Bad translation snares a good Bible teacher

Listening to a favorite preacher I'm having a problem with his use of one of the modern translations.

He's quoting Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 and instead of "the world was without form and void" he says "the world BECAME shapeless, empty and dark" and goes on to make much of how this supposedly reflects the fact that God doesn't make anything that isn't perfect, and how its becoming ugly and dark shows the entrance of sin into the world. Sort of as a parable of what was to come later.

But that point is pretty strained it seems to me, and the translation "became" isn't supported in any Bible version I have easy access to. All those at Blue Letter Bible, for instance, say it WAS without form and dark. The NIV, however, does have one of its famous footnotes at this point, saying it could possibly mean "became." Yeah, and Strong's has "become" as one of the possibilities too. So we're all made translators these days.

Why isn't it respected that eminent scholars and translators chose "WAS?" Why is the ordinary Christian given this option to translate the Bible over the experts who did so already? Especially the KJV scholars who were head and shoulders above the translators of any subsequent version, certainly above Westcott and Hort according to Dean Burgon who ought to know. So the ordinary preacher is given all this power to make judgments he's in no position to make, even if he learned some basic Greek in seminary. If Westcott and Hort's Greek was on the schoolboy level, as Burgon judged it, why should any pastor think his is any better than theirs? (This favorite Bible teacher I'm talking about did not go to seminary or Bible school, just for the record).

And then I have to ask why this Biblically grounded and highly spiritual teacher would go with a footnote anyway -- unless he's using a translation that's not on Blue Letter Bible's list. In any case it leads him into some questionable reasoning: God makes everything perfect so it MUST be that it was sin that brought the void and darkness at the beginning of creation. I'm afraid this is probably a case of his LIKING the idea of a certain kind of perfection, defending God's honor as it were, but really leaning to his own understanding. Happens all too easily to the human race. And the situation in which we're all invited to make our own decisions about what God really said certainly plays into this human weakness.

I dunno. Other explanations for the pre-world formlessness occur to me that don't challenge God's mastery. Anything in the first stages of existence might be describable as formless and void. How about the blastocyst stage before the embryo takes shape? In fact how about the early embryo itself, that doesn't yet show the form of the creature it is going to become? In fact I also think of stages of cooking, simple chemical operations. The first stages are pretty formless before the egg in a sauce thickens it or a cake emerges from the batter. I'm sure the same thing is true in chemistry in general. Or how about the example of the formless lump of clay before it becomes pottery? The biblical image of the Creation is of the Holy Spirit brooding over this unformed earth to bring it to birth, which even the human creator imitates in making something from unorganized material.

As usual, just because he has spiritual sense and basic Biblical knowledge, this preacher is able to go on to make valid points about the effects of sin and especially the sin of pride, even spiritually powerful points, but in relation to the Bible it's more of a rescue operation than a true building on the word of God, but of course the preacher who doesn't have Biblical grounding or spiritual sense has no hope of getting on track at all.

Is the Todd Bentley Healing & Revival Circus With Real (Bad) Angels and Tattooed Man breaking up?

I haven't done a post on the Todd Bentley supposed "revival" that's been going on in Lakeland, Florida for the last few months, but intended eventually to put up some links to other discussions of the phenomenon. Andrew Strom http://www.revivalschool.com/ and Scott Johnson http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=61008193588 and a few blogs I check in on from time to time have been keeping tabs on this "outpouring" of anything but the Holy Spirit.

Now I get an email from a friend quoting J. Lee Grady, editor of Charisma magazine, on his apparently rather sudden disillusionment with that "revival," brought about by the breakup of Bentley's marriage. It's a touchingly even painfully honest assessment of the charismatic mentality that sucks believers in the spiritual gifts into outrageously false spectacles like the Todd Bentley show:http://www.charismanews.com/

. . . this week, a few days after the Canadian preacher announced the end of his visits to Lakeland, he told his staff that his marriage is ending. . . .

