Jesus is Lord of all things.
Especially church.

Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures. 1 Corinthians 15

Added a Photo. 

Many years ago there was a Newsweek magazine cover: Is God Dead?

This one is not recent but it still concerns us. Our hope is still in God. But, can the church not do better?

Three words come to mind: Adapt or die.

  • 230
Added a File.   

What a plan! Self-supporting, professional, Christian workers showing up to... work. Rather than waving their seminary certificates and expecting to become religious local professionals. That's not to suggest that a seminary degree isn't a useful thing. All learning is of value just as all truth is from the Almighty,

I'm reminded of how the Apostle Paul found fellowship with those of the same employment and craft. And our Lord, too, of whom it was asked: Is this not the carpenter?

Accordingly, David Aikman envisions “thousands of Chinese technicians and workers”, wearing the disguise of the professional workers of the Chinese led global system of economic development. Their disguise is their non-western physicality, presumably indicating a lack of ideological and religious agenda but in reality concealing the fact that they are the representatives of an international effort to spiritually transform the societies they encounter.
The Islamic world… will no longer be able to resort to the usual complaints about the ‘decedent west’ or the perils of globalization. Globalization is indeed here to stay and the Christian component of it, more and more, will have a Chinese accent.

This paper is published by the kind permission of the author who describes himself:

I am currently a postdoctoral fellow at the center for the research of conversion and inter-religous encounters in Beer Sheva. My focus is on ethnicity and religion in contemporary China, particuarly in Yunnan Province. My doctorate dealt with christian missionary work in today's Yunnan and the way it realtes to issues of ethnicty, identity, state policy and globalization. 
In addition I teach Chinese history, culture and religion in Bar Ilan University and Herzog College.

Other papers he authored are found here.

  • 1175

Hello dear sister and long-time friend, good to hear from you.

Thank you for being here and putting yourself on the map. I have replied to you via PM (private message).

If anyone else needs an adjustment, just let us know.

  • 1722

I seem to be on the map twice but I do not know what email I used for the old listing

  • 1857
Added a comment to Papal Bull 

The Scripture just prior to the "keys" passage is near and dear to my heart. Here is Matt 16:13-18...

13 Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?” 14 And they said, “Some say John the Baptist, others say Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” 15 He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” 16 Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 17 And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of **** shall not prevail against it.

Listening to Peter's testimony of who Jesus actually is always warms my heart. Yet many church leaders turn this beautiful piece of Scripture into something it is not. They focus on Peter and not Jesus. They follow on with the "keys" passage to claim ultimate authority with the church, even beyond Christ as the Head of the Church. They fail on at least two key points:

  1. The original Greek translates the middle of verse 18 as "and on this the rock I will build My church". Please notice the definite article "the" (τῇ) before the word "rock". Jesus' focus is not on Peter as many would have you believe, but rather on the Messiah Himself. "The rock" is Peter's answer to Jesus' question, "But who do you say that I am?" (emphasis mine) The authority that church fathers attempt to derive from this passage fails to manifest itself when Christ is the center of attention rather than Peter
  2. Not only are the "keys" OF the kingdom and not TO the kingdom, as you rightfully point out, but the "binding" is clearly in response to God's will and not the will of man. Please take a look at this same Scripture in the Young's Literal Translation, "19 and I will give to thee the keys of the reign of the heavens, and whatever thou mayest bind upon the earth shall be having been bound in the heavens, and whatever thou mayest loose upon the earth shall be having been loosed in the heavens." English translations of the Bible often use active tense which tends to distort who the main actor is in a passage. The "binding" here is not the will of Peter and the other disciples, or of any other man, but rather of God Himself. The wording is admittedly a bit clunky, but hopefully you can see this principle in action if you pause mid-sentence with a comma... "whatever thou mayest bind upon the earth shall be, having been bound in the heavens". The binding and loosening has already taken place in Heaven before any "decision" was made by a disciple. I believe that it is God the Father who binds and loosens, and that the disciples were just following God's will
  • 2817

Thirty years is a long time. Many years ago and many miles ago. Many good memories among the not so good ones. God be thanked.

I think your and your wife's analysis is accurate. In looking back, I wish things had been different. And that the alternative church movement would not have been so continually pessimistic and judgmental.

It was summed up well in a line from the book Pagan Christianity: "The institutional church has no right to exist."

Well, something is better than nothing. Many of the critics of the institutional church had precious little themselves and therefore reduced the definition of church (literally, an assembly) to playing a round of golf, as portrayed in the book Revolution.

Rather than tear down the work of others - we must do something better ourselves.

Thou — who art thou that art judging another’s domestic servant? To his own master he will stand or fall; and he shall be made to stand, for God is able to make him stand. Romans 14:4.

No doubt, I have fallen into this quagmire myself and have been guilty from time to time. May God forgive me and enable me to do better in the time which remains. Looking back at some of the things I've written, the proper balance was occasionally lacking. I may have complained about "controlling clergy", for example. But for every one of them, there are dozens of "lazy laymen" who are unwilling to serve in any form of ministry or to exercise their newly discovered priesthood in Christ.

The perfect terminology about church affairs matters little. It is the substance which matters. Unless we are speaking the original Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic, we are not speaking "Biblically". Scriptures warns us of getting carried away with words. If we master them all but have not love - something went wrong.

The principles do matter however. And so the question remains: How do we present truth without contrasting it with error? Can it be done? Yes, I think so. If so, it must be done in love.

How do we not be overcome evil but overcome evil with good?

Yes, it's thirty years later. As the song goes: "It's later than it's ever been before." Billions of precious people still have not heard a single presentation of the Gospel or visited any church of any kind. They are looking for help and hope more than a debate of any kind. Let us keep these in mind when we are fighting among ourselves and writing each other off.

“Teacher,” said John, “we saw a man driving out demons in your name and we told him to stop because he was not one of us.” “Do not stop him,” Jesus said. “No one who does a miracle in my name can in the next moment say anything bad about me, for whoever is not against us is for us. Mark 9.
  • 3135

An inquiry came in via email about the author of this ground-breaking volume.

Not to stir the pot too much, the author used a "pen-name". He was a university professor in New York and perhaps did not want to bring the school into this controversy. Pen-names were not unusual back then, I gather.

One additional note about the author regarding his other productions from an old magazine:

  • 3484
Added a Post  

Part of the problem, or part of the solution? Almost 30 years ago we attended a House Church Retreat in the US. Some of the people we shared a cabin with were swapping stories of the problems they experienced in the Institutional Church.

My wife interrupted them by asking, "But what is God doing among you now?"

That was a sincere question. We had already seen what was wrong in Christianity. We came there looking for how to get it right, or at least better.

Fortunately, we did meet some wonderful people then who were making progress and enjoying what God was presently doing with them. Thirty years later I have seen a greater general acceptance of the principle of small fellowships that focus more on worship and personal growth over programs.

However, the drive to tear down more than to build up seems to persist.

I know it is still not easy to work with limited resources and so few people who get what we are doing. Jesus started with 12, and after His resurrection had 500 followers. Many of them persisted and God blessed their faithfulness. They became part of the solution!

  • 3683
Added a Discussion.  

Author of The Hireling Ministry - None of Christ's (London, 1652). Don't look for this title at your local Christian book / paraphernalia store.

Besides founding Rhode Island, in 1638 he founded the First Baptist Church in America in Providence. Williams studied the language of the New England Native Americans and published the first book-length study of it in English.

His combined writings fill 7 volumes. He was active in church, state, political, and missionary activities yet he provided for his own family. I wonder how many Baptists in today's world are aware of his example. The books I found this information in have not been recently checked out, you see.

A page below from the book Roger Williams, A Study of the Life, Times and Character of a Political Pioneer by Edmund Janes Carpenter (1909) is for further clarification of his unusual but Scriptural views:

  • 4250
Added a Discussion.  
‍‍Bless the Lord, O my soul

O my soul

Worship His holy name

Sing like never before

O my soul

I'll worship Your holy name

The sun comes up, it's a new day dawning

It's time to sing Your song again

Whatever may pass, and whatever lies before me

Let me be singing when the evening comes

Bless the Lord, O my soul

O my soul

Worship His holy name

Sing like never before

O my soul

I'll worship Your holy name

You're rich in love, and You're slow to anger

Your name is great, and Your heart is kind

For all Your goodness I will keep on singing

Ten thousand reasons for my heart to find

Bless the Lord, O my soul

O my soul

Worship His holy name

Sing like never before

O my soul

I'll worship Your holy name

And on that day when my strength is failing

The end draws near and my time has come

Still my soul will sing Your praise unending

Ten thousand years and then forevermore

Bless the Lord, O my soul

O my soul

Worship His holy name

Sing like never before

O my soul

I'll worship Your holy name

Jesus, I'll worship Your holy name

Lord, I'll worship Your holy name

Sing like never before

O my soul

I'll worship Your holy name

Jesus, I'll worship Your holy name

I'll worship Your holy name

  • 4452
Added a File.   

Here is a review of a recent book entitled: THE ELDERS: SENIORITY WITHIN EARLIEST CHRISTIANITY. STUDIES OF THE NEW TESTAMENT AND ITS WORLD by R. Alastair Campbell.

It a obviously a book about the identity of those called elders. As this word reads - so does it mean. These are merely the older Christians who are given the responsibility of oversight and shepherding in the church of God. When readers of the New Testament letters came across the word, it already had thousands of years of clear meaning.

By viewing this review one will be reminded that the traditional consensus view of church leadership is being challenged and that it is ongoing. It's too bad that we lost about two thousand years attempting to figure it out.

This is not a mere academic question. Satan has always attempted to keep believers from their responsibilities. Most older ones in the church today have no clue that they are to be caring for, shepherding, and pastoring the others. Thankfully, there are many who instinctively have an awareness to be occupied in such a way toward their junior members.

Yet overall, the simplest, most natural arrangement has been all but lost upon us. Worse still, millions of Christian men who should be serving others in this respect seem to have little or nothing to do or a reason to live. Worse still, the finances of the churches today are dominated by the "teaching elder" when in reality, every elder is required to be a teacher. 1 Timothy 3 2.

The church must again become the servant church. Otherwise more irrelevance and eventual death await it. How can the servant church occur when it continues to spend most of it's resources upon itself?

Worse still, the joyful task of shepherding is given to those already in place. "The elders AMONG you..." Only Heaven knows the amount of false teaching and damage which has been delivered from afar by those, often with a seminary degree in hand, but practically unknown in the locality of the church. Worse still, thousands of churches close each year for lack of ability to fund this "teaching elder." Yes, there have been exceptions but they do not upend the rule.

Biblical eldership is not a calling, not a career, not an office. Nor is it referred to as such. Nor is an elder referred to as 'the minister' or 'the preacher' in the modern sense. Unless disqualified by sin, every Christian senior is to be involved in the care of God's flock. Elders are "appointed" or "ordained" to be the only thing which they can be appointed to: oversight. (They are also known as bishops). And just as qualified senior women, (and masters) were to be honored according to the same source, so were senior men. But the context of this is support is clearly needs based for both the male and female seniors. 

Taken at face value, 1 Timothy 5 17 teaches that it is the alleged "ruling elders" who are also to receive double honor.

Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine.

Can we really believe these small churches, often meeting in homes, were paying full-time salaries to a list of widows as well as to "ruling" and "teaching elders"?

The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed: Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre but of a ready mind; Neither as being lords over God’s heritage but being examples to the flock.And when the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away. Likewise, ye younger... 1 Peter 5 1-5.

Did you happen to notice the last phrase above in which the seniors are contrasted to the younger ones? In Paul's address we see the same pattern. Elders are called to oversight. And do not overlook the fact that his manual work was intended to be an example to the elders of the church: 

And from Miletus he sent to Ephesus, and called the elders of the church. Wherefore I take you to record this day, that I am pure from the blood of all men. For I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God. Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.
Therefore watch, and remember, that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears. And now, brethren, I commend you to God, and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up, and to give you an inheritance among all them which are sanctified. I have coveted no man’s silver, or gold, or apparel. Yea, ye yourselves know, that these hands have ministered unto my necessities, and to them that were with me. I have shewed you all things, how that so laboring ye ought to support the weak, and to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, It is more blessed to give than to receive. Acts 20.

Above all, we readily acknowledge that church structure does not have to be perfect in order for a community to be used of God. And, of course, we readily acknowledge that myriads of seminary graduates have been equipped to be better servants of their Lord. Still, we must press toward the Biblical standards as they will be proven to be the most effective and efficient in the times ahead. Regarding leadership, the bar for entry must neither be set too high nor too low.

