about? Is it really true? If so, then Falwell is obviously much more of a threat to mankind than my previous posts hinted at. The King James Version of the Bible IS the original Word of God, in English anyway - at least that's what my Norwegian/Lutheran upbringing taught me.

I can't wait to hear the responses....

 

Actually, I mostly agree with Falwell on this point. He isn't saying that it's heretical to use the 1611 (he even calls it his favorite translation); only that it's heretical to believe that the 1611 is the only translation authorized by God. The only distinction is that I don't refer to doctrines I disagree with as heresies, because I consider that term outdated (it was used to refer to doctrines that impeded the spread of the faith).

Personally, I prefer the KJV's language for literary purposes but generally use the NRSV for my own study and worship. I consider the Bible as a whole to be the product of human faith traditions, so this controversy doesn't really affect me all that much.


Cheers,

 

KJB

Carl_Reginstein,

In reading the post I was unclear on where one correspondance ended and one began. However, as a christian and one who is a seminary student I will attempt to offer my 2 cents worth (I will let the reader decide if it is worth that much ).

For an evangelical, the bible is God's word to his people. This word was given to human beings and the humans had to write in the language that they had at the time(s) (Hebrew, Greek, etc).

Enough of the history lesson now, IMO having a copy of the scriptures in the language you speak (and understand) is more important than holding to some preconcieved notion. As an evangelical christian I believe that God's written revelation trancends our language barrier and can be just as inspired as the original king james. However this is just my opinon.

cbryant

 

As a Jew, I really feel that ALL people who look to the Jewish Bible for instruction or guidance should at least make a stab at learning enough Hebrew to reference the "received" text. If you do that, you will more easily understand and account for the compromises that the best translators must make.

I realize that the Christian texts present the additional difficulty of being originally in Greek whilst Jesus and the desciples may have spoken Aramaic.

FWIW, I think Falwell displayed considerable patience with someone who really didn't know what she was talking about...

 

I agree with my Jewish friend here, I think Falwell exercised restraint--there are those who believe that the KJV is the only inspired version of the Bible, and by my reckoning, they are on the fringe, offering little sound scholarship to support their suppositions. I believe that in some of the first KJV manuscripts, the seventh commandment was rendered "Thou shalt commit adultery". Hilarious typographical error, I have no notion of what the KJV-only sects do with it.

There is also a strong argument that the original NT was written primarily in Hebrew, not Koine Greek. I have a dear friend who's executive director of a center for the study of the original manuscripts and a more accurate Jewish understanding of the New Testament and Jesus. She recently wrote a book dealing peripherally with this subject of Hebrew vis-a-vis Greek.

Take a look, Nosborne! http://www.en-gedi.org/

 

Carl_Reginstein,

I'm simply trying to figure out your beef.

I've read many of your inflammatory posts and threads about Christianity, but have not responded to any of them, until now; so I'll simply cut to the chase, okay?

Without your acceptence of the Lord Jesus Christ into your heart, you will be hell bound. Do you believe in the diety of the Lord Jesus Christ?

 

Re: Re: Falwell says it is heresy to use King James Bible??

(1) If Carl believes that accepting Jesus is the only way to avoid Hell, then he obviously believes in the deity of Jesus Christ.

(2) If Carl does not believe in the deity of Jesus Christ, then he obviously does not believe that accepting Jesus is the only way to avoid Hell.

Your argument makes sense only to people who already agree with you and will just irritate those who don't, which means that what you're really doing here is anti-evangelism.


Cheers,

 

Re: Re: Falwell says it is heresy to use King James Bible??

I'm not sure I believe in the "Jesus diet", as your text above implies - mainly wafers and wine I'm afraid! However, as to "deity", if that is what you meant, then the answer is that I'm a Lutheran and was taught from birth that Jesus is the personal Savior of mankind, and that we are saved by faith and faith alone.

Note that I was not taught from birth, however, that adopting one text over the other of the bible could place one in jeopardy of the sin of heresy - this peculiarity of theology seems to be reserved for those who choose to follow the false prophet of the religious right: Jerry Falwell and his ilk.

 

Re: Re: Re: Falwell says it is heresy to use King James Bible??