Why did so many people flock to Lakeland from around the world to rally behind an evangelist who had serious credibility issues from the beginning?

To put it bluntly, we’re just plain gullible.

From the first week of the Lakeland revival, many discerning Christians raised questions about Bentley’s beliefs and practices. They felt uneasy when he said he talked to an angel in his hotel room. They sensed something amiss when he wore a T-shirt with a skeleton on it. They wondered why a man of God would cover himself with tattoos. They were horrified when they heard him describe how he tackled a man and knocked his tooth out during prayer.

But among those who jumped on the Lakeland bandwagon, discernment was discouraged. They were expected to swallow and follow. The message was clear: "This is God. Don’t question.” . . .

Why didn’t anyone in Lakeland denounce the favorable comments Bentley made about William Branham?

This one baffles me. Branham embraced horrible deception near the end of his ministry, before he died in 1965. He claimed that he was the reincarnation of Elijah—and his strange doctrines are still embraced by a cultlike following today. When Bentley announced to the world that the same angel that ushered in the 1950s healing revival had come to Lakeland, the entire audience should have run for the exits. . . .

Why didn’t anyone correct this error from the pulpit? Godly leaders are supposed to protect the sheep from heresy, not spoon feed deception to them. Only God knows how far this poison traveled from Lakeland to take root elsewhere. May God forgive us for allowing His Word to be so flippantly contaminated.

A prominent Pentecostal evangelist called me this week after Bentley’s news hit the fan. He said to me: “I’m now convinced that a large segment of the charismatic church will follow the anti-Christ when he shows up because they have no discernment.” Ouch. Hopefully we’ll learn our lesson this time and apply the necessary caution when an imposter shows up.

This is a great start, certainly for his own spiritual health, and we can hope the same for some of his readers as well, but I'm sure he hasn't yet appreciated the half of it, the tenth of it, when it comes to the problems with the charismatic movement. So much of it is riddled with out-and-out demonic manifestations and corrupted discernment that he hasn't yet seen, all we can do is pray that God will continue to open his eyes, but hope for the movement itself has pretty flimsy supports. Grady still thinks it's just a matter of Bentley being "corrected" by loving Christian leaders (some of whom themselves are rightly under suspicion by the discerning), but all the signs are that Bentley is not even remotely Christian to begin with.

Even while appreciating any honest self-appraisal from this camp, knowing how hard-won it has to be, one might nevertheless want to say "I told you so" or "It's about time" or "Too little too late" as Andrew Strom did in his blog a couple weeks ago:

http://revivalschool.wordpress.com/2008/07/27/questions-about-lakeland-j-lee-grady/

It may be too late, because a great deal of damage has been done by this false revival already, and the fact that Bentley's own camp may be dispersing will probably not stop its galloping career across the world.
=======

It did cross my mind that perhaps the breakup of the Lakeland dog and pony show could be thanks to Scott Johnson and friend who went there not too long ago and spent much of their time praying against the evil in it.
=======

More to come on this subject I'm sure.

A call to death to self, to life in Christ, and a note on the handicap of having a false Bible.

As I mentioned a few posts back, I've been appreciating the writings and talks of Zac Poonen, of Bangalore, India. I've listened and read enough now to have encountered some areas I disagree with him about, but overall his main message is so true to Christ I'm going to overlook the disagreements for now. This is exhortation to the Spirit-filled life that we just don't find except in old books, at least as old as A.W. Tozer and Leonard Ravenhill and Martyn Lloyd-Jones.

His main page: http://www.poonen.org/

A page of books you can read online or order for cost: http://www.cfcindia.com/web/mainpages/bookshelf.php

A page of links to topical Bible studies:
http://www.cfcindia.com/web/mainpages/topical_bible_study.php

And along the bottom of the page are links to other pages of sermons and teachings.