  • 5293

Here's an interesting quote from the above author George Bush. The phrase in view is "Pandora's Box of evil" which is spot on true. Please consider his words:

My question is: How can the Church again become the servant church? The early church had a list of qualified widows (among other things) which it supported, for example.

What happened to this list? I think I know the simple answer. Widows are no longer a financial priority. Most all the funding today goes to the clergy. I am referring to tens of billions of dollars each year.

  • 5394
Added a Discussion.  

Friday 2-2-24 6th. Day Of The Weekly Cycle, Shevat 21 5784, 44th. Winter Day

Some people are convinced that Sunday, the first day of the week, is the Biblical Sabbath. Others believe that Saturday, the seventh day of the week, is the Sabbath.

Let’s take an in-depth look at this topic and examine the facts about what day is the Sabbath of the Bible. According to the Ten Commandments, the Sabbath is located on the seventh day of the week. Exodus 20:8-10 says the following, “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God.” At creation God also rested and declared the seventh day holy (Genesis 2:1-3).

Is the seventh day the Sabbath?​

The New Testament is in agreement as to which day is the seventh day of the week. One of the most straight-forward references is found in Luke 23:53-56 & Luke 24:1, and describes Joseph of Arimathaea taking the body of Jesus down off the cross. “Then he took it [the body of Jesus] down, wrapped it in linen, and laid it in a tomb that was hewn out of the rock, where no one had ever lain before. That day was the Preparation, and the Sabbath drew near. And the women who had come with Him from Galilee followed after, and they observed the tomb and how His body was laid. Then they returned and prepared spices and fragrant oils. And they rested on the Sabbath according to the commandment. Now on the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they, and certain other women with them, came to the tomb bringing the spices which they had prepared.”

Therefore, according to the Bible, the Sabbath day can be pinpointed as the day before the first day of the week. Today, we call this day Saturday or the seventh day of the week.

Browse: Who changed the Sabbath to Sunday?

Preparation day or sixth day = Friday

Sabbath day or seventh day = Saturday

Resurrection day or first day = Sunday

Which day is the first day of the week?​

Jesus rising out of the tombMany have asked the question, my calendar begins on Monday, doesn’t that make Sunday the seventh day of the week? It is true that many calendars begin on Monday, but some calendars around the world begin on Friday, Saturday or Sunday as well. The answer to this can be found by studying the linguistics or meaning of each day’s name, rather than only looking at the order of the days printed on paper. Any human can change the order of a printed calendar, but it is a lot harder to change every language in the world.

Browse: Was the real Sabbath day lost because of a calendar change?

Consider the Greek language in which the New Testament was written. According to the Bible, the day before the Sabbath was called the preparation day or “paraskeue" in the Greek language. Even today, thousands of years later, the sixth day of the week, called "Friday" in the English calendar, is still called “Paraskeue" in the modern Greek calendar. Therefore the day that comes after Friday is the Sabbath day.

Sabbath around the world​

Looking at over 100 languages around the world, the seventh day of the week is translated as “Sabbath”. Here is a short list of languages and their translations: (Arabic: Sabet, Czech: Sobota, Indonesian: Sabtu, Italian: Sabato, Latin: Sabbatum, Portuguese: Sábado, Russian: Subbota, Spanish: Sabado).

What does the English language say about the Sabbath? Webster’s dictionary defines the Sabbath as the following: “Seventh day, Saturday, the seventh day of the week.” (Webster’s New Twentieth Century Dictionary, unabridged 2nd ed.)

Consider this—no language contains a correlating link between the word “Sabbath" and the first day of the week. In fact, not even one language designates another rest day besides the seventh day. This confirms the fact that those who used the original languages understood the meaning of the Sabbath and which day it fell upon.

Love, Walter And Debbie

  • 5555
Added a Discussion.  

Thursday 2-1-24 5th. Day Of The Weekly Cycle, Shevat 20 5784, 42nd. Winter Day

Has Jesus mentioned anything about Trinitarians Or Non-Trinitarians? Yet we have our beliefs.

Should we not just have one? Explanation Of Unity: Ephesians 4:4-6

Love, Walter And Debbie

  • 5812
Added a Discussion.  

1-31-24

Trinitarians and non-trinitarians have different beliefs because they interpret the Bible and the nature of God differently. Trinitarians believe that God is one being who exists in three distinct persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. They base their belief on passages in the Bible that suggest the divinity and unity of these three persons, such as Matthew 28:19, John 10:30, and 2 Corinthians 13:14.

They also rely on the decisions of the early ecumenical councils, such as Nicaea and Constantinople, that defined the doctrine of the Trinity in response to various heresies.

Non-trinitarians reject the doctrine of the Trinity and believe that God is either one person or a group of separate beings. They base their belief on passages in the Bible that emphasize the oneness and uniqueness of God, such as Deuteronomy 6:4, Isaiah 44:6, and Mark 12:29.

They also point out the passages that imply a distinction and subordination between the Father and the Son, such as John 14:28, Mark 13:32, and 1 Corinthians 15:28. They also question the reliability and authority of the ecumenical councils and the creeds that they produced.

The debate between trinitarians and non-trinitarians has been going on for centuries and is unlikely to be resolved anytime soon. Both sides claim to have biblical and historical support for their views, but they also have different ways of understanding and applying those sources. Ultimately, it comes down to one’s faith and personal relationship with God.

Love, Walter And Debbie

  • 5994

A fascinating story in so many ways. Shows God's love for all the nations, not only the Jews.

It reminds us in the innate knowledge of God in all people, made in his image. These "foreigners" knew right from wrong and dealt with Jonah accordingly. Overboard he went.

Please observe that Jonah was not told to go to seminary for extensive training or to earn an ordination certification in order to preach.

What has changed in all the time since Jonah? Not much. We still are disobedient and lethargic regarding his command to preach the gospel and disciple the nations.

All things still work for God, says the Scripture. In this story, we were given a picture of the Saviour of Mankind who would come many centuries later, live a perfect life, die for the sins of the world, and lay in the tomb for 3 days.

Praise his name everyone with life within them. He is risen!

  • 6737
Added a Discussion.  

Wednesday 1-24-24 4th. Day Of The Weekly Cycle, Shevat 12 5784, 35th. Winter Day The

Jonah 1

1 Now the word of the Lord came unto Jonah the son of Amittai, saying,

2 Arise, go to Nineveh, that great city, and cry against it; for their wickedness is come up before me.

3 But Jonah rose up to flee unto Tarshish from the presence of the Lord, and went down to Joppa; and he found a ship going to Tarshish: so he paid the fare thereof, and went down into it, to go with them unto Tarshish from the presence of the Lord.

4 But the Lord sent out a great wind into the sea, and there was a mighty tempest in the sea, so that the ship was like to be broken.

5 Then the mariners were afraid, and cried every man unto his god, and cast forth the wares that were in the ship into the sea, to lighten it of them. But Jonah was gone down into the sides of the ship; and he lay, and was fast asleep.

6 So the shipmaster came to him, and said unto him, What meanest thou, O sleeper? arise, call upon thy God, if so be that God will think upon us, that we perish not.

7 And they said every one to his fellow, Come, and let us cast lots, that we may know for whose cause this evil is upon us. So they cast lots, and the lot fell upon Jonah.

8 Then said they unto him, Tell us, we pray thee, for whose cause this evil is upon us; What is thine occupation? and whence comest thou? what is thy country? and of what people art thou?

9 And he said unto them, I am an Hebrew; and I fear the Lord, the God of heaven, which hath made the sea and the dry land.

10 Then were the men exceedingly afraid, and said unto him. Why hast thou done this? For the men knew that he fled from the presence of the Lord, because he had told them.

11 Then said they unto him, What shall we do unto thee, that the sea may be calm unto us? for the sea wrought, and was tempestuous.

12 And he said unto them, Take me up, and cast me forth into the sea; so shall the sea be calm unto you: for I know that for my sake this great tempest is upon you.

13 Nevertheless the men rowed hard to bring it to the land; but they could not: for the sea wrought, and was tempestuous against them.

14 Wherefore they cried unto the Lord, and said, We beseech thee, O Lord, we beseech thee, let us not perish for this man's life, and lay not upon us innocent blood: for thou, O Lord, hast done as it pleased thee.

15 So they took up Jonah, and cast him forth into the sea: and the sea ceased from her raging.

16 Then the men feared the Lord exceedingly, and offered a sacrifice unto the Lord, and made vows.

17 Now the Lord had prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah. And Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights.

Jonah 2

1 Then Jonah prayed unto the Lord his God out of the fish's belly,

2 And said, I cried by reason of mine affliction unto the Lord, and he heard me; out of the belly of **** cried I, and thou heardest my voice.

3 For thou hadst cast me into the deep, in the midst of the seas; and the floods compassed me about: all thy billows and thy waves passed over me.

4 Then I said, I am cast out of thy sight; yet I will look again toward thy holy temple.

5 The waters compassed me about, even to the soul: the depth closed me round about, the weeds were wrapped about my head.

6 I went down to the bottoms of the mountains; the earth with her bars was about me for ever: yet hast thou brought up my life from corruption, O Lord my God.

7 When my soul fainted within me I remembered the Lord: and my prayer came in unto thee, into thine holy temple.

8 They that observe lying vanities forsake their own mercy.

9 But I will sacrifice unto thee with the voice of thanksgiving; I will pay that that I have vowed. Salvation is of the Lord.

10 And the Lord spake unto the fish, and it vomited out Jonah upon the dry land.

I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me.

Philippians 4:13

Love always, Walter and Debbie 

  • 6854
Hey there dear Sunset, good to see you on our site. We welcome you in Jesus' name. It's obvious that you have a burning love for Our Lord and for his word.
(You remind me of myself. Because my mind is always racing from one topic to another. Haha. Especially as I read the scriptures each day. And as I see the news and behold my beloved country go deeper into decline, even into chaos. I don't share those things here because our focus is Christ-centered, non-traditional churches. It's not that current events or other Biblical questions are unimportant, of course.)
That Sabbath question has always intrigued me and house churchers have a golden opportunity to recovery a special day of rest. For myself, I cannot see that the day was ever changed on the calendar. It was intended to be a day of rest... which doesn't exactly correspond to the "first day of the week".
I love how Jesus reminds us that the day was made for our happiness. And to be a delight, too, as the saints of old were also reminded.
Sometime, will you let us know how you all celebrate and honor this special day in these modern times? We look forward to it.
1-22-24
First, how are you all? We are fine.
As we have come unto this knowledge of the Sabbath, Of resting, as we understand having Bible studies with the material of His teachings, especially on that day at home, with our leader and members live on a radio conference hook-up with one another.
But since our leader is deceased and his wife, we have been getting studies with the scriptures concerning that issue mainly, and about the Kingdom.
Love, Walter And Debbie
  • 7066

Hey there dear Sunset, good to see you on our site. We welcome you in Jesus' name. It's obvious that you have a burning love for Our Lord and for his word.

(You remind me of myself. Because my mind is always racing from one topic to another. Haha. Especially as I read the scriptures each day. And as I see the news and behold my beloved country go deeper into decline, even into chaos. I don't share those things here because our focus is Christ-centered, non-traditional churches. It's not that current events or other Biblical questions are unimportant, of course.)

That Sabbath question has always intrigued me and house churchers have a golden opportunity to recovery a special day of rest. For myself, I cannot see that the day was ever changed on the calendar. It was intended to be a day of rest... which doesn't exactly correspond to the "first day of the week".

I love how Jesus reminds us that the day was made for our happiness. And to be a delight, too, as the saints of old were also reminded.

Sometime, will you let us know how you all celebrate and honor this special day in these modern times? We look forward to it.

  • 7076
Added a Discussion.  

Hello, I have been thinking about the OP and the different posts, but have not received any revelation on what Jesus was talking about to Nicodemus. But I'm glad to have an understanding of these views on this thread and more on other site forums.

I was looking at: It is by scripture we as Christians are not Born Again until we are caught up to be with Christ 1 Thessalonians 4:17, and 1 Corinthians 15:51-58

But here are some views from Bing:

In Christianity, being born again means having a spiritual renewal or change of heart by accepting Jesus as the Savior and Lord. It is not about physical birth or external requirements, but about receiving salvation and becoming part of God’s family1.

The phrase “born again” is frequently misinterpreted. Looking at its primary reference, we see that its meaning is not about physical birth, but about experiencing a spiritual renewal. It is an expression used by many Protestants to define the moment or process of fully accepting faith in Jesus Christ. It is an experience when the teachings of Christianity and Jesus become real, and the “born again” acquire a personal relationship with God2.

