Weak members of the herd

Some anti-KJV/KJVO debaters consistently appeal to King James defenders to judge the KJV by “the same weights and measures” as they judge other translations. Well, duh. Wishful thinking. If a person believes his Bible is the word of God, he is not going to judge it in the same way he does a Bible that he believes is spurious. This presupposition, though the polemicist thinks it is wrong, will not be defeated by such an approach.

Other approaches of disputing with the KJV and TR defenders miss the mark in the same or similar ways. If a person accepts his Bible because he hears the voice of the Shepherd speaking to him through it, or because of what he believes that it teaches about inspiration and preservation, or because he is convinced of the preservation of the traditional Reformation-era texts, and such like – he will not be easily dissuaded by arguments that assume that the testimony of scholars is the kind of convincing that is needed.

Wolves and other predators pick off the weak members of a herd. It is my opinion that many of the contemporary King James Only and Traditional Text people who leave the position are “weak members” of the herd. That is probably offensive to some. Here is what I mean. 

I have a settled conviction about the KJV and the traditional texts, based on my biblical belief of inspiration and preservation. I may be wrong, and others have the opportunity to convince me that I am. Nevertheless, my belief is not based on manuscript evidence, the testimony of scholars, and so forth. If scholars were to come up with persuasive proof that it is impossible for the water of the Red Sea to stand up as walls with dry ground in between, I would not believe them. I may not have the expertise to argue historical, archaeological, or scientific evidence for or against the proposition, but I do not need it. My belief is not based on evidence, but on faith – that is, because the Bible says so. I believe the Bible is God-inspired and God-preserved, not based on historical and/or manuscript evidence, but because the Bible says so. Many who disagree with me in the details may say they have the same kind of belief, but when it comes down to it, they cannot and will not directly and unapologetically defend specific texts as the inspired and preserved word of God. I believe the “weak members of the herd” are not necessarily those who do not agree with me on all points, but those who have been convinced – through a long and systematic process which is located in our theological seminaries and allied accomplices – that what they believe about the Bible must be founded on scholarship and physical evidence. They are ripe for picking.

---

Note: Other weak members of the herd are those who have been taught by “KJVO Quacks” – those who would be teachers, but don’t know the first thing about the KJV, inspiration, preservation, and transmission. These are often followers of authority figures as well.

Jonah and the Whale

Q. Was Jonah swallowed by a whale or a fish?

A. Both. It is a whale (Matthew 12:40, κήτος) and a fish (Jonah 1:17, דָג). The Old Testament book says God prepared a fish to swallow Jonah and Jesus said that fish was a whale. Yet scientists say the whale is not a fish; it is a mammal, and the Bible is wrong. Who shall we believe? Believe God. We should look the scientist and skeptic in the eye and say, “God is sovereign.” God is the Sovereign of the universe and the Creator of all things. He is under no obligation to categorize fish and whales by some modern classifications or man-made distinction that some modern scientists have chosen. God is the creator of the whale. He can (and does) call it what he wants.

When puny humans can place a man inside a whale and bring him out alive after three days and three nights, maybe we will have earned some right to call him what we wish against what God says. Of course, we can’t, and won’t, and don’t! This issue might become a complicated debate for some, but let us reserve the debate over technicalities to within “the family.” There is no reason for Christians to run from this issue like a frightened schoolchild. We should and must stand for the Bible, truth against falsehood.

In modern English whale may mean (scientifically) any of various large marine mammals of the order Cetacea, or (popularly) any large sea creature or something that is impressive in size. The word comes from the Old English hwæl, Old Saxon hwal, apparently going back to the German hwal/wal, and Latin squalus (a kind of large sea fish).

• 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. (KJV, Jonah 1:17)

The Old Testament Hebrew is gadowl (גָּדֹ֔ול) dag (דָּ֣ג), meaning “great fish.”

• for as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. (KJV, Matthew 12:40)

The Greek used in the New Testament is ketos (κητος). Divry’s Modern English-Greek and Greek-English Dictionary (1974), is just a Greek/English dictionary. It has nothing directly to do with the Bible (i.e., it is a Greek language dictionary, not a Bible dictionary). If you look up the Greek word ketos, it has “whale.” If you look up the English word whale, it has “ketos.”

Notice also that the Greek LXX of the Old Testament translates (דָּג גָּדֹול) as κήτει μεγάλῳ and (הַדָּג) as κήτους – which Lancelot Brenton translates into English as great whale and whale (1:17 in the KJV, is 2:1 in LXX).

καὶ προσέταξεν κύριος κήτει μεγάλῳ καταπιεῖν τὸν Ιωναν καὶ ἦν Ιωνας ἐν τῇ κοιλίᾳ τοῦ κήτους τρεῖς ἡμέρας καὶ τρεῖς νύκτας

Now the Lord had commanded a great whale to swallow up Jonas: and Jonas was in the belly of the whale three days and three nights.

As late as 1952, the new Revised Standard Version still used the word “whale.”

• For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale, so will the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. (RSV, Matthew 12:40)

The modern pressure to be “scientific” has called forth a number of substitutes: great fish (ESV, NKJV, TLB), huge fish (CSB, LEB, NET, NIV), sea creature (ISV), sea monster (AMP, EXB, LSB, NASB, NRSV), and possibly others. I do not see these as wrong, in the sense that, in biblical terms the whale is a great or huge fish, and a sea creature. I see them as compromising, jellyfish translations (gelatinous members of the subphylum Medusozoa, a major part of the phylum Cnidaria), that bow to science when science should instead bow to God.

As if it matters, we notice that some people who attack the King James Bible in particular or the Bible in general claim that scientific terminology labeling whales as mammals predates the 1611 translation of the Bible. So the translators should have had their fingers in the wind, and not used the word “whale” (in their opinion). However, this assertion appears to be chronologically false. The information that I have found indicates that this system (re whales) dates to 1758 (of course, there were earlier folks developing taxonomic ideas, such as the Bauhin brothers, botanists). It was in the 1758 10th edition of Systema Naturae that Carl Linnaeus, a Swedish biologist and taxonomist, classified cetaceans as mammals rather than fish. The taxonomic system of Linnaeus formed the basis of modern whale classification. That does not matter in terms of biblical truth, but the timing nevertheless seems to be a false claim that deserves debunking. Regardless, Bible translators are not beholden to modern classifications as sources for translation.