His teaching solves for me the problem of the charismatic errors while supporting the basis for genuine Pentecostal and charismatic expectations, my hope for revival, the enlivening of the Lord's true people in these last days. He believes in the gift of tongues for today but judges that some 90% of them are counterfeit. I can go with that -- at least until I have solid reason to think otherwise. He's never been in a charismatic congregation, he simply takes his understanding of the spiritual gifts for today direct from the Bible and because of his strong emphasis on what the Christian life costs, I find him believable.

His denunciations of the prosperity teachings as the complete contradiction of the Biblical message are sharp and to the point. His main message is the Exchanged Life, that is, the giving up of our life for Christ's life within us. The more we die to self the more we live to Him and for Him and through Him. This is more than just getting sin out of our lives, it's also mortifying the flesh in giving up everything we are to Christ. The more we mortify our flesh the more we have of the Spirit. This is classical Christianity, but finding it in the morass of apostasy and confusion these days is not easy. If you have a strong spiritual leading in this direction you can pick out the occasional gems from the muck, but usually it means you need to go to the older writers.

And we need to do this because we need the right kind of spiritual food, the right kind of exhortation, to strengthen us in these days of silly self-indulgent fleshly "Christianity."

I do have to say that it bothers me a lot that Zac Poonen is trusting in the new Bible versions. Clearly he wants a simple English text to get across the simplicity of the gospel, and he thinks the KJV is not accessible to his people. So he goes to the Amplified or the Living Bible at times. I do find it disappointing to hear him quote a well known passage in anything but the KJV wording. It's just another proof of how Westcott and Hort damaged the church. A Spirit-led preacher can still make use of the bad versions, but it's discouraging to hear him make a case for, say, how God's word has "eyes of the heart," going on to explain that this is because it's the heart that concerns God more than the intellect, apparently not knowing that the KJV has "eyes of the understanding." Also, to call the Holy Spirit the "helper" isn't exactly wrong, but "comforter" was the choice of the truly God-inspired KJV writers.

See, most preachers and teachers of the Bible think all the versions are merely different translations of the same basic word of God. They trust the translators to have given them viable options that all express God's own mind and heart, and if they prefer one word over another themselves, it's usually on the basis of what they think their hearers will grasp best. The idea that one is right and another wrong does not necessarily enter into it.

If they try to inform themselves of the controversy and the history of the versions, they usually stop with the apologists for the modern versions. They may be (rightly I think) put off by some of the extreme King-James-only advocates.

You'll hear a talk from time to time on the Reliability of the Biblical Manuscripts which simply never gets into the subject of the different lineages and qualities of manuscripts, or anything relevant to the KJV only position. They'll argue from the great many manuscripts in existence, and from techniques of textual criticism that can establish lineages back to the originals, that our Bible is reliable, as if all our Bibles were basically the same, without ever mentioning that there are whole lineages of corrupted texts as well as trustworthy ones, that also go back to ancient times.

The KJV translators were aware of these textual traditions and rejected those they found to be corrupt in their own judgment, which included the texts that were later preferred by Westcott and Hort and now made the basis of almost all the non-KJV Bibles today. Now the different lineages and traditions are treated more or less as equal, more or less as God's word, but if they get into it at all a modern scholar will simply flatly claim that the Westcott and Hort texts are superior, only because supposedly they are older. (Recently I've run across the assertion that as a matter of fact there are other ancient texts that still survive, even from the lineage that underlies the KJV, texts OLDER than those that underlie the new versions. My argument has been (basically Burgon's I believe) that a text that happened to survive from the 2nd century has no particular claim to being superior to a whole lot of texts that survive from the 4th, 6th or 10th centuries, because all it means is that the older one wasn't used as much, wasn't copied as much, wasn't appreciated by the church. In fact the Sinaiticus text that now underlies the new versions was found in a wastebasket in a ruined monastery. But if there are even older portions of the Bible of the KJV type, that's great to know.)

So preachers in all good faith accept the modern versions, accept whatever rationalizations they've learned from the modern scholars, are probably put off by the shrill and denunciatory tone and outlandish claims of some of the KJV-only camp, and so the church limps on to the Last Day with its sword a tad dull and its shield more often than not dangling uselessly at its side.