Also, we will be in prayer about this process.

Bible Gateway passage: John 3:3-8, Colossians 1:15-18, Romans 8:29, Revelation 1:5, 1 Corinthians 15:50, Galatians 4:26, 2 John 1, 2 John 13, Revelation 12:1-5, Hebrews 12:23, Malachi 3:1 - King James Version

Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born? Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say...

thelord's_pearl said:
Hi all,
Does "born again" mean that you simply believe in faith or simply chose to believe in faith in Jesus Christ, or does it also mean that you have to be baptized? I hope this is a simple answer. Thank you.

Hello, I have been thinking about the OP and the different posts, but have not received any revelation on what Jesus was talking about to Nicodemus. But I'm glad to have an understanding of these views on this thread and more on other site forums.

I was looking at: It is by scripture we as Christians are not Born Again until we are caught up to be with Christ 1 Thessalonians 4:17, and 1 Corinthians 15:51-58

But here are some views from Bing:

In Christianity, being born again means having a spiritual renewal or change of heart by accepting Jesus as the Savior and Lord. It is not about physical birth or external requirements, but about receiving salvation and becoming part of God’s family.

The phrase “born again” is frequently misinterpreted. Looking at its primary reference, we see that its meaning is not about physical birth, but about experiencing a spiritual renewal. It is an expression used by many Protestants to define the moment or process of fully accepting faith in Jesus Christ. It is an experience when the teachings of Christianity and Jesus become real, and the “born again” acquire a personal relationship with God.

Love, Walter And Debbie

  • 7134
Added a Discussion.  

Edward Adams challenges a strong consensus in New Testament and Early Christian studies: that the early Christians met 'almost exclusively' in houses. This assumption has been foundational for research on the social formation of the early churches, the origins and early development of church architecture, and early Christian worship. Recent years have witnessed increased scholarly interest in the early 'house church'.
Adams re-examines the New Testament and other literary data, as well as archaeological and comparative evidence, showing that explicit evidence for assembling in houses is not nearly as extensive as is usually thought. He also shows that there is literary and archaeological evidence for meeting in non-house settings. Adams makes the case that during the first two centuries, the alleged period of the 'house church', it is plausible to imagine the early Christians gathering in a range of venues rather than almost entirely in private houses. His thesis has wide-ranging implications.

This fascinating scholarly book - the first of its kind - will not cause house church purists to rejoice. He does acknowledge their validity but believes there were other places in regular use as well.

  • 7373
Added a Discussion.  

Friday 1-19-24 6th. Day Of The Weekly Cycle, Shevat 7 5784, 29th. Winter Day

Is there anyone that keeps The Sabbath Day Holy, from Sunset on the 6th.Day/Friday until The ending of The 7th. Day at Sunset, on Saturday by The Gregorian Calendar.

If so being on one accord for that event to happen, We want to thank God for your Faith in doing just that as a start to perfection. Every Sabbath , Sabbath Scriptures: About Sabbath Scriptures , Sabbath Day In The KJV

Sabbath Day, Please Read all.

Sabbaths , Judging one another about the Sabbath .

I have reason to believe of the above study, that The Sabbaths and the Feast Days/Holy Convocations goes together for his/Jesus customs as him and The Apostles, went in the synagogues. Luke 4:16 , Acts 17:2

Acts 17:2

Righteousness is a position. When you become saved you are considered in right standing with God. ... Holiness is the quality of being holy,a life that is full of godly character.Righteousness is to be upright in God, to be blamless. A righteousness man is also a holy man,both of them works together.

Ephesians 4 KJV

Love, Walter And Debbie

  • 1
  • 7525
Added a File.   

Eventually, the subject of baptism will come up. Can this puzzle finally be solved? Hundreds if not thousands of books have been written regarding the mode and subjects of what is considered by most as a sacrament.

But... there are few books out there which regard external water baptism as now obsolete. In view of a better, inward spiritual baptism. This volume seems to lean toward the latter view. Read it for yourself and decide.

We're brothers and sisters in Christ. We are seeking unity, not division, as we seek the truth. Therefore we will not allow our interpretations to affect our friendship and good-will towards every other child of God.

That said, it never hurts to take a fresh look at anything we hold to be true.

Let me inquire today upon a different matter. If you lost your precious eyesight and had to be led around, would you still thank God for your life or would you become bitter? Would you seek to serve others as did this writer of old?

  • 7949
Added a Discussion.  

The Pope has been in the news more than usual. He is being opposed by Arch-Bishops and Cardinals, which is rare. His credibility is being called into question. As it should be.

Peter is alleged to be the first Pope. It looks as if Peter’s first Papal Bull was a dud and required a reproof. So much for Papal infalibility. Imagine Jesus referring to the first Pope and Satan.

And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ. From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day. Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee. But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men. Matthew 16:19-23

And notice the keys given to the Apostle Peter were OF the Kingdom, not TO it.

Us? Let us not be overcome with evil but overcome evil with good.

  • 7979

This is a very good read, and should take roughly an hour of your time. I recommend it to the Body of Christ as a way for you to consider how the "cult of personality" may distort your view of the redemptive power of Christ.

When we remodeled our home several years ago, we made sure that all of the seating spaces were designed such that the center of each room was the center of focus so that each person in the room was equal to all others. Our kitchen table is large and round. We eliminated the TV set from the family room. When you enter any room as a guest in our home, there is no obvious place of honor. Every seat is a seat of honor.

I imagine this to be how the church should be. The "gifted speaker" only exists because they are the focus of all of our attention when we are seated in the church pews. The pulpit draws our attention to them. Our bulletins tell us to be quiet and respectful in the church sanctuary. Reverence is only achieved when we all follow the prescribed dictates for orderly worship. The parishioners never initiate, but only ever respond to their leaders at the appropriate moments. It is the perfect setup for the "gifted speaker" as they have complete control over the crowd, and no one ever questions their authority.

Congregants have been led to believe over the centuries that true worship comes by following the formula that the church has set up. We are seldom, if ever, confronted with the reality of our sinful nature and our unholiness before God. When we are, it is, as Mr. Perks mentions, in times of emotion manipulation (i.e. blackmail) as in Jonathan Edward's "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" sermon.

I love reading about Paul in Athens (Acts 17:16-34). In this passage we see Paul observing the workings of Athens and engaging those around him in dialogue. It is the exact opposite of everything that we are told today that we need to do to make the church a success. Interestingly enough, when verse 22 tells us that Paul was "standing in the midst of the Areopagus", the Greek word for "midst" (μέσῳ) is the same one used in Luke 2:46 to describe the boy Jesus in the temple as He remained behind...

41 Now his parents went to Jerusalem every year at the Feast of the Passover. 42 And when he was twelve years old, they went up according to custom. 43 And when the feast was ended, as they were returning, the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem. His parents did not know it, 44 but supposing him to be in the group they went a day's journey, but then they began to search for him among their relatives and acquaintances, 45 and when they did not find him, they returned to Jerusalem, searching for him. 46 After three days they found him in the temple, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions. (emphasis mine)

The picture of both Jesus and Paul is that of interactive dialogue. Maybe if we started asking the "gifted speaker" some difficult questions from the pews, we would soon see that there is no substance to their content.

  • 1
  • 8919

Nice work, David. I think that you hit on some key points for me. Your comments on the Lord's Supper are close to my heart. So too those on baptism. I had lived nearly six decades before I became aware that Paul's comments to the Corinthians were made in the context of a public meal. As you describe it, a "real hunger and thirst quenching meal". Yet I can never recall any church of any denomination that I've attended ever talking about this. Either Communion was ignored, or it was just a quick five minute deal after the morning sermon on the first Sunday of each month. Every church denomination appears to want to be true to the church as found in the Book of Acts, so why isn't a simple detail like Communion being a part of a regular meal for which the saints gather not a well-understood part of the activity of the church?

For those who confess that Jesus is God Incarnate, come in the flesh to save us from our sins (1 John 4:2), I say that you are my brother or sister in Christ. Beyond that, any division that you would place between us by your interpretation of Scripture is shameful and sinful. The Bible calls us to be united in Christ, not argue over nuances of our respective theologies and the machinations of humans.

Praise his Mighty Name. Blessed assurance - Jesus is Mine

Amen!

  • 1
  • 8931
Added a File.   
One of the problems facing the Church in the Western world today is the problem posed by the “ministry” of those who are considered “gifted speakers” and consequently idolised by the Church. Stated in its most simple form this is the problem posed by the prioritising of the personality, charisma, “profile,” popularity, stage presence and ability of the speaker as an orator and entertainer over the content of the message being delivered—in short, the triumph of style over content, the consequence of which has been the creation of an intellectually feeble-minded and theologically malnourished generation of churchgoers who are over stimulated by sentimental and mindless entertainment worship masquerading as spiritual edification.  
The problem has a long history, but it is made particularly problematic today by the intellectual dumbing down process that currently afflicts British culture generally and has produced a semiliterate society. That the Church should also have fallen into this ditch is particularly problematic because her role in providing spiritual, moral and intellectual leadership for society is vital to the health of the nation. Without the leadership of the Church the nation cannot recover from its present descent into cultural degeneration and the neo-paganism that is its inevitably accompaniment. While the Church is obsessed with the mindless prioritising of style over content that is vitiating the cultural life of the nation as a whole she will remain useless and irrelevant to society, and therefore unable to provide the leadership that the nation so desperately needs.

This perspective could also advance and enhance the role of "ruling elders" or non-teaching elders. Since eloquence is not a requirement in order to address the assembly. Churches with no pastor could benefit, as well, by the implementation and activation of their "laity".

More about the author: Stephen is the Director of the Kuyper Foundation. He is the Editor of Christianity & Society, the Foundation’s journal, and has contributed articles on a variety of topics to journals in Britain, Europe and the USA. He has lectured on a variety of issues, including theology and Christian world-view, economics, politics, education, legal history and music, at conferences in Britain, Europe, the USA, Australia, New Zealand and Africa and has been regularly invited to contribute to local radio programmes dealing with various contemporary ethical issues.
And his broad copyright notice: Permission is hereby granted for the downloading, printing and copying of essays, articles, book texts, journals and audio files and films contained on this web site for personal use and for redistribution to others for personal use provided: that this is done on a strictly non-profit basis, that all material downloaded from this site and subsequently reproduced identifies the authors of such material and displays their copyright, and that the Kuyper Foundation is identified as the source of this material and its full postal address (Post Office Box 2, Taunton, Somerset, England, TA1 4ZD) and web site address (www.kuyper.org) are included.
  • 1
  • 9047
Added a Discussion.  

Nothing more fascinating than the subject of sacraments. But nothing more divisive throughout the history of the Church. In fact, the great Reformers of old could not come to agreement and many Christians have been put to death over the issue of baptism. Personally, I am suspicious of Roman Catholicism, which coined this unBiblical term centuries ago.

Consider. We are instructed in Scripture to greet one another with a holy kiss. And according to the Saviour we should wash each others feet. Are these also sacraments? Why not, I wonder? What about the Lord's Prayer? Jesus said to pray in this manner.

How many sacraments are there? And who determines? Some say 30. Some say 2. Who decides?

As for the Lord's supper, it can occur without an administrator or a complicated ceremony, in public or private. In my opinion. You will recall that the Passover was a family meal rather than a community event. 

Of course, the unharmonious meal among the Corinthians was a public meal. A real hunger and thirst quenching meal compared to the micro meal of today. Yes, it should have been a "supper of the Lord" - not one where some had too much food and drink and others too little. 

By the way... the New Testament also mentions a "table of demons" and a "synagogue of Satan". Were these carefully defined physical realities? I would think not. What I am getting at is that the only occurrence of the phrase "Lord's Supper" is employed in the same sentence with purely symbolic language about another supper or table - that of demons.

As for baptism, I was unaware that other than Quakers, there were Christians who did/do not baptize with water, believing that the Holy Spirit baptism replaced it. I am not convinced myself but intend to vigorously research the matter in the days ahead.

My question today: How symbolic is your world? Would you have been like the Israelites who just ate and drank without a care? Or would you have realized that the symbolic rock from which the water flowed was CHRIST, the water of life?

3 And did all eat the same spiritual meat; 4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them and that Rock was Christ. 1 Corinthians 10

What we can agree upon is that once something is consumed, it is very difficult to retrieve or to be taken from you. Same with Christ. No one is greater than He and he will never leave us. Nor can anyone snatch us away from the arms of the Good Shepherd.

Praise his Mighty Name. Blessed assurance - Jesus is Mine.