As far as a whale or fish swallowing Jonah, if we believe in a sovereign God who can do all things, and we believe that fish was “prepared by God” – that should remove all difficulties believing the story. God made a creature that, due to his preparation, was able to swallow an adult human. It was a miracle!

As far as a whale being a fish, if we believe God made all things, we allow him to call those things whatsoever he will – regardless of what anyone else decides to call them. God is the eternal sovereign Creator.

As William Jennings Bryan said to Clarence Darrow, “If the Bible said so…”

---

Note: I do not have a problem with the principle of scientific classifications. I myself have engaged in a good bit of religious taxonomy – working on how to classify Baptists within their denominational landscapes. It has a place in the field of knowledge, as long as it doesn’t overstep its bounds and start overriding what a biblical classification of a church is. I recognize it is man-made, but it can help make sense out of who we are as Baptists. So with scientific classifications of plants and animals. They are derived to help us understand the world around us. Let it do that, as long as it doesn’t overstep its bounds and start overriding what the Bible says. Search the scriptures, whether these things are so. Let God be true, but every man a liar.

Intellectual Property (or not)

We often speak of our ideas, our thinking, as “intellectual property” which belongs solely to us. Thomas Jefferson observes that possessing that property is really only possible when we keep it to ourselves, a secret. Once released “into the wild” it enters the minds of others and becomes their property in a very real sense.

“If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of every one, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. That ideas should freely spread from one to another over the globe, for the moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems to have been peculiarly and benevolently designed by nature, when she made them, like fire, expansible over all space, without lessening their density in any point, and like the air in which we breathe, move, and have our physical being, incapable of confinement or exclusive appropriation.”

Letter of Thomas Jefferson to Isaac McPherson, August 13, 1813

He Cares

This is a hymn I attempted to write in February of 2010, in 7s.6s. meter. It is not Isaac Watts or Charles Wesley, but perhaps it shares a little truth that might edify God’s people. May God bless it to be so. The theme is safety and security in Jesus. He is the only way of salvation, and the only one to lean on in life.

I like the idea of singing this to the Sacred Harp tune Ecstasy (No. 106 in either the Cooper or Denson books). My third stanza has some affinity to some of the words in John Leland’s hymn:

Whene’er you meet with troubles

And trials on your way,

Then cast your care on Jesus,

And don’t forget to pray.

If singing the hymn below with the tune Ecstasy, do not use the repeat found in the Cooper Book, and add the chorus (which is found in both books):

O! had I wings

I would fly away and be at rest,

And I’d praise God in His bright abode.

And I said, Oh that I had wings like a dove! for then would I fly away, and be at rest. Psalm 55:6

1. The night is dark and lonely;
The way is narrow, too.
But I am fixed on Jesus,
And so will make it through.

2. Yes, Jesus fixed me on him;

He is the Rock, the Way.

And only he can lead men,

To everlasting day.

3. So when you meet with troubles,

And know not what to do;

Cast all your cares on Jesus

For he will care for you.

The Sacred Harp tune Ecstasy is written by Thomas W. Carter (alto by W. M. Cooper), using the words by the Baptist preacher John Leland (1754-1841). T. W. Carter was a physician. Some of the tunes are credited as “Dr. T. W. Carter” (some give the full first name, Thomas). He was born in Abbeville District, South Carolina, April 18, 1822. He married Lucinda A. Tompkins in 1849 and they had one daughter, Hannah, before her passing. Carter was a Methodist by denomination, and a member of the Sons of Temperance. He moved to Florida in 1856 and died August 19, 1876 in Lake City, Florida. The location of his burial is unknown (though likely somewhere in Lake City). Carter contributed 13 tunes to The Sacred Harp by B. F. White and E. J. King in 1844.

---

Note: Thomas W. Carter wrote or arranged 13 songs that appeared in The Sacred Harp: Augusta, 35; The Old Ship of Zion, 79; Little Children, 86; Church Triumphant, 91; Oak Bowery, 94; Ecstasy, 106; Night Watchman, 108; Concord, 111; Sandtown, 112; Florence, 121; Irwinton, 124; Exhilaration, 170; Banquet of Mercy, 177.

Cease to be a moron, and other quotes

The posting of quotes by human authors does not constitute agreement with either the quotes or their sources. (I try to confirm the sources that I give, but may miss on occasion; please verify if possible.)

“It is the classic fallacy of our time that a moron run through a university and decorated with a PhD will thereby cease to be a moron.” -- attributed to Henry Louis “H. L.” Mencken, but I have yet to find a source to confirm it

“The best way to defeat a bad thought is to replace it with a better thought.” -- Tommy Marshall

“If I hate sin because of the punishment, I have not repented of my sin, I merely regret that God is just.” -- attributed to Charles H. Spurgeon

“The sacred responsibility of a parent is to be willing to sacrifice their own comfort and goals for the welfare of their child; not to sacrifice the welfare of their child for themselves.” -- Lila Rose

“Gender can not be ‘assigned’ at birth or any other point in someone’s life. Gender is determined by the chromosomes you are given by God at conception.” -- Kellen McGovern Jones

“If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless.” - Thomas Jefferson

“Freedom sits there in judgment of you, and makes you feel extremely inadequate if you don’t have the values and skills necessary to thrive in freedom.” -- Shelby Steele

“A baby boy born in a stable…turned B.C. into A.D.” -- Joel Smallbone

“The truly emancipated man is not in bondage to his liberty.” -- F. F. Bruce

“This most beautiful system of the sun, planets and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.” Isaac Newton, The Principia: Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy

It’s the same Greek word.

Often one says of the meaning behind certain Greek language words that have been translated into English, “It’s the same Greek word.” By this they state or imply that the words in those places must mean the same thing and therefore the word must also be translated by the same English (it should be  the same English word in all places). Such assertion assumes that the particular Greek word (whichever one is under discussion) does not have any range of meaning but always means only one thing. 