Well, I think some good preachers can for the most part rise above the handicap. But they are a rare breed.

Side Issues to be avoided in the KJV controversy (Did Dr. Wilkins really lose his voice or not?)

Scott Johnson is continuing the study of the Bible Versions problem, now getting into a general defense of the King James. He's collected most of the information I'd discovered myself in my own researches, which I'm not getting posted here as I'd hoped to do, so his talks are a good resource for me to link. A lot of it is in his PDF document which is linked at the button just below the Play button. (It's the same document for all his talks on this subject). http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=8110820493110

In this study he quotes mainly from one text, James Melton's Fighting Back, an online book which can also easily be found by googling it. (If the music is distracting to you, it's also available here). Melton makes it clear that he is not arguing the case but only presenting the main points of the KJVO position. Johnson simply reads it and does not check his facts independently, so it remains for that to be done.

I want to consider just one minor incident here, that Johnson brings up at the very beginning of today's talks, that I think unfortunately demonstrates how the real issues in the KJV debate get lost in side issues and misrepresentations and misunderstandings. This concerns an incident that occurred back in 1995 on a John Ankerberg Show discussion of the KJV-only controversy. Johnson reads a rather famous article describing this alleged incident, that is widely published on the internet, titled Bible Scholar Loses Voice on the John Ankerberg Show. This was written by Texe Marrs, a fervent KJV-only advocate, though few of the sites that publish it attribute it to him.

(Various sites where it is published:
http://www.scionofzion.com/loses_voice.htm
http://www.av1611.org/voice1.html
http://www.baptistpillar.com/bd0465.htm)

The Marrs/KJV-only account is that one of the new version translators on the show, Dr. Wilkins, translator of the NASB, actually completely lost his voice, at least for a short period of time, ironically when attempting to answer a question about the very claim that many new version translators had lost their voices, demonstrating that this is what happens to people who tamper with God's word.

I haven't researched this claim enough to have a judgment of my own about it. I did, however, do a little google-tracking of the brouhaha around the Ankerberg Show event and the first thing I found was an exchange of videos on You Tube between someone named Calcium Boy and Dr. James White, well known defender of the new versions. The first episode I ran across was one of Dr. White's answers to Calcium Boy: http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=kExSnDDxzyU&feature=user

Calcium Boy had called Dr. Sam Gipp, who was one of the KJVO panel on that same John Ankerberg Show, to make him aware of a video recently offered by Dr. White on You Tube purporting to be THE segment of the Ankerberg Show where Dr. Wilkins had lost his voice. It's a segment in which Dr. Wilkins has a catch in his throat and stops to drink some water. Dr. Gipp responded on Calcium Boy's answering machine that that was NOT the incident in question, and called it a "deception," which of course raises the question of Dr. White's integrity and so on and so forth. So Dr. White now shows that same piece of video tape again, which he apparently thinks must be the incident the KJVO people are talking about. (By the way he says this was cut out of the original broadcast, of which White has the tapes. He says it was put back into the DVD version of the program when it was digitized later so that's how he happens to have it. He also says that his own remarks were cut out to make room for this episode in the digitized version, and he plays both versions for us to see).

As I watched it what I found hard to believe was that anybody could possibly think anyone would consider that to be a case of losing one's voice. It just can't be the incident the KJVO people have in mind. On the tape a big deal is being made about a little catch in the throat that nobody would make in any normal conversation, but WOULD make if some previous incident had occurred that they wanted to make fun of.

The first thing that occurred to me was that some other voice-losing incident must have occurred earlier that they are referring back to by laughing it off as a joke. I mean, in itself, somebody's having a tiny frog in his throat and having to drink some water is not something to even notice, let alone have a jolly old time about. Wilkins makes a joke of it right away after his little cough and says "Oh, I'm losing my voice" which everyone else laughs at. I don't know what the original was, but this cannot possibly be it, and I don't see why James White doesn't recognize this obvious fact. It CAN'T be it. NOBODY would make such a fuss over such an incident, not even your craziest frothing-at-the-mouth KJVO advocate (and that does seem to be how some of them are regarded by White and Company). The only people making a fuss over it are the ANTI-KJV people because, obviously, it MUST refer back to something that had happened earlier.