  • 9428
Me, I'm dependent upon a good translation. I'm not a Greek or Hebrew scholar, you see

Neither am I. In fact, I only cracked open an interlinear bible for the first time a few months ago. Yet I've found having access to the original Greek extremely useful so far. It's not so much that I'm answering questions as much as I'm learning how to frame them. For example, I find Peter's confession of Jesus as "the Son of the living God" in Matt 16:16 to be truly fascinating. First and foremost, just the idea that God would be made incarnate completely blows my mind. But in addition, it is Jesus' promise of building his assembly on "this rock" in verse 18 that becomes a real challenge for us. The King James Bible translates this verse, "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of **** shall not prevail against it." Scores of Christian leaders, from Catholic to Orthodox and even to many Protestant traditions, will tell you that Jesus promised to build His assembly on the work of the person named Peter, and as spiritual descendants of Peter that their authority to govern the assembly comes through this promise. (Peter as the first Pope.) Yet reading this verse in the interlinear bible does not make that connection quite so obvious. One interlinear bible (https://biblehub.com/interlinear/matthew/16-18.htm) translates this passage as "I also now to you say that you are Peter and on this the rock I will build my church and [the] gates of hades not will prevail against it". The phrase "on this the rock" seems to open more possibilities than "upon this rock" as in the KJV since the original Greek contains a definite article not found in the English translation. Was Jesus really calling Peter "the rock"? Maybe yes, but maybe no. There are perhaps at least three possible explanations that we can explore:

  1. That Jesus did in fact see Peter, a fallible human being, as being worthy of building His assembly upon. I think that we can all agree that Peter had a pretty bad track record of being perfect both before and after Jesus' resurrection. He was more like the sand than as a rock
  2. That Jesus was referring to Himself the "the rock", which would be consistent with other descriptions of God as a rock and protector in both the Old and New Testaments
  3. That Jesus use of "the rock" ties immediately back to Peter's confession of Jesus as the Messiah. Consider the verses immediately preceding verse 18... "15 [Jesus] said to them, 'But who do you say that I am?' 16 Simon Peter replied, 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.' 17 And Jesus answered him, 'Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of **** shall not prevail against it.'" Could not "the rock" in this case be the truth that God revealed to Peter and upon which Peter made his confession?

I don't really know which, if any, of these items above is (are) the right answer(s). The Greek does not make it clear to me as I contemplate the question of what Jesus means when He speaks of "the rock". But what I am feeling is that the Greek is telling me that there may be more than meets the eye here when reading many English translations which omit the definite article "the"

So let me encourage you to do what you can to dig deeper into Scripture in the original languages as you are able. You never know when you might discover a seemingly insignificant word that may change the meaning of a passage that you think that you already know

  • 1
  • 10147

So many doctrinal errors take us back to the original languages. There are, of course, no original documents - only copies. Me, I'm dependent upon a good translation. I'm not a Greek or Hebrew scholar, you see.

The KJV is a most important document. Perhaps of all time. It has an almost cult-like following. I enjoy it, myself, for the most part but I do not idolize it as a translation.

The good news? Many of those who first read it had been previously and intentionally excluded from owning and reading their own Bible. The high-ranking clergy saw that as much too dangerous.

Some believe it is a perfect translation. If that were so, why would the translators themselves include thousands of alternate "marginal readings"? And speak of "uncertainly" in their Letter to the Reader.

They did the best they could, I suppose, as much as is humanly possible. Still, it is unfortunate that later editions do not include their Preface. Admittedly, it is a tough read. Even more unfortunate is what appears to be a hidden agenda regarding the "ecclesiastical words".

Men - even the best - have a bias. This is certain.

  • 10319
Added an Article. 

The Translators to the Reader

The Best Things Have Been Calumniated (Misrepresented)

Zeal to promote the common good, whether it be by devising anything ourselves, or revising that which hath been laboured by others, deserveth certainly much respect and esteem, but yet findeth but cold entertainment in the world. It is welcomed with suspicion instead of love, and with emulation instead of thanks: and if there be any hole left for cavil to enter, (and cavil, if it do not find a hole, will make one) it is sure to be misconstrued, and in danger to be condemned. This will easily be granted by as many as know story, or have any experience. For, was there ever any thing projected, that savoured any way of newness or renewing, but the same endured many a storm of gainsaying, or opposition? A man would think that Civility, wholesome Laws, learning and eloquence, Synods, and Church-maintenance, (that we speak of no more things of this kind) should be as safe as a Sanctuary, and out of shot, as they say, that no man would lift up the heel, no, nor dog move his tongue against the motioners of them. For by the first, we are distinguished from brute beasts lead with sensuality; By the second, we are bridled and restrained from outrageous behaviour, and from doing of injuries, whether by fraud or by violence; By the third, we are enabled to inform and reform others, by the light and feeling that we have attained unto ourselves; Briefly, by the fourth being brought together to a parley face to face, we sooner compose our differences than by writings which are endless; And lastly, that the Church be sufficiently provided for, is so agreeable to good reason and conscience, that those mothers are holden to be less cruel, that kill their children as soon as they are born, than those nursing fathers and mothers (wheresoever they be) that withdraw from them who hang upon their breasts (and upon whose breasts again themselves do hang to receive the Spiritual and sincere milk of the word) livelihood and support fit for their estates. Thus it is apparent, that these things which we speak of, are of most necessary use, and therefore, that none, either without absurdity can speak against them, or without note of wickedness can spurn against them. 

Yet for all that, the learned know that certain worthy men have been brought to untimely death for none other fault, but for seeking to reduce their countrymen to good order and discipline; and that in some Commonwealths it was made a capital crime, once to motion the making of a new Law for the abrogating of an old, though the same were most pernicious; And that certain, which would be counted pillars of the State, and patterns of Virtue and Prudence, could not be brought for a long time to give way to good Letters and refined speech, but bare themselves as averse from them, as from rocks or boxes of poison; And fourthly, that he was no babe, but a great clerk, that gave forth (and in writing to remain to posterity) in passion peradventure, but yet he gave forth, that he had not seen any profit to come by any Synod, or meeting of the Clergy, but rather the contrary; And lastly, against Church-maintenance and allowance, in such sort, as the Ambassadors and messengers of the great King of Kings should be furnished, it is not unknown what a fiction or fable (so it is esteemed, and for no better by the reporter himself, though superstitious) was devised; Namely, that at such a time as the professors and teachers of Christianity in the Church of Rome, then a true Church, were liberally endowed, a voice forsooth was heard from heaven, saying: Now is poison poured down into the Church, etc. Thus not only as oft as we speak, as one saith, but also as oft as we do anything of note or consequence, we subject ourselves to everyone's censure, and happy is he that is least tossed upon tongues; for utterly to escape the snatch of them it is impossible. If any man conceit, that this is the lot and portion of the meaner sort only, and that Princes are privileged by their high estate, he is deceived. As the sword devoureth as well one as the other, as it is in Samuel [2 Sam 11:25], nay as the great Commander charged his soldiers in a certain battle, to strike at no part of the enemy, but at the face; And as the King of Syria commanded his chief Captains to fight neither with small nor great, save only against the King of Israel: [1 Kings 22:31] so it is too true, that Envy striketh most spitefully at the fairest, and at the chiefest. David was a worthy Prince, and no man to be compared to him for his first deeds, and yet for as worthy as act as ever he did (even for bringing back the Ark of God in solemnity) he was scorned and scoffed at by his own wife [2 Sam 6:16]. Solomon was greater than David, though not in virtue, yet in power: and by his power and wisdom he built a Temple to the Lord, such a one as was the glory of the land of Israel, and the wonder of the whole world. But was that his magnificence liked of by all? We doubt of it. Otherwise, why do they lay it in his son's dish, and call unto him for easing of the burden, Make, say they, the grievous servitude of thy father, and his sore yoke, lighter. [1 Kings 12:4] Belike he had charged them with some levies, and troubled them with some carriages; Hereupon they raise up a tragedy, and wish in their heart the Temple had never been built. So hard a thing it is to please all, even when we please God best, and do seek to approve ourselves to everyone's conscience.

The Highest Personages have been Calumniated (Misrepresented)

If we will descend to later times, we shall find many the like examples of such kind, or rather unkind acceptance. The first Roman Emperor did never do a more pleasing deed to the learned, nor more profitable to posterity, for conserving the record of times in true supputation; than when he corrected the Calendar, and ordered the year according to the course of the Sun; and yet this was imputed to him for novelty, and arrogance, and procured to him great obloquy. So the first Christened Emperor (at the leastwise that openly professed the faith himself, and allowed others to do the like) for strengthening the Empire at his great charges, and providing for the Church, as he did, got for his labour the name Pupillus, as who would say, a wasteful Prince, that had need of a Guardian or overseer. So the best Christened Emperor, for the love that he bare unto peace, thereby to enrich both himself and his subjects, and because he did not seek war but find it, was judged to be no man at arms, (though indeed he excelled in feats of chivalry, and showed so much when he was provoked) and condemned for giving himself to his ease, and to his pleasure. To be short, the most learned Emperor of former times, (at the least, the greatest politician) what thanks had he for cutting off the superfluities of the laws, and digesting them into some order and method? This, that he hath been blotted by some to be an Epitomist, that is, one that extinguished worthy whole volumes, to bring his abridgments into request. This is the measure that hath been rendered to excellent Princes in former times, even, Cum bene facerent, male audire, For their good deeds to be evil spoken of. Neither is there any likelihood, that envy and malignity died, and were buried with the ancient. No, no, the reproof of Moses taketh hold of most ages; You are risen up in your fathers' stead, an increase of sinful men. [Num 32:14] What is that that hath been done? that which shall be done; and there is no new thing under the Sun, saith the wise man: [Ecc 1:9] and S. Stephen, As your fathers did, so do you. [Acts 7:51] 

His Majesty's Constancy, Notwithstanding Calumniation, for the Survey of the English Translations

This, and more to this purpose, His Majesty that now reigneth (and long, and long may he reign, and his offspring forever, Himself and children, and children's children always) knew full well, according to the singular wisdom given unto him by God, and the rare learning and experience that he hath attained unto; namely that whosoever attempteth anything for the public (especially if it pertain to Religion, and to the opening and clearing of the word of God) the same setteth himself upon a stage to be gloated upon by every evil eye, yea, he casteth himself headlong upon pikes, to be gored by every sharp tongue. For he that medleth with men's Religion in any part, medleth with their custom, nay, with their freehold; and though they find no content in that which they have, yet they cannot abide to hear of altering. Notwithstanding his Royal heart was not daunted or discouraged for this or that colour, but stood resolute, as a statue immovable, and an anvil not easy to be beaten into plates, as one saith; he knew who had chosen him to be a Soldier, or rather a Captain, and being assured that the course which he intended made much for the glory of God, and the building up of his Church, he would not suffer it to be broken off for whatsoever speeches or practices. It doth certainly belong unto Kings, yea, it doth specially belong unto them, to have care of Religion, yea, it doth specially belong unto them, to have care of Religion, yea, to know it aright, yea, to profess it zealously, yea to promote it to the uttermost of their power. This is their glory before all nations which mean well, and this will bring unto them a far most excellent weight of glory in the day of the Lord Jesus. For the Scripture saith not in vain, Them that honor me, I will honor, [1 Sam 2:30] neither was it a vain word that Eusebius delivered long ago, that piety towards God was the weapon, and the only weapon, that both preserved Constantine's person, and avenged him of his enemies. 