However, most words have some range of meaning, and some range so far as to mean opposite things. For example, consider the range of meaning of the English word “cleave.” So, for example, if we translate “cleave” into Spanish, we might translate it as adherirse or dividirse (considering the context of the English).

If someone did what we are talking about, they could say adherirse and dividirse both mean the same thing, since they are both translated from the word cleave. Nevertheless, they do not mean the same thing. Admittedly this may be an extreme example, but I think the extreme helps make the general point. 

I hope this musing out loud makes sense. This is an issue some raise when a Bible translates the same Greek or Hebrew word in more than one way.

Peter’s vision, Acts 10:9-16

Verse 9: The experience of Peter occurs “On the morrow” – the next day after the experience of Cornelius, and around noontime (“about the sixth hour”). As Peter ascends the roof to pray, the messengers of Cornelius draw near the city.[1] The time from the departure of Cornelius’s messengers from Cæsarea until their arrival in Joppa is about 20 hours.[2]

Verse 10: After prayer, Peter would engage in the meal being prepared, but while they made ready the meal, he instead fell into a trance. The vision makes use of the notion of eating, apropos to Peter’s circumstances.

Peter’s experience is described as a trance (v. 10, εκστασις) and a vision (vs. 17-19, οραμα, οραματος). The Greek εκστασις means or implies standing outside oneself; henceforth, a mental transport or rapture as to produce a trance-like dissociation or trance-like state, being moved out of one’s self or one’s normal state. See also Acts 3:10; 11:5; 22:17. Our English word “ecstasy” is traced back to this word origin.

Verses 11-12: The conception. The vision consists of several parts. First, heaven is opened. Then “a certain vessel” (σκευος τι) descends down to Peter. Its characteristic is of a huge sheet (οθονην: cf. Acts 11:5) knit or bound (δεδεμενον: cf. Luke 19:30; John 18:24) at the four corners. The opened sheet reveals its contents, “all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.” “all manner” means that the sheet contained things that Jews did not eat.

The modern Critical Greek text leaves out “unto him” (επ αυτον), as well as “knit…and” (δεδεμενον και).

TR:        και θεωρει τον ουρανον ανεωγμενον και καταβαινον επ αυτον σκευος τι ως οθονην μεγαλην τεσσαρσιν αρχαις δεδεμενον και καθιεμενον επι της γης

NU:        και θεωρει τον ουρανον ανεωγμενον και καταβαινον σκευος τι ως οθονην μεγαλην τεσσαρσιν αρχαις καθιεμενον επι της γης

Verses 13-15: The conversation. A voice from heaven gives a command, “Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.” Peter, though hungry, replies as an observant Jew, he had “never eaten any thing that is common or unclean” according to the Law. The voice replies, “What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.”[3] God’s command and God’s cleansing is, ultimately, “the law.”

Verses 16: The calculation. “This was done thrice” For emphasis, this vision occurred three times – heaven opened and a four cornered sheet-like vessel let down to the earth; the command of the voice, Peter’s reply, and the voice’s rebuttal. The number “three” is given substantial significance in the chapter. The sheet was let down three times. Three news-bearers appear in Acts 10:  an angel of God (vs. 3, 7); a voice (from heaven, vs. 13, 15); the Spirit (v. 19). Three messengers were coming to seek Peter. Cornelius’s story is told three times (3-7, 22, 30-33). Other threes could have flooded Peter’s thoughts. Peter denied Jesus three times. Jesus lay in the grave three days and three nights. Peter told Jesus three times that he loved him.

“The vision had given Peter considerable food for thought.”[4] While the household of Simon prepares a meal, God serves Peter dinner! It contains physical food (in a vision) and spiritual food that does not entice his palate. The God who declared animals unclean (cf. Leviticus 11) can make them clean.

---

[1] Many of these homes had flat roofs that were used for various purposes, such as prayer.
[2] Human adults walk at an average speed of 3 miles per hour, which equates roughly to 1 mile every 15 to 20 minutes. Younger people tend to walk faster than older people do, and men tend to walk faster than women do.
[3] For food restrictions under the Mosaic Law, see Leviticus 11:1-17; Deuteronomy 14:3-21; Exodus 23:19; 34:26. Compare also Acts 15:20, 29; 21:25.
[4] Dwyer, The Book of Acts, p. 166.

Just live by faith

Habakkuk 2:4 Behold, his soul which is lifted up is not upright in him: but the just shall live by his faith. (Note the faith and trust of Habakkuk 3:17-19.)

There are two ways people approach the puzzling question of the Divine providence. Some object to it, quarrel against God and contest his providences. Let God be true, but every man a liar. They are proud and lifted up, believing they are right and God is wrong. Some react with faith, submit to God, wait on his work, knowing the Judge of all the earth will do right. Ultimately, this intersects with the promise of the coming Messiah – those who received him and those who rejected him (John 1:11-12). Some scoffed at the promise of his coming, and did not believe him when he came. Some held dear the promise, and believed of Jesus as the Christ when he came.

Paul makes reference to this “living by faith” statement of Habakkuk three times in his writings.

Faith is ready to preach the gospel.

• Romans 1:17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.

Justification is by faith and not the law.

• Galatians 3:11 But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.

Faith is an encouragement to perseverance.

• Hebrews 10:38 Now the just shall live by faith: but if any man draw back, my soul shall have no pleasure in him.

Living by faith begins with a new birth.

• Romans 5:1 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:

Living by faith trusts in God. It is not just some blind leap, but buys the truth of God’s word and sells it not. Matthew Poole calls it a “well-grounded dependence on a persuasion of the truth of God’s promises.”

• Creator - Isaiah 40:28 Hast thou not known? hast thou not heard, that the everlasting God, the Lord, the Creator of the ends of the earth, fainteth not, neither is weary? there is no searching of his understanding.
• Owner - 1 Corinthians 6:19-20 … ye are not your own? For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s.
• Saviour – Romans 5:8-9 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.
• Guide - John 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth…

Surely we can and should trust the one who is all these things to us.

Is the Holy Spirit a Thing?

Q. In the King James Bible in Romans 8:16 and 8:26, the Holy Spirit is called an “it.” Is not that translation incorrect?