Why doesn't White catch this? John Ankerberg does:
http://www.johnankerberg.org/ankerberg-articles/wilkins.html

Second, in previous shows Ankerberg had commented about Riplinger’s claim that new translations editors had lost their voices. He wanted an answer on this to quell the rumor and set the record straight since, obviously, none of the people present had lost their voices and neither did they know of this occurring to anyone else.

This is in fact a plausible enough explanation -- of the segment itself, that is, why they were joking around about a mere frog in the throat. It doesn't explain why the KJVO people remember an actual incident of voice-losing, however.

The Ankerberg report goes on to point out Marrs' errors:

But on the segment reported by Marrs, this was not Ankerberg’s question. Ankerberg’s question was to ask Wilkins about the credibility ofRiplinger’s book. So Marrs has distorted the context as well.

Third, the event in question was not at all like Marrs reported it. Dr. John Weldon, Chief Researcher for ATRI, personally reviewed this segment of the tape where Wilkins supposedly lost his voice. He didn’t lose his voice at all; he merely developed a "frog" in his throat which took about five seconds to cough out. This happens to people all the time and is hardly a sign of God’s judgment, nor would it be unexpected with someone who had just flown in from Athens, Greece and was tired. In response, Wilkins simply cleared his throat and said, a bit embarrassed, but half in jest, "I’m losing my voice." Everyone laughed and he took a drink of water and then proceeded to answer Ankerberg’s question concerning the unreliability of Riplinger’s book. He went on immediately to state that the Lockman Foundation had spent six weeks in investigation of Riplinger’s book and that "what I personally found is that virtually everything she says is wrong, or a misquotation or a deliberate deception of people…."

Right, but this can't possibly be what the KJVO people had in mind. Even making allowances for errors of all sorts as well as exaggeration of the incident itself, how can anyone suppose that Texe Marrs actually considered this to be an incident of losing one's voice? I can't buy it. I don't know what the explanation is, but it's just too hard to believe that Marrs would have misread such a trivial incident. In this incident Wilkins didn't lose his voice at all. He experienced a small catch in his throat and that didn't even stop him from going on to joke about how it meant "I'm losing my voice." THEN he took the glass of water. The whole thing looked staged to me (but I guess I could be wrong). And Sam Gipp directly denied it was the incident in question in his response on the answering machine recording put up on You Tube by CalciumBoy.

One thing I'd like to know is what Thomas Strouse who was also on the KJVO side on that program would say about it now. I couldn't find the answer on a brief google but I'll probably look more later.

I end up not knowing what the truth is about this alleged incident of Dr. Wilkins' supposedly losing his voice, but the segment White posted can't possibly be it, that's all.

What this shows more than anything else, I'm afraid, is how easily this discussion bogs down in irrelevancies and side issues. James White didn't miss the opportunity to call into doubt the credibility of Sam Gipp by quoting a few statements from his book that have nothing to do with the voice-losing incident. Dr. Gipp is apparently a defender of the most radical KJVO position, a follower of Peter Ruckman, a position that goes so far as to claim the Septuagint translation of the Old Testament didn't even exist (why this is an issue I'm not quite clear about), and no doubt supports the position that the King James Bible is absolutely the word-for-word perfect God-given text that must not be changed at all for any reason whatever. So White ridicules his position on the Septuagint, and he calls it "lying," which I guess is supposed to so impugn his character that we are advised not to trust him when he says that segment of Wilkins coughing isn't the one Marrs was writing about and they all witnessed.