The Praise of the Holy Scriptures

But now what piety without truth? what truth (what saving truth) without the word of God? What word of God (whereof we may be sure) without the Scripture? The Scriptures we are commanded to search. John 5:39. Isa 8:20. They are commended that searched and studied them. Acts 17:11 and 8:28,29. They are reproved that were unskilful in them, or slow to believe them. Matt 22:29. Luke 24:25. They can make us wise unto salvation. 2 Tim 3:15. If we be ignorant, they will instruct us; if out of the way, they will bring us home; if out of order, they will reform us; if in heaviness, comfort us; if dull, quicken us; if cold, inflame us. Tolle, lege; Tolle, lege, Take up and read, take up and read the Scriptures, (for unto them was the direction) it was said unto S. Augustine by a supernatural voice. Whatsoever is in the Scriptures, believe me, saith the same S. Augustine, is high and divine; there is verily truth, and a doctrine most fit for the refreshing and renewing of men's minds, and truly so tempered, that everyone may draw from thence that which is sufficient for him, if he come to draw with a devout and pious mind, as true Religion requireth. Thus S. Augustine. And S. Jerome: Ama scripturas, et amabit te sapientia, etc. Love the Scriptures, and wisdom will love thee. And S. Cyril against Julian; Even boys that are bred up in the Scriptures, become most religious, etc. But what mention we three or four uses of the Scripture, whereas whatsoever is to be believed or practiced, or hoped for, is contained in them? or three or four sentences of the Fathers, since whosoever is worthy the name of a Father, from Christ's time downward, hath likewise written not only of the riches, but also of the perfection of the Scripture? I adore the fulness of the Scripture, saith Tertullian against Hermogenes. And again, to Apelles an heretic of the like stamp, he saith; I do not admit that which thou bringest in (or concludest) of thine own (head or store, de tuo) without Scripture. So Saint Justin Martyr before him; We must know by all means, saith he, that it is not lawful (or possible) to learn (anything) of God or of right piety, save only out of the Prophets, who teach us by divine inspiration. So Saint Basil after Tertullian, It is a manifest falling way from the Faith, and a fault of presumption, either to reject any of those things that are written, or to bring in (upon the head of them, epeisagein) any of those things that are not written. We omit to cite to the same effect, S. Cyril B. of Jerusalem in his fouth Cataches., Saint Jerome against Helvidius, Saint Augustine in his third book against the letters of Petilian, and in very many other places of his works. Also we forebear to descend to later Fathers, because we will not weary the reader. The Scriptures then being acknowledged to be so full and so perfect, how can we excuse ourselves of negligence, if we do not study them, of curiosity, if we be not content with them? Men talk much of eiresiwnh, how many sweet and goodly things it had hanging on it; of the Philosopher's stone, that it turneth copper into gold; of Cornucopia, that it had all things necessary for food in it, of Panaces the herb, that it was good for all diseases; of Catholicon the drug, that it is instead of all purges; of Vulcan'sarmor, that it was an armor of proof against all thrusts, and all blows, etc. Well, that which they falsely or vainly attributed to these things for bodily good, we may justly and with full measure ascribe unto the Scripture, for spiritual. It is not only an armor, but also a whole armory of weapons, both offensive and defensive; whereby we may save ourselves and put the enemy to flight. It is not an herb, but a tree, or rather a whole paradise of trees of life, which bring forth fruit every month, and the fruit thereof is for meat, and the leaves for medicine. It is not a pot of Manna, or a cruse of oil, which were for memory only, or for a meal's meat or two, but as it were a shower of heavenly bread sufficient for a whole host, be it never so great; and as it were a whole cellar full of oil vessels; whereby all our necessities may be provided for, and our debts discharged. In a word, it is a Panary of wholesome food, against fenowed traditions; a Physician's shop (Saint Basil calleth it) of preservatives against poisoned heresies; a Pandect of profitable laws, against rebellious spirits; a treasury of most costly jewels, against beggarly rudiments; finally a fountain of most pure water springing up unto everlasting life. And what marvel? The original thereof being from heaven, not from earth; the author being God, not man; the inditer, the holy spirit, not the wit of the Apostles or Prophets; the Penmen such as were sanctified from the womb, and endued with a principal portion of God's spirit; the matter, verity, piety, purity, uprightness; the form, God's word, God's testimony, God's oracles, the word of truth, the word of salvation, etc.; the effects, light of understanding, stableness of persuasion, repentance from dead works, newness of life, holiness, peace, joy in the holy Ghost; lastly, the end and reward of the study thereof, fellowship with the Saints, participation of the heavenly nature, fruition of an inheritance immortal, undefiled, and that never shall fade away: Happy is the man that delighteth in the Scripture, and thrice happy that meditateth in it day and night. 

Translation Necessary

But how shall men meditate in that, which they cannot understand? How shall they understand that which is kept close in an unknown tongue? as it is written, Except I know the power of the voice, I shall be to him that speaketh, a Barbarian, and he that speaketh, shall be a Barbarian to me. [1 Cor 14] The Apostle excepteth no tongue; not Hebrew the ancientest, not Greek the most copious, not Latin the finest. Nature taught a natural man to confess, that all of us in those tongues which we do not understand, are plainly deaf; we may turn the deaf ear unto them. The Scythian counted the Athenian, whom he did not understand, barbarous; so the Roman did the Syrian, and the Jew (even S. Jerome himself calleth the Hebrew tongue barbarous, belike because it was strange to so many) so the Emperor of Constantinople calleth the Latin tongue, barbarous, though Pope Nicolas do storm at it: so the Jews long before Christ called all other nations, Lognazim, which is little better than barbarous. Therefore as one complaineth, that always in the Senate of Rome, there was one or other that called for an interpreter: so lest the Church be driven to the like exigent, it is necessary to have translations in a readiness. Translation it is that openeth the window, to let in the light; that breaketh the shell, that we may eat the kernel; that putteth aside the curtain, that we may look into the most Holy place; that removeth the cover of the well, that we may come by the water, even as Jacob rolled away the stone from the mouth of the well, by which means the flocks of Laban were watered [Gen 29:10]. Indeed without translation into the vulgar tongue, the unlearned are but like children at Jacob's well (which was deep) [John 4:11] without a bucket or something to draw with; or as that person mentioned by Isaiah, to whom when a sealed book was delivered, with this motion, Read this, I pray thee,he was fain to make this answer, I cannot, for it is sealed. [Isa 29:11] 

The Translation of the Old Testament out of the Hebrew into Greek

While God would be known only in Jacob, and have his Name great in Israel, and in none other place, while the dew lay on Gideon's fleece only, and all the earth besides was dry; then for one and the same people, which spake all of them the language of Canaan, that is, Hebrew, one and the same original in Hebrew was sufficient. But, when the fulness of time drew near, that the Sun of righteousness, the Son of God should come into the world, whom God ordained to be a reconciliation through faith in his blood, not of the Jew only, but also of the Greek, yea, of all them that were scattered abroad; then lo, it pleased the Lord to stir up the spirit of a Greek Prince (Greek for descent and language) even of Ptolemy Philadelph King of Egypt, to procure the translating of the Book of God out of Hebrew into Greek. This is the translation of the Seventy Interpreters, commonly so called, which prepared the way for our Saviour among the Gentiles by written preaching, as Saint John Baptist did among the Jews by vocal. For the Grecians being desirous of learning, were not wont to suffer books of worth to lie moulding in Kings' libraries, but had many of their servants, ready scribes, to copy them out, and so they were dispersed and made common. Again, the Greek tongue was well known and made familiar to most inhabitants in Asia, by reason of the conquest that there the Grecians had made, as also by the Colonies, which thither they had sent. For the same causes also it was well understood in many places of Europe, yea, and of Africa too. Therefore the word of God being set forth in Greek, becometh hereby like a candle set upon a candlestick, which giveth light to all that are in the house, or like a proclamation sounded forth in the market place, which most men presently take knowledge of; and therefore that language was fittest to contain the Scriptures, both for the first Preachers of the Gospel to appeal unto for witness, and for the learners also of those times to make search and trial by. It is certain, that that Translation was not so sound and so perfect, but that it needed in many places correction; and who had been so sufficient for this work as the Apostles or Apostolic men? Yet it seemed good to the holy Ghost and to them, to take that which they found, (the same being for the greatest part true and sufficient) rather than by making a new, in that new world and green age of the Church, to expose themselves to many exceptions and cavillations, as though they made a Translation to serve their own turn, and therefore bearing witness to themselves, their witness not to be regarded. This may be supposed to be some cause, why the Translation of the Seventy was allowed to pass for current. Notwithstanding, though it was commended generally, yet it did not fully content the learned, no not of the Jews. For not long after Christ, Aquila fell in hand with a new Translation, and after him Theodotion, and after him Symmachus; yea, there was a fifth and a sixth edition, the Authors whereof were not known. These with the Seventy made up the Hexapla and were worthily and to great purpose compiled together by Origen. Howbeit the Edition of the Seventy went away with the credit, and therefore not only was placed in the midst by Origen (for the worth and excellency thereof above the rest, as Epiphanius gathered) but also was used by the Greek fathers for the ground and foundation of their Commentaries. Yea, Epiphanius above named doth attribute so much unto it, that he holdeth the Authors thereof not only for Interpreters, but also for Prophets in some respect; and Justinian the Emperor enjoining the Jews his subjects to use especially the Translation of the Seventy, rendereth this reason thereof, because they were as it were enlightened with prophetical grace. Yet for all that, as the Egyptians are said of the Prophet to be men and not God, and their horses flesh and not spirit [Isa 31:3]; so it is evident, (and Saint Jerome affirmeth as much) that the Seventy were Interpreters, they were not Prophets; they did many things well, as learned men; but yet as men they stumbled and fell, one while through oversight, another while through ignorance, yea, sometimes they may be noted to add to the Original, and sometimes to take from it; which made the Apostles to leave them many times, when they left the Hebrew, and to deliver the sense thereof according to the truth of the word, as the spirit gave them utterance. This may suffice touching the Greek Translations of the Old Testament.

Translation out of Hebrew and Greek into Latin

There were also within a few hundred years after Christ, translations many into the Latin tongue: for this tongue also was very fit to convey the Law and the Gospel by, because in those times very many Countries of the West, yea of the South, East and North, spake or understood Latin, being made Provinces to the Romans. But now the Latin Translations were too many to be all good, for they were infinite (Latini Interpretes nullo modo numerari possunt, saith S. Augustine). Again they were not out of the Hebrew fountain (we speak of the Latin Translations of the Old Testament) but out of the Greek stream, therefore the Greek being not altogether clear, the Latin derived from it must needs be muddy. This moved S. Jerome a most learned father, and the best linguist without controversy, of his age, or of any that went before him, to undertake the translating of the Old Testament, out of the very fountains themselves, which he performed with that evidence of great learning, judgment, industry, and faithfulness, that he hath forever bound the Church unto him, in a debt of special remembrance and thankfulness. 

The Translating of the Scripture into the Vulgar Tongues

Now though the Church were thus furnished with Greek and Latin Translations, even before the faith of Christ was generally embraced in the Empire; (for the learned know that even in S. Jerome's time, the Consul of Rome and his wife were both Ethnics, and about the same time the greatest part of the Senate also) yet for all that the godly-learned were not content to have the Scriptures in the Language which themselves understood, Greek and Latin, (as the good Lepers were not content to fare well themselves, but acquainted their neighbors with the store that God had sent, that they also might provide for themselves) [2 Kings 7:9] but also for the behoof and edifying of the unlearned which hungered and thirsted after righteousness, and had souls to be saved as well as they, they provided Translations into the vulgar for their Countrymen, insomuch that most nations under heaven did shortly after their conversion, hear Christ speaking unto them in their mother tongue, not by the voice of their Minister only, but also by the written word translated. If any doubt hereof, he may be satisfied by examples enough, if enough will serve the turn. First S. Jerome saith, Multarum gentium linguis Scriptura ante translata, docet falsa esse quae addita sunt, etc. i.e. The Scripture being translated before in the languages of many Nations, doth show that those things that were added (by Lucian or Hesychius) are false. So S. Jerome in that place. The same Jerome elsewhere affirmeth that he, the time was, had set forth the translation of the Seventy, suae linguae hominibus, i.e., for his countrymen of Dalmatia. Which words not only Erasmus doth understand to purport, that S. Jerome translated the Scripture into the Dalmatian tongue, but also Sixtus Senensis and Alphonsus a Castro (that we speak of no more) men not to be excepted against by them of Rome, do ingenuously confess as much. So, S. Chrysostom that lived in S. Jerome's time, giveth evidence with him: The doctrine of S. John (saith he) did not in such sort (as the Philosophers' did) vanish away: but the Syrians, Egyptians, Indians, Persians, Ethiopians, and infinite other nations being barbarous people translated it into their (mother) tongue, and have learned to be (true) Philosophers, he meaneth Christians. To this may be added Theodoret, as next unto him, both for antiquity, and for learning. His words be these, Every Country that is under the Sun, is full of these words (of the Apostles and Prophets)and the Hebrew tongue (he meaneth the Scriptures in the Hebrew tongue) is turned not only into the Language of the Grecians, but also of the Romans, and Egyptians, and Persians, and Indians, and Armenians, and Scythians, and Sauromatians, and briefly into all the Languages that any Nation useth. So he. In like manner, Ulfilas is reported by Paulus Diaconus and Isidor (and before them by Sozomen) to have translated the Scriptures into the Gothic tongue: John Bishop of Sevil by Vasseus, to have turned them into Arabic, about the year of our Lord 717; Bede by Cistertiensis, to have turned a great part of them into Saxon: Efnard by Trithemius, to have abridged the French Psalter, as Bede had done the Hebrew, about the year 800: King Alfred by the said Cistertiensis, to have turned the Psalter into Saxon: Methodius by Aventinus (printed at Ingolstadt) to have turned the Scriptures into Slavonian: Valdo, Bishop of Frising by Beatus Rhenanus, to have caused about that time, the Gospels to be translated into Dutch rhythm, yet extant in the Library of Corbinian: Valdus, by divers to have turned them himself, or to have gotten them turned, into French, about the year 1160: Charles the Fifth of that name, surnamed the Wise, to have caused them to be turned into French, about 200 years after Valdus his time, of which translation there be many copies yet extant, as witnesseth Beroaldus. Much about that time, even in our King Richard the second's days, John Trevisa translated them into English, and many English Bibles in written hand are yet to be seen with divers, translated as it is very probable, in that age. So the Syrian translation of the New Testament is in most learned men's Libraries, of Widminstadius his setting forth, and the Psalter in Arabic is with many, of Augustinus Nebiensis' setting forth. So Postel affirmeth, that in his travel he saw the Gospels in the Ethiopian tongue; And Ambrose Thesius allegeth the Pslater of the Indians, which he testifieth to have been set forth by Potken in Syrian characters. So that, to have the Scriptures in the mother tongue is not a quaint conceit lately taken up, either by the Lord Cromwell in England, or by the Lord Radevile in Polony, or by the Lord Ungnadius in the Emperor's dominion, but hath been thought upon, and put in practice of old, even from the first times of the conversion of any Nation; no doubt, because it was esteemed most profitable, to cause faith to grow in men's hearts the sooner, and to make them to be able to say with the words of the Psalm, As we have heard, so we have seen. [Ps 48:8] 

The Unwillingness of Our Chief Adversaries, that the Scriptures Should Be Divulged in the Mother Tongue, etc.