Romans 8:16 - The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

Romans 8:26 - Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered.

A. No, it is not incorrect. It seems to be something latched on to by KJV Detractors as some kind of major criticism of the flaws in the King James Bible. KJV-Only opponent Doug Kutilek is representative of the clamour (and perhaps the primary originator?).

“Any honest evaluation of the King James Version leads to the conclusion that it has numerous defects as a translation, some major, most minor. But of these defects, among the most serious, quite probably the worst of the lot, is its occasional use of the English pronoun ‘it’ to refer to the Holy Spirit. ... I will plainly state my opinion on the matter: I think that here the KJV comes dangerously close to blasphemy, if it does not in fact actually wander into it.” (from his website KJVOnly.org, which is not currently working, 12/14/2023)

This is a harsh “take down” of the King James Bible and its translators. To Kutilek, this is a serious error (possibly the worst in the KJV), and is “dangerously close” or “in fact” blasphemy! He covers all bases by implying that anyone who does not agree with him has not made an “honest evaluation” of the King James Version.

In the long run, Kutilek succeeds in exposing his own ignorance of the Greek language, the English language, and English Bible translations in general. His complaint and criticism focus on four verses: John 1:32; Romans 8:16, 8:26, and 1 Peter 1:11.

I will mainly focus on the passages in Romans, with some mention of 1 Peter 1:11. Even disregarding the explanations I will give below, his including John 1:32 is worse than a quibble. The antecedent of “it” in that passage is “dove.” Of course, the Spirit is descending like a dove, but “it” – the Spirit in the form of the dove – abode upon him.[i] 

Misunderstanding the Greek.

Every Greek word has a distinct gender – masculine, feminine, or neuter. The Greek word for spirit (πνεῦμα) is designated as a neuter noun. The Greek pronoun αὐτὸ is also neuter. The phrase “the Spirit itself” is an accurate translation of the Greek “auto to pneuma” (αὐτὸ τὸ πνεῦμα). The pronoun “auto” is correctly translated “it” or “itself.” So, let us ask ourselves? Do we believe God inspired the words of the Bible – the very words that Paul wrote in Romans 8:16 and 26? If you claim the King James translators were wrong to use a neuter or genderless pronoun (itself) to refer to a neuter noun (Spirit), will you also, with Doug Kutilek, have a problem with God using a neuter pronoun (αὐτὸ) to refer to a neuter noun (πνεῦμα)?? What a gaggle of gibberish! Let God be true, but every man a liar.

These two verses use a neuter pronoun in reference to the Spirit. “Himself” is not incorrect in the sense of identification. Nevertheless, adding “himself” rather than “itself” is a case of the translators making a minor interpretation of what Paul wrote rather than simply translating what he wrote.[ii]  

1 Peter 1:11 searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.

“it testified beforehand” is a translation of προμαρτυρόμενον, which is neuter in gender, so “it” is the proper pronoun (i.e., same kind of pronoun in English fitting the Greek).

Misunderstanding the English.

The quibbles on these three verses proceed from the assumption that “it” and “itself” only refer to inanimate objects, things. However, dictionaries disagree with this unsustained assessment. Dictionary.com gives the following:

“it” is a pronoun “used to represent an inanimate thing understood, previously mentioned, about to be mentioned, or present in the immediate context” and/or “used to represent a person or animal understood, previously mentioned, or about to be mentioned whose gender is unknown or disregarded.”

“itself” is a pronoun, “an emphatic appositive or a reflexive form of it.”

That’s right, it can refer to a person! The entire quibble is that using “it” or “itself” means the Holy Spirit is not a person. Not so.

KJV not the only one.

Some people say that only the King James Bible does this. That is not correct, though the majority of modern translations do have himself rather than itself. Using the two initial verses mentioned, at least the following English translations have “itself” in Romans 8:16, 26.

Romans 8:16 “The Spirit itself” (αὐτὸ τὸ πνεῦμα) Darby Translation, 1602 Bishops, New American Bible (Revised Edition), New Testament for Everyone.

Romans 8:26 “the Spirit itself” (αὐτὸ τὸ πνεῦμα) Coverdale, Darby Translation, 1560 Geneva, 1599 Geneva, 1602 Bishops, Jubilee Bible 2000, New American Bible (Revised Edition), New Testament for Everyone.

Additionally, though other Bibles may not have “itself” or “it” in these places, I would urge complainers, “Physician, heal thyself.” Check your own Bibles, whichever one you use regularly, and find that they also use neutral pronouns to refer to people.[iii] Just weights and measures, as anti-KJVO detractor Rick Norris always repeats. I guess he forgot to mention it to his friend Doug Kutilek.

Conclusion.

Sincere inquirers who want to know about the use of “it” in reference to the Holy Spirit can be assured there is nothing wrong, nefarious, or blasphemous in the King James Bible translations of John 1:32, Romans 8:16, 8:26, and 1 Peter 1:11.[iv] Those who persist in quibbling complaints on these verses expose the petty nature of their challenges to find anything they can to use against the King James Bible and the King James Onlyist. They say they are not against the King James Bible, but these charges about the translation itself prove otherwise.

---

[i] John 1:32 And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him. Even Dan Wallace’s NET Bible has “…and it remained on him.”
[ii] Early English versions often used “same Spirit” or “selfsame Spirit,” which carries the same connotation.
[iii] For example, whatever is born of God in 1 John 5:4 is neuter. Many Bibles translate this as “whatsoever,” “whatever,” or “everything.” including AMP, ASV, CJB, DLNT, DRA, HCSB, KJV, LSB, NASB1995, NKJV, NRSV, NTE, OJB, RSV, WEB, WYC. Are you born of God? Are you a thing or a person? Let God use whatsoever word he will, and let every man bow before him.

[iv] If anything, it is Doug Kutilek who nears blasphemy. By his diatribe against the King James Bible for using a neuter pronoun to translate a neuter pronoun inspired by God, he inadvertently crosses the line into criticizing the words chosen by God in the original language.

How is the Word of God to be Preached?