Clearly there is no connection between the two things and shouldn't White steer clear of that sort of thing? Well, Gipp did it too when he called the segment "deception." Shouldn't Christians exhibit that old KJV word, "charity" to their opponents, assume the best rather than the worst, and stick to the known facts instead of making accusations? It may be that White really does think that's the only incident that could have been meant. Even to think that means his judgment of his opposition is a tad lacking in charity, but still, he may really believe what he said.

======================

While all this cross-talk is going on, the main points are getting missed, as I see it, but then I'm not on the radical end of the KJVO position so maybe I see it this way for that reason. Anti-KJVOs aren't going to do anything with an article like Marrs' except ridicule it as this You Tube exchange shows, and in in my opinion in the context of the overall debate it's best to leave Marrs and other extremists out of the discussion. There is now no way to prove that Wilkins lost his voice on that show, and Marrs' attitude to White is not exactly exemplary Christian behavior, (which has to be said about Gail Riplinger's way of dealing with David Cloud too). Neither is White's exemplary, but he's probably THE advocate for the new versions we need to refute, so we can't ignore him, we have to answer him and it needs to be done well.

I think we should concede that the KJV could have errors and need some correction, and even advocate that such corrections be made under the right conditions, but the main job here is to show the corruption of the new versions, and as long as the argument is based on defending a perfect KJV this main job is not getting done. We don't need to focus on the character of Westcott and Hort even, we merely need to show that they were commissioned to do some very minor corrections and that they did something entirely different. Dean Burgon's work shows the corruption of the texts they used, and also shows the deceitfulness of their violation of their trust in changing thousands of words that by no stretch of the imagination could be called necessary. This is where the focus should be.

Even focusing on all the changes made and the words and phrases of the KJV that are left out of the new versions doesn't by itself win the argument, because the opposition's main claim is that their texts are superior to those of the KJV, so that whatever differences are to be found between the KJV and the revisions, theirs are the right ones. (Of course the many differences even between the revisions themselves can also be mustered to show that isn't the whole story).

Again, Burgon's expert judgment of the different Greek and Hebrew texts is the place to start, showing the corruption of those chosen by W&H and perpetuated in all the new versions today, a corruption that was recognized by the KJV translators as well. Exposing the sleight of hand W & H pulled in the thousands of unnecessary changes should be the left hand knockout punch that follows the right (or vice versa).

=============================================

There is plenty more at You Tube on the Ankerberg incident for anyone who is interested.

This one is apparently an earlier video by James White in which he claims he just found out about the digitized version of the John Ankerberg show that includes the previously left out segment of what he calls the voice-losing incident, though it's really just Wilkins having a frog in his throat for a second and making a joke out of it as losing his voice:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMp5VnSQe40&feature=related

This is "CalciumBoy's" reply to White's discovery of the supposedly original footage of the voice-losing event: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sAcKzQH_HAY

The next one in this series is the one by White I included in the body of the post above and commented on, but I'll repeat the URL here as well: http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=kExSnDDxzyU&feature=user

And this is CalciumBoy's answer to that: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8aA8izSpCRA&watch_response I agree with him that the segment White posted can't be the one Marrs and Gipp were referring to.

Then there's a series of four videos by James White aimed at discrediting Texe Marrs. Part I:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yf1ChCDnY94&feature=related
Part II of White on Texe Marrs:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AaEFwC1LN5U&NR=1
In Part III White is going to get back to the lost voice segment and it's the same thing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SR4CFAh72KM&NR=1
Then Part IV "Why do these people WANT to believe what they do?" White is asking. Well, he says, the KJVO people were soundly routed so Texe Marrs is saving face. I don't see this. The anti people are raising irrelevancies and the KJVO people don't get sufficient time to answer. For instance Ankerberg and White raise the point that the KJV had marginal notes though the KJVO people object to the marginal notes in the other versions, isn't that a contradiction? Strouse says no, it's because those marginal notes are from the Nestle-Aland text (basically the Westcott-Hort text), and that's exactly the reason and it's completely valid. It just didn't get emphasized enough: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lS86OtdCYns&NR=1

Revival and Personal Revival

Another theme I haven't yet developed here as much as I'd hoped to is about the nature of revival and our need of the Holy Spirit to come in power in these days. I did give a link to SermonIndex where you can hear the sermons from last Fall's Revival Conference, and some of them are very inspiring. http://www.sermonindex.net/modules/mydownloads/viewcat.php?cid=720.