Now the Church of Rome would seem at the length to bear a motherly affection towards her children, and to allow them the Scriptures in their mother tongue: but indeed it is a gift, not deserving to be called a gift, an unprofitable gift: they must first get a licence in writing before they may use them, and to get that, they must approve themselves to their Confessor, that is, to be such as are, if not frozen in the dregs, yet soured with the leaven of their superstition. Howbeit, it seemed too much to Clement the Eighth that there should be any Licence granted to have them in the vulgar tongue, and therefore he overruleth and frustrateth the grant of Pius the Fourth. So much are they afraid of the light of the Scripture, (Lucifugae Scripturarum, as Tertulian speaketh) that they will not trust the people with it, no not as it is set forth by their own sworn men, no not with the Licence of their own Bishops and Inquisitors. Yea, so unwilling they are to communicate the Scriptures to the people's understanding in any sort, that they are not ashamed to confess, that we forced them to translate it into English against their wills. This seemeth to argue a bad cause, or a bad conscience, or both. Sure we are, that it is not he that hath good gold, that is afraid to bring it to the touchstone, but he that hath the counterfeit; neither is it the true man that shunneth the light, but the malefactor, lest his deeds should be reproved [John 3:20]: neither is it the plain-dealing Merchant that is unwilling to have the weights, or the meteyard brought in place, but he that useth deceit. But we will let them alone for this fault, and return to translation. 

The Speeches and Reasons, both of Our Brethren, and of Our Adversaries against this Work

Many men's mouths have been open a good while (and yet are not stopped) with speeches about the Translation so long in hand, or rather perusals of Translations made before: and ask what may be the reason, what the necessity of the employment: Hath the Church been deceived, say they, all this while? Hath her sweet bread been mingled with leaven, her silver with dross, her wine with water, her milk with lime? (Lacte gypsum male miscetur, saith S. Ireney.) We hoped that we had been in the right way, that we had had the Oracles of God delivered unto us, and that though all the world had cause to be offended and to complain, yet that we had none. Hath the nurse holden out the breast, and nothing but wind in it? Hath the bread been delivered by the fathers of the Church, and the same proved to be lapidosus, as Seneca speaketh? What is it to handle the word of God deceitfully, if this be not? Thus certain brethren. Also the adversaries of Judah and Jerusalem, like Sanballat in Nehemiah, mock, as we hear, both at the work and workmen, saying; What do these weak Jews, etc. will they make the stones whole again out of the heaps of dust which are burnt? although they build, yet if a fox go up, he shall even break down their stony wall. [Neh 4:3] Was their Translation good before? Why do they now mend it? Was it not good? Why then was it obtruded to the people? Yea, why did the Catholics (meaning Popish Romanists) always go in jeopardy, for refusing to go to hear it? Nay, if it must be translated into English, Catholics are fittest to do it. They have learning, and they know when a thing is well, they can manum de tabula. We will answer them both briefly: and the former, being brethren, thus, with S. Jerome, Damnamus veteres? Mineme, sed post priorum studia in domo Domini quod possums laboramus. That is, Do we condemn the ancient? In no case: but after the endeavors of them that were before us, we take the best pains we can in the house of God. As if he said, Being provoked by the example of the learned that lived before my time, I have thought it my duty, to assay whether my talent in the knowledge of the tongues, may be profitable in any measure to God's Church, lest I should seem to have laboured in them in vain, and lest I should be thought to glory in men, (although ancient,) above that which was in them. Thus S. Jerome may be thought to speak. 

A Satisfaction to Our Brethren

And to the same effect say we, that we are so far off from condemning any of their labors that travailed before us in this kind, either in this land or beyond sea, either in King Henry's time, or King Edward's (if there were any translation, or correction of a translation in his time) or Queen Elizabeth's of ever renowned memory, that we acknowledge them to have been raised up of God, for the building and furnishing of his Church, and that they deserve to be had of us and of posterity in everlasting remembrance. The judgment of Aristotle is worthy and well known: If Timotheus had not been, we had not had much sweet music; but if Phrynis (Timotheus his master) had not been, we had not had Timotheus. Therefore blessed be they, and most honoured be their name, that break the ice, and giveth onset upon that which helpeth forward to the saving of souls. Now what can be more available thereto, than to deliver God's book unto God's people in a tongue which they understand? Since of a hidden treasure, and of a fountain that is sealed, there is no profit, as Ptolemy Philadelph wrote to the Rabbins or masters of the Jews, as witnesseth Epiphanius: and as S. Augustine saith; A man had rather be with his dog than with a stranger (whose tongue is strange unto him). Yet for all that, as nothing is begun and perfected at the same time, and the later thoughts are thought to be the wiser: so, if we building upon their foundation that went before us, and being holpen by their labours, do endeavor to make that better which they left so good; no man, we are sure, hath cause to mislike us; they, we persuade ourselves, if they were alive, would thank us. The vintage of Abiezer, that strake the stroke: yet the gleaning of grapes of Ephraim was not to be despised. See Judges 8:2. Joash the king of Israel did not satisfy himself, till he had smitten the ground three times; and yet he offended the Prophet, for giving over then. [2 Kings 13:18-19] Aquila, of whom we spake before, translated the Bible as carefully, and as skilfully as he could; and yet he thought good to go over it again, and then it got the credit with the Jews, to be called kata akribeian, that is, accurately done, as Saint Jerome witnesseth. How many books of profane learning have been gone over again and again, by the same translators, by others? Of one and the same book of Aristotle's Ethics, there are extant not so few as six or seven several translations. Now if this cost may be bestowed upon the gourd, which affordeth us a little shade, and which today flourisheth, but tomorrow is cut down; what may we bestow, nay what ought we not to bestow upon the Vine, the fruit whereof maketh glad the conscience of man, and the stem whereof abideth forever? And this is the word of God, which we translate. What is the chaff to the wheat, saith the Lord? [Jer 23:28] Tanti vitreum, quanti verum margaritum (saith Tertullian,) if a toy of glass be of that reckoning with us, how ought we to value the true pearl? Therefore let no man's eye be evil, because his Majesty's is good; neither let any be grieved, that we have a Prince that seeketh the increase of the spiritual wealth of Israel (let Sanballats and Tobiahs do so, which therefore do bear their just reproof) but let us rather bless God from the ground of our heart, for working this religious care in him, to have the translations of the Bible maturely considered of and examined. For by this means it cometh to pass, that whatsoever is sound already (and all is sound for substance, in one or other of our editions, and the worst of ours far better than their authentic vulgar) the same will shine as gold more brightly, being rubbed and polished; also, if anything be halting, or superfluous, or not so agreeable to the original, the same may be corrected, and the truth set in place. And what can the King command to be done, that will bring him more true honour than this? and wherein could they that have been set a work, approve their duty to the King, yea their obedience to God, and love to his Saints more, than by yielding their service, and all that is within them, for the furnishing of the work? But besides all this, they were the principal motives of it, and therefore ought least to quarrel it: for the very Historical truth is, that upon the importunate petitions of the Puritans, at his Majesty's coming to this Crown, the Conference at Hampton Court having been appointed for hearing their complaints: when by force of reason they were put from all other grounds, they had recourse at the last, to this shift, that they could not with good conscience subscribe to the Communion book, since it maintained the Bible as it was there translated, which was as they said, a most corrupted translation. And although this was judged to be but a very poor and empty shift; yet even hereupon did his Majesty begin to bethink himself of the good that might ensue by a new translation, and presently after gave order for this Translation which is now presented unto thee. Thus much to satisfy our scrupulous Brethren.

An Answer to the Imputations of Our Adversaries

Now to the latter we answer; that we do not deny, nay we affirm and avow, that the very meanest translation of the Bible in English, set forth by men of our profession, (for we have seen none of theirs of the whole Bible as yet) containeth the word of God, nay, is the word of God. As the King's speech, which he uttereth in Parliament, being translated into French, Dutch, Italian, and Latin, is still the King's speech, though it be not interpreted by every Translator with the like grace, nor peradventure so fitly for phrase, nor so expressly for sense, everywhere. For it is confessed, that things are to take their denomination of the greater part; and a natural man could say, Verum ubi multa nitent in carmine, non ego paucis offendor maculis, etc. A man may be counted a virtuous man, though he have made many slips in his life, (else, there were none virtuous, for in many things we offend all) [James 3:2] also a comely man and lovely, though he have some warts upon his hand, yea, not only freckles upon his face, but also scars. No cause therefore why the word translated should be denied to be the word, or forbidden to be current, notwithstanding that some imperfections and blemishes may be noted in the setting forth of it. For what ever was perfect under the Sun, where Apostles or Apostolic men, that is, men endued with an extraordinary measure of God's spirit, and privileged with the privilege of infallibility, had not their hand? The Romanists therefore in refusing to hear, and daring to burn the Word translated, did no less than despite the spirit of grace, from whom originally it proceeded, and whose sense and meaning, as well as man's weakness would enable, it did express. Judge by an example or two. Plutarch writeth, that after that Rome had been burnt by the Gauls, they fell soon to build it again: but doing it in haste, they did not cast the streets, nor proportion the houses in such comely fashion, as had been most sightly and convenient; was Catiline therefore an honest man, or a good patriot, that sought to bring it to a combustion? or Nero a good Prince, that did indeed set it on fire? So, by the story of Ezra, and the prophecy of Haggai it may be gathered, that the Temple built by Zerubbabel after the return from Babylon, was by no means to be compared to the former built by Solomon (for they that remembered the former, wept when they considered the latter) [Ezra 3:12] notwithstanding, might this latter either have been abhorred and forsaken by the Jews, or profaned by the Greeks? The like we are to think of Translations. The translation of the Seventy dissenteth from the Original in many places, neither doth it come near it, for perspicuity, gravity, majesty; yet which of the Apostles did condemn it? Condemn it? Nay, they used it, (as it is apparent, and as Saint Jerome and most learned men do confess) which they would not have done, nor by their example of using it, so grace and commend it to the Church, if it had been unworthy the appellation and name of the word of God. And whereas they urge for their second defence of their vilifying and abusing of the English Bibles, or some pieces thereof, which they meet with, for that heretics (forsooth) were the Authors of the translations, (heretics they call us by the same right that they call themselves Catholics, both being wrong) we marvel what divinity taught them so. We are sure Tertullian was of another mind: Ex personis probamus fidem, an ex fide personas? Do we try men's faith by their persons? we should try their persons by their faith. Also S. Augustine was of another mind: for he lighting upon certain rules made by Tychonius a Donatist, for the better understanding of the word, was not ashamed to make use of them, yea, to insert them into his own book, with giving commendation to them so far forth as they were worthy to be commended, as is to be seen in S. Augustine's third book De doctrina Christiana. To be short, Origen, and the whole Church of God for certain hundred years, were of another mind: for they were so far from treading under foot, (much more from burning) the Translation of Aquila a Proselyte, that is, one that had turned Jew; of Symmachus, and Theodotion, both Ebionites, that is, most vile heretics, that they joined them together with the Hebrew Original, and the Translation of the Seventy (as hath been before signified out of Epiphanius) and set them forth openly to be considered of and perused by all. But we weary the unlearned, who need not know so much, and trouble the learned, who know it already. 