Your ability to tap dance is quite remarkable. Dance man, dance!!!

But you never answered the question!!! Alas, you knew that.

You were not asked what you were taught; you were simply asked what you believed. Since you are willing to share so many other religious opinions, maybe you will share this one too? Should the question be restated?

 

Um, perhaps I can reply for Carl, who is more civil than I am and a lot more liberal. Lutherans are a lot (if I said alot would you smile for uncle?) more concerned about whether Jesus has a place for them in His heart than about whether Carl or I are nice enough to have a place for Jesus in our hearts that is suitable by human standards. We are assured that the first case is true and that the second case is irrelevant. If Carl is OK with God it is on account of Christ's bitter passion and precious death fulfilling the requirements of the Law in the manner of God's own choosing, not on acccount of Carl's answering your bitter questions and cheap rhetoric in the way you choose to require.

Have a nize day.

 

Who is bitter? < scratches head >

A salvic question is not cheap rhetoric. On the contrary, it may have eternal consequences for many people.

 

Since you have no control over anyone else's afterlife, your question is neither salvic nor eternally consequential--and your threats are completely worthless. I respect Baptist theology when it's done in a competent way, but all you're doing here is presenting Christianity in a bad light.


Cheers,

 

Carl, Falwell and his ilk agree with you entirely; read that exchange more closely: he was saying that it was heresy to insist upon but one translation of the Bible as correct. The KJV-only crowd is a rather rigid and fringe sect, Falwell's reacting against them, he's on your side on this point.

 

Ditto for me. I also like the New Century Version. With my limited knowledge of Hebrew and Greek, I think the NRSV is the most accurate translation.

 

Doh! mea culpa

 

I think THAT would give me a rather unconfortable feeling!

 

I've always been fond of the pidgin Bible, the result of 12 years of work by a Univ. of Hawaii professor and 26 pidgin speakers.

The Lord's Prayer:
“God, you our Fadda.
You stay inside da sky.
We like all da peopo know fo shua how you stay,
An dat you stay good an spesho,
An we like dem give you plenny respeck.
We like you come King fo everybody now.
We like everybody make jalike you like,
Ova hea inside da world,
Jalike da angel guys up inside da sky make jalike you like.
Give us da food we need fo today an every day.
Hemmo our shame, an let us go
Fo all da kine bad stuff we do to you,
Jalike us guys let da odda guys go awready,
And we no stay huhu wit dem
Fo all da kine bad stuff dey do to us.
No let us get chance fo do bad kine stuff,
But take us outa dea, so da Bad Guy no can hurt us.
Cuz you our King.
You get da real power,
An you stay awesome foeva.
Dass it!”

 

Thanks for this, Jimmy. I didn't expect to like the NRSV, but I fell in love with it when I started using it at church. Haven't tried the New Century Version, but I may have to pick it up.

One paraphrase--not a translation--that folks here might like is Good as New, which is an entirely modernized retelling of the New Testament. I found it to be thought-provoking, though it doesn't even try to be a literal translation. The introduction is written by Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, and it has been a pretty hot seller in England.


Cheers,

 

janko, you mentioned a while back having a framed portrait of Mordecai Kaplan in your study. I'm studying Kaplan pretty extensively for my dissertation--on Max Kadushin, who was originally a pupil of Kaplan's but went off in another direction--and like your taste in theologians. If you haven't already, you need to check out Communings of the Spirit, the recently published first volume of his journals (covering the period up to 1934). They are, I think, the most lucid writing ever published with his name attached--very addicting and human and at times even funny (he has this wonderful anecdote about what his mother said when she read some of his work). They are also, the editor argues, the longest journals ever written by a Jewish thinker. There's a story the editor tells about how once Kaplan had a deadline and only had time to write an academic article or his daily journal entry. He chose the journal entry on the grounds that anyone could write another article, but only he could write his own journal.


Cheers,

 

Thanks, Tom. In an effort to "remember the rock whence [we] were hewn," I buy a book of serious Judaica each year at Rosh Hashanah. I would very much like to read your diss when it's baked and browned on top. Good luck to you as you continue your work. Janko