Of course we need the Holy Spirit to come in power in ANY time, and we need Him as individuals whether we have revival or not. I mentioned below, in the post about the woman's head covering, how I recently discovered a very inspiring teacher, Zac Poonen. I can't recommend his writings and sermons enough. This is a page of his books, which can be read online: http://www.cfcindia.com/web/mainpages/bookshelf.php#zac

A famine of hearing the word of the Lord Pt 8

I haven't followed up on the Bible Versions topic as I had hoped to do, especially in giving more references to information so others can track it all down.

Here I'll just link to a talk by Scott Johnson on the New King James Bible:
http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=8508220339

In his weekly teachings Johnson mostly reads from various sources on topics that relate to the last days we are living in, to alert the church. You can download the PDF document here,
http://media.sermonaudio.com/mediapdf/8508220339.pdf that he's posted at Sermon Audio on the page alongside the audio button, which gives the material he's reading from, and includes various graphics you need to see for yourself in some cases. The material for this teaching covers the occultic and Catholic source of the triquetra symbol printed at the front of the NKJV(at least older editions of it -- until people started complaining) and many of the changes in the text, most of which are the same as all the new versions, showing that the NKJV is VERY far from just an updating of the KJV.

Listen carefully, the changes are both meaningless useless nuisance changes and changes that change the meaning of the text.

When you become aware of the kinds of changes that were made, you must see that they are designed to obscure and confuse, they are far from clarifying.

This teaching alone ought to demonstrate that the new versions aren't just new translations, let alone mere updatings, they are something diabolical and destructive.

I think Johnson must be right that all the changes from version to version are there because a new one must have sufficient differences from earlier versions in order to qualify for copyright. Which means the motive is money, so it's the money motive that leads them to commit this sin against the church of causing chaos, confusion and disunity.

Precept Ministries' call to weekly revival prayer

I just want to emphasize this move of theirs, as it is just what I've been wanting to see happen, and they are in a position to influence many across the nation to make it happen. Inspired by the Fulton Street prayer meetings of 1857 in New York City, that led to a great revival and the conversion of hundreds of thousands, they are calling for weekly prayer at noon on Thursdays through the election and even to Christmas Day.

UPDATE: I found the exact same instructions for this prayer project through James Dobson's Focus on the Family where it is linked but not attributed.

http://listen.family.org/images/CallToCorporatePrayer.pdf

At least I suppose that means it's getting some wide coverage.

http://www.precept.org/site/PageServer?pagename=gen_PrayerForOurNation

I'll quote most of their page here:

A CALL TO CORPORATE PRAYER ON BEHALF OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

God has laid it upon our hearts to call the people of the United States of America to prayer on behalf of our nation.

In the inspiration and tradition of the Fulton Street Revival of 1857, we are calling for a grassroots movement of prayer around the cities of America for the welfare of this nation. Many believe that with the upcoming presidential election, the future of our country lies in the balance. . . .

Thursday Noon Prayer Meetings through the November Election
In the tradition of the Fulton Street Revival of 1857, we are calling those who fear God to come together for corporate prayer every Thursday at 12 noon for 30 – 60 minutes of prayer in churches and places of business. Ask God to rend the heavens and come down again in His mercy and lovingkindness, to visit this nation and turn our hearts back to a fear of God as He is revealed in His Word, the Holy Bible.

SUGGESTIONS FOR THURSDAY PRAYER MEETINGS

Some have asked for guidelines for these prayer meetings. These are given in light of that request with the prayer that the Lord Himself, by His Spirit, will clearly direct our prayers.