Yet before we end, we must answer a third cavil and objection of theirs against us, for altering and amending our Translations so oft; wherein truly they deal hardly, and strangely with us. For to whom ever was it imputed for a fault (by such as were wise) to go over that which he had done, and to amend it where he saw cause? Saint Augustine was not afraid to exhort S. Jerome to a Palinodia or recantation; the same S. Augustine was not ashamed to retractate, we might say revoke, many things that had passed him, and doth even glory that he seeth his infirmities. If we will be sons of the Truth, we must consider what it speaketh, and trample upon our own credit, yea, and upon other men's too, if either be any way an hindrance to it. This to the cause: then to the persons we say, that of all men they ought to be most silent in this case. For what varieties have they, and what alterations have they made, not only of their Service books, Portesses and Breviaries, but also of their Latin Translation? The Service book supposed to be made by S. Ambrose (Officium Ambrosianum) was a great while in special use and request; but Pope Hadrian calling a Council with the aid of Charles the Emperor, abolished it, yea, burnt it, and commanded the Service book of Saint Gregory universally to be used. Well, Officium Gregorianum gets by this means to be in credit, but doth it continue without change or altering? No, the very Roman Service was of two fashions, the New fashion, and the Old, (the one used in one Church, the other in another) as is to be seen in Pamelius a Romanist, his Preface, before Micrologus. the same Pamelius reporteth out Radulphus de Rivo, that about the year of our Lord, 1277, Pope Nicolas the Third removed out of the Churches of Rome, the more ancient books (of Service) and brought into use the Missals of the Friers Minorites, and commanded them to be observed there; insomuch that about an hundred years after, when the above name Radulphus happened to be at Rome, he found all the books to be new, (of the new stamp). Neither were there this chopping and changing in the more ancient times only, but also of late: Pius Quintus himself confesseth, that every Bishopric almost had a peculiar kind of service, most unlike to that which others had: which moved him to abolish all other Breviaries, though never so ancient, and privileged and published by Bishops in their Dioceses, and to establish and ratify that only which was of his own setting forth, in the year 1568. Now when the father of their Church, who gladly would heal the sore of the daughter of his people softly and slightly, and make the best of it, findeth so great fault with them for their odds and jarring; we hope the children have no great cause to vaunt of their uniformity. But the difference that appeareth between our Translations, and our often correcting of them, is the thing that we are specially charged with; let us see therefore whether they themselves be without fault this way, (if it be to be counted a fault, to correct) and whether they be fit men to throw stones at us: O tandem maior parcas insane minori: they that are less sound themselves, ought not to object infirmities to others. If we should tell them that Valla, Stapulensis, Erasmus, and Vives found fault with their vulgar Translation, and consequently wished the same to be mended, or a new one to be made, they would answer peradventure, that we produced their enemies for witnesses against them; albeit, they were in no other sort enemies, than as S. Paul was to the Galatians, for telling them the truth [Gal 4:16]: and it were to be wished, that they had dared to tell it them plainlier and oftener. But what will they say to this, that Pope Leo the Tenth allowed Erasmus' Translation of the New Testament, so much different from the vulgar, by his Apostolic Letter and Bull; that the same Leo exhorted Pagnine to translate the whole Bible, and bare whatsoever charges was necessary for the work? Surely, as the Apostle reasoneth to the Hebrews, that if the former Law and Testament had been sufficient, there had been no need of the latter: [Heb 7:11 and 8:7] so we may say, that if the old vulgar had been at all points allowable, to small purpose had labour and charges been undergone, about framing of a new. If they say, it was one Pope's private opinion, and that he consulted only himself; then we are able to go further with them, and to aver, that more of their chief men of all sorts, even their own Trent champions Paiva and Vega, and their own Inquisitors, Hieronymus ab Oleastro, and their own Bishop Isidorus Clarius, and their own Cardinal Thomas a Vio Caietan, do either make new Translations themselves, or follow new ones of other men's making, or note the vulgar Interpreter for halting; none of them fear to dissent from him, nor yet to except against him. And call they this an uniform tenor of text and judgment about the text, so many of their Worthies disclaiming the now received conceit? Nay, we will yet come nearer the quick: doth not their Paris edition differ from the Lovaine, and Hentenius his from them both, and yet all of them allowed by authority? Nay, doth not Sixtus Quintus confess, that certain Catholics (he meaneth certain of his own side) were in such an humor of translating the Scriptures into Latin, that Satan taking occasion by them, though they thought of no such matter, did strive what he could, out of so uncertain and manifold a variety of Translations, so to mingle all things, that nothing might seem to be left certain and firm in them, etc.? Nay, further, did not the same Sixtus ordain by an inviolable decree, and that with the counsel and consent of his Cardinals, that the Latin edition of the old and new Testament, which the Council of Trent would have to be authentic, is the same without controversy which he then set forth, being diligently corrected and printed in the Printing-house of Vatican? Thus Sixtus in his Preface before his Bible. And yet Clement the Eighth his immediate successor, publisheth another edition of the Bible, containing in it infinite differences from that of Sixtus, (and many of them weighty and material) and yet this must be authentic by all means. What is to have the faith of our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with Yea or Nay, if this be not? Again, what is sweet harmony and consent, if this be? Therefore, as Demaratus of Corinth advised a great King, before he talked of the dissensions among the Grecians, to compose his domestic broils (for at that time his Queen and his son and heir were at deadly feud with him) so all the while that our adversaries do make so many and so various editions themselves, and do jar so much about the worth and authority of them, they can with no show of equity challenge us for changing and correcting.

The Purpose of the Translators, with their Number, Furniture, Care, etc.

But it is high time to leave them, and to show in brief what we proposed to ourselves, and what course we held in this our perusal and survey of the Bible. Truly (good Christian Reader) we never thought from the beginning, that we should need to make a new Translation, nor yet to make of a bad one a good one, (for then the imputation of Sixtus had been true in some sort, that our people had been fed with gall of Dragons instead of wine, with whey instead of milk:) but to make a good one better, or out of many good ones, one principal good one, not justly to be excepted against; that hath been our endeavor, that our mark. To that purpose there were many chosen, that were greater in other men's eyes than in their own, and that sought the truth rather than their own praise. Again, they came or were thought to come to the work, not exercendi causa (as one saith) but exercitati, that is, learned, not to learn: For the chief overseer and ergodiwkthVunder his Majesty, to whom not only we, but also our whole Church was much bound, knew by his wisdom, which thing also Nazianzen taught so long ago, that it is a preposterous order to teach first and to learn after, yea that to en piqw keramian manqanein, to learn and practice together, is neither commendable for the workman, nor safe for the work. Therefore such were thought upon, as could say modestly with Saint Jerome, Et Hebraeum Sermonem ex parte didicimus, et in Latino pene ab ipsis incunabulis etc. detriti sumus. Both we have learned the Hebrew tongue in part, and in the Latin we have been exercised almost from our very cradle. S. Jerome maketh no mention of the Greek tongue, wherein yet he did excel, because he translated not the old Testament out of Greek, but out of Hebrew. And in what sort did these assemble? In the trust of their own knowledge, or of their sharpness of wit, or deepness of judgment, as it were in an arm of flesh? At no hand. They trusted in him that hath the key of David, opening and no man shutting; they prayed to the Lord the Father of our Lord, to the effect that S. Augustine did; O let thy Scriptures be my pure delight, let me not be deceived in them, neither let me deceive by them. In this confidence, and with this devotion did they assemble together; not too many, lest one should trouble another; and yet many, lest many things haply might escape them. If you ask what they had before them, truly it was the Hebrew text of the Old Testament, the Greek of the New. These are the two golden pipes, or rather conduits, where-through the olive branches empty themselves into the gold. Saint Augustine calleth them precedent, or original tongues; Saint Jerome, fountains. The same Saint Jerome affirmeth, and Gratian hath not spared to put it into his Decree, That as the credit of the old Books (he meaneth of the Old Testament) is to be tried by the Hebrew Volumes, so of the New by the Greek tongue, he meaneth by the original Greek. If truth be to be tried by these tongues, then whence should a Translation be made, but out of them? These tongues therefore, the Scriptures we say in those tongues, we set before us to translate, being the tongues wherein God was pleased to speak to his Church by his Prophets and Apostles. Neither did we run over the work with that posting haste that the Septuagint did, if that be true which is reported of them, that they finished it in 72 days; neither were we barred or hindered from going over it again, having once done it, like S. Jerome, if that be true which himself reporteth, that he could no sooner write anything, but presently it was caught from him, and published, and he could not have leave to mend it: neither, to be short, were we the first that fell in hand with translating the Scripture into English, and consequently destitute of former helps, as it is written of Origen, that he was the first in a manner, that put his hand to write Commentaries upon the Scriptures, and therefore no marvel, if he overshot himself many times. None of these things: the work hath not been huddled up in 72 days, but hath cost the workmen, as light as it seemeth, the pains of twice seven times seventy two days and more: matters of such weight and consequence are to be speeded with maturity: for in a business of moment a man feareth not the blame of convenient slackness. Neither did we think much to consult the Translators or Commentators, Chaldee, Hebrew, Syrian, Greek or Latin, no nor the Spanish, French, Italian, or Dutch; neither did we disdain to revise that which we had done, and to bring back to the anvil that which we had hammered: but having and using as great helps as were needful, and fearing no reproach for slowness, nor coveting praise for expedition, we have at the length, through the good hand of the Lord upon us, brought the work to that pass that you see. 

Reasons Moving Us To Set Diversity of Senses in the Margin, where there is Great Probability for Each

Some peradventure would have no variety of senses to be set in the margin, lest the authority of the Scriptures for deciding of controversies by that show of uncertainty, should somewhat be shaken. But we hold their judgment not to be so sound in this point. For though, whatsoever things are necessary are manifest, as S. Chrysostom saith, and as S. Augustine, In those things that are plainly set down in the Scriptures, all such matters are found that concern Faith, Hope, and Charity. Yet for all that it cannot be dissembled, that partly to exercise and whet our wits, partly to wean the curious from loathing of them for their every-where plainness, partly also to stir up our devotion to crave the assistance of God's spirit by prayer, and lastly, that we might be forward to seek aid of our brethren by conference, and never scorn those that be not in all respects so complete as they should be, being to seek in many things ourselves, it hath pleased God in his divine providence, here and there to scatter words and sentences of that difficulty and doubtfulness, not in doctrinal points that concern salvation, (for in such it hath been vouched that the Scriptures are plain) but in matters of less moment, that fearfulness would better beseem us than confidence, and if we will resolve, to resolve upon modesty with S. Augustine, (though not in this same case altogether, yet upon the same ground) Melius est dubitare de occultis, quam litigare de incertis, it is better to make doubt of those things which are secret, than to strive about those things that are uncertain. There be many words in the Scriptures, which be never found there but once, (having neither brother nor neighbor, as the Hebrews speak) so that we cannot be holpen by conference of places. Again, there be many rare names of certain birds, beasts and precious stones, etc. concerning which the Hebrews themselves are so divided among themselves for judgment, that they may seem to have defined this or that, rather because they would say something, than because they were sure of that which they said, as S. Jerome somewhere saith of the Septuagint. Now in such a case, doth not a margin do well to admonish the Reader to seek further, and not to conclude or dogmatize upon this or that peremptorily? For as it is a fault of incredulity, to doubt of those things that are evident: so to determine of such things as the Spirit of God hath left (even in the judgment of the judicious) questionable, can be no less than presumption. Therefore as S. Augustine saith, that variety of Translations is profitable for the finding out of the sense of the Scriptures: so diversity of signification and sense in the margin, where the text is no so clear, must needs do good, yea, is necessary, as we are persuaded. We know that Sixtus Quintus expressly forbiddeth, that any variety of readings of their vulgar edition, should be put in the margin, (which though it be not altogether the same thing to that we have in hand, yet it looketh that way) but we think he hath not all of his own side his favorers, for this conceit. They that are wise, had rather have their judgments at liberty in differences of readings, than to be captivated to one, when it may be the other. If they were sure that their high Priest had all laws shut up in his breast, as Paul the Second bragged, and that he were as free from error by special privilege, as the Dictators of Rome were made by law inviolable, it were another matter; then his word were an Oracle, his opinion a decision. But the eyes of the world are now open, God be thanked, and have been a great while, they find that he is subject to the same affections and infirmities that others be, that his skin is penetrable, and therefore so much as he proveth, not as much as he claimeth, they grant and embrace. 