Q. How is the word of God to be preached by those that are called thereunto?

A. They that are called to labor in the ministry of the word, are to preach sound doctrine, diligently, in season and out of season; plainly, not in the enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit, and of power; faithfully, making known the whole counsel of God; wisely, applying themselves to the necessities and capacities of the hearers; zealously, with fervent love to God and the souls of his people; sincerely, aiming at his glory, and their conversion, edification, and salvation.

Westminster Larger Catechism, No. 159 (this is a Presbyterian & Reformed document rather than Baptist, but I think they said this well)

Jesus Our All

Joseph Hart wrote the hymn titled “Jesus Our All.” It is No. 11 in his Hymns Composed on Various Subjects, in 7s. meter. Joseph Hart was born in 1712. He was independent evangelical minister and hymn writer. In the article “Joseph Hart and His Hymns” (Scottish Bulletin of Evangelical Theology), Peter C. Rae wrote that Hart “has regrettably passed into obscurity.” This is a sad condition, considering that he wrote so many biblical hymns that are full of grace, passion, and Christian experience. His hymns are still well-known in some circles – for example, William Gadsby’s hymn book is well filled with Hart’s hymns. A few are more widely known (e.g., Come ye sinners, poor and needy).

Hart died May 24, 1768 and was buried in the dissenters’ burial ground at Bunhill Fields in London.

The 2nd stanza is a grand poetic capturing of the doctrine of substitutionary atonement. “Jesus Our All” can be sung with any of several good 7s meter tunes, such as Gainsville, Solid Comfort (King of Peace), and Weeping Sinners.

1. Jesus is the chiefest good;
He has sav’d us by his blood;
Let us value nought but him;
Nothing else deserves esteem.

2. Jesus, when stern Justice said,
“Man his life has forfeited,
Vengeance follows by decree,”
Cried, “Inflict it all on me.”

3. Jesus gives us life and peace,
Faith, and love, and holiness;
Every blessing, great or small,
Jesus freely gives us all.

4. Jesus, therefore, let us own:
Jesus we’ll exalt alone;
Jesus has our sins forgiven,
And will take us safe to heaven.

Fuller reprints Mauro

King James Detractors complain ad nauseum that David Otis Fuller reprints material from the book of Seventh-day Adventist Benjamin George Wilkinson. And it is true that he did, however inadvisable it may have been. These pointer-outers usually do not mention at all, or at least downplay, that Fuller reprints material of many other writers besides Wilkinson: Bishop, Hills, Hoskier, Martin, Wilson, and others in Which Bible (1970); Burgon, Gaussen, Philpot, and Which Version by Philip Mauro in True or False (1973); Brake, Burgon, Hills, and others in Counterfeit or Genuine (1975). Obviously, Doug Kutilek and those of his ilk know this but do not feel they can make enough hay using these other names. So, mum’s the word.

Philip Mauro wrote Which Version: Authorized or Revised six years before Wilkinson wrote Our Authorized Bible Vindicated. He was part of the orbit that created the famous “Fundamentals” series of books in the early 1900s. He condemned the Revised Version and supported the King James Bible. How many times have you heard the King James Detractors mention this fact? Few to none, I suspect.

How long, O, How long?

Q. How long should you study in preparation for preaching? How long should a sermon last?

A. Many preachers and seminary professors are quick to weigh in with their two cents on how long a preacher should spend preparing a sermon, how many minutes the sermon should last, and so on. Some may be know-it-alls, while most probably have good intentions of trying to guide and help young preachers. Nevertheless, we too much have reduced preaching to a formula of “do it this way,” “put in this much time studying,” “preach for this many minutes,” etc. – this is the right way (or only way) to preach. Conspicuously, seldom does the advice come with references to Scripture. There must be more acknowledgment that every preacher is different, every sermon is different, and every congregation is different. One size does not fit all. The preacher spends a lifetime of study of the word of God. A sermon is over when it is over.

The following series might prove helpful:

• https://baptistsearch.blogspot.com/2013/09/true-new-testament-preaching-7-questions.html
• https://baptistsearch.blogspot.com/2013/09/alliterated-sermons.html
• https://baptistsearch.blogspot.com/2013/09/what-kinds-of-sermons.html
• https://baptistsearch.blogspot.com/2013/09/3-evangelistic-sermons.html
• https://baptistsearch.blogspot.com/2013/09/3-church-sermons.html
• https://baptistsearch.blogspot.com/2013/09/answering-7-questions-from-monday.html
• https://baptistsearch.blogspot.com/2013/09/preaching-differences-and-similarities.html

The raising of Tabitha, or Dorcas, Acts 9:36-43

Verses 36-37: Luke moves to the next account, establishing the reason why the disciples called Peter to come to Joppa. At Joppa dwelt a disciple named Tabitha (in Hebrew) or Dorcas (in Greek).[1] Not “just” a disciple, “this woman was full of good works and almsdeeds which she did” – she showed her faith by her works (I Timothy 2:10; 6:18; James 2:18).

Joppa was a seaport on the Mediterranean Sea, only about ten miles from Lydda.[2] In the Old Testament, it is the place to which temple materials were brought by sea (II Chronicles 2:16; Ezra 3:7), and where Jonah headed to flee from the Lord’s call to Nineveh (Jonah 1:3). The Old Testament name of Japho may also represent the same city (see Joshua 19:46).

In this period coinciding with Peter’s visit to the town of Lydda, Tabitha became sick and died (cf. II Kings 13:14).  The disciples washed her and laid her “in an upper chamber” (probably in anticipation of burial).

Verse 38: However, the disciples in Joppa knew that Peter was nearby in Lydda, and that he had performed miracles by the power of God. It may seem surprising that these disciples would expect Peter to raise the dead, since no apostle had done so before (only Jesus had). Nevertheless, Jesus gave the apostles power to do so, Matthew 10:8. The Joppan disciples sent by two men an urgent message for him to come to them without delay (cf. John 11:1-6).

Verses 39-41: Upon receiving the two men, Peter went with them without delay. When they arrived, the disciples “brought him into the upper chamber” where Tabitha was laid. Luke describes the scene: Love and sorrow mingled together. Widows, who perhaps came in with Peter, stood by him weeping. They displayed and talked about coats and garments that she had made. Likely these were samples of the good works and almsdeeds Tabitha had done for widows.