WHEN AND WHERE

We suggest that these prayer meetings take place across our nation:

• Every Thursday at 12 noon to 12:30 or 1 pm beginning on May 1, the National Day of Prayer and continuing at least through the elections or until Thursday, December 25 when we honor the birth of the Lord Jesus Christ.
• In homes, churches and places of business which open their facilities so that people can conveniently gather together for corporate prayer.

BEGINNING AND SUSTAINING CORPORATE PRAYER TIMES

• Prayerfully seek God’s direction as to who you are to approach in beginning these prayer meetings and where they are to be. God has been stirring the hearts of people to pray and there are many pockets of prayer going on already. Remember there is to be no competition—rather a joining in the work of God.
• Once you have a place to hold the meeting, ask God how to spread the word. This could be through church bulletins, public service announcements on radio and television, posters, cards to hand out to others, email and the internet. Finance what God lays on your heart. (Stations and networks across the nation will be carrying radio and television spots calling the nation to prayer.)
• Seek God regarding a moderator who can begin and end the prayer meeting on time and possibly ring a bell after 5 minutes of prayer. Begin and end on time.
• Have slips of paper at the door so those coming to pray will understand what is taking place and the guidelines for this time of prayer.
• Ask God to draw people to these prayer meetings. You pray. God will gather.
• Possibly begin with one hymn or song of worship but no more as the people have come to pray. Be very conscious of time if the prayer meeting is only to last for 30 minutes rather than an hour. Remember it is a time for prayer.
• Read a Scripture that causes the people to focus on God and/or the condition of the United States of America. Some suggestions are:

Isaiah 63:19 – 64:4
Daniel 9:3-19
Ezekiel 14:12-20
Ezekiel 22;
22:1-12 22: 23-31
Ezekiel 9
2 Chronicles 20

• Confess the sins of our nation and cry out to God for mercy. Ask Almighty God to visit our nation in the power of His HOLY Spirit.
• Take your petitions to Him knowing “we do not have because we do not ask” or “we ask and do not receive because we ask with wrong motives – to spend it on our pleasures” rather than to conform to His holiness. (James 4:2-3, NASB)
• Pray that our nation will return to a fear of God, that multitudes will be convicted of their sin and turn to Him that they might live righteously before Him. “Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people.” (Proverbs 14:34, NASB)
• Diligently seek God to be merciful to us in the leader He will give us as the President of the United States. Leave politics out of your prayers and remember “It is He [God] who changes the times and the epochs; He removes kings and establishes kings; He gives wisdom to wise men and knowledge to men of understanding.” (Daniel 2:21, NASB)
• Do not become discouraged if few attend the prayer meeting. Continue, persevere in prayer. At the Fulton Street Prayer meeting Jeremiah Calvin Lanphier prayed by himself for the first 30 minutes, when he was joined by one other person. Eventually five more joined him. Only six came to that first prayer meeting, but the Spirit of God grew it until it outgrew the church and they had to open the church down the street.

God will bring His people. You are only responsible for you. Do what God has called you to do and trust God to do the rest. This is a grassroots movement, which means it begins with people just like you who hear God’s call and move in faith’s obedience.

We believe that if God does not move in mercy in answer to our prayers, America will be judged. Corporate prayer, repentance, and the mercy of God are our only hope.

Thank You, Lord, for inspiring Kay Arthur to call for this prayer commitment, and I pray that You will draw many to it and that You will hear from heaven and heal our land.

Again, I'd like to add that repenting on behalf of all the sins of the churches belongs in here somewhere -- since the nation would not be in this situation if the churches had been living up to our call, and maybe some of my suggestions below will also ring a bell for some -- as well as a reminder that some groups could commit to fast as well as pray, and some groups could commit to meet more frequently or at more length also. The revival in the Hebrides came after a few months of prayer meetings by the church elders on two nights a week well into the night. The more prayer, the righter the prayer, the better.

Praise the Lord for this move.