Reasons Inducing Us Not To Stand Curiously upon an Identity of Phrasing

Another thing we think good to admonish thee of (gentle Reader) that we have not tied ourselves to an uniformity of phrasing, or to an identity of words, as some peradventure would wish that we had done, because they observe, that some learned men somewhere, have been as exact as they could that way. Truly, that we might not vary from the sense of that which we had translated before, if the word signified the same thing in both places (for there be some words that be not of the same sense everywhere) we were especially careful, and made a conscience, according to our duty. But, that we should express the same notion in the same particular word; as for example, if we translate the Hebrew or Greek word once by Purpose, never to call it Intent; if one where Journeying, never Traveling; if one where Think, never Suppose; if one where Pain, never Ache; if one where Joy, never Gladness, etc. Thus to mince the matter, we thought to savour more of curiosity than wisdom, and that rather it would breed scorn in the Atheist, than bring profit to the godly Reader. For is the kingdom of God become words or syllables? why should we be in bondage to them if we may be free, use one precisely when we may use another no less fit, as commodiously? A godly Father in the Primitive time showed himself greatly moved, that one of newfangledness called krabbaton skimpouV, though the difference be little or none; and another reporteth that he was much abused for turning Cucurbita (to which reading the people had been used) into Hedera. Now if this happen in better times, and upon so small occasions, we might justly fear hard censure, if generally we should make verbal and unnecessary changings. We might also be charged (by scoffers) with some unequal dealing towards a great number of good English words. For as it is written of a certain great Philosopher, that he should say, that those logs were happy that were made images to be worshipped; for their fellows, as good as they, lay for blocks behind the fire: so if we should say, as it were, unto certain words, Stand up higher, have a place in the Bible always, and to others of like quality, Get ye hence, be banished forever, we might be taxed peradventure with S. James his words, namely, To be partial in ourselves and judges of evil thoughts. Add hereunto, that niceness in words was always counted the next step to trifling, and so was to be curious about names too: also that we cannot follow a better pattern for elocution than God himself; therefore he using divers words, in his holy writ, and indifferently for one thing in nature: we, if we will not be superstitious, may use the same liberty in our English versions out of Hebrew and Greek, for that copy or store that he hath given us. Lastly, we have on the one side avoided the scrupulosity of the Puritans, who leave the old Ecclesiastical words, and betake them to other, as when they put Washing for Baptism, and Congregation instead of Church: as also on the other side we have shunned the obscurity of the Papists, in their Azimes, Tunike, Rational, Holocausts, Praepuce, Pasche, and a number of such like, whereof their late Translation is full, and that of purpose to darken the sense, that since they must needs translate the Bible, yet by the language thereof, it may be kept from being understood. But we desire that the Scripture may speak like itself, as in the language of Canaan, that it may be understood even of the very vulgar.

Many other things we might give thee warning of (gentle Reader) if we had not exceeded the measure of a Preface already. It remaineth, that we commend thee to God, and to the Spirit of his grace, which is able to build further than we can ask or think. He removeth the scales from our eyes, the veil from our hearts, opening our wits that we may understand his word, enlarging our hearts, yea correcting our affections, that we may love it above gold and silver, yea that we may love it to the end. Ye are brought unto fountains of living water which ye digged not; do not cast earth into them with the Philistines, neither prefer broken pits before them with the wicked Jews. [Gen 26:15. Jer 2:13.] Others have laboured, and you may enter into their labours; O receive not so great things in vain, O despise not so great salvation! Be not like swine to tread under foot so precious things, neither yet like dogs to tear and abuse holy things. Say not to our Saviour with the Gergesites, Depart out of our coasts [Matt 8:34]; neither yet with Esau sell your birthright for a mess of pottage [Heb 12:16]. If light be come into the world, love not darkness more than light; if food, if clothing be offered, go not naked, starve not yourselves. Remember the advice of Nazianzene, It is a grievous thing (or dangerous) to neglect a great fair, and to seek to make markets afterwards: also the encouragement of S. Chrysostom, It is altogether impossible, that he that is sober (and watchful) should at any time be neglected: Lastly, the admonition and menacing of S. Augustine, They that despise God's will inviting them, shall feel God's will taking vengeance of them. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God; [Heb 10:31] but a blessed thing it is, and will bring us to everlasting blessedness in the end, when God speaketh unto us, to hearken; when he setteth his word before us, to read it; when he stretcheth out his hand and calleth, to answer, Here am I, here we are to do thy will, O God. The Lord work a care and conscience in us to know him and serve him, that we may be acknowledged of him at the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom with the holy Ghost, be all praise and thanksgiving. Amen.

  • 10404

Hi Jesse,

Thank you so much for your comments. I haven't had time to fully digest them, so I can't say with any certainty that I agree with them completely. There is certainly food for thought. I do, however, have a couple of comments to make based on my initial reading of your post...

First, my preferred Bible translation is the Young's Literal Translation (YLT). I've verified that it indeed translates ekklesia as "assembly" as you suggest. But it does so much more than just that. For example, as I have noted previously on these pages, it uses the phrase "reign of God" in place of "kingdom of God" (e.g. Matt 6:33), which I believe more accurately describes what God has brought about under His Messiah. It's the idea of God being at the center of all things rather than God being ascribed to a physical location (e.g . a church building). Also, and perhaps most importantly, the YLT preserves the passive voice of the original Greek. Most English Bible translations translate Scripture into an active voice, thereby making man the center of the activity. For example, the ESV translates John 3:16 as "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life" whereas the YLT translates it as "for God did so love the world, that His Son -- the only begotten -- He gave, that every one who is believing in him may not perish, but may have life age-during". The change in phrasing from "whoever believes in him" to "everyone who is believing in him" puts God rightfully back at the center of salvation.

As for your comment about despising the word "church", my concern is more focused on what the assembly has become, regardless of what name we use for it. Much of what the assembly is today is not reflected in the pages of Scripture. And I'm not talking about playing drums during the church service. Many practices that I see taking place in our assemblies do not mirror the Biblical narrative. For example, at what point do we see assemblies operating on Robert's Rules and run by majority opinion? Unity of believers is a key concept in the New Testament (1 Cor 1:10-17). Where in Scripture are church leaders allowed to deny Communion to penitent believers? Where is God's command to rest on the first day of the week? Or for churches to have membership? I find the last question to be particularly important, since church membership is extremely damaging to the assembly as a whole. In Ex 20:10, God commands rest for everyone, including the "sojourner who is within thy gates". Yet virtually every Christian leader (Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant) who claims that they are the spiritual descendants of Peter in Matt 16:18 will tell you that their responsibility to the assembly lies only with members of their church. How can it be that a Christian's only true responsibility is toward those who contribute to their salaries and their buildings, and who agree with their theological leanings? God clearly has concern for those outside of the local tribe, yet our assemblies operate to the contrary.

To close out what has already become a long thread, I think that your point, Jesse, is that our Bible translations co-opt words for use with their own agendas. On this point I think that we can agree. But I would take your premise one step further to say that God's truth may still be gleaned from the pages of Scripture despite the poor translations that are generally most widely used. I've only recently become a seventh day Sabbatarian because all of the Scripture that I've read previously, regardless of translation, tells me that the Sabbath is on the seventh day. The reason that I spent almost 60 years believing that Sunday was the Sabbath is that I never questioned the authority that told me that it was. It was not until my former church literally kicked me out a few years back for questioning their authority which appeared to place Christ in subject to church leadership that things changed. It was God who opened my eyes to the truth that the church follows cultural conventions nearly as much as it follows Scripture. There is no doubt in my mind that God is still at work in many of the churches today and that many are saved because of it. It's just that we deprive ourselves of experiencing him as we should through our own sinful actions. May we all hope and pray that God will show us His reign as we seek to do His will.

  • 1
  • 10604
Added a File.   

One of the very best books on the subject of Church history.

The author was not a man of inferior learning. He compiled and published a Concordance as well as books on Astronomy, among many other things. Also, a poet.

Look through it here and if you can use it you can download this large, once rare volume for your own collection. It is now offered in a single file.

The days are short, the nights are cold. Warm your soul at the hearth of James Gall.

  • 10927

Thanks David - the last paragraph of that quote says it all. "Let it be remembered that the translators had a double task to perform, not only to give an English version of the Scriptures, but so to manage that version as not to disturb the ecclesiastical order of their own communion."

Very polite way of saying if they didn't prop up the church structure and the career clergy with their word choices, they would face dire consequences.

  • 11691

Hey Jesse. Hey all. Here's just one more example of how things went askew regarding our Christian vocabulary. Check it out and think it over if you will.

It's a real tragedy that we are even having this discussion instead of advancing the cause of the Kingdom in more tangible ways. Ways in which every believer is a co-equal brother/sister and a bona-fide minister of the Almighty. We have literally lost centuries of opportunities..

These are fundamental issues and as they say: Form determines function. Obviously, the church needs to adjust and even overhaul her form and structure. And that without delay.

The author was the Professor of Hebrew at a major University. He also wrote a Hebrew Grammar. This page is from a biography about him after his death. We'll be publishing (without cost) more of his work before long.

  • 11710

Hey there dear brother, you have touched on many serious issues. We definitely should dig deeper here. I'm going to be thinking about this and I hope everyone else will look into it in greater depth. I was reminded of a footnote I read just yesterday:

If I recall, the NT "churchy" words were just common words, already in use. For example, the word for church also applies to the vicious mob, recorded in the book of Acts. And of course, words change meanings over time - just as the swastika was once an ancient Christian symbol.

Lemme rant here for a moment.... Last week I received climbing gear from Notch, designed in your city. Those mountains also produced a legendary tennis champion who has even defeated Roger Federer: John Isner. Not to mention Honda jet aircraft, flying cross-country in just a few hours.

I'm a former North Carolinian (Montreat) so let me remind the world that when the Declaration of Independence was being penned, an earlier version of a similar document was either on the table or in minds of those who were sitting there with their quills. I'm referring to the Mecklenburg Declaration.

I bring up these details because the city is not that large yet its influence is global in reach....

Soooo your own life and your small church be used for good if you follow the Lamb, seek his glory, and pursue his Kingdom. Just like the mustard seed which grows into a great tree. Or the yeast which makes bread to rise. Or the "stone" in Daniel's prophecy which grew and "filled the whole earth". Etc.

Someone might have reminded the mother of John and Charles Wesley that she was just a housewife. But years later, books were written documenting how, under the hand of Providence, these two men changed the entire landscape. One such book is entitled: England After the Wesleys.

Reader, let us get in step behind Jesus. Let us love him every moment. Let us obey his words, regardless of where they may lead, knowing that the final outcome will be in his hands.

  • 11949

Sorry we missed you while you were in our city!

  • 12034
Added a Discussion.  

I don't know how well this thought will be received on a site called "house church network," but there are very few words in the English language that I have come to despise and mourn more than the word "church". Adding the word "house" really only communicates a move of the exact same problems into a different geography - and so often, that's exactly what happens in real practice, too. And here's the kicker - the word itself is an impostor to the New Testament.

Did you know the English word "church" was not a translation of the Greek word "ekklesia", but rather was inserted? Did you know that those who attempted to simply translate that and other "churchy" words were severely persecuted or killed for their "heresies" by powerful church clergy? Why? Because those clergy needed the Bible (which was being read for the first time by their parishioners) to support and uphold their positions of power, control, and wealth. They knew if these words were fully translated, they would quickly lose their hold over the lives and fortunes of others.

I highly recommend reading through the New Testament using the World English Bible or even better its cousin, the World Messianic Bible - both available freely on Bible.is (Web site or app). Inserted or transliterated "churchy" words like Church, Ministry, Apostle, Deacon, Gospel, Christ, and others are instead fully translated with the plain meaning of the original. No more reading "into" the real text with our centuries of cultural malpractice. It is quite freeing - and challenging!

By the way, if you are one who gets heartburn over the use of certain families of manuscripts for translation, etc, then you could just take your favorite Bible translation and more fully translate it using the following...

Church = assembly, Gospel = good news, preach = announce, Ministry = service, Christ = the Messiah, Apostle = emissary, Deacon = servant, Bishop = overseer

  • 1
  • 12141