Peter put the observers out, to deal with Tabitha alone (cf. Mark 5:40; Luke 8:54). Peter kneeled down, prayed, and said, “Tabitha, arise.” Tabitha opened her eyes, saw Peter, and sat up. The lifeless body returned to life. Peter gave her his hand and led her out to present her alive to “the saints and widows.” This phrase “and widows” (and the fact that Peter had put them out of the chamber) may suggest that the widows that Tabitha helped were not saints (i.e., disciples). However, the mention might only emphasize the correspondence to the weeping widows in verse 39.[3]

As Peter’s instruction to Æneas is reminiscent of the instructions of his Lord, so Peter’s words to Tabitha (“Tabitha, arise”) reminds us of Jesus’s words to the daughter of the ruler of the synagogue, recorded in Mark 5:41, “And he took the damsel by the hand, and said unto her, Talitha cumi; which is, being interpreted, Damsel, I say unto thee, arise.” Jesus can speak so the dead will hear (cf. Luke 7:14-15; 8:54; John 5:25-29; 11:43), and in this case an apostle of Jesus does so as well.

Verse 42: “many believed in the Lord” the raising of Tabitha resulted in more believing in the Lord Jesus as their Saviour. The demonstrated power of God effected results like those in Lydda.

Verse 43: Simon Peter stays “many days” at Joppa in the house of Simon, a tanner. That Peter spent his time here indicates that this Simon the tanner was also a disciple of Jesus.

---

[1] The name, in either language, means antelope, gazelle, or roe (cf. Song of Solomon 2:7, 9, 17). This is the only direct reference in the New Testament to a female as disciple (μαθητρια). Bock, Acts, p. 377.
[2] “Joppa” and “Lydda,” D. F. Payne in The New Bible Dictionary, pp. 654-760. Cf. Baker’s Bible Atlas.
[3] Some have taken the reference to widows to suggest Tabitha was also a widow.

Bible numerics

Back in September (2023), discussion on the Textus Receptus Academy Facebook group brought back to mind some things of which I had not thought of much in a while. The focus there was positive promotion of and negative detraction concerning using numerics to support the King James Bible.[i] 

According to dictionary sources, numerics is the field of numerically-controlled engineering.[ii] Bible numerics, also called biblical numerology, is the study of and belief that the Scriptures exhibit a numerical design that can only be explained by the direct inspiration of a Creator, or the study of how numbers are used in Scripture and what they reveal about God and his word.

I have two books in this general genre in my library. One is That Ye May Marvel, Or, The Significance of Bible Numbers (Jonesboro, AR: Sammons, 1953), written by George Elliott Jones (1889-1966). He was a well-respected author and Baptist preacher in Arkansas. Some older preachers when I was growing knew of and made use of it. The other is Number in Scripture: Its Supernatural Design and Spiritual Significance, by E. W. Bullinger, a well-known, respected, and somewhat controversial figure in dispensationalism.

Another thing I had not thought of in several years came to mind. When I was a young preacher, I knew of some teachers and preachers who used The New Testament in the Original Greek; The Text Established by Means of Bible Numerics, by Ivan Panin. Panin was believed by some (himself included) to have recovered and restored the text of the original autographs by the use of numerics. I am not a partisan for or believer in what Panin did, or the success of it. Nevertheless, it is an interesting memory to come up after having no reason to think about it for a long long time. I do not know whether this Greek text finds much use today. Popular author Chuck Missler was a proponent of Panin’s work.

Ivan Panin

Some forms of Bible numerics are limited to the study of the meaning and significance of numbers mentioned in the text of the Bible. Other forms of Bible numerics seek hidden numerical patterns in the letters, words, chapters, and books of the Bible. Oswald T. Allis describes these two categories as (1) open numeric phenomena, in which the numerical evidence is plain and incontestable, and (2) hidden numeric phenomena, in which the numerical evidence cannot be determined by normal (such as simple counting, the frequency or places of their occurrence, etc.) but are based on assigning numeric value to the letters of the alphabet. Great care should be taken to not think too little of the obvious use of numbers in the Bible, neither add too much mystical esoteric importance on unclear and unknown humanly devised systems not interpreted by God. These become “secret codes” hidden to all but the initiated.[iii]

Here are some books in the Bible numerics genre. This is not a recommendation of these books, but a list (in chronological order) for informational and research purposes.[iv]

• Number in Scripture: Its Supernatural Design and Spiritual Significance, Ethelbert William Bullinger. London: Eyre and Spottiswoode, 1894
• The Numerical Bible, being a Revised Translation of the Holy Scriptures with Expository Notes: Arranged, Divided, & Briefly Characterized according to the Principles of their Numerical Structure, Frederick W. Grant. New York, NY: Loizeaux Brothers, The Bible Truth Press, 1904
• Bible Numerics: a Periodical Devoted to the Numerical Study of the Scriptures, Ivan Nikolayevich Panin. Grafton, MA, No. 1, January 1904
• The Last Twelve Verses of Mark: Their Genuineness Established, Ivan Nikolayevich Panin. Lowestoft: Green and Co., 1910
• The New Testament from the Greek Text as Established by Bible Numerics, Ivan Nikolayevich Panin, Editor. New Haven, CT: Bible Numerics Co., 1914
• Ivan Panin’s Scientific Demonstration of the Inspiration of the Scriptures, A. B. K, W. T. Swinnerton, J. J. Summerbell, E. H. Moore, Daniel B. Turney, Ivan Panin. Toronto, Ontario: Armac Press, Ltd., 1915
• The New Testament in the Original Greek: The Text Established by Means of Bible Numerics, Ivan Nikolayevich Panin. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1934
• Astounding New Discoveries: Thousands of Amazing Facts discovered beneath the very surface of the Original Bible Text, Karl George Sabiers. Robertson Publishing Company, 1941
• That Ye May Marvel, Or, The Significance of Bible Numbers, George Elliott Jones. Jonesboro, AR: Sammons, 1953
• Biblical Numerology: a Basic Study of the Use of Numbers in the Bible, John James Davis. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1968
• Biblical Mathematics: Keys to Scripture Numerics, Edgar Franklin Vallowe. Midnight Call, 1995
• By Divine Order: Scripture Numerics and Bible Prophecy, Michael W. Hoggard. Hearthstone Publishing Ltd, 2000
• The King James Code: More Scripture Numerics and Bible Prophecy, Michael W. Hoggard. Prophetic Research Ministry, 2001
• Sealed by the King: Intricate Patterns and Details Pointing to God’s Inspiration over the 1611 Holy Bible in English, Brandon Peterson. sealedbytheking.com, 2022

---

[i] For example, the name Jehovah is found in the King James Bible 7 times; the title of the Lord Jesus Christ as “the Word” is found in the King James Bible 7 times. Or, more esoterically, both the first and last verses of the King James Bible (Genesis 1:1; Revelation 22:21) have the same number of letters (44), consonants (27), and vowels (17).
[ii] Gematria (Hebrew) and Isopsephy (Greek) are subsets of numerics or numerology which look at the Hebrew or Greek letters of a word and their corresponding numerical values in order to find possible patterns and meanings.
[iii] As an example of this, Ed Vallowe says, “Only to the students of the Word, those to whom God's Spirit has given spiritual insight, will the code be plain.”
[iv] Some may be beneficial, and some definitely are not.

Freely Give: a Book Review of The Dorean Principle

Conley Owens, The Dorean Principle: a Biblical Response to the Commercialization of Christianity. Dublin, CA: FirstLove Publications, 2021. ISBN 9781953151155. 180 pages (xvi, 164). $0.00. This book is available in print from FirstLove Publications (an imprint of FirstLove Ministries) and electronically at The Dorean Principle web page.

Introduction.

The author of this work, Conley Owens, is a Reformed Baptist, a pastor at Silicon Valley Reformed Baptist Church in Sunnyvale, California. He holds an MDiv from The Log College & Seminary (formerly North American Reformed Seminary), and is also a software engineer for Google. He is a husband and father. With Andrew Case and Jon Here, he writes for the web site “Selling Jesus.” Owens states that “The goal of this brief book is to establish ‘the dorean principle,’ a biblical precept that distinguishes ethical ministry fundraising from unethical ministry fundraising” (p. 2). “The Dorean Principle: In the context of gospel proclamation, accepting support as anything other than an act of colabor compromises the sincerity of ministry.”[i] Owens wants us to learn how to discern when religious financial enterprise goes too far, and how to exercise biblical discernment that extends beyond just recognizing “the most egregious infractions” of ministry fundraising and solicitation (p. 1). The author attempts to show that the teaching of Jesus and his disciples impart this dorean principle, and that New Testament church practice accords with this biblical financial theology.

“Our methods matter” and in holy enterprises “the ends do not justify the means.” Biblical methods must rise from and accord with sound theology (“Foreword,” Joseph M. Jacowitz, p. xv). As one who has made some, albeit halting, attempt to “freely give,” to “make the gospel of Christ without charge,” and to teach that the methods we attach to our message really do matter, I find the purpose of this book compelling.

Overview of The Dorean Principle.

The presentation is divided into an introduction, fourteen chapters, and a conclusion – followed by three appendices, a bibliography, as well as both scripture and subject indices. The electronic version also includes an errata page.[ii] 

The first chapter establishes the difference between reciprocity and co-labor, using especially the statements of our Lord to his apostles as recorded in Matthew 10 (freely ye have received, freely give; the workman is worthy of his meat). This distinction may not be immediately apparent to many, but is foundational to understanding the dorean principle set forth by Owens. In brief, it is God the “employer” who “pays” those whom he calls and sends forth to minister to him. The minister does not charge those to whom he ministers the gospel. Ministry is not quid pro quo, “I’ll scratch your back if you scratch mine,” pay me and I’ll preach the gospel to you.[iii] 

In chapter two, Owens moves from “The Command of Christ” to “The Policy of Paul.” He explains that Paul follows a pattern consistent with the mandate of his Master. He does not receive reciprocal support, but does accept “propempo” support – the support of his co-laborers in sending him forth to minister the gospel.[iv] Chapter three investigates several examples and figures of speech relaying mediated obligation (co-labor support). The meaning of the “burden” of support for Paul is the subject of chapter four. Chapter five suggests ministerial financial policy must fit the steward or servant aspect of the minister, which fits the dorean principle. Chapters six and seven contrast sincere ministry with the insincere ministry of false teachers. “What is the fruit of false teachers? Their greed. In more concrete demonstrations, it is the acceptance of reciprocity, their exchange of ministry for money” (p. 71). This is followed up in chapter eight by looking at Paul’s attitude toward other ministers in Corinth – both the true ministers of God and those “super-apostles” (false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ) who corrupt the word of God.

Chapters 1-8 deal with the “theory” (doctrinal teaching) and establishment of the dorean principle in the scriptures. Beginning at chapter nine, Owens begins to bring the teaching down to practice, walking the reader “through some of the more prominent [biblical] examples we see of colabor” (p. 84). In chapter ten, he pursues evidence of the practice of the principle in church history. If this is a biblical teaching, wouldn’t we expect it to find some Christians practicing this? The author shows up some places we find the dorean principle put into practice. Chapter eleven defines the boundaries of what is and is not gospel ministry. To whom and in what contexts does the dorean principle apply? Owens answers, “any activity that proclaims the gospel or directly attends to its proclamation” (p. 105). The author takes aim at concrete matters of modern situations in chapters twelve and thirteen – parachurch ministries, seminaries, Bible conferences, and copyright law. Owens does not stand against parachurch ministry, rather simply offering suggestions of their support through co-labor rather than reciprocity. Concerning copyrights, the author supports providing Christian teaching freely in the public domain, particularly in our times through the use of “Creative Commons Zero.”[v] He continues in chapter fourteen looking specifically at issues touching Bibles, books, music, and software.[vi]  

Though recognizing “Any restriction on the distribution and use of the Bible potentially harms the church,” the author (in what I feel is inconsistent with the dorean principle) cites Bible verses from (primarily) the English Standard Version and (secondarily) the New American Standard Bible – both Bibles which are copyrighted and whose use is restricted.[vii] It is not as if there are no other options. First and foremost, the King James translation is freely distributed in the United States without any restrictions. Even those who do not prefer the King James Bible have other options. For example, the World English Bible (WEB), though having a trademarked name, has a text that has been placed in the public domain, and may be freely copied both electronically and in print.[viii] Is the Sovereign God, who has preserved his words for millennia, now in modern times dependent on human institutions and legal copyrights to preserve his words? God forbid! To continue to contribute to Big Ĕrus[ix] is to continue down the road we have been far too long traveling.

The “Conclusion” (pp. 139-140) offers a brief “final word about the gospel.” The author believes (correctly, in my opinion) that “The modern church has unintentionally gone astray, blindly following the model of the world.” Clearly Conley Owens believes the dorean principle effectively resolves some apparent difficulties in the Bible’s teaching on ministerial support.[x] He challenges his readers to believe, accept, and apply the dorean principle in modern ministry context. He recognizes that in some areas this will only require smoothing some rough edges, while in others “demands radical transformation.”

The three appendices offer some points for further study (A) and more details about copyright and copyright law (B & C).

Some miscellaneous comments and quibbles.

As to length and writing style, it is a fairly easy read. On the other hand, it is full of depth and requires concentration on the principle and teaching set forth. Properly considered, the book highlights the shocking amount of biblical instruction that is rushed past by those who commercialize Christianity.

I like the book. I like the author’s opposition to the commercialization of Christianity. I do not claim to agree with Conley Owens in every point he makes. I am not sure I understand every point he makes. I intend to further consider and meditate on the texts of scripture from which he derives the dorean principle. Nevertheless, before even reading the book, I held the orthopraxy of a general principle of making the gospel “without charge,” which predisposed me to view it sympathetically. Some reviewers seem to start with a prejudice against this idea.

Were I writing the book, I think I would have come down harder on seminaries and Bible publishers than the author seemed to, bearing down harder in favor of local church ministry. Owens’s use of “colabor” vs. “co-labor” is explained on page 8, in footnote 4. Nevertheless, I found its use distracting. Colabor, to me, just consistently looked like it was and ought to be a different word, no matter how many times I saw it. No doubt this was a personal issue of my literalism, and likely, the young probably do not experience the same level of discomfort!

Consistent with the dorean principle, the book is not copyrighted, and is distributed freely in print and electronic media. Conley Owens exhibits a sincere desire to make what he believes is the truth available “without charge” to all people. He follows through. He practices what he preaches (or in this case, writes).

Recommendation.

The Dorean Principle is well-endorsed by a number of individuals in conspicuous Christian ministry. See the front matter for 17 such recommendations. With these and others, I recommend that you read The Dorean Principle, and, as a “Berean,” search the scriptures whether these things are so. 

Owens has offered his attempt toward recapturing “a biblical ethic of ministry fundraising.” According to the grace of God which is given unto us, let us labor together to inspect, improve, and build on this foundation.

Transparency and Conclusion.

I received a free copy of The Dorean Principle, but not in exchange for anything. All copies are freely distributed. It was not sent for review when I ordered it, neither did I intend to review it when I ordered it. I write the review as a “labourer together with God” because, after reading the book, I believe it offers both timely introspection and needed condemnation of our modern commercial quagmire in Christianity, and that it promotes valid suggestions and resolutions to the problem. Let us not merely bemoan the commercialization of Christianity. Offering Christian material freely puts that material in the hands of those who most often need it freely offered. Offering Christian ministry freely makes the gospel “without charge.” May the Lord help us do so. And more.

Endnotes.

---

[i] From the Greek δωρεάν (dorean), freely, without payment.
[ii] Owens’s more complete MDiv thesis is also available at the site, though not as obviously so.
[iii] Some of the difficulty of understanding may come from the fact that, on a practical level, the “reciprocal” support of the ministry and “colabor” support of the ministry may look basically the same, requiring some understanding of the motivation of a person’s support – obligation to the minister versus obligation to God (pp. 8-9).
[iv] From the Greek προπεμπω (propempo), to send with things necessary for a journey.
[v] I found this chapter especially helpful. I have published hard-copy print material at my own expense and distributed it without charge, while using “copyright” as a manner of protection of the content. For example, my thinking has been that if I write “salvation is by grace alone through faith alone” I do not want someone to have the right or ability to come along and change it to “salvation is by grace, plus baptism, plus good works…” Owens effectively challenges even that kind of use of copyright (pp. 126-127).
[vi] Owens’s comments about the King James Bible are confusing (p. 133). While it is true that the KJV is under restriction in the United Kingdom (in much the same way as copyrighted Bibles in the U.S.), it is indubitably known, historically, legally, and practically that the King James Bible is freely printed and distributed outside the United Kingdom.
[vii] Here is part of how the Crossway and Good News Publishers restrict the use of the ESV:
The ESV text may be quoted (in written or print form) up to and inclusive of five hundred (500) verses without express written permission of the publisher, providing that the verses quoted do not amount to more than one-half of any one book of the Bible nor do the verses quoted account for 25 percent or more of the total text of the work in which they are quoted.
Common Uses Include:

• Church bulletin
• Bible studies
• Classroom use
• Writing a book (print format)

Notice of copyright must appear as follows on the title page or copyright page of printed works quoting from the ESV, or in a corresponding location when the ESV is quoted in other media:
“Scripture quotations are from the ESV® Bible (The Holy Bible, English Standard Version®), © 2001 by Crossway, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved. The ESV text may not be quoted in any publication made available to the public by a Creative Commons license. The ESV may not be translated in whole or in part into any other language.”
Requests Outside Standard Use Guidelines
Permission requests that exceed the above guidelines require written permission. To obtain written permission, complete and submit our Online Form.
[viii] This is not a recommendation of the World English Bible, but simply a recognition that those who wish to use a public domain Bible are not limited to the King James Bible, and therefore cannot use that as an excuse.
[ix] The “Bible Industrial Complex,” or network of organizations that seek to shape, control, and profit from the publication and distribution of the word of God. Ĕrus or Erus is Latin for master, owner, proprietor.
[x] Particularly, things Bible students may think appear contradictory on the surface.